HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Reports /2007/05/23
AGENDA
MEETING OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
6:00 p.m.
Wednesday, May 23, 2007
Council Chambers
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA
CALL TO ORDER:
ROLL CALL I MOTIONS TO EXCUSE:
Planning Commission:
Felber _ Vinson_Moctezuma_Bensoussan
Tripp_Clayton_ Spethman_
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE and MOMENT OF SILENCE:
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
April 11, 2007
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS:
Opportunity for members of the public to speak to the Planning Commission on any
subject matter within the Commissions' jurisdiction, but not an item on today's agenda.
Each speaker's presentation may not exceed three minutes.
1. PUBLIC HEARING:
PCC 07-63; Consideration of a Conditional Use
Permit for Championship Off-Road Racing (CORR)
June 8-10 and September 28-30, 2007, Rock
Mountain Quarry land adjacent to the Otay River
Valley. Applicant: James Baldwin. (Quasi-Judicial)
Project Manager: Harold Phelps, Associate Planner
Planning Commission Agenda
-2-
May 23, 2007
2. PUBLIC HEARING:
3. PUBLIC HEARING:
DIRECTOR'S REPORT:
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
ADJOURNMENT:
PCZ 07-06; Consideration of a zone change from
CTP Zone to R-3 Zone, and a request for a density
bonus for a reduction in the required parking and
open space, an increase in the number of
compact spaces allowed, and a reduction in the
required front setback for the project "Los
Vecinos", located at 1501 Broadway.
Project Manager: Miguel Tapia, Sr. Community
Development Specialist
Consideration of the following applications filed
by Lorna Ratonel for a service station located
within the commercial center known as Terra
Nova Plaza, 350 East H Street:
a) ZAV 07-06; A Variance application requesting
approval of a 4 ft. encroachment for the
carwash building and a 5 ft. encroachment for
the vacuum canopy into the required front
setback.
b) PCC 05-44; Conditional Use Permit for a
carwash facility and expansion/relocation of an
existing convenience store.
Project Manager: Caroline Young, Assistant Planner
To a Regular Planning Commission on June 13,
2007.
MINUTES OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
6:00 p.m.
April 11 , 2007
Council Chambers
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA
CALL TO ORDER:6:09:25 PM
ROLL CALL I MOTIONS TO EXCUSE:
Members Present:
Felber, Bensoussan, Vinson, Tripp, Spethman
Members Absent:
Clayton and Moctezuma
MSC (SpethmanlTripp) 5-0-2-0) to excuse Cmr. Moctezuma and Cmr. Clayton. Motion
carried.
ORAL COMMUNICATION: No public input.
1. PUBLIC HEARING:
PCC 07-01; Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit to
permit Leap and Bound Academy, a 16,381 sf childcare
learning center on a Community Purpose Facility (CPF) site
within Rolling Hills Ranch planned community. Seeker
Development, LLC.
6:16:08 PM Background: Brian Catacutan reported that the proposal is to construct a
16,381 sf child learning center on a Community Purpose Facility within the Rolling Hills
Ranch Master Planned Community. On February 5, 2007 the Design Review Committee
considered and approved the project, and is now before the Planning Commission for
consideration of a Conditional Use Permit.
The Leap and Bound Academy operation profile consists of a maximum of 260 students
ranging from the ages of infants to 11 years, and a maximum of 25 employees. The hours
of operation would 6:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday.
Staff Recommendation: That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution PCC 07-01
based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein.
6:16:47 PM Commission Comments:
6:18:13 PM Cmr. Tripp pointed out that this project was previously covered under a
supplemental EIR, and inquired if there were any mitigation measures that are applicable to
this project.
Mr. Catacutan responded that a focus traffic study was conducted, which concluded that
there would be no impacts on the surrounding community.
Minutes of the Planning Commission - 2 -
April 11 , 2007
Mr. Catacutan further stated that a new resolution was placed on the dais tonight and
pointed out that there is a new finding (#5), that states that CPF sites that are sold for-profit
have to be on the market for a minimum of five years.
Mr. Hare clarified that CPF sites are held aside for nonprofit-type uses, and there is a
provision which states that a CPF site must be on the market for a minimum of five years or
greater, before it can be considered for a for-profit use.
6:20:54 PM Charles Staker, Leap and Bound, stated he was available to answer any
questions from the Commission and thanked them for their consideration of their proposal.
MSC (SpethmanNinson) (5-0-2-0) that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution
PCC 07-01 based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein.
Motion carried.
2. REPORT:
Otay Ranch Eastern Urban Center Sectional Plan Area Plan
Compliance with General Plan Eastern District Framework
Strategy Objectives and Policies
6:24:33 PM Rick Rosaler, Tony Lettieri and Todd Galarneau of the McMillan Co. gave an
overview of the Urban Core.
The General Plan Land Use and Transportation Element (LUT) establishes planning districts
to guide more detailed planning of certain areas, one of which is the Eastern District, which
includes the Otay Ranch's Freeway Commercial and Eastern Urban Center. The General
Plan requires that the EUC SPA Plan address the goals and policies of the Eastern District
Framework Strategy prior to or in conjunction with preparation and approval of any
subsequent SPA documents that may be required within the Study area.
Since the EUC SPA Plan is currently being process, staff is bringing the report to the
Planning Commission and City Council to ensure that all the necessary components of the
Framework Strategy are addressed and to obtain any direction on this matter prior to
completing the SPA processing.
6:31 :08 PM Todd Galarneau gave a brief presentation on the Eastern Urban Center, a
project that is deemed to be the focal point of the Otay Ranch Master Plan. The EUC is
extraordinary, even on a national scale, in part due to its size because typically these
centers are anywhere from 40 to 80 acres in size, whereas, the Eastern Urban Center is 210
acres. Mr. Galarneau indicated that SANDAG has identified the EUC as one of eight Smart
Growth Urban Centers in the region. Mr. Galarneau thanked the Commission for their
consideration and support of the report and stated he was available to answer questions.
Cmr. Spethman stated that his long-standing history of dealings with the McMillin
Company, through serving on various city boards and commissions, is that their company
strives for excellence in whatever project they are proposing to develop in this community
and the region. Cmr. Spethman stated, however, that he is eager to see some of the same
quality development that is going in to eastern territory come to the western side of Chula
Vista.
Minutes of the Planning Commission - 3 -
April 11, 2007
6:55:41 PM Cmr. Bensoussan stated that it was her understanding that the Main St.
corridor would be a lower-scale, low density concept, with a gradual higher density and
higher rise buildings as you spread out; she inquired if that was still the case.
Mr. Galarneau responded that the way they see the urban form and scale building in the
EUC, is that they will build in towards the middle with the higher densities. The proposal
within the Main Street is to create a four story and higher format through the Main St. district
and reserve the blocks outside of the Main Street for the higher densities. Varying
architecture styles, step backs and heights will be utilized in order to avoid monotony along
the street-frontage.
Cmr. Bensoussan asked if there is a public art component to this development.
Mr. Galarneau responded that there is a civic district in the EUC that will have parks and
plazas where, certainly, sculpture gardens, fountains and the like would be appropriate.
7:05:09 PM Cmr. Tripp echoed Cmr. Spethman's sentiments and stated that, recognizing
the challenges that exist, he too is eager to see these types of efforts extended to the west
side of the City.
7:06:06 PM Cmr. Vinson stated that LUT 94.7 makes mention of identifying existing
development regulations, design standards and regulatory measures that could hinder
achieving the intended urban vision for the EUC as it relates to the university study area,
and asked for further elaboration on that statement.
Mr. Lettieri stated that each SPA that comes forward should look at existing policies and
regulations to ensure that those regulations don't interfere with the intended vision for the
EUC.
Mr. Lettieri also indicated that a Notice of Preparation for an EIR will be going out shortly
that will list a number of potential changes in ordinances and even the GDP. Some of those
proposed changes will be in the Park Land Dedication Ordinance; density transfer
provisions so that there's flexibility in moving Commercial to Residential or vice versa;
responding to the market place is another that will be analyzed in the EIR. Another proposal
is that staff has encouraged, and McMillin has embraced, the idea of a form-base code.
What McMillin has proposed is a set of regulations that looks at the form, height and bulk of
a structure, but puts a lot of emphasis on the structure's relationship to public spaces
(streets, sidewalks and parks).
7:10:13 PM Cmr. Felber asked what is the forecasted square footage for the
retail/commercial as oppose to residential.
Mr. Galarneau stated that the land use allocation that's in the GDP is approximately 3,000
units and 3.5 million sf of non-residential. We have ensured that the EIR covers the entire
project to its maximum build-out.
Cmr. Felber asked where the concentration of the height intensity will be located; in the
residential or commercial/retail.
Minutes of the Planning Commission - 4 -
April 11 , 2007
Mr. Galarneau responded that most likely the tallest buildings will be located within the office
district.
7:17:04 PM Cmr. Spethman stated that public art is subjective, and noted that the entire
project is replete with artistic design by way of enhanced walkways and pavement elements,
light fixtures, fountains and water features, building design, etc., all of which contribute in
some form to the public art element.
7:18:46 PM Tony Lettieri enumerated the reasons for staff's recommendation that the
Planning Commission adopt Resolution PCM 99-07 recommending that the City Council
accept the report on the 'EUC SPA Plan compliance with the General Plan Eastern District
Framework Strategy Objectives and Policies. They are:
. The changes in regulations that are necessitated to make this happen
. The integration of the civic uses into the project which is in the central, most visible area
of the project
. The distinctive urban character where diverse architecture styles are proposed
. Provision of linkages to other uses and neighborhoods dealing with future university site
. The public transit that is in the center of the project that has involved multi-jurisdictional
efforts i.e. SANDAG and MTS
. The existence of paseos and walkways and pedestrian bridges extending over Eastlake
Parkway and then to the university to the south
7:22:21 PM Cmr. Felber noted that there is going to be a regional trail going through the
EUC and asked if its an off-shoot of a trail from the Greenbelt Master Plan.
Rick Rosaler responded that the trail is a key component of the plan, but in this case it goes
to an urban form as oppose to a trail through a canyon. It will be an enhanced, wider
sidewalk that connects to the pedestrian bridge that goes to Village 11.
7:23:48 PM Cmr. Bensoussan asked if there would be bicycle paths going through the
EUC, and when the Bus Rapid Transit is expected to be constructed.
Mr. Rosaler stated that there is presently extensive discussion amongst staff on this subject.
The Bicycle Master Plan calls for bike lanes along the major arterial like Birch, Eastlake
Parkway and Hunte Ave. With respect to the BRT, Mr. Rosaler indicated that the route
would be from the border, through the Otay Ranch, all the way to downtown San Diego.
SANDAG has identified federal funding that this project is eligible for, however, the awarding
of these funds will delay the project approximately two more years, therefore, its
construction would not commence until 2010 with an estimated completion date of 2012.
Cmr. Bensoussan inquired about the civic component of the EUC, i.e. libraries, museums,
performing arts centers.
Rick Rosaler responded that the two civic components of the EUC are the library and a fire
station. both of which have been in the Library Master Plan and the Fire Service Master Plan
for a long time. The cost of those facilities have been included in the Public Facilities
Development Impact Fee and as those facilities are built, McMillin will receive a credit on
their building permits Public Facilities DIF.
Minutes of the Planning Commission - 5 -
April 11 , 2007
7:33:09 PM MSC (SpethmanlTripp) (5-0-2-0) that the Planning Commission adopt
Resolution PCM 99-07 recommending that the City Council accept the report on EUC
SPA Plan compliance with the General Plan Eastern District Framework Strategy
Objectives and Policies. Motion carried
Director's Report:
7:34:39 PM Jim Hare reported that a workshop meeting is in the works for May 16 to go over
rules and procedures, and asked for input from the Commission on topics that they would be
interested in discussing.
7:35:41 PM Cmr. Tripp stated he'd be interested in staff discussing the significance of
nexus, and "rough proportionality", as well as findings in CEQA
7:36:38 PM Cmr. Bensoussan strongly urged staff to avoid scheduling two high-profile items
on the same night, as was the case in the Cummings Initiative and the Urban Core Specific
Plan.
Cmr. Felber suggested that a topic of discussion could be the protocol for the amount of
speaking time allowed to private citizens and speakers who state they are representing an
organization.
7:49:13 PM Adjournment to a regular Planning Commission meeting on April 28, 2007.
-:)l~A'0
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA STATE
-.------e ~-~_. "'~I_oJIV'
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing: Conditional Use Permit (PCC-07-063) for Championship
Off-Road Racing (CORR) June 8-10 and September 28-30, 2007, Rock
Mountain Quarry land adjacent to the Otay River Valley - James Baldwin,
Applicant
James Baldwin, owner of Championship Off-Road Racing (CORR), has applied for a Conditional
Use Permit for two temporary off-road racing events on June 8-10 and September 28-30,2007.
Aside from the new location in the Rock Mountain Quarry, these racing events will be the same as
the four temporary racing event weekends conducted in 2006 and two conducted in 2005 in Otay
Ranch Village Two. Race days will be Saturdays and Sundays with events scheduled from 7:00 a.m.
- 7:00 p.m. The sale of alcoholic beverages is requested during the races until prior to the last race.
On the Fridays before race day events, the racetrack will be open from 10 a.m. - 4:00 p.m. for
practice and qualifying. The site plan proposes that grandstands and race pit areas south of a
temporary racetrack built within the Rock Mountain Quarry. The agricultural fields of the
undeveloped Otay Ranch Village Three are proposed to provide the public parking lot areas, with to
be access from Energy Way. A fee will be required at the entrance to the parking lot areas separate
from the admission ticket. A 27-acre camping area is proposed in the area shown in the General Plan
as the western Active Recreation area in the Otay River Valley.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act and has conducted an Initial Study, IS-07-030 in accordance
with the California Environmental Quality Act. Based upon the results of the Initial Study, the
Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the project could result in significant effects
on the environment. However, revisions to the project made by or agreed to by the applicant would
avoid or mitigate the effects to below significance; therefore, the Environmental Review Coordinator
has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration, IS-07-030.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION:
Resource Conservation Commission
The Resource Conservation Commission (RCC) found that the Mitigated Negative Declaration
"insufficient" (or inadequate) by a vote of (4-2-0-1). Therefore, the RCC did not recommend
adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration at their May 7, 2007 meeting. The RCC's
recommendation was generally based on a decision that proposed proj ect was not an appropriate use
within the Otay River valley, or adjacent to the surrounding sensitive preserve areas.
Page 2, Item:
Meeting Date: OS/23/07
Several RCC Commission members expressed that allowing this type of use within this area would
set a precedent that could make future planning efforts within the OVRP more difficult. The
Commission also felt that the proposed race offered no net benefit to the community and ifthey were
to recommend approval ofthis project, they would not be fulfilling their commitment to protect the
valuable resources offered within this area.
Several RCC Commission members also expressed general concerns related to the adequacy ofthe
MND and validity of the supporting technical information. The RCC was concerned that baseline
noise conditions were not sufficiently substantiated and that the monitoring locations did not
accurately reflect where race related activities would occur in relation to adjacent Preserve areas.
RCC also raised concerns with the June race and its potential to impact sensitive biological resources
during the breeding season.
The Otay Valley Regional Park Citizens Advisory Committee and the Policy Committee
The Otay Valley Regional Park (OVRP) Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) held a meeting on
April 25, 2007, and the Otay Valley Regional Park (OVRP) Policy Committee (PC) held a meeting
on April 26, 2007 to discuss the proposed racing events. A Championship Off-Road Race (CORR)
Sub-Committee consisting of CAC/PC members held a meeting on May 4, 2007 to make a
recommendation to the OVRP CAC on the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for the 2007
Championship Off-Road Race.
By a vote of 5-2 the OVRP CAC CORR Sub-Committee will be making a recommendation to the
OVRP CAC to approve the CUP for the 2007 CORR event at the May 18, 2007 meeting. The
CORR Sub-Committee will be recommend approval with conditions to (I) adhere to all mitigation
measures set forth in the final version of the MND, (2) monitor and measure current baseline
conditions of sound, air and water before and during racing events, and (3) that the recommendation
not be construed to be an endorsement of a future temporary or permanent racing events.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission approve Planning Commission Resolution PCC-07-063
recommending adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) and recommending approval
ofthe Conditional Use Permit to the City Council in accordance with the findings and subject to the
conditions contained in the draft City Council resolution.
DISCUSSION:
1. Site Characteristics
The Rock Mountain Quarry is a 1 50-acre site located due east of Main Street, where it turns into the
alignment of Heritage Road, where vehicles veer right to enter the Coors Amphitheatre and Knott's
Soak City. The Rock Mountain Quarry access road generally forms the southern border of the
proposed track/pit/grandstand area, with the Otay River located south and W olfCanyon to the west.
Page 3, Item:
Meeting Date: OS/23/07
Surrounding land uses include the active portion of the Rock Mountain Quarry to the immediate
north and Open SpacelPreserve areas to the immediate east, south, and west. Land uses within the
general vicinity of the project site include Otay Ranch Village Three and the Otay Landfill to the
northwest, developed residential uses within the City of San Diego to the south, and the Coors
Amphitheater and Knott's Soak City Water Park to the southwest.
The site has been fully disturbed by ongoing aggregate mining and processing operations. Current
mining operations include rock drilling, blasting, resource extraction and processing, stockpiling of
construction aggregate and waste products. The racetrack, parking, and camping areas are sited to
avoid any direct impacts to sensitive biological resources.
Of note, the southern portion ofthe racetrack project area is located within the preserve area of the
City's MSCP Subarea Plan, which was disturbed as a result of an unauthorized encroachment by the
former quarry operator. The Rock Mountain Quarry Reclamation Plan includes a restoration plan to
restore this area within 25 years back to a level consistent with the adjacent undisturbed preserve
areas to the south.
2. General Plan, Land Use, and Zoning
General Plan
The 2005 General Plan Update land use designations for the project site include "Open Space" (Non-
Preserve) for the racetrack, grandstands and pit areas and VIP parking areas. The public parking
areas are designated "Industrial," and the camping area is designated "Open Space Active
Recreation." The VIP parking area, pit area, track, and grandstands are fully located within the
existing boundaries ofthe Otay Ranch Quarry Reclamation Plan further described in the sub-section
below regarding the Otay Ranch Rock Mountain Quarry Reclamation Plan. The proposed public
parking is an allowable use within an Industrial land use designated area, and the proposed camping
in the Open Space Active Recreation land use designation is one of the intended uses within this
area. In addition, these uses are considered temporary under the Conditional Use Permit application,
so there is no need for a consistency determination relative to General Plan land use designations.
Otay Ranch General Development Plan
The Otay Ranch GDP identifies the boundaries ofthe parcel containing the Rock Mountain Quarry
as "Not a Part." The proposed public parking areas for the project are land designated for industrial
use in Village Three, and the camping area is shown as Open Space Active Recreation. Because the
use is temporary and subject to a Conditional Use Permit, a consistency determination relative to
General Development Plan land use designations is not required, even for the racetrack being inside
the rock quarry operation reclamation plan area. The parking and camping areas are consistent with
the General Development Plan land use designations. Of note, a SPA Plan has been prepared for
Otay Ranch Villages Two, Three and portion of Village Four, and the public parking area is located
within the Village Three planning area. The SPA Plan shows Village Three being planned for
industrial and open space uses.
Page 4, Item:
Meeting Date: OS/23/07
Otay Ranch Rock Mountain Quarry Reclamation Plan
The Otay Ranch Pit has operated since the 1940's, and the Reclamation Plan was prepared in
accordance with the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) of 1975, and approved by the
County of San Diego in 1980.
The reclamation plan details (I) the beginning and expected ending dates for each phase of mining
activities; (2) all reclamation activities required; (3) criteria for measuring completion of specific
reclamation activities; and (4) estimated costs for completion of each phase of reclamation. The total
land area in the adopted Reclamation Plan totals 157-acres.
The Reclamation Plan describes the ultimate reclamation ofthe Rock Mountain Quarry to occur in a
manner that would facilitate future development consistent with the City's General Plan. The
adopted reclamation plan includes a biological restoration plan designed to reclaim previously
disturbed Preserve areas back to a level consistent with the surrounding undisturbed open space
Preserve areas.
Reclamation of the disturbed Preserve areas is not scheduled to occur until the completion of
extraction activities, which is approximately 25 years from now. Given the temporary, short-term
nature of the project, no adverse impacts are anticipated that would prevent the ultimate reclamation
of this site as detailed in the currently approved Reclamation Plan.
The VIP parking area, pit area, racetrack, and grandstands are fully located within the existing
boundaries of the Otay Ranch Quarry Reclamation Plan. In April 2006, the State Mining and
Geology Board amended the original site reclamation plan approved by the County of San Diego in
1980 to include areas that were disturbed by a former quarry operator as a result of on-going
extraction operations.
The amendments revised the reclamation plan boundaries to include approximately 38 acres of fully
disturbed land but subtracted approximately 29 acres of undisturbed land located within adjacent
W olfCanyon. The southern portion ofthe racetrack, pit areas and grandstands are within a portion of
this acreage.
Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP) Subarea Plan
The Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP) Subarea Plan was prepared by the City of
Chula Vista in coordination with the Federal and State Regulatory agencies in order to implement the
MSCP Subregional Plan within the City of Chula Vista. The City Council adopted the MSCP
Subarea Plan on May 13,2003. Subsequently, the Wildlife Agencies issued the City a Take Permit
and signed the Implementing Agreement granting the City Take Authorization on January 11,2005.
The existing quarry site is recognized by the City's MSCP Subarea Plan as a legal, non-conforming
use, in operation at the time the underlying zone was established. As such, existing mining activities
have continued to operate under legally existing permits.
Page 5, Item:
Meeting Date: OS/23/07
Otay Valley Regional Park Concept Plan
The Cities of San Diego and Chula Vista, and the County of San Diego adopted the Otay Valley
Regional Park (OVRP) Concept Plan in July 1997. The OVRP identifies active recreation areas that
are not a part ofthe Preserve, but are surrounded by Preserve areas. The OVRP Concept Plan does
not change existing zoning or planned land uses, or add new development regulations, nor does it
preclude private development in designated recreation areas consistent with existing zoning or
planned land uses. The proposed project is a temporary use and would not prohibit future planning
or use of the area, as contemplated in the OVRP.
Zoning
Current zoning for the site is Planned Community (PC). The proposed racing event activities can be
conditionally permitted within the Planned Community (PC) Zone, through Zoning Code
(I 9.54.020J -7). The proposed activity requires that a conditional use permit be considered by the
Planning Commission and approved by the City Council. As a temporary use, the racetrack will not
require any amendments to the Chula Vista General Plan, or the Otay Ranch GDP.
3. Proposal
The proposed project is a temporary event involving off-road racing on a portion of the Rock
Mountain Quarry located adjacent to the Otay River Valley, in addition to a portion ofOtay Ranch
Village Three for public parking and the western Active Recreation Area within the Otay River
Valley for camping (See Attachment 1: Locator Map).
The racing events will occur over two, non-consecutive weekends, June 8 - 10 and September 28-
30,2007. The off-road racetrack is proposed within the southern portion ofthe Rock Quarry that is
no longer subject to resource extraction operations.
It should be noted that mining operations are ongoing within the boundaries of the Rock Mountain
Quarry, and pursuant to the approved Reclamation Plan under the California Surface Mining and
Reclamation Act, grading and leveling of the racetrack is being conducted under the Reclamation
Plan and is not subject to review or approvals by the City of Chula Vista. Site preparation will
include installation of grandstands, security lighting and fencing, orange bio-fencing to restrict access
to the City's MSCP Preserve, signage for sensitive habitat areas, and storm water BMPs.
The public parking will occur on the agricultural land within a portion ofOtay Ranch Village Three.
The vehicular entrance to this parking area will be from the cuI-dc-sac terminus of Energy Way, via
Nirvana Road from Main Street.
Other access points that will not be open to the general public but will provide access to the site for
race teams, emergency vehicles, VIPs and campers include the two existing dirt roads on both sides
of the Otay River off of Main Street and Heritage Road. The first dirt road to the north of the Otay
River off of Main Street will provide access to the racetrack, pit areas, and VIP parking areas.
Page 6, Item:
Meeting Date: OS/23/07
The second dirt road to the south of the Otay River off of Heritage Road will provide access to the
camping area. Overnight camping is proposed within a 27-acre parcel designated for "Active
Recreation" within the City's General Plan.
The City will provide fire; police and emergency services and the event sponsors will cover all costs
associated with additional service demands. A temporary traffic control plan will be developed to
facilitate arrival and departure from parking lot areas. Event-related activities include:
I. Races on Saturdays and Sundays of event weekends.
2. Pre-race track trials and qualifications (Friday before event weekends)
3. Friday through Sunday overnight camping on event weekends.
4. Event Parking.
5. Nighttime security lighting.
6. Limited Fireworks and Live Entertainment before, during and after race events.
The project proposes to include structural e1ements to provide sound attenuation, including the
installation of vinyl covered rise and run stairs and grandstand seats or plywood on the back of the
grandstands. The plywood barrier (or other approved material) would be mounted on the back of
four grandstand structures, each measuring 234 feet in width and 60 feet in height. The thickness of
the plywood would be a minimum Yz inch.
Noise attenuation is primarily provided by the existing terrain/topography on the north and east sides
ofthe track area. Specifically, an approximate 15 foot-high shearrock face separates the track from
the adjacent open space areas located to the north and east. The project also includes fencing to
provide security and to avoid unauthorized access to adjacent Preserve areas.
The sale of alcoholic beverages is requested for approval as part of this Conditional Use Permit in
conjunction with the required Alcohol and Beverage Control (ABC) permits. The Amusement and
Entertainment Facilities use requirements allows for alcoholic beverages to be sold or consumed on
the premises in conjunction with a restaurant. Through this conditional use permit the applicant is
requesting permission to sell alcohol in conjunction with food vendors.
BACKGROUND:
Championship Off-Road Racing (CORR) has occurred within the City over the past two years on a
temporary racetrack that was constructed on the Otay Ranch VilJage Two project site, subject to
Conditional Use Permits (CUP) issued in 2005 and 2006 for two weekend and four weekend racing
events in 2005 and 2006, respectively.
CORR representatives met with staff on November 8, 2006 about a proposal to conduct racing
events within the Otay Valley Regional Park's eastern Active Recreation Area (under the Otay
Valley River SR-125 Toll way Bridge, still under construction). This proposal was strongly
discouraged by both the Federal Fish & Wildlife and State Fish & Game agencies in December 2006.
Page 7, Item:
Meeting Date: OS/23/07
CORR representatives met with staffabout use ofthe Rock Mountain Quarry project site on January
31, 2007. At that meeting, staff pointed out that issues related to the impact on the MSCP Preserve
and Otay Valley Regional Park (OVRP) would need to be resolved to ensure that there would be the
appropriate amount of time for all parties, including the Federal Fish & Wildlife, State Fish & Game,
and the OVRP Citizen's Advisory Committee (CAe) and Policy Committee (PC) to review the
application.
Staff held meetings on March 7, 2007 with the Federal Fish & Wildlife and State Fish & Game
agencies, and on April 18th with the OVRP City and County of San Diego staff. On April 25th ,
City staff met with the OVRP Citizen's Advisory Committee (CAe), on April 26th with the OVRP
Policy Committee (PC), and on May 4th with the OVRP Trails Sub-Committee. The Resource
Conservation Commission met on May 7,2007 regarding the project.
ANALYSIS:
Racetrack:
The proposed site plan shows a racetrack, including the grandstands and pit areas within the Rock
Mountain Quarry mining bowl adjacent to the revised southern boundary. Ideally the racetrack
would be located more towards the middle of the quarry to attenuate noise, but mining operations are
still underway at the center of the project site. However, the idea oflocating the racetrack in the
quarry addresses concerns that have been raised in the past two years about the impacts of an off-
road racetrack on surrounding residential uses. The Otay Ranch Village Two temporary racetrack
utilized in 2005 and 2006 was adjacent to the residential Otay Ranch Villages One, Five, Six and
Seven. The nearest residential neighborhoods to the Rock Mountain Quarry are over a mile away in
San Diego's Otay Mesa, to the south and west of Coors Amphitheatre and Knott's Soak City.
The proposed temporary racetrack for this year's June and September racing events is a pilot or test
run for a future permanent racetrack facility in the Rock Mountain Quarry. The applicant has
expressed interest in constructing a permanent facility starting in 2008 that would allow for public
use throughout the year by all-terrain vehicles, motor cross motorcyclist and mountain bicyclist.
There is even speculation about a drag strip or a racing oval within the Rock Mountain Quarry.
It is important to note that nothing has been determined this year, except that certain conditions of
approval are being requested to monitor the noise, air and water quality effects of this years racing
events in order to provide base line of information and reference for any future permanent racetrack
facilities that may be contemplated by the applicant.
It is also important to the note that in meeting with the Federal Fish & Wildlife, State Fish & Game
agencies, they have acknowledge that there is a need and demand for these type of facilities in
coastal counties, where currently such public uses are rarely available anywhere other than inland
desert counties such as in the Imperial Valley. Such a facility would also be able to provide an
alternative (as a controlled off-road racetrack) to individuals who now are already illegally engaged
in riding off-road vehicles, all-terrain vehicles, and motorcycles through the preserve.
Page 8, Item:
Meeting Date: OS/23/07
Parking:
Approximately 7,440 public parking spaces wil1 be available over approximately 76-acres ofOtay
Ranch Vil1age Three. Access to the Village Three parking area wil1 be provided Energy Road to the
west. Modifications to the Energy Way cul-de-sac include temporary replacement of the existing
curb and chain link fence with an asphalt driveway and crushed gravel and/or rumble plates. A
shuttle will be provided to transport patrons from the camping area to the track area. The parking lots
are currently agricultural fields that have been mowed. By maintaining the hay field roots, dust wil1
be minimized in these designated parking areas; however, watering ofthe access driveways without
gravel treatment and other parking areas will be required as a condition of approval to minimize dust
created from spectator vehicles.
Camping:
Overnight camping will be provided for up to 150 campsites on a 27-acre campsite within the
Western Active Recreation area of the Otay Valley Regional Park. Security will be provided in the
camping area from the end ofthe last race to 7 a.m. the following day. Security fencing will prevent
campers and patrons from entering into the adjacent MSCP Preserve.
Noise:
The issue that raises the most concern regarding the potential effect of the project is the potential
effect of racing event noise on sensitive bird species during their nesting seasons (typically February
to Mid-September) for the June 8-IO racing events. As discussed in the Noise analysis in the
Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), noise from vehicle racing, loudspeakers, or other incidental
sound sources associated with the events will have an adverse affect on certain sensitive bird species
such as the Coastal California Gnatcatcher and Least Bell's Vireo.
The project site is adjacent to the MSCP Preserve, and noise impacts on these noise sensitive species
within the MSCP Preserve Subarea Plan restricts uses located adjacent to Preserve areas that
generate excessive noise during the breeding season for these noise sensitive bird species, because
their habitat is located within the Preserve. The City's MSCP Subarea Plan does not provide a
specific numerical threshold for operational noise affecting these species, but for comparative
purposes, a generally accepted standard used to evaluate impacts is a one-hour average noise level
greater than 60 dB.
It is important to note that the noise impacts for the races will not exceed those already generated by
the existing rock quarry operations which wi1l be suspended during the racing events. The noise
analysis prepared for the project provides an estimate of noise levels generated by the proposed
project. Unattenuated noise levels at the closest sensitive habitat location within the Preserve,
immediately adjacent to the south of the proposed track, estimated to be 85 dB hourly Leq.
Taking the existing terrain topography into consideration, and providing the maximum sound
attenuation available through structural design features (enclosure of the rear of the stands located
between the track and the Preserve), the noise analysis concludes that areas having potential to
support least Bell's vireo and coastal California gnatcatcher are expected to be exposed noise levels
of approximately 75 dB hourly Leq noise level during the racing events.
Page 9, Item:
Meeting Date: OS/23/07
The Noise Ordinance also governs fixed source and/or operational noise. However, the proposed
project is classified as a temporary outdoor gathering, and as such is considered to be exempt from
the provisions ofthe Ordinance, pursuant to Section 19.68.060 which states "The provisions of this
title shall not apply to occasional outdoor gatherings, public dances, shows and sporting and
entertainment events, provided the events are conducted pursuant to a permit or license issued by the
city relative to the staging of the events."
Biological Resources:
Implementation of the proposed project would result in direct impacts to annual (non-native)
grassland and developed/disturbed land. All of the impacts to annual grassland are within former
agriculture areas of the Parking and Camping areas. Site preparation for these areas will consist of
mowing only, and no soil-disturbing site preparation (i.e., grading activities) is proposed. Therefore,
impacts to annual grassland within the Parking and Camping areas would be temporary and would
not result in permanent or significant adverse impacts to annual grasslands. These areas are
anticipated to recover without the need for active restoration. Freshwater marsh, mixed riparian
scrub, and southern willow scrub within the survey area would be avoided and not be directly
impacted by the project.
According to the attached MND, no long-term, direct impacts to sensitive vegetation communities
would result from project implementation. Direct impacts to active burrowing owl nests could result
if nests are present at the time of operation during the nesting season (June race only). The entire
project site avoids interface with the City of Chula Vista MSCP Sub-Area Plan, as all activities are
located entirely within developable areas; however security personnel will monitor the MSCP area to
prevent access from the site to the preserve areas.
Air Quality:
An air quality technical report was prepared for the project. Project related emissions would occur
from vehicles traveling to the CORR event site, race vehicle emissions generated during race events
and dust generated by the racing activities. All mining activities associated with the existing quarry
will cease during race events. The operational impacts associated with the Project would be confined
to impacts associated with automotive traffic from spectators, employees, support vehicles, and the
race participants. The mitigation measures would mitigate short-term operational air quality impacts
to below a level of significance. These measures are included as a part ofthe Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program, which may include monitoring ofthis years racing events for future baseline
information relative to a future permanent racetrack in the Rock Mountain Quarry.
Water Ouality:
The Tacing events would involve activities that could result in potential impacts to hydrology and
water quality. During the races, urban runoff from the site has the potential to contribute pollutants,
including oil and grease, suspended solids, metals, gasoline, and pathogens to the receiving waters.
Once the racing event is complete, some portions of the site, including manufactured slopes, may be
exposed and susceptible to erosion. Pollutants of concern associated with the proposed project are
grouped into the following categories: sediments; metals; oil and grease; trash, debris and floatables;
bacteria and viruses; and organic compounds and oxygen-demanding substances.
Page 10, Item:
Meeting Date: OS/23/07
In order to address these issues, features have been incorporated into the project design to minimize
water quality impacts. The racetrack has been designed such that runoff would drain into a treatment
BMP and away from the MSCP Preserve, including Otay River and Wolf Canyon. With project
design features, potential impacts to hydrology and water quality may still occur; however, BMPs
would be implemented to mitigate potential impacts to less than significant levels. The BMPs have
been identified in Appendix A and require review and approval by the Director of Public Works.
BMPs identified in Appendix A include, but are not limited to the following: desilt basins, special
drums for containment of waste, trash and hazardous materials and silt fencing/sand bags.
Hazardous Materials/Solid Waste:
The proposed project would involve the transport, storage, and handling of hazardous materials
(gasoline and engine fluids) associated with the proposed activities for a short duration of time.
Potential impacts resulting from exposure to or leaks/spills of hazardous materials may occur;
however, BMPs would be in place that would reduce potential impacts to less than significant.
BMPs include features such as special drums that would serve as self-contained treatment for all
runoff from maintenance bays (pit areas), vehicle and equipment wash areas, bathroom areas, and
trash and material storage areas. Vactor trucks would be used to remove runoff from the
containment drums and the collected runoff would be disposed of in accordance with City standards.
Hazardous materials would be placed in an enclosure that prevents contact with runoff or spillage to
the storm water conveyance system. Storage, wash, and maintenance areas for race vehicles and
hazardous materials/waste, as well as restroom areas would be lined with an impervious material to
contain leaks and spills and these areas would (where feasible) have a roof or awning to minimize
direct precipitation within the secondary containment area.
With implementation ofthe BMPs, the project would not create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, or create a
significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident
conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment.
The project is a temporary use that would not have the ability to impair implementation of or
physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.
Further, the project features include public safety plans and personnel assigned to the events to
further protect public safety during the events. Because the project is a temporary use and fire
equipment and personnel will be present on the site during the proposed events, the project would
not expose people or structures to a significant risk ofloss, injury or death involving wildland fires.
Traffic Control:
The racing events would be accessed via Main Street, Heritage Road, and Energy Way via Nirvana
Road off of Main Street. The proposed events are anticipated to generate up to 7,440 vehicles per day
of the event. Based on the additional special event traffic and the potential for queuing to pay for
parking, there is the potential for localized congestion at ingress and egress points ofthe project and
parking impacts on City roadways during the two weekends.
Page 11, Item:
Meeting Date: OS/23/07
A Traffic Control Plan is required to be prepared in accordance with City guidelines by the project
applicant and submitted for review and approval by the City Engineer. Elements of the Traffic
Control Plan would include, but not limited to, a description of the signage, striping, delineate
detours, flagging operations and any other devices which would be used during events to guide
motorists safely to parking locations from public roadways.
The Traffic Control plan would also include provisions for coordinating with local emergency
service providers regarding event times and measures for bicycle lane safety. The Plan would
address parking plans for each parking lot, and would address methods to facilitate collection of
parking fees to minimize queuing on public streets.
The Traffic Control Plan would ensure that access and traffic flow would be maintained, and that
emergency access would not be restricted. Additionally, the Plan would ensure that congestion and
temporary delay of traffic resulting from the event and would be of a short-term nature.
Public Safetv:
The race event also has the potential to result in safety hazards associated with accidents during the
race events as well as the police control efforts associated with spectators and traffic control.
Therefore, there will be a temporary increase in demand for police and fire services.
The racetrack will be situated approximately 8-ft. below the grandstands, with 10,000-lb. concrete
barriers running along the entire frontage of the grandstand area. In addition, a 10-ft. high catch
fence with steel cables will run the entire length of the grandstand area to protect spectators.
The Fire Department will have a fully staffed brush engine dedicated to these racing events and paid
for by the applicant. The event security team will furnish the Fire Department and Ambulance
service a means for two-way radio communication during the races. An Emergency Medical Plan
prepared by the applicant's management team will need to be approved by the Fire Department prior
to the first races, as a condition of approval.
The Police Department will also require a Security Plan that shall address all issues regarding on-site
security, traffic, parking, and camping subject to the approval of the Police Chief. The applicant's
management team is meeting with the Police Department's Special Events & Special Investigations
Unit regarding the Security Plan.
Alcoholic Beverages:
Sales of alcoholic beverages are again requested for approval as part ofthis Conditional Use Permit
prior to obtaining the required Alcohol and Beverage Control (ABC) permits. If approved, the
applicant will coordinate the ABC permitting with the Police Department's Special Events & Special
Investigations Unit prior to any sales of alcohol on the project boundary site at the racing events. All
alcohol sales shall be incorporated within the food vending areas or within segregated "beer garden"
areas. lt is recommended that the condition of approval require that the sale of alcoholic beverages
cease prior to the last racing event of each racing day.
Page 12, Item:
Meeting Date: OS/23/07
CONCLUSION:
Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit based on the findings and conditions as
noted in the draft City Council resolution. The Director of Planning and Building, City Engineer,
Police Chief and Fire Chief may modify the various plans, such as the Security Plan, Emergency
Medical Plan, and Traffic Control Plan between each of the racing event weekends to address
problems or concerns raised and/or corrections as needed from the previous racing event weekends.
However, if any unanticipated problems occur, staff will schedule a new public hearing between each
racing event weekend to modify or revoke the Conditional Use Permit.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Locator Map
2. Planning Commission Resolution PCC-07-063
3. Draft City Council Resolution
4. Application Documents with Disclosure Statement
5. Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-07-030
6. May 7,2007 Resource Conservation Committee Action Agenda
7. May 7,2007 Resource Conservation Committee Minutes (Draft)
8. Recommendation of the OVRP Off-Road Race Sub-Committee
9. May 4,2007 OVRP Off-Road Race Sub-Committee Meeting Minutes
10. April 26, 2007 Joint Policy Committee-Citizen's Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes
1 I. April 25, 2007 OVRP Citizen's Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes
12. Comment Letter from Patricia and Michael McCoy, OVRP Committee Member
13. 3 Comment Letters from Frank Ohrmund, OVRP Committee Member
14. Comment Letter from Karen Smith, OVRP Committee Member
15. Comment Letter from Mike Behan, OVRP Committee Member
J :\PLANNINGIHAROLDlPCC-07-063-PCREPORT.DOC
RESOLUTION NO. 2007-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF CHULA VISTA ADOPTING THE MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION
MONITORING PROGRAM, IS-07-030, AND GRANTING A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, PCC-07-063, TO CONDUCT
OFF-ROAD RACING EVENTS ON A TEMPORARY OFF-
ROAD RACETRACK ON A PORTION OF THE OTAY
RANCH ROCK MOUNTAIN QUARRY, LOCATED OFF OF
HERITAGE ROAD AND ADJACENT TO THE OTAY
RIVER VALLEY.
A. RECITALS
1. Project Site
WHEREAS, the parcels which are the subject matter of this resolution are
represented in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, and
for the purpose of general description are located on a portion of the Otay Ranch Rock
Mountain Quarry land adjacent to the Otay River Valley, including a portion of Otay
Ranch Village Three for a general public parking area, and the western Active Recreation
Area within the Otay River Valley for an overnight camping area ("Project Site"); and
2. Project Applicant
WHEREAS, on April 9, 2007 a duly verified application for a conditional use
permit (PCC-07-063) was filed with the City of Chula Vista Planning Department by
James Baldwin ("Applicant"); and
3. Project Description; Application for Conditional Use Permit
WHEREAS, said Applicant requests permission to conduct off-road racmg
events on June 8 - 10 and September 28 - 30,2007 on said Project Site; and
4. Planning Commission Record of Application
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on the
project on May 23, 2007 and voted X - X - X - X recommending that the City Council
approve/deny the project in accordance with Resolution PCC-07-063; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission motion was approved by a majority vote
(or) (failed for the lack of a majority vote of the Commission) and the applicant has
requested the project come forward for City Council consideration.
5. City Council Record of Application
Resolution No.
Page 2
WHEREAS, a duly called and noticed public hearing on the project was held
before the City Council of the City of Chula Vista on June 5, 2007; to receive the
recommendation of the Planning Commission, and to hear public testimony with regard
to the same.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby
find, determine, and resolve as follows:
B. PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD
The proceedings and all evidence on the Project introduced before the Planning
Commission at their public hearing on this project held on May 23, 2007 and the minutes
and resolution resulting therefrom, are hereby incorporated into the record of this
proceeding.
C. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and has conducted an Initial
Study, IS-07-030 in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Based
upon the results of the Initial Study, the Environmental Review Coordinator has
determined that the project could result in significant effects on the environment.
However, revisions to the project made by or agreed to by the applicant would avoid the
effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur;
therefore, the Environmental Review Coordinator has prepared a Mitigated Negative
Declaration, IS-07-030.
D. CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA
The City Council does hereby find that the Mitigated Negative Declaration and
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (IS-07-030) has been prepared in
accordance with requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the
State CEQA Guidelines, and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Chula
Vista, and hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program (IS-07-030).
E. INDEPENDENT JUDGEMENT OF CITY COUNCIL
The City Council does hereby find that in the exercise of their independent review and
judgment, the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program (IS-07 -030) in the form presented has been prepared in accordance with
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the
Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Chula Vista and hereby adopts the
same.
F. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS
Resolution No.
Page 3
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby make the findings required by
the City's rules and regulations for the issuance of conditional use permits, as
hereinbelow set forth, and sets forth, thereunder, the evidentiary basis that permits the
stated finding to be made.
1. That the proposed use at this location is necessary or desirable to provide a
service or facility which will contribute to the general well being of the
neighborhood or the community.
The environmental document and staff reports outlines how the racetrack and
temporary facilities are located a significant distance from residential
neighborhoods to the south and visually obscured from view by the surrounding
rock mountain quarry.
2. That such use will not under the circumstances of the particular case be
detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or
working in the vicinity or injurious to property or improvements in the
vicinity.
This conditional use permit for a two (2) weekend racing events required
environmental documentation that analyzed the proposal with respect to the effect
of the proposal on health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working
in the vicinity or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity.
While certain aspects of the proposal such as traffic and noise may result in some
minor traffic congestion near the site at the time of the events as well as perhaps
some occasional noise annoyances due to racing events, the temporary sporting
events are not regulated by the noise control ordinance. For participants and
spectators deciding to attend these racing events, safety precautions are
maximized to ensure the health, safety or general welfare of persons involved as
outlined in the environmental document and staff reports.
In addition, the conditions to grant approval of this permit require that an Off-
Road Race Security Plan, Safety/Medical Plan, and Traffic Control Plan shall be
provided by the applicant to minimize the potential impacts to public safety, fire,
traffic, parking, and other environmental effects on participants, spectators, and
the surrounding residential neighborhoods in the vicinity.
3. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions
specified in the code for such use.
The temporary racing event and activities is a conditionally permit able use within
the Planned Community (PC) Zone, utilizing the unclassified use requirements
listed under unclassified uses in the Zoning Code (l9.54.020J-7) for race tracks,
which requires that a conditional use permit be issued by the City Council.
Resolution No. Page 4
4. That the granting of this Conditional Use Permit will not adversely affect the
General Plan of the City or the adopted plan of any government agency.
Because the two (2) racing events proposed in the Conditional Use Permit are
being considered a temporary land use, the granting of this permit will not require
amendments to the Chula Vista General Plan, or the Otay Ranch General
Development Plan.
G. TERMS OF GRANT OF PERMIT
The City Council hereby grants Conditional Use Permit PCC-07-063 subject to the
following conditions whereby the Applicant shall:
I. Develop the project site as shown on the racetrack site plan map submitted for review
on April 9, 2007. Any revisions to this site plan required for compliance with the
conditions of approval shall be provided prior to the first racing event.
2. The Applicant shall implement, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning and
Building and the Environmental Review Coordinator, all mitigation measures
identified in the Final Mitigated Negative Declaration for a Conditional Use Permit
for a Temporary Championship Off-Road Race (IS-07-030) and Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program in accordance with the requirements, provisions
and schedules contained therein. Modification of the sequence of mitigation shall be
at the discretion of the Director of Planning and Building and Environmental Review
Coordinator.
3. Race events can only occur on June 8 - 10 and September 28 - 30, 2007, unless
postponed due to a rain event. Race related events would generally occur from 7 a.m.
to 7 p.m. on those dates. Practice runs may only be held on the Fridays before the
weekend racing events from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m.
4. The Security Plan to be provided to the Police Department will provide detailed
guidelines for the controlling the use and access to the racetrack, parking and
camping areas. The Police Chief prior to the first racing event weekend must approve
the Security Plan.
5. The campsite areas shall be minimally lighted for safety and will prohibit the creation
of open fire pits, the use of All-Terrain Vehicles (ATV's) and all other similar
motorized vehicles, and have a curfew imposed between the hours of II :00 p.m. and
7:00 a.m.
6. Security staff as well as two on-duty Police Officers will be provided in the campsite
areas from the end ofthe last race to 7 a.m. the following day, or as determined by the
Police Chief.
Resolution No.
Page 5
7. As there are no provision for sanitary sewer connections on the site, the campsite area
shall have a septic truck available to campsite users free of charge on everyday that
camping is allowed, to prevent the illegal dumping of wastewater or the discharge of
raw sewage onto areas that may lead to drainage systems, or within the solid waste
and recycling receptacles anywhere on-site by the campers and recreational vehicles
utilizing the campsite.
8. The campsite area is contingent upon each night of camping successfully complying
with the conditions of this permit. Failure of the campers to abide by said conditions
shall be cause for revocation of the permit to allow camping immediately, including
during the same race event weekend.
9. Maintenance of the access roads, the racetrack and other transition areas shall be
continuous during race events. Access roads, the racetrack and other transition areas
shall be watered as needed to minimize fugitive dust.
10. All parking lots on agricultural land shall be mowed such that roots of the vegetation
remain intact in order to provide soil stabilization. In addition, the installation of Best
Management Practices (BMPs) to control erosion and sediment transport and to
contain hazardous material storage areas shall be provided.
11. On-site parking fee collections shall occur at the very end of the access roads off of
Energy Way, adjacent to the parking areas, to prevent the queuing of vehicles onto
City streets. No stacking of vehicles shall be permitted on City streets and the Traffic
Control Plan will require patrons to circulate further into the parking area beyond the
access road collection point until traffic on-site can accommodate all vehicles
amvmg.
12. The pit areas, as well as the storage area for hazardous materials/waste and restroom
areas, shall be lined with an impervious material to prevent spills and potential
leakage of automobile fluids and other materials into the ground or any waterways.
In addition, any storage, handling or disposal of hazardous materials/waste will be in
accordance with local, state and federal laws. A hazardous materials permit and
inspection shall be obtained from the Fire Department prior to the first weekend's
racing events.
13. Concerts or live entertainment is only allowed before; during, and immediately after
each racing event occurs in association with the racing event weekends.
14. Use of the track after the final race each day will not be permitted. Access to the
track would be locked after race activities have ceased for the day, and access to the
site will only be permitted for race participants, crewmembers and security staff.
15. In the event of heavy rain, where there is significant surface runoff and the safety of
race participants is in jeopardy, all race events will cease.
Resolution No.
Page 6
16. Race participant team trucks may arrive no sooner than the Wednesday before the
race events. Equipment, race vehicles and some race participants/crews may remain
onsite for the duration of the weekend race event.
17. A Traffic Control Plan shall be developed that addresses traffic control at event
access areas. The traffic control plan shall include a parking plan and a traffic-
signing plan including the location of changeable message boards. Businesses
operating on Nirvana and Energy Way will be notified regarding the use of these
public roads for routing general public parking along their frontages to the parking
areas. The City Police and Engineering Departments shall approve the Traffic
Control Plan, respectively, prior to the start of the race events.
18. General clean up and trash pick-up of the pit area, spectator stands, foodlbeverage
area and parking lots shall occur on a continuous and as needed basis throughout the
race events to prevent trash and debris from leaving the site.
19. Post-event activities will essentially consist of site clean up. All trash and debris
generated by the proposed project will be removed. Any containers with hazardous
materials/waste will be properly disposed of in accordance with local, state and
federal laws. Disturbed areas of the parking and camping areas shall be stabilized to
prevent or reduce soil runoff.
20. During the time in-between racing weekends, the safety/security plan prepared for the
project will require that the general public parking access point from Energy Way be
closed off.
2 I. All temporary structures such as light poles, grandstand bleachers, canopies, portable
restroom facilities, and power generators may remain on the racetrack site after the
first racing event weekend if secured, or shall otherwise be disassembled and
relocated or removed from the site.
22. A 6-ft. high with razor wire temporary perimeter fence shall be erected to maintain a
division between the race event area and the MSCP preserve line to prevent the
intrusion of trash, debris or sediment to the MSCP area.
23. Temporary lighting will be limited to the pit area, overnight camping and vendor
staging areas. The track shall not be lighted. The lighting for these areas shall be
directed downward, and away from the Preserve.
24. A building permit will be required. Plans must comply with 2001 ADA, 2001 CVC,
and 2004 CEC requirements for temporary power poles, power supply generators,
and temporary seating grandstands and canopies. Structural calculations are required
for the bleachers. Provide a letter of approval for installation of bleachers, and
provide portable seating system details. The path of travel from parking areas and the
path of travel to restroom facilities shall be designed to meet ADA handicapped
accessibility code requirements.
Resolution No.
Page 7
25. As San Diego Gas and Electric has an overhead electric transmission line running
along the dirt access road to the camping site, measures should be taken to control
dust on the road, such as restricting speed and keeping the road dampened. The road
should be left in as good as, if not better condition than it is presently.
26. All Best Management Practices (BMPs) proposed in the submitted Storm Water
Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and its addendum shall be implemented before,
during, and after each race event, as required. It is required that a person nominated
by the applicant be in charge of conducting inspections and maintaining BMPs
before, during, and after the race events. The name and contact number of the
designated person shall be provided to the Storm Water Management Section.
27. It is required that the existing desilting basins remain operational and accessible at all
times. Storm runoff shall be directed to those desilting basins before leaving the site.
The desilting basins shall be maintained and cleaned by the applicant as necessary.
28. Barriers or fences are required to prevent race spectators from entering
environmentally sensitive areas adjacent to the race area as well as camping and
parking areas.
29. The existing site has two desilting basins along the south side of the quarry property.
The applicant is required to submit a plan showing the final grading of the site and
drainage patterns to demonstrate that all runoff leaving the project site pass through
the desilting basins.
30. A new berm has been constructed along sections of the Otay River. This berm needs
to have erosion control protection in the form of hydro seeding or bonded fiber
matrix.
3 I. The dirt access road leading to the proposed campsite on the south side of the Otay
River has been widened. Based on NPDES Regulations for soil disturbance, the
applicant is required to obtain coverage under the NPDES General Construction
Permit that includes the access road. A copy of the receipt of the Notice of Intent
shall be submitted to the Storm Water Management Section as soon as possible. The
SWPPP for the site shall be amended to include BMPs for the access road.
32. The applicant shall submit site plans showing and identifying all existing sewer lines,
water lines, and all easements located within the project boundary properties.
33. The applicant is required to maintain roadway access for San Diego Gas and Electric,
the City of Chula Vista, the City of San Diego, Otay River (SR-125) Construction,
and al1 other local, state, and federal governmental agencies that need access to sewer
lines, the water lines/aqueduct, toll way construction etc., in order to fulfil1 functions
that occur as part of business and governmental operations within the affected
properties.
Resolution No.
Page 8
34. Apply for a construction permit to perform work within public right-of- way to
remove and replace the curb, gutter and sidewalk located at the cul-de-sac terminus of
Energy Way that win provide access to the general public parking area. An
businesses located along the frontage of Energy Way and Nirvana Avenue shan be
notified regarding use of these roads for racing event traffic routing. In addition, if
there is any proposal for limiting parking by posting "No Parking" signs on Energy
Way and Nirvana Avenue during the racing events it shan be included for review in
the Traffic Control Plan.
35. The project applicant shall prepare an Emergency Medical and Safety Plan to be
approved by the Chula Vista Fire Chief. The plan shan detail, among other items,
emergency access routes, type of emergency vehicles required to adequately serve the
project, alternative access routes to be employed in the event of rain or damp
conditions, the variety of emergency medical services that can be provided by the
contract emergency medical company, chain of communication between event
sponsor and medical staff, number of ambulances present onsite and the number of
uniformed Chula Vista Fire Department staff needed onsite. A funy staffed Fire
Department engine company and Battalion Chief win be onsite during an race events.
36. Provide approved fire access from Energy Way to parking. Provide approved
emergency access within fenced areas. An access ways shan be no less than twenty
feet wide. Provide approved fire lane through vendors, pits, parking and camping
area. Provide access to the racetrack.
37. Provide plans showing location of parked fuel truck in relationship to entire event.
This truck shall be down wind of the entire event. Purchase a permit for hazardous
materials and submit manifest. Provide 20- ft. wide access to fuel truck. Provide 25-
ft. minimum from generators, 50-ft. from combustibles (tents) and post "No
Smoking" signage. Drums shan be bonded in an approved manner. Provide NFP A
704 signage. Any dispensing shall be provided with an approved means of secondary
containment. Provide at least a 2A40BC fire extinguisher. This applies to an fuel
trucks even if only delivering fuel.
38. Submit plans for an generator users such as race teams, food vendors, and carnival
areas. Submit plans and apply for a fireworks permit prior to event. Ensure that all
generators are grounded and fenced off. Apply for an additional permit for hazardous
materials. Provide a fire extinguisher on site.
39. Submit plans and apply for an necessary permits to the Fire Department for all
tents/canopies in related to the racing events. Obtain a letter of indemnification for
semi truck / race trailers from Fire Marshal. Obtain approved stand by from fire
department personnel.
40. Submit plans for the placement of grandstands to the Fire Department. Ensure correct
aisle ways/exit paths. An exit paths shan remain clear of an items. Provide clear fire
access and fire lane. Post "No Smoking" signage in pit areas. Obtain permit for the
Resolution No.
Page 9
pit areas for the storage area of hazardous materials prior to the first racing events.
Provide Emergency Medical Plan for review and approval by the Fire Chief prior to
the event.
41. Provide the Fire Department access to all of the camping areas. No campfires are
allowed or any open burning or the creation of open fire pits. Fenced area shall have
approved number of emergency exiting. Access roads to any of the camping areas
shall be no less than twenty feet wide.
42. The Applicant shall provide signs at all of the entrances to the racing event indicating
the following: California Vehicle Code (CVC) 22658: (a) Except as provided in
Section 22658.2, the owner or person in lawful possession of any private property,
within one hour of notifying, by telephone or, if impractical, by the most expeditious
means available, the local traffic law enforcement agency, may cause the removal of
a vehicle parked on the property to the nearest public garage under any of the
following circumstances: (I) There is displayed, in plain view at all entrances to the
property, a sign not less than 17 by 22 inches in size, with lettering not less than one
inch in height, prohibiting public parking and indicating that vehicles will be removed
at the owner's expense, and containing the telephone number of the local traffic law
enforcement agency. The sign may also indicate that a citation may also be issued for
the violation.
43. The Applicant's representative Championship Off-Road Racing (CORR)
management team shall provide a Security Plan for review and approval by the Police
Department's Special Events & Special Investigations Unit and subject to final
review and approval by the Police Chief. Compliance with the Security Plan
approved by the Police Chief is a condition of this permit.
44. The Applicant's representative CORR management team shall obtain and provide all
required Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) permits to the Police Department's
Special Events & Special Investigations Unit prior to any sales of alcohol on the
project boundary site at the racing and entertainment events. The sale of alcoholic
beverages may occur during the races and shall cease one hour prior to the end of the
races. Compliance with the limitation to the sales of alcohol is a condition of this
permit.
45. The Applicant shall furnish the Chula Vista Police Department, Fire Department,
American Medical Response, and CORR management team a means for two-way
radio communication during the hours of operation.
46. Provide a minimum 20-ft. wide parking aisle to every parking space area. Parking
aisles shall serve a maximum double-loaded row of vehicles. Tandem parking is
prohibited.
47. Provide an Emergency Medical Plan for review and approval by the Fire Chief prior
to the commencement of the first racing event.
Resolution No.
Page 10
48. The Applicant shall provide proof of liability insurance coverage naming the City of
Chula Vista as an additionally insured party in the amount of $10 million. The
liability insurance policy shall be reviewed and approved by the Risk Management
Department two weeks prior to the event.
49. Noise impacts adjacent to the preserve shall be minimized. Berms and/or walls shall
be constructed adjacent to uses that introduce noises that could impact or interfere
with wildlife utilization. The proposed project shall construct a noise attenuation
barrier along the backs of all grandstands adjacent to the preserve to the satisfaction
of the City's Environmental Review Coordinator and Director of Planning and
Building.
50. The Applicant shall provide acoustical monitoring at the edge of and within sensitive
habitat areas including designated MSCP Preserve areas to the satisfaction of the
Environmental Review Coordinator throughout all pre-race events and the race event
weekend. Monitoring locations shall be reviewed, and approved by the City's
biological consultant prior to the commencement of any race related activity. Upon
completion of the acoustical monitoring, a summary report shall be provided to City
staff.
51. The Applicant shall provide biological monitoring within sensItIve habitat areas
including designated MSCP Preserve areas to the satisfaction of the Environmental
Review Coordinator throughout the race event weekend to ensure implementation of
appropriate resource protection measures. Monitoring shall include, but is not limited
to, the following: changes in sensitive species behavior (most notably coastal
California gnatcatchers and least Bell's vireo), intrusions into the MSCP Preserve,
visible trampling of natural vegetation adjacent to the project footprint, and edge
effects at the border of the MSCP preserve and adjacent to the project footprint.
Monitoring locations shall focus on adjacent Preserve areas, the locations of which
shall be reviewed and approved by the City's biological consultant prior to the
commencement of any race related activities. Upon completion of the biological
monitoring, a report summarizing the general baseline biological conditions (i.e., pre-
race conditions), the observed effects of race related activities on biological
resources, and the applicant's conformance to the City's adjacency management
guidelines shall be provided to City staff.
52. Prominently colored, well-installed fencing shall be in place wherever race related
operations, including access roads, parking areas, camping areas, and track are
adjacent to sensitive vegetation communities and/or other biological resources, as
identified by a qualified monitoring biologist. Fences will provide a minimum of a
I OO-foot buffer, where feasible, between the project footprint and the Preserve.
53. Sensitive habitat signage shall be installed approximately every 150' along all fences
and Preserve edges.
Resolution No.
Page II
54. Use of the existing Otay River access road (Parking and Camping Areas to Track
Area) and existing Wolf Canyon access road during the race weekend(s) by
pedestrians is strictly prohibited. On-site security staff shall direct race patrons to the
appropriate shuttle pick-up/drop-offlocations. Enforcement of this condition shall be
detailed in the proponents security plan which shall be reviewed and approved by the
city's Environmental Review Coordinator prior to the commencement of any race
related activities.
55. Lighting of all developed areas adjacent to the Preserve shall be directed away from
the Preserve, wherever feasible and consistent with public safety. In compliance with
the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, all lighting shall be shielded and directed away
from the Preserve. Prior to the commencement of any race related activities, a
lighting plan and photometric analysis shall be submitted to the City's Environmental
Review Coordinator for review and approval. The lighting plan shall illustrate the
location of the proposed lighting standards and type of shielding measures. Low-
pressure sodium lighting shall be used if feasible and shall be subject to the approval
of the City's Environmental Review Coordinator.
56. Parking and camping stalls shall be sited a minimum of 100 feet away from the
Preserve edge and/or any identified areas containing sensitive biological and
archeological resources. Parking and camping stalls shall be sited under the direction
of a qualified biologist and archeologist.
57. Prior to approval of the proposed CUP, the project applicant shall prepare a security
plan to be approved by the Chula Vista Police Chief and the City's Environmental
Review Coordinator. The security plan shall detail, among other items, the number of
security personnel provided, general distribution of security throughout the race event
including Preserve areas, and number of uniformed Chula Vista police staff required.
In order to maintain the biological integrity of the adjacent Preserve areas, the
security plan shall further describe all activities that are prohibited within or adjacent
to Preserve areas as well as address how violations are to be processed. Prohibited
activities include, but are not limited to, use of illegal fireworks, campfires, use of
personal ATV's within the project area including camping and parking areas,
encroachment into designated Preserve areas and/or sensitive habitat areas, and
pedestrian use of the Otay River and Wolf Canyon shuttle routes.
58. The Applicant shall enforce the following rules in the camping area: I) an I I p.m.
curfew on noise disturbance (e.g., no loud speaking equipment or stereos will be
allowed), proper disposal of all trash, a prohibition on leaving the campground and
intruding into the adjacent Preserve areas, and a prohibition on the personal use of
fireworks. All campers should receive a leaflet explaining the campground rules,
how campers will be able to access the racetrack (i.e., via shuttle onlv), and the
biological sensitivity of the surrounding areas.
59. This permit shall be subject to any and all new, modified or deleted conditions
imposed after approval of this permit to advance a legitimate governmental interest
Resolution No.
Page 12
related to health, safety or welfare which the City shall impose after advance written
notice to the Permittee and after the City has given to the Permittee the right to be
heard with regard thereto.
60. Applicant/operator shall and does hereby agree to indemnify, protect, defend and hold
harmless City, its Council members, officers, employees, agents and representatives,
from and against any and all liabilities, losses, damages, demands, claims and costs,
including court costs and attorneys' fees (collectively, "liabilities") incurred by the
City arising, directly or indirectly, from (a) City's approval and issuance of this
Conditional Use Permit (PCC-07-063) and the Final Mitigated Negative Declaration
for this Conditional Use Permit allowing for a Temporary Championship Off-Road
Race (IS-07-030) and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, (b) City's
approval or issuance of any other permit or action, whether discretionary or non-
discretionary, in connection with the use contemplated herein, and (c) the activities
conducted in conjunction with this Conditional Use Permit and Final Mitigated
Negative Declaration, including all claims for damages for alleged personal injuries
or property damage from any person or entity, whether such injury or damage is
allegedly caused by applicant/operator, race participants, vendors, or spectators.
Applicant/operator shall acknowledge their agreement to this provision by executing
a copy of this conditional use permit where indicated, below. Applicant's/operator's
compliance with this provision is an express condition of this conditional use permit
and this provision shall be binding on any and all of Applicant' s/operator' s successors
and assigns.
H. EXECUTION AND RECORDATION OF RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL
The property owner and the applicant shall execute this document by signing the lines
provided below, said execution indicating that the property owner and applicant have
each read, understood, and agreed to the conditions contained herein. Upon execution,
this document shall be recorded with the County Clerk of the County of San Diego, at the
sole expense of the property owner and/or applicant, and a signed, stamped copy of this
recorded document within ten days of recordation to the City Clerk shall indicate the
property owners/applicant's desire that the project, and the corresponding application for
building permits and/or a business license, be held in abeyance without approval. Said
document will also be on file in the City Clerk's Office and known as document No.
Signature of James Baldwin
ApplicantlProperty Owner
Date
Signature of Applicant's Event Representative
From Championship Off-Road Racing (CORR)
Date
Resolution No.
Page 13
I. INVALIDITY; AUTOMATIC REVOCATION
It is the intention of the City Council that its adoption of this Resolution is dependent
upon the enforceability of each and every term, provision, and condition herein stated;
and that in the event that anyone or more terms, provisions, or conditions are determined
by a Court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable, this
resolution and the permit shall be deemed to be automatically revoked and of no further
force and effect ab initio.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Jim Sandoval
Planning and Building Director
Ann. Moore
City Attorney
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista,
California, this 5th day of June, 2007, by the following vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Council members:
Council members:
Council members:
Council members:
Cheryl Cox, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan Bigelow, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO )
CITY OF CHULA VISTA)
I, Susan Bigelow, City Clerk of Chula Vista, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution No. was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council at a
regular meeting of the Chula Vista City Council held on the 5th day of June 2007.
Executed this 5th day of June 2007.
Susan Bigelow, City Clerk
J :IPLAI'I'INCIHAROLDIRESOLUTlONSIPCC-07-063CCRESO.DOC
OTAY
LANDFILL
VILLAGE 3
IVIAJN ST
VILLAGE 4
EXISTING
ROCK QUARRY
COORS
AMPHITHEATRE
NORTH
MSCP
PRESERVE
~ Project Area
MSCP Preserve
~\ft-
-fJ-
-~
~-
OlY OF
CHULA VISTA
Planning & Building Department
Planning Division
APPLICATION . DEVELOPMENT PROCESSING . TYPE A
Part 1
Type of Review Requested
L><:J Conditional Use Permit
D Design Review
D Variance
D Special Use Permit (redevelopment area only)
D Misc.
Application Information
Applicant Name Championship Off-Road Racinq (CaRR)
Applicant Address 610 West Ash Street. Suite 1500, San Dieqo. CA 92101
Contact Name Ranie Hunter Phone 619-234-4050 ext 107
Applicant's Interest in Property (If applicant is not the owner. th authorization signature at the end of this form is
required to process this request.) 181 Own 0 Rent 0 Other:
ArchitecUAgent: Address:
Contact Name: Phone:
Primary contact is: 181 Applicant 0 ArchitecUAgent 181 Email ofprimarycontact:rhunter@otavranch.com
General Project Description (all types)
Project Name: 2007 CaRR Event Proposed Use: Off-Road Racinq
General Description of Proposed Project: See Attached Exhibit A
Has this project received pre-application review comments? 0 Yes (Date:)
181 No
Subject Property Information (all types)
Location/Street Address:2041 Heritaqe Road, Chula Vista. CA 91913
Assessor's Parcel #: see attached Total Acreage: 89 Redevelopment Area (if applicable): N/A
General Plan Designation: OS Zone Designation:N/A
Planned Community (if applicable): Otav Ranch (Portion)
Current Land Use: Reclaimed Rock Quarrv Within Montgomery Speci(ic Plan? 0 Yes ~ No
Proposed Project (all types)
Type of use proposed: 0 Residential DCommercial
Landscape Coverage ('Yo of lot):
o Industrial [8J Other:Temporarv Special Event
Building Coverage ('Yo of lot):
276 Fourth Avenue I Chula Vista I California I 91910 I (619) 691-5101
Assessor's Parcel #'s:
. 644-060-06
. 645-030-19
. 644-060-07
. 644-060-08
. 644-060-09
. 644-060-12
. 644-060-11
~\f?
-tl-
-::::----:--
APPLICATION . DEVELOPMENT PROCESSING . TYPE A
Part 2
CllYOF
CHULA VISTA
Residential Project Summary
Type of dwelling unit(s): N/A
Number of Jots:
Dwelling units:
PROPOSED
EXISTING
1 Bedroom
2 Bedroom
3+ Bedroom
TOTAL
Density (DU/acre):
Maximum Duilding height:
Minimum lot size:
Average lot size: _
Parking Spaces:
Required by code: Provided:
Type of parking (i.e. size; whether covered, etc.):
Open space description (acres each of private, common, and landscaping):
Non-Residential Project Summary
Gross floor area: N/A Proposed: Existing: N/A Building Height: N/A
Hours of operation (days & hours): Race Dav Schedule: 7am to 7pm (except Fri. Wam to 5pm); Limited
weekday testinq 9am to 5pm. Dates: June 8-10 and September 28-30
Anticipated number of employees: 40 Staff/50 misc vendors Maximum number of employees at anyone
time: 40 Staff
Number and ages of students/children (if applicable): N/A Seating capacity: 10,000
Parking Spaces:
Required by code: N/A Provided: 7150 Approximatelv
Type of parking (i.e. size; whether covered, etc.): open field
Authorization
Print applicant name:Ja~ldWin , <~dt--
Applicant Signature: : J / 'l,1iLL, ~'C../
Date:
_~)dS/l)?
Print owner name*:, 'd.
Owner Signature*~-'r>~/n~ ~- ~
Date:
~~/D7
,
276 Fourth Avenue I Chula Vista I California I 91910 I (619) 691-5101
-~----,-~.~--~-----_... --- --~~~-
_._~--_._._-_._,-
~!~
-1<1-
--
--
Planning & Building Department
Planning Division I Development Processing
OlY OF
CHULA VISTA
~--..----~~--_.---
APPLICATION APPENDIX A
Project Description & Justification
Project Name: CORR Race Events
Applicant Name: Championship Off-Road Racinq (CORR)
Please fully describe the proposed project, any and all construction that may be accomplished as a result of
approval of this project. and the project's benefits to yourself, the property, the neighborhood, and the City
of Chula vista. Include any details necessary to adequately explain the scope and/or operation of the
proposed project. You may include any background information and supporting stalements regarding the
reasons for, or appropriateness of, the application. Use an addendum sheet if necessary.
For all Conditional Use Permits or Variances, please address the required "findings" as listed in the
Application Procedural Guide.
DESCRIPTION AND JUSTIFICATION: Temporary Championship Off-Road Racinq Event. The proposed
project is a temporary off-road racinq event proposed on the reclaimed portion of the Rock Quarry located
adjacent to the Otav River Valley, a portion of Otav Ranch Villaqe Three (parkinq) and the western Active
Recreation Area within the Otay River Valley (campinq). The event will occur on two weekends. June 8 -
10 and September 21 - 23.2007. Site preparation will include installation of qrandstands. securitv liqhtinq
and storm water BMPs. The racinq venue is proposed within the southern portion of the Rock Quarry which
has been reclaimed and is lonqer subiect to active mininq operations. Parkinq will occur on aqricultural land
within a portion of Otav Ranch Villaqe Three. The event area will be fenced. Vehicular entrances to
parkinq lots will be via existinq dirt roads from Main Street and Heritaqe Road. Event sponsors and the Citv
will provide fire, police and emerqency services. A temporary traffic control plan will be developed to
facilitate arrival and departure from parkinq lot areas. Overniqht campinq is proposed within a 27 acre
parcel desiqnated for "Active Recreation" within the MSCP and Otay Vallev Reqional Park Concept Plan.
Races will occur durinq davtime hours. Temporary niqht liqhtinq will be provided. Permits will be required to
address non-storm water discharqes. The project requires a Conditional Use Permit.
------------
- ---------
---------
-----------------
-------------------------
--
------
- ------------------
- ----------------------
--- ----
---
276 Fourth Avenue I Chula Vista I California I 91910 I (619) 691-5101
~ \ ft...
-.-
~--~
---
--
CllY OF
CHULA VISTA
Planning & Building Department
Planning Division I Development Processing
--------
APPLICATION APPENDIX B
Disclosure Statement
Pursuant to Council Policy 101-01, prior to any action upon matters that will require discretionary action by
the Council, Planning Commission and all other official bodies of the City. a statemenl of disclosure of certain
ownership or financial interests. payments, or campaign contributions for a City of Chula Vista election must
be filed. The following information must be disclosed:
1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the property that is the subject of the
application or the contract, e.g., owner, applicant, contractor. subcontractor, material supplier.
Jim Baldwin
Rimrock Quarry
2. If any person* identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all
individuals with a $2000 investment in the business (corporation/partnership) entity.
Jim Baldwin
3. If any person* identified pursuant to (1) above is a non-profit organization or 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. Please identify every person, including any agents, employees, consultants, or independent
contractors you have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter.
Kim John Kilkennv Ranie Hunter
Rob Cameron Lex Williman
Kent Aden
5. Has any person* associated with this contract had any financial dealings with an official** of the City
of Chula Vista as it relates to this contract within the past 12 months. Yes ~ No ~
If Yes. briefly describe the nature of the financial interest the official** may have in this contract.
6. Have you made a contribution of more than $250 within the past twelve (12) months to a current
member of the Chula Vista City Council? No ~ Yes 0 If yes, which Council Member?
276 Fourth Avenue I Chula Vista I California I 91910 I (619) 691-5101
~\f?
-.-
F~~
--
--
olY OF
CHULA VISTA
Planning & Building Department
Planning Division I Development Processmg
APPLICATION APPENDIX B
Disclosure Statement - Page 2
7. Have you provided more than $340 (or an item of equivalent value) to an official** of the City of Chula
Vista in the past twelve (12) months? (This includes being a source of income, money to retire a legal
debt, gift, loan, etc.) Yes D- No ~
If Yes, which official" and what was the nature of item provided?
( /1 ~~
'r/1211~ /
Signature of Contractor/Applicant
Date: March 28. 2007
Ranie Hunter
Print or type name of Contractor/Applicant
.
Person is defined as: any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint venture. association, social club,
fraternal organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate. any other county, city,
municipality, district, or other political subdivision, -or any other group or combination acting as a
unit.
**
Official includes, but is not limited to: Mayor, Council member, Planning Commissioner. Member of
a board, commission, or committee of the City, employee, or staff members.
276 Fourth Avenue I Chula Vista I California I 91910 I (619) 691-5101
~\f?
-.-
-- .:
~~
OlY OF
(HULA VISTA
Planning & Building Department
Planning DivislOn I Development Processing
APPLICATION APPENDIX C
Development Permit Processing Agreement
Permit Applicant:
Applicant's Address:
Type of Permit:
Agreement Date:
Deposit Amount:
James P. Baldwin
610 West Ash Street. Suite 1500. San DieQo. CA 92101
Conditional Use Permit Temp.
This Agreement ("Agreement") between the City of Chula Vista, a chartered municipal corporation ("City") and the
forenamed applicant for a development permit ("Applicant"). effective as of the Agreement Date set forth above, is made
with reference to the following facts:
Whereas, Applicant has applied to the City for a permit of the type aforereferenced ("Permit") which the City has
required to be obtained as a condition to permitting Applicant to develop a parcel of property; and,
Whereas. the City will incur expenses in order to process said permit through the various departments and before
the various boards and commissions of the City ("Processing Services"): and.
Whereas the purpose of this agreement is to reimburse the City for all expenses it will incur in connection with
providing the Processing Services;
Now, therefore. the parties do hereby agree. in exchange for the mutual promises herein contained. as follows:
1. Applicant's Duty to Pay.
Applicant shall pay all of City's expenses incurred in providing Processing Services related to Applicant's Permit. including
all of City's direct and overhead costs related thereto. This duty of Applicant shall be referred to herein as "Applicant's
Duty to Pay."
1. 1. Applicant's Deposit Duty.
As partial performance of Applicant's Duty to Pay. Applicant shall deposit the amount aforereferenced ("Deposit").
1.1.1. City shall charge its lawful expenses incurred in providing Processing Services against
Applicant's Deposit. If, after the conclusion of processing Applicant's Permit. any portion of the
Deposit remains. City shall return said balance to Applicant without interest thereon. If, during the
processing of Applicant's Permit, the amount of the Deposit becomes exhausted. or is imminently
likely to become exhausted in the opinion of the e City, upon notice of same by City. Applicant
shall forthwith provide such additional deposit as City shall calculate as reasonably necessary to
continue Processing Services. The duty of Applicant to initially deposit and to supplement said
deposit as herein required shall be known as "Applicant's Deposit Duty".
2. City's Duty
City shall. upon the condition that Applicant is no in breach of Applicant's Duty to Payor Applicant's Deposit Duty,
use good faith to provide processing services in relation to Applicant's Permit application.
2.1. City shall have no liability hereunder to Applicant for the failure to process Applicant's Permit application. or for
failure to process Applicant's Permit within the time frame requested by Applicant or estimated by City.
276 Fourth Avenue I Chula Vista I California I 91910 I (619) 691-5101
~\/~
-11-
~-~
~.~-~---
CllY Of
(HULA VISTA
Planning & Building Department
Planning Division I Development Processing
Development Permit Processing Agreement - Page 2
2.2. By execution of this agreement Applicant shall have no right to the Permit for which Applicant has applied.
City shall use its discretion in valuating Applicant's Permit Application without regard to Applicant's promise to pay for the
Processing Services. or the execution of the Agreement.
3. Remedies.
3.1. Suspension of Processing
In addition to all other rights and remedies which the City shall otherwise have at law or equity, the City has the
right to suspend and/or withhold the processing of the Permit which is the subject matter of this Agreement, as well as the
Permit which may be the subject matter of any other Permit which Applicant has before the City.
3.2. Civil Collection
In addition to all other rights and remedies which the City shall otherwise have at law or equity. the City has the
right to collect all sums which are or may become due hereunder by civil action, and upon instituting litigation to collect
same. the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees and costs.
4. Miscellaneous.
4.1 Notices.
All notices. demands or requests provided for or permitted to be given pursuant to this Agreement must be in
writing. All notices. demands and requests to be sent to any party shall be deemed to have been properly given or served
if personally served or deposited in the United States mail, addressed to such party, postage prepaid, registered or
certified. with return receipt requested at the addresses identified adjacent to the signatures of the parties represented.
4.2 Governing LawNenue.
This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California.
Any action arising under or relating to this Agreement shall be brought only in the federal or state courts located in San
Diego County, State of California, and if applicable. the City of Chula Vista. or as close thereto as possible. Venue for this
Agreement. and performance hereunder, shall be the City of Chula Vista.
4.3. Multiple Signatories.
If there are multiple signatories to this agreement on behalf of Applicant. each of such signatories shall be
jointly and severally liable for the performance of Applicant's duties herein set forth.
4.4. Signatory Authority.
This signatory to this agreement hereby warrants and represents that he is the duly designated agent for the
Applicant and has been duly authorized by the Applicant to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Applicant. Signatory
shall be personally liable for Applicant's Duty to Pay and Applicant's Duty to Deposit in the event he has not been
authorized to execute this Agreement by Applicant.
4.5 Hold Harmless.
Applicant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, its elected and appointed officers and
employees, from and against any claims, suits, actions or proceedings, judicial or administrative, for writs, orders,
injunction or other relief, damages, liability. cost and expense (including without limitation attorneys' fees) arising out of
City's actions in processing or issuing Applicant's Permit. or in exercising any discretion related thereto including but not
limited to the giving of proper environmental review. the holding of public hearings. the extension of due process rights.
except only for those claims. suits. actions or proceedings arising from the sole negligence or sole willful conduct of the
City, its officers. or employees known to. but not objected to. by the Applicant. Applicant's indemnification shall include
any and all costs. expenses, attorney's fees and liability incurred by the City, its officers, agents. or employees in
defending against such claims. whether the same proceed to judgement or not. Further. Applicant, at its own expense.
shall. upon written request by the City. defend any such suit or action brought against the City. its officers, agents. or
employees. Applicant's indemnification of City shall not be limited by any prior or subsequent declaration by the
276 Fourth Avenue I Chula Vista I California I 91910 I (619) 691-5101
---~-----
~\r?-
-tJ-
~~~
-~---~_.~
CITY OF
CHULA VISTA
Planning & Building Department
Planning Division I Development Processing
-_._._--~
Development Permit Processing Agreement - Page 3
Applicant. At its sole discretion, the City may participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action. but such
participation shall not relieve the applicant of any obligation imposed by this condition.
4.6 Administrative Claims Requirements and Procedures.
No suit or arbitration shall be brought arising out of this agreement against the City unless a claim has first
been presented in writing and filed with the City of Chula Vista and acted upon by the City of Chula Vista in accordance
with the procedures set forth in Chapter 1 .34 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, as same may from time to time be
amended. the provisions of which are incorporated by this reference as if fully set forth herein. and such policies and
procedures used by the City in the implementation of same. Upon request by City, Consultant shall meet and confer in
good faith with City for the purpose of resolving any dispute over the terms of this Agreement.
Now therefore, the parties hereto. having read and understood the terms and conditions of this agreement, do hereby
express their consent to the terms hereof by setting their hand hereto on the date set forth adjacent thereto.
Dated:
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista. CA
By:
Dated: March 28. 2007 James P. Baldwin
. / 610 West Ash Street. Suite 1500
By: ~/J1/f2~~;;;;eqo. CA 92101
276 Fourth Avenue I Chula Vista I California I 91910 I (619) 691-5101
CHAMPiONSHIP
OFF ROAD RACING
Chula Vista International Raceway
Mitigated Negative Declaration
PROJECT NAME:
Conditional Use Permit for Temporary
Championship Off-Road Race 2007
PROJECT LOCATION:
East of the existing terminus of Main Street, east of
Heritage Road
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.:
644-030-19-00,644-060-06-00,644-060-07-00,
644-060-08-00, 644-060-09-00, 644-060- I 2-00
PROJECT APPLICANT:
James P. Baldwin
CASE NO.:
IS-07 -030
DATE OF DRAFT DOCUMENT:
April 2Q+, 2007
DATE OF RESOURCE
CONSER V AnON COMMISSION
MEETING:
Mav 7,2007
DATE OF FINAL DOCUMENT:
PREPARED BY:
Glen Laube, Environmental Projects Manager
Revisions made to this document subsequent to the issuance of the Notice of Availabilitv of
the draft Miti!!ated Ne!!ative Declaration are denoted bv underline.
A. BACKGROUND
As described in detail in Section B below, the proposed project is the temporary use--fer
ChaH,pioHship Off road Racing (COR.c'l), _of a portion of the Otav Ranch Pit Rock Quarry
located adjacent to the Otay River Valley, a portion of Otay Ranch Village Three (paorkiHg), and
a portion of the western Active Recreation Area within the Otay River Valley (eamping) for the
2007 Championship Off-road Racing (CORR) event. CORR was held on the Village Two and
Four project sites for the 2005 and 2006 temporary race events, subject to Conditional Use
Permits (CUP) for those events.
This Mitigated Negative Declaration MNP-(hereinafter referred to as MND IS-07-030) evaluates
the potential environmental effects from site preparation, off-road racing and post-racing
activities associated with the proposed two-weekend 2007 race events. This MND has been
Page 1 of 36'Mi I
prepared by the City as the lead agency and in conformance with 915070, subsection (a), of the
State CEQA Guidelines.
B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project is a temporary event involving off-road racing on the portion of the Rock
Quarry located adjacent to the Otay River Valley, a portion of Otay Ranch Village Three
(parking) and the western Active Recreation Area within the Otay River Valley (camping)
(Figures I and 2). The event will occur over two, non-consecutive weekends, June 8 - 10 and
September 28 - 30, 2007. Site preparation will include installation of grandstands, security
lighting and fencing, orange bio fencing (orange bio fencing, chain-link, three-strand) to restrict
access to the City's MSCP Preserve, signage for sensitive habitat areas, and storm water BMPs.
The racing venue is proposed within the southern portion of the Otav Ranch Pit Rock Quarry
which is no longer subject to resource extraction operations. Parking wi1l occur on agricultural
land within a portion of Otay Ranch Village Three. Vehicular entrances to parking lots will be
via existing dirt roads from Main Street, Heritage Road, and Energy Way. Event sponsors and
the City will provide fire, police and emergency services. A temporary traffic control plan will
be developed to facilitate arrival and departure from parking lot areas. Overnight camping is
proposed within a 27-acre parcel designated for "Active Recreation" within the City's General
Plan. Races will occur during daytime hours only; however, temporary night lighting will be
provided for secnrity purposes. Permits will be required to address non-storm water discharges.
The project requires a Conditional Use Permit.
Event-related activities include:
1. Races on Saturdays and Sundays of event weekends.
2. Pre-race track trials and qualifications (Friday before event weekends)
3. Friday through Sunday overnight camping for race participants and event attendees on
evcnt weekends.
4. Event Parking.
5. Nighttime security lighting.
6. Limited fire works.
7. Live music before, during and after race events.
The site layout and orientation of uses for the proposed CORR are graphically depicted on
Figure 3. The site plan includes a temporary racetrack, standslbleachers for spectators, food
areas, pit areas for race participants, a camping area, and parking areas. The project proposes to
include structural clements to provide sound attenuation, including, but not limited to,
installation of plywood to the back of the grandstands. The plywood ban-jer would be mounted
on the back of four grandstand stmctures, each measuring 234 feet in width and 60 feet in height.
The thickness of the plywood would be a minimum Y2 inch. The project also includes fencing to
provide security and to avoid unauthorized access to adjacent Preserve areas. The location of
sound attenuation elements and fencing are also shown on Figure 3.
Page 2 of36;).6 I
Orange
County
Ri-v:er~ County
Fallbrook
Camp
Pendleton
Oceanside
Valley
Center
Escondida
La Jolla
Alpine
San Diego
Coronado
o
Imperial
Beach
Mexico
o
4
,Miles
8
Championship Off-Road Race MND I FIGURE I
Regional Map 1
~.IT'-
~, '-
,
,,~ i
,
-'?~~~''''''
i:fr;;~J- - ~-
'.'
o
'"
"D
JI'fo-",_
I
!
^'
{'-.--.i,.~ .
c=--
"or,
>
-\
,..
f r-' ~.:.:!-- ~ ~_~ _~"
~ IL_:,-.L ~1-;s.L'>----! '".-e-,i\-'" ~
D U --tr - I .\'11__ ... .,G' I ,-'
,=-~, 'v"" ~ 11. !..... - ' JI ',,_',_ . ,-- ", ,t .
.} __~~ ~ AI E...~' ~ =: :;:. ~:.: ' , --:-: .-"- -- _,' /",' "':: I !A]
~-"-"":--=-~ - ::',f.:~ ~~>-~Li;s .-~~~~""1"""""""
:1 "ff, ~'" . ! ,0 T :\ A\", <1'
U~G~ 7.5 Minute se;ie~.;~.~~i, B~ach &Otay M'es~~'uad;~ngleS () .. 20;;"
;.- :-:.-
..-.:
b
- L
-- --- .-....
."f
-'
'"
'\
\
\
, \
\
'\
('1:>irl':-i0-,
"
"
"
~
o
.,
l:'~:
'"
;-
"'
".
,__ J~i_~:;"
^
BASE MAP SOURCE:
,
I
I
r' "~f'"~"->
I
I
101'
c.1'o(\ -
_~.-'-.R
.."'...
J
;
'---',.~~
,t>..
,
"- ,\ () \ " v
_,-"'i -
"- < '
l .
O'
\-;
"
'f'
./" '
0;\-..... ';
. .:!!-t '<':'>o-,~
',.
"
'., " ,.....
":--</,0
?"'....~:: ~
"
"J
,
'-,~
".,.
'^
';,''v_=.
::"'(o.r.ca~''-'~'.~ ...~
,,,,A,,;,':-' ---~'=<.
"
,
."
".
.f
#
"
'--....~
'P~;-kirl~i ......
I '"
~," ! .-~'"Ji
." .~__ 'V. ;.
~ 1.'-
;;
'.'.
-
,
.,
.;J'
q;.Q
-
.
"
"
.
.,
"
"
.n
..
,~.,~
~.~t'./ ..._
__,.' o~o .
/..;{-
.' ..,0
.
.,
...
;f~~3~~
~-'-
--'''''''''=---
IJ --.. ~'<.:~., , -/,:" ....,... fiE '" "
.:.; i>~~+~~~37 -,..-'-{ '.
~.~..;..;e,.fln. .' 0 l' rA Y .:
-"',' ~~ ----:-_?~---:_-::."'..:--,.-.:
~~-;;;:-~r:fich?, ,'c ;<-camping->~-H_." _-
."--""'~-~-"~~.!:~~.,,;:;., ._"'---....~-,~-.: . -'
~ .'
.
~:-... ...
"'-'.'- ..
\ ~,-'"'"
\
" -.1
, ,-~
"-:';:'
l:"~
:~>~~1
~. 1..",J" __ _
1,>':--r' '.
-'~., '"I -=-=.:
'r lr -~,
",: ~
X},t J,i
"\ .
c".. ___
-.,.
v-
I
.n
.iZ.
~'t
=7~I--
.,~,
~.--:.,,---
>-,
..
.'........--
,
/~
I
'.
'(-
,
11
,Ii
f;
J.
"
,__-c-= "'~>---"~
i
~
.'fo-rlO~
,-:"
---,--~---==-,--",
I'
k',Hn'N~
.-' .
:::28
r' L E L D
,
I
.\(;XII_I,\II.Y
I
~ ;\ \; A L
A II<
,-
, '
~t4 ;h2
'.'
~
" I~-
1
.'
--
Championship Off.Road Race MND I FIGURE I
Vicinity Map 2
.
"
.
~
'"
.
::i Q)
. "
'Ii C
.c ~
<.> 6
iQ in
I~ 0~ I
'" '"
z 0
~ '.j:j
'" '"
u <.>
~~
iiJ...
'* ~
;g~
.9- CD
.<: <.>
~ '"
.~ a:
~'i
J;! II>
U 0
CI..
E
c..
Additional noise attenuation is provided by existing terrain/topography on the north and east
sides of the track area. Specifically, an approximate 15 foot-high shear rock face separates the
track from the adjacent open space areas located to the east.
It should be noted that quarry operations are ongoing within the boundaries of and pursuant to an
approved Reclamation Plan under the California Surface Mining and Reclamation Act. Grading
and leveling of the track is being conducted under the Reclamation Plan and is not subject to
additional environmental review or approvals by the City of Chula Vista. As noted above, site
preparation that is considered part of the use that is subject to the CUP includes installation of
grandstands, security lighting and fencing, orange bio fencing (orange bio fencing, chain-link,
three-strand) to restrict access to the City's MSCP Preserve, signage for sensitive habitat areas,
and storm water BMPs. Also, this MND addresses all activities that are associated with the race
operation, including the use of the track that is created under separate permits.
CORR Access and Parkin!!
It is anticipated that the CORR event will draw approximately 10,000 spectators per day from the
San Diego County region. Freeway access to the CORR event will be from the Main Street
interchange at 1-805, located approximately two miles to the west. Entrances into the race area
will be provided from Wiley Road, which is the existing quarry access road, and Energy Way
located within the industrial area south of the Otay Landfill.
A total of 7,440 parking spaces will be provided in the designated parking area within Village
Three. Access to the Village Three parking area will be provided Energy Road to the west. A
shuttle will be provided to transport patrons from the camping area to the track area. The Village
Three parking area is on agricultural land that has been mowed. By maintaining the root
structure, dust will be minimized in these areas, and agricultural activities can resume after the
last CORR event.
Access to the parking area in Village Three will require minor modifications to the cul-de-sac
located at the eastern terminus of Energy Way. Modifications to the Energy Way cul-de-sac
include temporary replacement of the existing curb and chain link fence with asphalt driveway
an ancillary BMPs including but not limited to crushed gravel and/or "rumble plates".
Temporary BMP to be employed at this location are further detailed in the project's Storm Water
Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP).
No race-event parking will be permitted in non-designated areas. Race-event staff members will
be positioned to direct race spectators into designated parking areas. Parking will be prohibited
along Wiley Road, cast of Main Street with the exccption of the designated VIP parking areas
located within the southwestern area of the cxisting quarry site that are currently used for
transport staging and weigh-in (i.e., scales area).
Access to the camping area will be provided via an existing dirt road located off existing
Heritage Road. From the camping area, race patrons will be shuttled across the Otay River via an
existing, elevated easement road. Pedestrian access through Wolf Canyon and across the Otay
River will be prohibited and monitored by on-site security staff.
Page 6 of36~ I
Site Preparation Phase
Site preparation activities associated with site preparation involve minor leveling of the track and
other previously graded areas, mowing of previously mowed areas, set up for the pit area for race
crews, spectator stands and food service areas, and installation of Best Management Practices
(BMPs) to control erosion and sediment transport and to contain hazardous material storage
areas. As noted previously, the track and surrounding areas within the boundary of the
Reclamation Plan will be graded/leveealeveled as part of the reclamation activities of the
existing quarry.
Existing dirt access roads off of Main Street will provide access to VIP parking areas and the
race event area. No new grading will be required for the access roads. Watering of the access
roads and all cleared areas will occur throughout site preparation to minimize dust emissions.
Gravel may also be laid down at transition areas from dirt to paved surfaces to reduce dust.
The maintenance area for race vehicles (pit areas) will be located to the west of the racetrack
(Figure 3). These areas, as well as the storage area for hazardous materials/waste and restroom
areas, will be lined with an impervious material to prevent spills and potential leakage of
automobile fluids and other materials into the ground or any waterways. In addition, any
storage, handling or disposal of hazardous materials/waste will be in accordance with local, state
and federal laws.
Because the CORR event is temporary, no permanent utilities wil1 be constructed. Generators for
lighting and electricity will be brought onto the site, as well as portable restrooms facilities and
water. Temporary standslbleachers and any equipment needed for the spectator and
entertainment areas wil1 also be provided by the event sponsor.
Installation BMPs as described in the SWPPP for the project will be required during site
preparation. The BMPs are required to control erosion, stabilize manufactured slopes, reduce
site runoff and protect water quality. The required BMPs for this phase are described in
Attachment A, Implementation of Best Management Practices for Storm Water Pollution
Prevention at the Otay Ranch Championship Race Track Site. The specified BMPs will require
approval by the Director of Public Works and will be monitored throughout the event.
Race Event Phase
Race events will occur over two, non-consecutive weekends, June 8-10 and September 28-30.
Race event hours will be generally from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. on Saturdays and Sundays. Practices
will occur on the Fridays before the event from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. Actual racing on the weekend
will begin during a one-hour practice session from 9:30 to 10:30am. On the race event days, up
to six races wil1 be held each day of the event. The last race will conclude at approximately 3
p.m. Limited non-racing weekday activities would involve registration and technical inspections.
The CUP win require that no race car engines shall be operated before 8 a.m. and no racing on
the track will occur before 9:30 a.m.
Page 7 of 36~ I
No helicopter flights are proposed in conjunction with the race events.
Post race events may incl ude an awards ceremony, which will conclude at sunset. Loud speakers,
microphones and other audio-visual equipment will be provided to announce races. Night
lighting for security purposes will be limited to the pit area, overnight camping and vendor
staging areas. Live music will occur throughout the race event; however" N1}o nighttime
concerts are proposed.
Overnight camping will be penl1itted for event attendees (up to 150 camping spaces). The
camping area would consist of 27.2 acres and would be located southeast of the proposed race
track within the designated Active Recreation Areas of the Otay River Valley. Security will be
provided in the camping area from the end of the last race to 7 a.m. the following day. Use of
the track after the final race will not be permitted. Security staff will have cell phones and will
have direct access to City of Chula Vista Police Department. Specific requirements for onsite
security will be outlined in the Security Plan to be prepared by the applicant and approved by the
Chief of Police.
During the time in-between the weekend race events, the race areas will be closed off to the
public. The safety/security plan prepared for the project will require that the gate surrounding
the race areas is locked. During the weekend race events, access to the race areas would also be
locked after race activities have ceased for the day, and access to the site will only be permitted
for race participants, crew members, and security staff. Racing events will not be held if it rains.
Race participants will arrive on the Wednesday before the race events. Equipment, race vehicles
and some race participants/crews will remain onsite for the duration of the weekend race event.
Security, fire and medical services will be provided on each weekend of the CORR events. The
event sponsors will have security persOllliel onsite, at entrances and other offsite locations, as
needed. The City ofChula Vista Police Department will provide supplementary law enforcement
services. In addition, the City ofChu1a Vista Fire Department and an emergency medical service
provider will be available in case of medical emergencies. A security plan and emergency
medical plan will be prepared by the project applicant and will be approved by the City Police
and Fire Departments, respectively, prior to the start of the race events. In addition, a traffic
control plan will be developed to facilitate arrival and departure from the event and will require
approval by the City Police Chief and City Engineer prior to the start ofrace events.
Maintenance of racing vehicles will occur within the designated pit areas. Maintenance may
include refueling, mounting racing wheels, and checking/refilling of fluids. General clean-up
and trash pick-up ofthe pit area, spectator stands, foodlbeverage area and parking lots will occur
on a daily basis. Access roads, parking lots and the race track will be watered to minimize dust
emiSSIOns.
Installation BMPs as described in the SWPPP will be required during the race events. The
BMPs are required to provide contaillli1ent of hazardous materials storage areas, deter seepage of
potentially toxic substances into the soil, minimize sediment transport off-site, control dust,
minimize site runoff, prevent trash from entering the MSCP Preserve area and protect water
Page 8 of 36M! I
quality. The required BMPs for this phase are described in Attachment A, Implementation of
Best Management Practices for Storm Water Pollution Prevention at the Otay Ranch
Championship Race Track Site. The specified BMPs will require approval by the Director of
Public Works.
Post Race Event Phase
Post-event activities essentially consist of site clean up and soil stabilization of exposed slopes.
All trash and debris generated by the proposed project will be removed. All temporary
structures, stands, bleachers, canopies, portable restroom facilities, and power generators will be
disassembled and removed from the site within two-weeks following the September 2007 race
event. Any containers with hazardous materials/waste will be properly disposed of in
accordance with local, state, and federal laws.
Installation BMPs as described in the SWPPP will be reqnired during the post-race event phase.
The BMPs are reqnired to minimize site runoff, protect water quality and encourage revegetation
of manufactured slopes and graded areas. The required BMPs for this phase are described in
Attachment A, Implementation of Best Management Practices for Storm Water Pollution
Prevention at the Otay Ranch Championship Race Track Site. The specified BMPs will require
approval by the Director of Public Works.
BMPs that provide for erosion control and reduction of sediment transport into drainages,
including desilt basins and silt fencing, will remain in place.
Discretionarv Actions/Other Proiect Approvals
A Conditional Use Permit (CUP) will be required to conduct the proposed CORR events. The
following additional approvals will be required in order to implement the proposed project.
.
City of Chula Vista Engineering: approval of BMPs and traffic control plan;
/.mendmeflt :0 CfH"la Viota Municipal Cede (CVMe) Chapter 5.11.101, for allewanee
" ehieles with iflternal c8mBUGtiofl engines
City of Chula Vista Police Department: approval of security plan and traffic control plan; and
City of Chula Vista Fire Department: approval of emergency medical plan.
of I
.
.
.
C. PROJECT SETTING
The proposed project site is located within a portion of Otay Ranch, in southern San Diego
County, California (Figure I). Specifically, the project area occupies a total of approximately
150 acres east ofthe location where Main Street turns into the alignment of Heritage Road, in the
City of Chula Vista as shown in Figure 2. The existing quarry access road generally forms the
southern border of the proposed track/pit/grandstand area, with the Otay River located adjacent
to the south of the track area, and Wolf Canyon to the west of the track area. The existing site
conditions consist of land that has been fully disturbed by ongoing aggregate mining and
processing operations. Current mining operations include rock drilling, blasting, resource
extraction and processing, stockpiling of construction aggregate and waste products, and
transportation ofproccssed materials from the site to serve the market.
Page 9 of 36M! I
The CORR racetrack, location of parking areas and other uses associated with the proposed
project were intcntionally sited and designed with fully disturbed areas in order to avoid any
direct impacts to sensitive biological resources. The CORR track, pit area, spectator stands,
food/beverage area, camping area, restrooms and VIP parking areas, consist of previously
disturbed areas associated with previous surface mining activities and are located within the
boundary of the existing reclamation plan (refer to Figure 4). The southern portion of the
project, including portions of the pit and vcnder areas, is located within an area designated as
Preserve within the City's MSCP Subarea Plan. It's important to note that this area was
previously disturbed as a result of an unauthorized encroachment by a former quarry operator.
Subsequent to the encroachment, the existing quarry's reclamation plan was amended to include
a conceptual restoration plan to restore this area back to a level consistent with the adjacent
undisturbed Preserve areas to the south. In accordance with the quarry's approved reclamation
plan, the reclamation of this area back to Preserve is scheduled to occur sometime within the
next 25 years.
Surrounding land uses include the active portion of the Otay Ranch Quarry to the immediate
north and open space/Preserve areas to the immediate east, south, and west. Land uses within the
general vicinity of the project site include Otay Ranch Village Three and the Otay Landfill to the
northwcst, developed residential uses within the City of San Diego to the south, and the Coors
Amphitheater and Knott's Soak City Water Park to the southwest.
D. PRIOR APPROVALS AND ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION
Otav Ranch General Development Plan/Subre!!ional Plan Pro!!ram EIR
The Final Program Enviromnental Impact Report (Program EIR #90-01) for Otay Ranch General
Development Plan/Subregional Plan (GDP/SRP) was prepared and certified jointly by the City of
Chula Vista and County of San Diego. The Program EIR 90-01 addresses the environmental
impacts of implementation of the Otay Ranch GPAlGDP/SRP and related documents, which
include Facility Implementation Plans, a Village Phasing Plan, Phase One Resource
Management Plan (RMP), and a Service/Revenue Plan. As part of Program EIR 90-01, a
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) was prepared to define implementation
of the mitigation measures described in the Program EIR. The Otay Ranch GDP/SRP designates
tho sitc for residential and mixed use development. Relative to the project site, the Program EIR
identified significant noise, biological resources, air quality, geology, cultural resources,
paleontological resources and cumulative agricultural resource impacts associated with build-out
of the site in accordance with thc GDP.
ViIla!!e Two. Three and Four (portion) SPA Plan and TM Second Tier EIR
The primary parking area for the CORR event is located within the Otay Ranch Village Three
planning area. In accordance with the General Plan and Otay Ranch GDP, the site (as part of
Village Three) is planned for industrial and open space uses.
Page 10 of36M! I
D
b
~ '"
u >
~ ~
~ III
~ e
"'c..
>0
..,c..
0;(,.)
>CI)
~:!!:
C2.s::::
~:!:::
i5 ;:
c
CI
'w
'"
...
.9
...
...
'"
...
I-
'"
...
'"
0::
...
'"
III
CI
E-
c..
:'<:;""'"
I '"''I'..,
" ":, ~;'I
~,"
!~i~
"
,
,
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
"
,.....
~..
..
.
~
.
~
. ..,it i
,,<'-',1/
if ;Ii
..~" 1
(~ ! j
,. J ~r
A SPA Plan has been prcpared for Otay Ranch Villages Two, Three and portion of Village Four.
A final EIR was certified for the proposed SPA and TM (EIR #02-02), on May 23, 2006. The
EIR addresses buildout of Village Three in accordance with the SPA. Industrial uses are planncd
for the subject CORR event parking area. The EIR identified the following environmental issue
areas as significant and Ullli1itigable: Relative to the project site, this Second Tier EIR identified
significant noise, biological resources, air quality, geology, cultural resources, paleolontological
resources and cumulative agricultural resource impacts associated with build-out of the site.
Mitigation measures were provided to reduce impacts to these resources.
Issues addressed in the EIR that are relcvant to the proposed action include potential impacts
associated with air quality, and geology and soils. In addition, data from biological surveys for
this project were used to address biological impacts for the proposed 2007 CORR events.
Hanson Al!:l!:rel!:ates Pacific Southwest, Inc.. Otav Ranch Pit Amended Reclamation Plan.
MND
The VIP parking area, pit area, track, and grandstands are fully located within the existing
boundaries of the Otay Ranch Quarry Reclamation Plan. In April 2006, the State Mining and
Geology Board prepared an MND that evaluated an amendment to the sites original reclamation
plan approved by the County of San Diego in 1980 (RP79-09). The amendments included
adjusting limits of the active quarry operations to include areas that were disturbed by a former
quarry operator as a result of on-going extraction operations. The proposed amendments revised
the current reclamation plan boundaries to include approximately 38 acres of fully disturbed land
and subtract approximately 29 acres of undisturbed land located within adjacent Wolf Canyon.
Additionally, the proposed reclamation plan included a revised termination date for surface
mining operations, identified a post mining land use, established monitoring criteria for mining
operations, and provided a conceptual landscape/restoration plan and phasing for implementing
the ultimate reclamation design. The MND addressed impacts associated with cultural resources,
hazards and hazardous materials, and found them to be significant but mitigable.
E. COMPLIANCE WITH ZONING AND PLANS
Citv of Chuta Vista General Plan
The City of Chula Vista updated its General Plan in December 2005. Genera] Plan land use
designations on the project site include Industrial (Parking Areas), Open Space Active
Recreation (Camping Areas), and Open Space (Non-Preserve), (Track Area). Because the use is
temporary and subject to a Conditional Use Permit, a consistency detennination relative to
General Plan land use designations is not applicable. However, the Open Space Active
Recreation designation includes outdoor campgrounds as one of the intended uses within these
areas. In addition, Parking is an allowable use within Industrial use designated areas.
Page 12 of 36M! I
Otay Vallev Regional Park COllcept Plall
The Otay Valley Regional Park (OVRP) Concept Plan was adopted in July 1997 by the Cities of
San Diego and Chula Vista, and the County of San Diego. The OVRP identifies active
recreation areas that are not a part of the Preserve, but are surrounded by Preserve areas. The
OVRP Concept Plan does not change existing zoning or planned land uses, or add new
development regulations, nor does it preclude private development in designated recreation areas
consistent with existing zoning or plmmed land uses. The proposed project is a temporary use
and would not prohibit future plamling or use of the area, as contemplated in the OVRP.
Otav Ranch General Development Plan
The GDP identifies development of the Otay Ranch in a series of 15 Villages and 5 Planning
Areas. These Villages and Planning Areas combined would allow approximately 13,000 single-
family residential dwelling units and approximately 11,000 multi-family units. As mitigation for
impacts to sensitive biological resources within the proposed development areas of the Otay
Ranch, a Resource Management Preserve ("Preserve") was identified. The Preserve m1d
associated policies and requirements related to biological resources protection are outlined in the
Resource Management Plan, Phases I and 2, as further described below. Areas within the
Preserve were assigned a land use designation of Open Space in the GDP/SRP. The proposed
project includes land designated for industrial use in Village Three, Open Space Active
Recreation, and "Not a Part" (the boundaries of the parcel containing the rock quarry). Because
the use is temporary and subject to a Conditional Use Permit, a consistency determination
relative to General Development Plan land use designations is not applicable. However, the
Open Space Active Recreation designation includes outdoor campgrounds as one of the intended
uses within these areas. In addition, Parking is an allowable use within Industrial use designated
areas.
Otav Ranch Resource Management Plan (Phase 1 and 2)
In addition to the General Development Plan, the Otay Ranch plalming documents include the
Resource Management Plan (RMP), Phases I and 2 (adopted October 28,1993 and June 4,1996,
respectively). The goal of the Otay Ranch RMP is to establish a permanent preserve within Otay
Ranch to protect and enhance biological, paleontological, cultural and scenic resources; maintain
biological diversity, and promote the survival and recovery of native species and habitats. The
RMP Phase I ("RMPI") was adopted by the County of San Diego and the City of Chula Vista,
concurrent with approval of the Otay Ranch GDP/SRP. The RMPI provides general biological
infornlation and establishes overall Preserve conservation and management goals. The RMPI
also provides performance stmldards for preservation of biological resources. The RMP Phase 2
("RMP2") provides detailed biological studies, specific plans and programs for habitat
management, and a habitat conveyance plan. As development occurs in Otay Ranch, habitat is
conveyed to the City and the County with an undivided interest. The RMP2 establishes a habitat
conveyance schedule, requiring that 1.188 acres of habitat is to be conveyed for each acre of land
developed. The proposed project will not be required to convey preserve land, primarily because
it is not a permanent use, and conveyance of preserve land would be triggered by final maps
associated with a development project. Also, it should be noted that the portions of the project
Page 13 of36M! I
located in the area identified as "not a part" in the Otay Ranch GDP and RMP would not be
subject to any of the requirements of the RMP or GDP, including conveyance requirements.
An important part of the RMPI is the creation of the Otay Ranch Preserve. The Otay Ranch
Preserve is a "hard-line" preserve (indicating that all of the areas designated as Preserve would
be set aside for resource conservation purposes). The Otay Ranch Preserve includes
approximately 11,375 acres of land to be set-aside as mitigation for impacts to sensitive
resources resulting from Otay Ranch development that will occur both within the City and in the
County. The Otay Ranch Preserve has been designed and is proposed to be managed specifically
for protection and enhancement of multiple species present on Otay Ranch. These conservation
lands will also serve to COill1ect large areas of open space through a series of wildlife corridors.
Portions of the project are proposed within the RMP Preserve (Camping Area), and portions are
within areas designated as development (Track Area and Parking Area). The RMP identifies
active recreation use within portions of the Preserve designated areas of the Otay River Valley
(Camping Area), consistent with the GDP. The proposed camping LIse is consistent with the
active recreation designation for the area within which it is proposed, but as noted previously, all
of the proposed uses are temporary and would not preclude implementation of the RMP.
Otav Ranch Pit Reclamation Plan
The Otay Ranch Pit Reclamation Plan was prepared in accordance with the Surface Mining and
Reclamation Act (SMARA) of 1975. The reclamation plan details (I) the beginning and
expected ending dates for each phase of mining activities; (2) all reclamation activities required;
(3) criteria for measuring completion of specific reclamation activities; and (4) estimated costs
for completion of each phase of reclamation. The total land area included in the adopted
reclamation plan totals 157.7 acres. As described in the reclamation plan, the ultimate
reclamation of the quarry would occur in a manner that would facilitate future development
within this area consistent with the City's General Plan. Additionally, the adopted reclamation
plan includes a biological restoration plan designed to reclaim previously disturbed Preserve
areas back to a level consistent with the surrounding undisturbed open space Preserve areas.
Reclamation of the disturbed Preserve areas is not scheduled to occur until the completion of
extraction activities associated with Sub-phase 5.3 and Sub-phase 5.4, respectively, which is
approximately 25 years from present. Given the temporary, short-tenl1 nature of the project, no
adverse impacts are anticipated that would prevent the ultimate reclamation of this site as
detailed in the currently approved reclamation plan RP 79-09.
Zonin!!
Current zoning for the site is Planned Community (PC). The proposed CORR event is allowed
subject approval of a CUP by the City Council as provided for in the Unclassified Use Section
19.54 of the Municipal Code. Because the use is temporary, it will not require amendments to
thc Chula Vista General Plan, or the Otay Ranch GDP.
Page 14 of 36M! I
City of CB:mla Vista Multiple Species Conservation Pro!!ram Subarea !Plan
The Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP) Subarea Plan was prepared by the City of
Chula Vista in coordination with the Federal and State Regulatory agencies in order to
implement the MSCP Subregional Plan within the City of Chula Vista. The City Council
adopted the MSCP Subarea Plan on May 13, 2003. Subsequently, the Wildlife Agencies issued
the City a Take Permit and signed the Implementing Agreement granting the City Take
Authorization on January I 1,2005.
The existing quarry site is recognized by the City's MSCP Subarea Plan as a legal, non-
conforming use, in operation at the time the underlying zone was established. As such, existing
mining activities have continued to operate under legally existing permits. Potential indirect
impacts to the City's MSCP Subarea Plan are discussed below in Section F.
F, PUBLIC COMMENTS
On April 9, 2007, a Notice of Initial Study was circulated to property owners and residents
within a 500-foot radius of the proposed project site. The notice period ended April 19,2007.
Four written comments wcre received during the 10-day public review of the NOr. Comments
received raised concerns regarding noise impacts, impacts air qualitv, impacts water quality,
impacts to biological resources, impacts cultural resources, public services, site access,
consistencv with the City's Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP) Subarea Plan
Preserve and Otav Ranch Resource Management Plan (RMP), and consistencv with the Otay
Valley Regional Park (OVRP) Concept Plan.
On April 20, 2007 a Notice of Availabilitv of the Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration for
the project was posted in the Countv Clerk's Office and circulated to property owners and
residents within a 500- foot radius of the proiect site as well as adiacent businesses, property
owners, and tenants along Nirvana Avenue and Energv Wav, who are located beyond the 500-
foot radius. The 30-day public comment period closed on May 2 L 2007.
G, IDENTIFICATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
The City of Chula Vista detelmined that the proposed project would have significant
envirOlm1ental effects (see the Environmental Checklist included in this MND). All of these
effects have been mitigated to below significance by project design or mitigation measures (see
Section H and the attached MMRP). 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 proposed project would occur over two non-consecutive weekends and does not propose any
permanent structures or improvements. The total area that would be used by the proposed event
Page 15 of36M! I
activities encompasses approximately 154 acres, of which 35.6 acres have already been disturbed
through mineral extraction. Only minor surface preparation activities will be required for the
proposed event. As previously noted, only minor site preparation is required, and therefore, no
modifications to existing natural landform would occur, therefore there would be no impacts
associated with grading. No grading permit will be required.
The proposed activities would include temporary tent-like structures, spectator stands, shade
canopies, and portable restroom facilities as well as parked vehicles that would be visible from
some public and private vantages points primarily to the south and west. Nighttime security
lighting would be allowed in the pit areas and overnight camping areas located on the west and
south of the track facility (Figure 3). The night lighting would be visible from residential areas
to the south of the site.
The project will be required to comply with the light and glare regulations (Section 19.66.100) of
the Chula Vista Municipal Code (CVMC). Compliance with these regulations will ensure that
no significant glare, or light would affect daytime or nighttime views in the surrounding
residential neighborhood area or adjacent roadways. Additionally, lighting will be directed
downward and away from adjacent MSCP Preserve areas.
Because the nighttime lighting would be temporary, occurring over two independent weekends,
the proposed project would not permanently alter the aesthetic or visual character of the site or
result in a new source of substantial light or glare. Therefore, the proposed 2007 CORR event is
not anticipated to result in significant impacts to aesthetics.
Air Oualitv
An air quality technical report was prepared by Scientific Resources Associated (April 2007) for
the project. Project related emissions would occur from vehicles traveling to the CORR event
site, race vehicle emissions generated during race events and dust generated by the racing
activities. All mining activities associated with the existing quarry will cease during race events.
Race Event Phase
The operational impacts associated with the Project would be confined to impacts associated
with automotive traffic from spectators, employees, support vehicles, and the race participants.
Fugitive dust emissions from the racing events themselves were estimated based on the U.S.
EPA's emission factors for travel on unpaved roads from the Compilation of Air Pollutant
Emission Factors (AP-42), Section 13.2 (U.S. EPA 2003). The emissions from unpaved roads
are estimated to be 489.56 pounds per day.
It should be noted that the majority of the PM10 emissions predicted by the URBEMIS model
are attributable to road dust from vehicles traveling on paved roads to the event; these emissions
are bascd on the default assumptions within the URBEMIS model, and assume that 4.71 Ibs/day
PMIO are attributable to vehicle exhaust, with 79.93 lbs/day attributable to road dust. PM2.5
Page 16 of 36M! I
emissions have been estimated in accordance with the SCAQMD guidelines (SCAQMD 2006) as
discussed under construction emissions.
Emissions of VOCs and NOx, would be below screening criteria for daily emissions thresholds.
Fugitive dust emissions (both PMIO and PM2s) would be above the screening thresholds without
mitigation. Project mitigation is incorporated to provide for spraying of water during the 15-
minute intervals between races, to control fugitive dust; thus there will be a minimum of6 passes
(6 races per day). Based on the control efficiency in the URBEMIS 2002 model, 3 passes of
watering per day provides a 51 % control efficiency on unpaved roads; therefore it was assumed
that 6 passes per day would provide a 90% control efficiency. This would be consistent with the
SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook (SCAQMD 1993), which projects a control efficiency
of up to 85% for watering three times daily on unpaved roads. Implementation of this mitigation
would reduce emissions of PM 10 and PM2.5 to below the significance thresholds.
Emissions of CO are be above the screening criteria for significance. Therefore, the next tier of
analysis, a CO "hot spots" analysis, was performed to determine the actual significance of the
impact.
Projects involving traffic impacts may result in the formation of locally high concentrations of
CO, known as CO "hot spots." To verify that the project would not cause or contribute to a
violation of the CO standard, a screening evaluation of the potential for CO "hot spots" was
conducted in accordance with guidance in the Caltrans ITS Transportation Project-Level Carbon
Monoxide Protocol (Caltrans 1998).
Project effects were modeled using the CALINE4 model. The CO concentrations predicted by
the model, in addition to the high I-hour background concentration, resulted in a total
concentration ofless than 10 parts per million (ppm), which is below the CO standard of20 ppm.
Therefore impacts related to CO hot spots are less than significant, and the project would not
expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations of CO.
All portable generators required for the race events would either be registered by the APCD, or
would have appropriate permits; therefore the emissions from portable generators are not
included in this analysis.
Post Race Event Phase
Once the operation phase of the project has been completed, emissions would be generated from
the transport of any contaminated soil (i.e., oil and gasoline from on-site vehicles) from the
project site to appropriate disposal locations approved by local, state, and federal agencies. If
required for site cleanup, it is anticipated that soil would be transported off-site.
In addition, after the racing event is completed, the project site would be retained in its pre-
project condition. Hence, one additional truck would be traveling to and from the project site,
post projcct operation.
Page 17 of 36M! I
The quantity of trucks traveling to and from the project and amount of soil being disturbed
during the post-operation phase is anticipated to be the same or less than what would be
generated during the site preparation phase and therefore, post-operation emissIOns are
anticipated to be less than significant. No mitigation measures are required.
The mitigation measures contained in Section H below would mitigate short-term operational air
quality impacts to below a level of significance. These measures are included as a part of the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
A!!ricuItural Resources
Historically, portions of the project site that contain the proposed parking areas in Village Three,
and the camping area in Otay River Valley have been used for dry farming, as well as cattle and
sheep grazing. Crop production was limited to hay and grains (typically barley) due to limited
water availability. The project area does not contain designated Prirne Farmland, Farmland of
Statewide Importance or Unique Fam11and (United States Department of Agriculture, Soil
Conservation Service, California Department of Agriculture). The site has been locally
designated as Farmland of Local Importance and is identified as Grazing Land. No land within
the project area is subject to the Williamson Act.
The former agricultural fields will be utilized for parking and camping. The fields have been
harvested, and the remaining vegetation has been mowed. Thus, the temporary parking and
camping on the fields will not preclude used of the land for agricultural purposes after the race
events. Therefore, impacts to agricultural uses on the site would be less than significant.
Biolo!!ical Resources
Implementation of the proposed project would result in direct impacts to the following
vegetation communities: annual (non-native) grassland (103.4 acres) and developed/disturbed
land (38.0 acres). Furthermore, all of the 103.4 acres of impacts to annual grassland are within
former agriculture areas of the Parking and Camping areas. Site preparation for these areas will
consist of mowing only, and no soil-disturbing site preparation (i.e., grading activities) is
proposed. Therefore, impacts to aunual grassland within the Parking and Camping areas would
be temporary and would not result in permanent or significant adverse impacts to aunual
grasslands. These areas would not require active restoration for recovery to pre-project
conditions. Freshwater marsh, mixed riparian scrub, and southem willow scrub within the survey
area would be avoided and not be directly impacted by the project.
During the course of the site visit, two individual male coastal California gnatcatchers were
observed in disturbed coastal sage scrub outside of the project's direct impact area (sec Figure
5). In addition to the two gnatcatcher locations identified in recent surveys, Figure 5 also shows
locations of previously identified locations for gnatcatcher and least Bell's vireo, to provide
context for potentially suitable habitat for these species, and to help understand the nature and
extent of potential indirect effects.
Page 18 of 36M! I
. . .
. " ,
:; 0 , ,
. 4 . ,
, ~ .
~ . . ;;
~ , , ,
. , , .,
., . , . ,
, . . t , ,
.
t ~ . , . . . .
, , " , , ,
, ~ , jj . . .
> . , 0 ,
., . , . ..
, , . , . -
, 0 , . .
~ . " . ~ . , .~ . ,
. , . . , ,
, , , , ~ ~ . , .
~ . ~ ., , ;; , . . , , u
~ , ~ .
~ , , . '" . , , " i: , . ,
, ., , , , , , , , , , . . , ~
~ ~ . . , . . . .
. ~ , > , , , ~ " , ; ~ ~ ~
, , ,
. ., . .. , . i , ;; .,
. ~ . z " . . . ;;
. . . .2 ~ , . , , . , ;;
~ , , .. . , " , , "
;; , .~ ~ . 0 ~ ., . . , "
. . . , " . ~ " .. . .
, ~ ~ , . , .
u , " " " . " .
. . . . ~ .
.. , 0 . ~ . U
> , .. > " " " . . . .. . .
. , u u " . ~ " . .
" . . .
. 0 . . 0
. 4 U
.~ 0 e
~
I~ ~ I
-
0,...
"'0
:20
"'N
u
~ -
a::: 'i:
'C c..
~<
'" -
""'"
~ ...
0,=
.9- ::s
~e..
.~ go
iiJ:2
.<=
U II)
...
'-'
~
=
Q
II)
...
0::
CO
'-'
'6>
Q
"0
a:i
The allliual grasslands identified in the Parking and Camping Areas could serve as potentially
suitable habitat for burrowing owl. To avoid direct impacts to burrowing owl, pre-construction
surveys will be required (February through August - therefore only applicable to the June race
event). If owls are found to be nesting as a result of the surveys, the active nest areas will be
avoided and fenced as appropriate.
No long-telm, direct impacts to sensitive vegetation communities would result from project
implementation. Direct impacts to active burrowing owl nests could result if nests are present at
the time of operation during the nesting season (June race only).
The project site is located adjacent to the City's MSCP Preserve. Implementation of the
proposed proj ect will result in indirect impacts to sensitive habitat and species found within the
Preserve. In order to reduce indirect impacts to the Preserve, the project will be required to
adhere to specific guidelines established in the Adjacency Management Issues discussion in the
Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan (Section 7.5.2 of the Subarea Plan). The following is a
summary of the requirements relevant to the proposed proj ect, and a discussion of project
compliance.
Drainage/Toxics:
All develoved and vaved areas must vrevent the release of toxins. chemicals. vetroleum
vroducts. exotic vlant materials and other elements that mif!ht def!rade or harm the natural
environment or ecosvstem vrocesses within the Preserve.
The project would involve the use, transport, storage, handling and disposal of toxic substances
such as gasoline and other automotive fluids. Use of these substances onsite would occur for the
short duration of time of the racing event. No use of these substances would occur in the MSCP
Preserve, whieh is located apprOJ[imately 150 fcet from the edge of the raeetrac!c and over 500
feet from the pit area. As discussed under the Hazards and Hazardous Materials section, BMPs
wou1d be implemented during all phases of the project to mitigate for potential impacts
associated with hazardous waste/toxins entering drainages. Thcse BMPs are specified in
Appendix A and require City revicw and approval by the Director of Public Works.
The following summarizes the BMPs from Appendix A, and are required to reduce effects
associated with drainage and toxics to less than significant levels, as required by the Subarea
Plan:
Containment Areas - BMP's utilized during Race Events include secondary containment at
vehicle maintenance (pit) areas, hazardous materials storage areas, vehicle wash stations,
portable bathrooms, trash disposal and materials storage areas. Additionally, any fuel drum
storage and used oil storage areas will be contained and also bermed. Hazardous materials are to
be placed in closed containers to prevent contact with runoff and to prevent spillage to the stonn
water conveyance system. Secondary containment, such as benl1s or dykes, will also be
provided. Vactor trucks will be used to remove runoff from the containment areas and the
collected runoff will be disposed of in accordance with City standards. Hazardous Waste
containers will remain covered at all times. Run-on from adjacent areas will be prevented from
Page 20 of36M! I
coming into contact with the containment areas. Attached lids are provided on all trash
containers to minimize direct precipitation.
Site Runoff-Two desilting basins will be used as retention basins. Outlets will be blocked off so
that no runoff will be allowed to discharge from these basins. At the conclusion of each racing
event, accumulated debris and pollutants will be removed from these basins and disposed of in
accordance with City standards. An existing perimeter fence is located at the limits of grading to
prevent the escape of wind blown trash and debris. There is an existing earthen berm along the
southern edge of the proposed race track facilities that will also ensure any direct run-off into the
Otay River.
Maintenance - Dust and trash control measures are included as wel1. To further inhibit sediment
migration, the track is watered between races. Access roads and parking areas will be routinely
watered as well. Onsite trash collection is provided throughout the event. Parking areas are
graded, with silt fences and bio- filters along the perimeter to treat oil and grease from parked
vehicles.
There are no permanent utilities at the site. Generators, water trucks, a vactor truck, and portable
bathroom facilities will be utilized. No temporary facilities will remain on site after the final race
event. Long term maintenance of all remaining BMP's are the responsibility of James P. Baldwin
and Associates who guarantee performance of proper BMP maintenance by the posting of a
performance bond as required by the City of Chula Vista.
Access Roads - There are three proposed access roads into the site. This will be used for public
access and emergency access during race events. The main entrance to the facility is from the
intersection of Main Street and Heritage Road and runs eastward on Wiley Road toward the
existing rock quarry. The main access road will have a crushed asphalt base 6" in depth, for the
first 200' from the point of cntry. Maintenance will be continuous during race events. The
Applicant will be responsible for the maintenance of these construction entrances and all other
BMP's described herein. Access to the parking area within Village Three is proposed from
Energy Way to the west. In addition, access to the camping area is proposed from Heritage
Road.
Trackinf!. - To insure that no tracked sediment reaches the storm drain system, a sweeper truck is
employed to remove any sediment deposited onto Main Street or Heritage Road due to increased
traffic during race events. All efforts will bc made to prevent mud from being tracked onto
public roads. In no case will vehicles be permitted to drive on, or park in muddy areas, or to
leave the site without first removing any accumulations of loose mud. In the event of rain, all
race events will be rescheduled.
Wind Erosion/Dust Control - Silt fencing is provided at the limits of grading to prevent escape of
trash, debris or sediment to the surrounding area. This BMP is designed to capture wind-blown
pollutants. To enhance the dust control efforts, the track will be watered extensively between
races. To enhance trash control efforts, onsite trash collection is provided throughout race events.
Page 21 of36M! I
Lighting:
Liz.htinz. of all develoved areas adiacent to the Preserve should be directed awav from the
Preserve wherever feasible and consistent with vublic safetv. Where necessarv. develovment
should vrovide adequate shieldinlZ to vrotect the Preserve and sensitive sveCleS from nilZht
lilZhtinlZ.
Temporary safety lighting associated with the project would be limited to the pit area, spectator
area and camping area. The lighting for these areas would be directed downward, and away from
the Preserve. The portion of the project that is located adjacent to the Preserve is the track area.
The track portion of the project site would not be lighted, and no race events would occur at
night. Light spillage into the Preserve would be considered significant.
Noise:
Uses in or adiacent to the Preserve should be desilZned to minimize noise imvacts. Berms or
walls should be constructed adiacent to commercial areas and anv other use that mav introduce
noises that could imvact or interfere with wildlife utilization of the Preserve. Excessivelv noisv
uses or activities adiacent to breedinlZ areas. inc/udinlZ temvorarv IZradinlZ activities. must
incorvorate noise reduction measures or be curtailed during. the breedinlZ season of sensitive
bird svecies.
As discussed in the Noise analysis of this MND, noise resulting from project related activities
includes noise associated with vehicle racing, loudspeakers, or other incidental sound sources
associated with the events. Species of concern relative to this policy (i.e. sensitive bird species)
include the coastal California gnatcatcher and least Bell's vireo.
Because the project site is adjacent to the MSCP Preserve, analysis of noise impacts on noise
sensitive species within the MSCP Preserve is required. Specifically, the Subarea Plan restricts
uses located adjacent to Preserve areas that generate excessive noise during the breeding season
for noise sensitive bird species. In this particular case, the species of concern are the Least Bell's
Vireo and Coastal California Gnatcatcher, because their habitat is located within the Preserve.
The City's MSCP Subarea Plan does not provide a spccific numerical threshold for operationa1
noise affecting these species, but for comparative purposes, a generally accepted standard used to
evaluate impacts is a one-hour average noise level greater than 60 dB. No other specics identified
in the Subarea Plan or MSCP Sub regional Plan as having specific conditions related to noise
impacts are located within the portions of the MSCP Preserve in the vicinity of the project.
The noise analysis prepared for the project (Environmental Noise Assessment for the Temporary
Off-Road Race Track, Dudek & Associates, April 16, 2007) provides an estimate of noise levels
gencrated by the proposed project. Unattenuated noise levels at the closest sensitive habitat
location within the Preserve, immediately adjacent to the south of the proposed track, are
estimated to be 85 dB hourly Leg.
Taking the existing terrain topography into consideration, and providing the maximum sound
attenuation available through stmctural design features (enclosure of the rear of the stands
located between the track and the Preserve), the noise analysis concludes that areas having
Page 22 of36M! I
potential to support least Bell's vireo and coastal California gnatcatcher are expected to be
exposed noise levels of approximately 75 dB hourly Leq noise level during the racing events.
Ambient noise measurements were recorded within the project area, as noted in the Noise
Assessment. Ambient noise within the project area is primarily associated with the existing rock
quarry operation, including rock and gravel extraction, earth moving equipment, and rock
crushing activities. Ambient noise measurements in portions of the quarry adjacent to sensitive
habitat areas within the Preserve indicate noise levels of up to 78 dB Leq. The noise recording
locations are within close proximity to areas historically occupied by Cali fornia gnatcatcher and
least Bell's vireo, suggesting that there may be localized tolerance of elevated noise levels by
these species in this area.
Due to the short-tenn nature of the proposed project (two consecutive days during the nesting
season), and existing elevated ambient noise levels, it is not anticipated that the project will
result in significant indirect impacts on these noise sensitive species.
Invasives:
No invasive non-native viani svecies shall be introduced into areas immediatelv ad;acent to the
Preserve.
The project does not propose landscaping that would introduce invasive species, and the erosion
control BMPs specifically require that native plant species be used. Unauthorized access and/or
predation by domestic pets may result from introduction of the human use adjacent to the
Preserve. To avoid such adverse effects, the project shall be required to provide fencing and
signage to discourage access to the Preserve. In addition, the project shall be required to either
prohibit domestic pets, or require that all pets remain on leases pursuant to applicable City
requirements.
Implementation of the proposed temporary uses includes measures to avoid indirect impacts on
the Preserve through adherence with the Subarea Plan requirements relative to adjacency
management issues. Therefore, the project would not result in any conflicts with the provisions
of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other
approvcd local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan.
The mitigation measures contained in Section H below would mitigate potential indirect impacts
to scnsitivc biological resources to below a level of significance. These measures are included as
a part of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Cultural and Paleontolo!!ical Resources
Based on data reviewed from previous studies and additional testing conducted in 2007
(Archaeological Study for the Chula Vista International Raceway, Brian F. Smith and
Associates, Spril, 2007), two sites (SDl-9976 and SDl-12,29Ib) were determined to be
significant under the guidelines set forth by the City of Chula Vista and CEQA (Section
15064.5). The remaining sites are either not significant or wcre located in areas outside of
potential direct impacts and were not tested.
Page 23 of 36M! I
Impacts will occur to cultural resources in the parking area, the camping arca, the track area and
the various access roads. For most of the impacts, these arc characterized as "superficial" and
are related to mowing and parking.
Potential dircct adverse impacts are anticipated for only two cultural resource sites, SDI-9976
and SDI-12,291(b). Measures to reduce potential impacts will focus upon preservation. Data
recovery will not be required as an alternative for the mitigation of impacts, as sufficient latitude
is available for organization of the project to facilitate preservation of the significant resources.
For sites that are significant, or were not evaluated and are assumed to be significant, mitigation
measures will include preservation and fencing.
Based on the underlying geologic formations, the proposed parking and camping areas are
located within areas considered to be of moderate to high sensitivity for paleontological
resourccs. However, because the proposed proiect does not involve any grading of these areas,
impacts to paleontological resources is considered to be less than significant.
The mitigation measures contained in Section H below would mitigate potential impacts to
Archeological Rewsources to below a level of significance. These measures are included as a
part ofthc Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Geolo!!v and Soils
The project consists of a temporary usc, and involves no grading, excavation or cutting/filling of
slopes, and involves only minimal clearing and leveling activities would be conducted. The
project is a temporary cvent taking place over two separate weekends, and no permanent
structures are proposed. Therefore, the project would not expose people or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects involving seismic ground shaking, seismic-related ground failure or
landslides; nor would it be affected by potential unstable soils, or cause soils to become unstable,
or result in or be affected by liquefaction or collapse. Further, the project does not propose the
use of septic tanks or altemative wastewater disposal systems.
Erosion impacts could occur as a result ofrace operations. Erosion control measures and erosion
BMPs are identified in Attachment A to this MND, Implementation of Best Management
Practices for Storm Water Pollution Prevention at the Otay Ranch Championship Race Track
Site, and would mitigate potential impacts resulting from erosion to less than significant. The
erosion control measures identified in Appendix A would require review and approval by the
Director of Public Works.
The mitigation measures contained in Section H below would mitigate potential impacts to
Geology and Soils to below a level of significance. These measures are included as a part of thc
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
The proposed project would involve the transport, storage, and handling of hazardous materials
(gasoline and engine fluids) associated with the proposed activities for a short duration of time.
Page 24 of 36:;e I
Potential impacts resulting from exposure to or leaks/spills of hazardous materials may occur;
however, BMPs would be in place that would reduce potential impacts to less than significant.
The BMPs are identified in Appendix A and are identified as mitigation measures in Section H
of this document. BMPs include features such as special drums that would serve as self-
contained treatment for all runoff from maintenance bays (pit areas), vehicle and equipment
wash areas, bathroom areas, and trash and material storage areas. Vactor trucks would be used
to remove runoff from the containment drums and the collected nmoff would be disposed of in
accordance with City standards. Hazardous materials would be placed in an enclosure that
prevents contact with runoff or spillage to the storm water conveyance system. Storage, wash,
and maintenance areas for race vehicles and hazardous materials/waste, as well as restroom areas
would be lined with an impervious material to contain leaks and spi lls and these areas would
(where feasible) have a roof or awning to minimize direct precipitation within the secondary
containment area. With implementation of the BMPs, the project would not create a significant
hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of
hazardous materials, or create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment. Thereforc, project impacts to these relevant thresholds would be
less than significant. The project is not located in the vicinity of an existing or proposed school,
nor is it on a list of hazardous materials site. Further the project is not in the vicinity of a public
or private airport, and not subject to an airport land use plan. Therefore, no impacts relative to
these thresholds would result.
Thc project is a temporary use that would not have the ability to impair implementation of or
physically interfere with an adopted emergency rcsponse plan or emergency evacuation plan.
Further, the project features include public safety plans and personnel assigned to the events to
further protect public safety during the events.
Becausc the project is a temporary use and fire equipment and personnel will be present on the
site during the proposed events, the project would not expose people or structures to a significant
lisk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires.
The mitigation measures contained in Section H below would mitigate potential impacts to
Hazards and Hazardous Materials to below a Icvel of significance. These measures are included
as a part of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Hvdrolol!V and Water Oualitv
The proposed CORR eyents would involve activities that have the potential to result in potential
impacts to hydrology and water quality. During race events, urban runoff from the site has the
potential to contribute pollutants, including oj] and grease, suspended solids, metals, gasoline,
and pathogens to the receiving waters. Once the CORR event is complete, some portions of the
site, including manufactured slopes, may be exposed and susceptiblc to erosion. Pollutants of
concern associated with the proposed project are grouped into the following categories:
sediments; metals; oil and grease; trash, debris and floatables; bacteria and viruses; and organic
compounds and oxygen-demanding substances.
Page 25 of 36M! I
In order to address these issues, features have been incorporated into the project design to
minimize water quality impacts. The racetrack has been designed such that runoff would drain
into a treatment BMP and away from the MSCP Preserve, including Otay River and Wolf
Canyon.
With project design features, potential impacts to hydrology and water quality may still occur;
however, BMPs would be implemented to mitigate potential impacts to less than significant
levels. The BMPs have been identified in Appendix A and require review and approval by the
Director of Public Works. BMPs identified in Appendix A include, but are not Jimited to the
following: desilt basins, special dmms for containment of waste, trash and hazardous materials
and silt fencing/sand bags.
Because of the scope of activities proposed and the short duration of the proposed project, the
race events would not have the abiJity to substantially alter the flow of surface or groundwater.
In addition, the project would not involve pumping of groundwater and would therefore not
result in the possibility of depletion of groundwater supplies. Although portions of the project
site are within the laO-year flood plain of the Otay River, the project does not propose
construction of permanent structures and therefore, would not expose people or structures to a
significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding. In addition, the proposed operations
would occur outside of the rainy season.
The project would not directly discharge to an existing storm drain system and would not alter
any drainage pattern. Therefore, no impact upon storm water conveyance capacities would occur.
The mitigation measures contained in Section H below would mitigate potential impacts to
Hydrology and Water Quality to below a level of significance. These measures are included as a
part ofthc Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Noise
An Acoustical Analysis was prepared by Dudek and Associates (April 2007) for the proposed
project which is summarized below.
The existing noise levels at the site were monitored to detennine ambient noise levels in the
project vicinity, including areas adjacent to and within the MSCP Preserve. On site noise
monitoring results indicate the existing noise levels at the monitored locations to range between
68 and 78 dBA.
Applicable Standards
The City of Chula Vista has adopted a quantitative noise ordinance to control excessive noise
generated in the City. The ordinance limits are in tenns of a one-hour average sound level. The
allowable noise limits depend upon the noise receiving land use and time of day.
Page 26 of 36M! I
Thc City's noise ordinance statcs that if thc measured ambient level exceeds that permissible by
the land use standards, the allowable noise exposure standard shall be the ambient noise level.
The ambient level shall be measured when the alleged noise violations source is not operating. If
the measured ambient noise level without the subject noise source exceeds the applicable land
use limit. the allowable one-hour average noise levels shall be the an1bient noise level.
The City of Chula Vista noise ordinance exterior noise limit for single-family residences is
45 dB between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. on weekdays, and between 10 p.m. and 8 a.m. on weekends.
The daytime (between 7 a.m. and 10 p.m. on weekdays, and between 8 a.m. and 10 p.m. on
weekends) exterior noise limit is 55 dB. The project's noisc generating activities will occur
during daytime, i.e., between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. on weekdays, and between 8 a.m. and 7 p.m. on
weekends. Consequently the 55 dB exterior noise criteria has been used for our evaluation of the
project's potential noise impacts upon the closest residences, located at approximately 6,000 feet
or more to the southwest of the site in the City of San Diego. The 70 dB exterior noise criteria
has been used for our evaluation of the project's potential noise impacts upon the industrial land
use at approximately 1,000 feet distance, southwest of the project site.
Chapter 19.68 Section 19.68.060 ofthe City of Chula Vista Municipal Code exempts occasional
outdoor gatherings, public dances, shows and sporting and entertainment events, provided the
events are conducted pursuant to a permit or license issued by the city relative to the staging of
the events.
The City's General Plan Noise Element contains land use/noise compatibility guidelines for
various types of uses. The City considers an annual noise level of65 dB CNEL to be compatible
with residential land uses. The General Plan states that the compatibility guidelines are not
intended to conflict with or contradict the Noise Ordinance, but provide guidance for total noise
exposure, including traffic noise and other sources that are not regulated by the Noise Ordinance.
The following analysis provides a complete assessment of project related noise, including traffic
noise, and therefore addresses impacts in accordance with the Noise Ordinance, the General Plan
guidelines, and the MSCP Subarea Plan. Noise issues related to sensitive biological resources are
addressed above under the subheading Biology.
Scveral activitics associated with thc racc event would contribute to the overall potential noise
impact of the project, including off-road racing, public address system, generators, and
miscellaneous activitics, such as revving engines and vehicles in various parking lot areas. The
noise levcls associated with these events and activities have becn evaluated based on noise
measurcments previously conducted during various CORR racing events in the City of Chula
Vista and published noise level data, as appropriate. Noise measurements taken from previous
evcnt include cumulative noise associated with racc vehicle engines, loud speakers, event music
and fireworks. The measured and published data have been llsed to calculate the noise levels at
the ncarest residential properties and at the adjacent noise sensitive species habitat area(s).
To determine the worse-case (loudest) noise level associated with the Championship Off-Road
Racing Event, the loudest noise level monitored during CORR truck and buggy racing events in
2006 at thc temporary Chula Vista CORR race track was uscd. These noise measurcments
Page 27 of36M! I
indicate that a worse case-racing event would generate an average hourly Leq of 93 dBA at
100 feet distance from the racetrack. This 93 dBA noise level has been used as a basis to
estimate the worse case hourly Leq racing events noise levels at the nearest residential area, the
adjacent industrial land use, and the adjacent biological habitat.
The nearest residences are located at approximately 6,000 feet or more to the southwest of the
site. This large distance from the racetrack site al10ws the noise source to be considered as a
point source with 6 dB attenuation per distance doubling. For typical atmospheric conditions, A-
weighted sound levels are attenuated by l-dBA per 1,000 feet distance due to atmospheric
absorption. The stands between the racetrack and this residential location are also expected to
provide some shielding, approximately 3 to 5 dB. Applying the distance, atmospheric, and
stand shielding attenuation to the 93 dBA at 100 ft racetrack noise level results in a 46 to 48 dBA
noise level at the nearest residents' location. This calculated noise level does not exceed the City
of Chula Vista Noise ordinance 55 dB exterior noise criteria between 7 a.m. and 10 p.m. on
weekdays, and between 8 a.m. and 10 p.m. on weekends.
Based on the proposed racing schedule and the calculated hourly 48 dB racetrack level, the
resulting noise levels at the nearest residential location would be less than 50 dB CNEL. This is
wel1 below the City's General Plan Noise Element 65 dB CNEL residential land use noise
compatible criteria. Therefore, the racing noise impacts from the project upon the nearest
residential area is considered less than significant.
An industrial land use is located at approximately 1,000 feet distance, southwest of the project
site. Applying the distance, atmospheric, and stand shielding attenuation to the 93 dBA at 100
feet racetrack noise level results in a 63 to 65 dBA noise level at the industrial land use property.
This calculated noise level does not exceed the City of ChuJa Vista Noise Ordinance 70 dB
exterior noise criteria for Light Industrial Land Uses. Therefore, the racing noise impacts from
thc project upon the adjacent industrial land use is considered less than significant.
The average hourly project noise levels at the adjacent industrial and nearest residences would
compJy with the City's 70 dB and 55 dB noise ordinance criteria for light industrial and
residential land uses, respectively. As previously noted the race events would only occur for
4 days (two weekends) with individual practice runs and qualifying on Fridays. Chapter 19.68
Section 19.68.060 of the City of Chula Vista Municipal Code exempts occasional sporting and
entertainment events, provided the events are conducted pursuant to a permit or license issued by
the city relative to the staging of the events.
Concluding, the noise generated by the proposed project does not exceed the City's Noise
Ordinance criteria during the race events, and the project would represent an occasional outdoor
sporting and entertainment event that is exempt from the noise level limit provisions of the
City's noise ordinance, and, consequently, is not considered a significant noise impact on
surroundi ng land uses.
In terms of the City's CNEL noise guideline, the combined noise from all the identified race
activities would be an annual CNEL of less than 50 dB at the nearest residential location. This
noise level would comply with the City's 65 exterior annual CNEL noise criterion at the nearest
Page 28 of 36M! I
residences. Since thcse rcsidences are located in City of San Diego, it should be noted that the
project noise levels would also meet thc City of San Dicgo' s 65 dB CNEL noise criterion.
Public Services
The proposed project would not involve changing land uses that would result in increased
permanent demand for public services persOllliel, equipment and facilities or result in changes in
service levels. The proposed project has the potcntial to result in hazards associated with
accidents during the race events and therefore creates a temporary increase in demand for police
and fire services. The closest fire station that would respond to an incident at the project site is
located at 1410 Brandywine Ave., approximately 3 miles to the northwest.
Thc mitigation measures contained in Section H below would mitigate potential public services
impacts to a Jess than significance level. These measures are included as a part of the Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Transpo rta tio n/Tra ffi c
The proposed CORR events would be accessed via Main Strcet, Heritage Road, and Energy
Way. The proposed events are anticipated to generate up to 7,440 vehicles per day of the event.
Pay parking wi1l be offered at the onsite parking lots. Based on the additional special event
traffic and the potential for queuing to pay for parking, there is the potential for localized
congestion at ingress and egress points of the project and parking impacts on City roadways
during the two weekends of the proposed CORR event.
A traffic control plan is required to be prepared in accordance with City guidelines by the project
applicant and submitted for review and approval by the City Engineer prior to issuance of the
CUP. Elements of the traffic control plan would include, but not limited to, a description of the
signage, striping, delineate detours, flagging operations and any other devices which would be
used during events to guide motorists safcly to parking locations from public roadways. The
traffic control plan would also include provisions for coordinating with local emergency service
providers regarding event times and measures for bicycle lane safety. The Plan would address
parking plans for each parking lot, and would address methods to facilitate collection of parking
fces to minimize queuing on public strcets. The Traffic Control Plan would ensure that access
and traffic flow would be maintained, and that emcrgency access would not be restricted.
Additionally, the Plan would ensure that congestion and temporary dclay of traffic resulting from
the event and would be of a short-term nature. Implementation of the traffic control plan would
mitigate potential impacts to circulation and parking to less than significant.
The mitigation measures contained in Section H below would mitigate potential temporary
Transportation impacts to a less than significance level. These measures are included as a part of
the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Page 29 of 36M! I
Utilities and Service Systems
The project would not result in increased demand for utilities. Because the project would be a
temporary event, no permanent utilities would be constructed. Temporary generators would
provide power for lighting and electricity. Portable restrooms and water would also be brought
in for use during the CORR event. Trash would be collected routinely throughout the event and
disposed of in approved disposal containers.
The City's existing Salt Creek Sewer Interceptor line traverses the southern limits of the existing
quarry site. Any activity or operation that would restrict the City's access to this utility would be
considered significant. Based on the conceptual site plans, vender tents and portions of the pit
area would be situated over the pipeline. The City's Department of Public Works has stated that
lightweight tents and/or canopies are pem1issible over the pipeline but parking of vehicles shall
be prohibited. Additionally, 24-hour, unrestricted access to all manholes shall be maintained at
all times during site preparation and race operations.
The mitigation measures contained in Section H below would mitigate potential utilities and
service systems impacts to a less than significance level. These measures are included as a part
of the Mitigation Monitoring and Rcporting Program.
Thresholds
The project would not result in any of the identified growth management thresholds falling
below acceptable levels, as indicated in the discussion of public services, traffic and utilities and
servIces.
H. MITGATION NECESSARY TO AVOID SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS
Project-specific mitigation measures are required to reduce potential environmental impacts
identified in this Mitigated Negative Declaration to a less than significant level. These
mitigation measures are listed below and included in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program (MMRP) included as Attachment B to this MND.
Air Qualitv
I. The following project design features, have been included as mitigation measures to
assure their implementation, and shall be implemented prior to commencement of each race
event:
. Workers shall perform excavation, site preparation, materials handling, and hauling
in compliance with SDAPCD Regulation 4, Rules 52 and 54 regarding fugitive dust
for Control of Fine Particulate Matter (PMIO). Specific measures to be included in
specifications shall address the maintenance of adequate moisture content in soils to
be excavated and transported; the stabilization of exposed graded areas; and
prevention of soil track-out from disturbed areas onto paved roads.
. Low emission mobile heavy equipment shall be used, where feasible.
Page 30 of 36M! I
. The contractors shall obtain applicable air quality permits for any portable or
stationary internal combustion engine subject to SDAPCD permit requirements.
. To reduce fugitive dust, the track area, access roads, and parking areas shall be
watered at a minimum of twice a day to reduce PMIO levels.
. Excluding race vehicles operating on the designated track, spectator and
maintenance vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall not exceed 15 miles per hour.
. All trucks hauling materials subject to wind dispersal shall be watered and covered.
. All disturbed soil areas not subject to re-vegetation shall be stabilized with
approved nontoxic soil binders, jute netting, or other methods, as appropriate.
. Idling time of trucks and other heavy equipment shall be minimized.
. Groundcover on the site shall be re-established through seeding and watering.
. The streets shall be swept immediately when silt is carried over to adjacent public
thoroughfares.
. Engines in site preparation equipment shall be maintained by keeping them properly
tuned.
. Low sulfur fuel shall be used for stationary eq uipment.
. Existing power sources (e.g., power poles) or clean fuel generators rather than
temporary power generators shall be used, whenever feasible.
. The track shall be watered by a minimum of four trucks during each IS-minute rest
period.
. All parking lots within agricultural fields shall be mowed such that roots of the
vegetation remain intact in order to provide soil stabilization.
. Parking Jots and other arcas with exposed dirt shall bc watered to minimize fugitive
dust, as necessary.
Biolo!!ical Resources
2. To avoid direct impacts to potential nesting burrowing owl, pre-construction surveys will
be required prior to commencement of each race event. If owls are found to be nesting as
a result of the survcys, the active nest areas will be avoided and fenced as appropriate.
3. Prior to commencement of each racc event, prominently colored, well-installed biological
fencing shall be installed place wherever the project limits are adjacent to the Preserve,
sensitiye yegetation communities, and/or any other biological resources, as identified by
a qualified monitoring biologist. Figure 3 above identifies the general Jocation of the
reg uired fencing.
4. Prior to commencement of each race event "Sensitive Habitat - Keep Out" signage shall
be posted every 150 feet along the Preserve edge to discourage access to the Preserve. In
addition, the project shall be requircd to either prohibit domestic pets, or require that all
pets remain on leashes pursuant to applicable leash law requirements.
5. Prior to the commencement of race activities, a lighting plan shall be submitted to the
City's Environmental Review Coordinator for review and approval. The lighting plan
Page 31 of36M! I
shall clearly demonstrate that all temporary security lighting shall be directed away
and/or shielded from the Preserve to prevent any potential indirect impacts due to night
lighting. Additionally, low-pressure sodium lighting shall be used to reduce these
potential effects.
Cultural Resources
6. The area identified as significant for SDI-9976 shall be removed from the plam1ed
camping area and fenced as illustrated on Figure 8.0-1 of the approved archeological
study prepared by Brian F. Smith & Associates (An Archeological Study for the Chula
Vista International Raceway, April 10, 2007). Prior to commencement of each race
event, the fencing shall be installed under the direction of the project archaeologist and
shall remain for the duration of the racetrack use. No access to this site area shall be
allowed during the race events.
7. The access road through SDI-12,29Ib shall be fenced prior to commencement of each
race event, to prevent traffic from straying into the significant site area. The area to be
fenced is illustrated on Figure 8.0-1. The fencing shall be installed under the direction of
the project archaeologist and shall remain for the duration of the racetrack use. Vehicular
and pedestrian traffic through the sensitive site area shall be minimized. The project
archaeologist shall have the latitude to monitor the condition of the site during track
events and to add measures as necessary to ensure the site is not adversely impacted by
event activities.
8. Access roads or trails that pass through sites identified as significant or potentially
siguificant shall be fenced prior to commencement of each race event to prevent intrusion
into potentially sensitive areas. The fence locations are noted on Figure 8.0-1. The
project archaeologist shall identify the locations of all fences and the type of fence that
would be appropriate to ensure the sites are not disturbed.
9. Any grading, trenching, mowing, or other site preparations that might uncover
archaeological materials or affect recorded sites shall be monitored by an archaeologist
prior to commencement of race event preparations. In the event that the monitor
identifies a potentially significant site, measures shall be initiated to evaluate the site and
to implement mitigation measures as necessary to minimize impacts. Data recovery to
mitigate impacts is an option, but preservation of resources is the preferred mitigation
measure.
10. During the monitoring of mowing or other site preparations, the archaeological monitor
shall collect all surface artifacts, map the locations, and report findings to the City.
11. All cultural materials recovered during the testing of SDI-9976 or collected during
monitoring shall be prepared for permanent storage. Curation of all artifacts recovered
shall be required. Curation shall be arranged at an appropriate facility and will be
coordinated through the City ofChula Vista.
Geolo!!y and Soils
12. Prior to approval of the proposed CUP, the City Engineer shall approve erosion control
Page 32 of36M! I
measures and erosion BMPs as identified in Appendix A (Implementation of Best
Management Practices for Storn1 Water Pollution Prevention at the Otay Ranch
Championship Race Track Site).
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
13. Prior to approval of the proposed CUP, the City's Director of Public Works shall review
and approve containment area BMPs as identified in Appendix A.
14. Prior to the approval of the CUP, the project applicant shall submit an Nor and obtain an
NPDES Pem1it for Construction Activity from SWRCB. The SWPPP shall include a
description of pollution prevention controls and practices to be utilized both during and
following (post-race) raceway activities. Adherence to all conditions of the General
Permit for Construction Activity is required. The SWPPP shall also include a Storm
Water Sampling and Analysis Strategy (SWSAS), pursuant to the SWRCB General
Construction Permit requirements.
Hydrolo!!v and Water Quality
15. Prior to approval of the proposed CUP, the City Engineer shall review and approve
erosion control measures and erosion BMPs as identified in Attachment A.
16. Prior to the approval of the CUP, the project applicant shall submit an Nor and obtain an
NPDES Permit for Construction Activity from SWRCB. The SWPPP shall include a
description of pollution prevention controls and practices to be utilized both during and
following (post-race) raceway activities. Adherence to all conditions of the General
Pennit for Construction Activity is required. The SWPPP shall also include a Storm
Water Sampling and Analysis Strategy (SWSAS), pursuant to the SWRCB General
Construction Permit requirements.
17. The applicant shall request a site inspection by the City's Public Works and Storm Water
Inspectors after completion of site preparation, and prior to each race event. If the
inspectors identify any violation of the BMPs, race events shall be delayed until such
BMPs are properly implemented.
18. During race events, standby cleanup equipment and crews shall be available to respond to
potential hazardous material spills. Significant spills shall be reported to the appropriate
authorities and the City of Chula Vista as soon as such spill occur.
19. A quaJified person shall be designated for monitoring and repair ofBMPs. The name and
phone number of such person shall be provided to the Storm Water Management Section
prior to cach race event.
Public Services
20. Prior to approval of the proposed CUP, the project applicant shall prepare a security plan
to be approved by the Chula Vista Police Chief prior to the start of the CORR events.
Page 33 of 36M! I
The security plan shall detail, among other items, the number of security personnel
provided, general distribution of security throughout the race event, and number of
uniformed Chula Vista police staff required.
21. Prior to approval of the proposed CUP, the project applicant shall prepare an emergency
medical and safety plan to be approved by the Chula Vista Fire Chief. The plan shan
detail, among other items, emergency access routes, type of emergency vehicles required
to adequately serve the project, alternative access routes to be cmployed in the event of
rain or damp conditions, the variety of emergency medical services that can be provided
by the contract emergency medical company, chain of communication between event
sponsor and medical staff, number of ambulances present onsite and the number of
uniformed Chula Vista Fire Department staff needed onsite. A funy staffed Chula Vista
Fire Department engine company and Battalion Chief win be onsite during all race
events.
22. Prior to the approval of the proposed CUP, perimeter fencing will be shown around the
entire site on all plans, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Security personnel posted
shan be posted at an acccss points throughout the event.
23. Grandstands will be protected by 10,000 pound concrete barriers along the entire frontage
of the grandstand area. In addition, a 10 foot high catch fence with steel cables will run
the entire length of the grandstand area.
24. In accordance with the approved medical plan, emergency medical equipment and
personnel and ambulance will be present during the term of the race event.
25. In accordance with the approved security plan, both uni fonl1ed police and private security
personnel will be stationed onsite and offsite, as needed.
26. Prior to commencement of each race event, the applicant must install protective fencing
around all manhole covers (l5'rad / 30'diam) for the Salt Creek Interceptor Sewer.
Fencing shall consist of orange bio fencing 8l1d shall be installed to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer. The Applicant shall ensure that24-hour, unrestricted access to all
manholes will be maintained at an times during site preparation and race operations.
Lightweight vender items located along the remainder of the sewer alignment is
acceptable, but no parking will be allowed over the alignment of the sewer.
Transpo rta tio n/Traffic
27. Prior to approval of the proposed CUP, a traffic control plan shall be prepared in
accordance with City guidelines to the satisfaction of the Police Chief and City Engineer.
Elements of the traffic control plan will include, but not limited to, a description of the
signage, striping, delineate detours, flagging operations and any other devices which will
be used during events to guide motorists safely to ingress locations from public
roadways. The traffic control plan will also include provisions for coordinating with
local emergency service providers regarding event times and measures for bicycle lane
safety. The Traffic Control Plan win ensure that access and traffic flow will be
maintained, and that emergency access will not be restricted. Parking lot attendants will
direct attendees to vacant parking spaces within the parking lots.
Page 34 of36M! I
..
> ~
~.... -
-""""""~~
L .\GRIEEi\IEi\T TO Ir\WLE~UEi\T MITIGATION MEASURES
By signing thc linc(s) providcd helow. the Applicant and Operator stipulate thai they liave caeh
read. undL'rstooJ and 11 '-1 V\:' their respective compan)"'~ authority to and do agree tn the mitigation
measures contained herein, and will implement same to the satls!~lction of the Environmental
Review Coordinator. Failure to sign the linc(s) provided below prior to postlllg of this Mingated
Ncgative Declaration with the County Clerk shall indicate the Applicant's and Operator's desirc
thai the Project be held in abeyance without approval and that the Applicant and Operator shall
dppJy for an Environmental Impact Report.
I i) i ': i;. i., : ie,', . .1.,,, i :'
J"-'-i', ~ ,~': 1\_+~ i ,. ('L'{:,: I; !i!-I--'i'(
___ ~__, __~_=___.L_"___\~_~___'___~-- -_:~--~~~~':~Y,__:_~,--~-
Pr1l1tcd NamL' and ['lIle or Appllcant:,_' i ,~)( I i 1 f-'! C i \,' it /'
tor JuthorJ/L'O n::prcscI1lallvc) k.) (I
/_ ((I Date
-
.L_i
-;I (" (
i"
"
'-~
----
-~,--"---"---_.
[Jate
SlgnJturc Dr Applicant
(()r ~juthori/cd reprc~cntat\\c)
n~~n__' c.UA
Pnnlcd :'\Jamc anJ Title or Oper3tor
(lfdIlTcH..:nt (rom Applicant)
----
Date
"A
---------------
Si~llaturc or Operator
(II' dil'lcrcntli'om ,\pplicant)
Ihte
.1. CONSULTATION
1. lnuivi(!~a]s aJ~I OrS;~_\Ilil.atiol1s
City or Chula Vista
Glen Lauhc, Environmcntal Projects :Y1anagcr
'vlarisa Lundstedt. Environmental Projects \Llllagcr
Rick Rosalcr. Principal Planner
Jamal NaJi, :\ssislant Civil Engineer, Land Dc\"c!opment
Khusro Arlllnpour, Civil Engincer, Land Devclopment
I"rik Steenblock. Envirollmental Health Specialist
Don Redmond. Police Department
Pa~e-3+uf 36
~ ~c;,
--,
Doug Perry, Fire Depm1ment
Amy Linquist, Firc Department
Kirk Ammerman, Public Works
Harold Phelps, Associate Planner, Plamling Department
Wendy Loeffler, Biologist, RECON
Cheryl Johnson, Acoustical Analyst, RECON
Others
James P. Baldwin, Championship Off Road Racing, Applicant
Ranie Hunter, Applicant Representative
Joe Monaco and Mike Komula, Dudek and Associates
Valorie Thompson, Scientific Resources Associated
2. Documents
. Otay Ranch General Development Plan/Subregional Plan Program EIR (Program EIR
90-01), October, 1993.
. Archaeological Study for the Chula Vista International Raceway, Brian F. Smith and
Associates, April, 2007.
. Environmental Noise Assessment for the Temporary Off-Road Race Track, Dudek &
Associates, April 9, 2007.
. Biological Resources and Impacts Analysis Letter for Championship Off Road
Racing, Chula Vista, California, Dudek, April 2007
. Biological Resources Report and Impact Asscssment for Otay Ranch Villages Two
and Three, Dudek, February, 2006.
. Air Quality Technical Report for the Championship Off-Road Racing Event,
Scientific Resources Associated, April, 2007.
. Final Second Tier EIR for Villages Two, Three and Four (portion) SPA and TM, City
ofChula Vista.
3. Initial Study
This environmental deternlination is based on the attached Initial Study, and any
comments received in response to the Notice ofInitial Study. The report reflects the
independent j '(1grnent of the City of Chula Vista. Further information regarding the
cnvironment I ~cview of this project is available from the Chula Vista Planning and
Building D en, 276 F m1h Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910.
Date:
sl (+107-
Glen L be
Environmental Projects Manager
Page 36 of 36M! I
ATTACHMENT "A"
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM (MMRP)
OTAY RANCH CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR TEMPORARY
CHAMPIONSHIP OFF-ROAD RACE 2007 - IS-07-030
This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program has been prepared by the City of Chula Vista
in conjunction with the proposed Otay Ranch Conditional Use Permit for Temporary
Championship Off-Road Race 2007 (MND IS-07-030). 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. The
legislation requires pubJic agencies to ensure that adequate mitigation measures are implemented
and monitored for Mitigated Negative Declarations.
AB 3180 requires monitoring of potentially significant and/or significant environmental impacts.
The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for this project ensures adequate
implementation of mitigation for the following potential impacts(s):
1. Air Quality
2. Biological Resources
3. Cultural Resources
4. Geology/Soils
5. Hazards/Hazardous Materials
6. Hydrology and Water Quality
7. Public Services
8. Transportation/Traffic
MONITORING PROGRAM
Due to the nature of the environmental issues identified, the Mitigation Compliance Coordinators
shall be the Environmental Review Coordinator and City Engineer of the City of Chula Vista.
The appJicant shall be responsible to ensure that the conditions of the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program are met to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator and
City Engineer. The applicant shall provide evidence in written form confirming compliance with
the mitigation measures specified in Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-07-030 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 I, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Checklist, lists the mitigation measures
contained in Section H, Mitigation Necessary to Avoid Significant Effects, of Mitigated
Negative Declaration IS-07-030, which will be implemented as part of the project. In order to
determine if the applicant has implemented the measure, the method and timing of verification
are identified, along with the City department or agency responsible for monitoring/verifying
that the applicant has completed each mitigation measure. Space for the signature of the
verifying person and the date of inspection is provided in the last column.
~I
~I
~I
c:
il
~I
l:J
c:
ro
<J)
c:
.~
~l
jl
fl
CI>
U
..
:011:
~~
ClII:
0:::
11:0
~]
~ g
II: "g
o E
Q. ..
Ws:;
II:U
~ ~
<e g
CI E
~ CI>
11:1-
o ~
!::.E
z:!::
o E
:0 G;
zll.
Q ::
1-::1
<en;
CI c:
i= 0
:E~
"'C
c:
o
U
~
'E
~
E
E
o
u
.
-g ';;j
_ c
!-
E '"
o .!!!
U '"
.E
~
:;:;
''\2:
ct:
o ~
c.o.
~
~
'"
"'-'
o .
",,0
'0.968
"'-;
cUe--
.E~
i= ~!;g
0.0
o
c--
_C
00
"0:';:;
o ~
:::!E
~ ~
:; ~
>
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
:;
C
.2
-;
~
:E
C ~
o ~
.- ~
callie)
gmz
:E:;
g ~.q
U';:: U
:'=(1)__"0
8:: ~ E!=: 'i:
..... "t:'" Q)E ~ u
..... '-", OJ) OJ) E
..... !=: t: == == t
~ UJ ro ~ "'0 ro
"2'.f'2-B52-
o.UOo.C!JO
--'
. .
00
0.0
-
><
><
><
:;
,.:
~
~~
BV)
~"'"
,9 ~
~ >
0. U
c
.g
u
u
c.
.E!
~.~ B
~..s
~
o
~ ~.~
" ~
~~]
~ c
~ -8 E
~ u
"E [/) 0-
~1:~
~
"
u
E
"
C
v
u >
,Q U
U
""@ g
C '" ~
~.g <J] {j
.~ (\:1"'0 (\:I
o OJ) c 0)
'-..... cd.......
>- p...~ 0
!- OJ) g c
:s .~ ~"-g E
..( 0 t:: ~
~]"2E~
u "'5vE
a:v"Uo..E
-( ~ .5.5 8
.~
~
U
'0
-
~,.nl- 25Cl)c'-
..:::cc82 @...c20
~ @.S t1 ~ ~,2 ~ .9 B
",~.:E-6~ c~~cg
d c 5b ~ .......5 a o..D v [J)
3 ron~.f~"2 ~.~_ ~ ~c.~
'od gp "@) (\:I "'0 ... '"
~:.:=B<Z:22.sc-="'@"O
u"'O b1)V~:2~.-i:iro~
x ~ 14 !: 'E'- Q) t: v ." '-
~..c::<r:~:;Q)"'Ot~.2
t:: V> 0 .... u..o:g ~ Oc. ~ .~
...... - C/) ro._ .8 ro ;:::; [/) Cd-o
.g 'E.;: ~ ~ [/] - ;:::I C "'0 E
Q) Q)._ ...... ~ Q) ro ~ ro Q) 0
p.. 'od ~ ,. OJ ~ ~ '0 .::: "g <b
co :n g ] ~ ~ .~ ~ ] ~ '50
..gOroro4-E-Cd"'Ou I
~ -z ~N ~ u ~ ;:::I v ~ ~
Q)~E~2SS8"~&r!
~,..,ov uu"'9~~"""
o::Ju"3~uQ,)''''u-
~ 0..5 ~ u ~ ~'o ~ '0 ~
.
~
-g
o
~
'0
v
>
"
c.
-;;
'"
~
'E
u
E
c.
E
or
u
>>
>
~
u
'" ~
~~
:.D ro
E~
c ~
o U
";;;...1:::
~ ~
E-o
u u
~ ~
o u
...J,Q
;.-.. ~ ro
.... @ tl ~
.~ g ~ 13 :::
~.~B ~~~
~8~ ~~~
8:vE'ui g..D..6
ro::D ;;; 'E .... - ~
.S ~ v Eu 1:] jg B
ro 0 t:: ...... [J"J
.:E 0...5JJ ~ ......~ ~ >-
o 2 6.:; ~ ~.g
c;jro!::2""'Ororo
i; b .2 .... v DJ) (jJ
~ ~ ~ .~ :~ ~ .~
B.-<;;:..D.... DJ)..........
uEE~<22..'o
~~80~]E
gcCdE~.gro6
~ ~ (jJ ~ 1: -0'".;:: ~
tS g..S~ ~ 2.E~
.
.
.
co
"
u
c ;;
(I,) 8 s::
-51\,)_
5 .s ]
~ E ~
.~ "'O~
~ @ 2
o.~'O
001\,) .:
~ E ~ g
u ~ o.....c:
:..a fF 3 fi:j
~.;l5;;
(I,) u v; (I,)
gg~]
~"'O ~>r\
c2v;........
:.a ro d.J"'O
:::I au I\,)
~.u;:..a tl
u.J~~~
.
c-
o
23
N
;:;
~I
0>,
~l
~I
&-1
~I
il
~l
~I
0>
:2
:;:
..
u
..
::EO::
~~
ClO::
0:::
11::0
~~
~ g
0:: .~
o E
11. ..
W.c:
0::0
~ ~
-t 0
CI ~
~ ..
0::1-
o ...
t=.2
Z:!::
o E
::E :.
zD..
Q m
!;(::I
CI~
~ 0
;;:;::;
..::i:j
C
o
U
J!!
~
~
E
E
o
()
~
'" .
.'!! c
~
'Q,f--
E !!!
o .~
() "
.:
~
:;;
.~~
~~
o ~
0.0.
~
~
'"
m-,
~ ~
'i:~
a ,9 ~8
",10
.=.!:!~
E1:
;=>d1!~
"0
u
-
-"
o 0
-0=
o i3
:5~
~ ~
:o~
>
~
e
"
~
~
~
:0
~
.2
10
~
:0
~ ~
o ~
:g~ci
~mz
:1:0
--'
~ .
00
"u
-
"
"
'0
"
:;:
.,;
E ~
'H ~
.~ 0
.D U
~11
~ ro
~"O
~ V
V ~
_ v
ro Cd
E ~
.s ~
'3_
ro ro
-"-"
~~
U
E ~
a.
:;:~
'0
V ~
, > v
p 0 ~
- :s. '0
so......
ro 0
a3-:S :.5
B'~ "B
~ 'V IJJ
_ V ~
g ~ ~
'fJ E .2.,2
~ .s <I5'.:j
@ ~ ;:; Q.
_ ~"2 e
5;c;E 2:
'0-" ro
~ ~ ~ ~
~ 0 u "'~
~, '';::: ~ 'D
~~.9..2
",,,-
~ ~ g E
.
.
"
>
ro
u
-"
~]
,s N
~ :~
" ~
~ "6
.;:; v
s.D
4--;;0
0"",
.~ 5
",g,
.5 "5
:3 6f
~
U
.D
~
"
~ u
<:':I;"::::::
:.a-g
E~
5 ~
p. .st
V'O
~ ro
~ E
.D ~
'""@ 6 vi
~]~
ti ):::~
~(3~
o
.=::: 0
'w.s
~
V
.D
f-
.
.
"
{i-2
" u
u a.
E 2
0.0.
"5 E
O'v
v-"
" -
.S ~
E "0..
8 8
go-",
a.E
1''0
"[jj g
.S @
~ .'g
.~ E"8
" u "
lLJ...c.3
.
oD
2
l'
?: ~
~-g
_ ro
'" '"
~ .S
~"E
";jj ~
.B~
" 0
o 0
v.B
>'0
o u
U.D
'0 ~
~:.=
O.D
o ro
o~
c
ro
"
o
.~
..8
'0
u
~
o
~ ~
u
" E
{;.@"
-0 0'
<-2 ~
~ .9
U
'3 0
~ b
~ ~
o "
...J 8
.
.
::;
,.-.., c.....
~ ro OJ
(3 :s ~
o.o.~
t E]
~ ~ ~
o ~ ^
o.ro'O
~ -5 ~
"'~o
~.s~
~ ~
~ ~
o ::;
s; ~
~ u
~ ~
o '"
0._
~,.2
..;::: c
.~ cd
~ u
cu'U
"
.D
~
~
o
e
u
"
u
"'u
t;9
~ ~
o '"
a.""
.
.,.
~
o
E
o
E ~
i:i r:
'g ~
ro "
Z"E
'0';'
~-
U.D
Cd ~
~ u
u '"
.D "E
o
'0
"
.D
~ ~
-,,-"
g g .
bt::]
u ~ -
.D 0 ~
f-< <2 g.
.
t-
o
2;
'"
~
@I
OJI
el
!l.
:?I
t'
o
0.
Q)
I:t:
'0
c,
.il
~I
0,
:2:,
gl
il
I
'"
u
;;.
:;;"0
~ ~
c)o::
oi
0::0
~~
~ ~
.... 0
0:: "2
o E
II. 111
w~
0::0
~ ~
< ~
C) E
~ '"
0::....
o '-
t::.2
z-
o 'E
:;; :-
zll.
o ::
~::::I
C) ~
i= 0
~~
I:
o
o
'"
'E
~
E
E
o
u
'0 S
$ ~
-[-
E "
o .!!
U ~
~
:c
';;;,.,
~t:
0..
0.0.
'"
~
'"
'"-'
o.
-':0
o.~ .58
~~-
"e!E _
i=~!~
0.0
o
e-
- ~
o 0
-0;:;
o1j
.;:;:E
~ ~
'" ~
>
tau;
00
0.0
-
'"
'"
~
.D
-;; 0
.;;i .g
'0 ~ '-
e V ~
-" M ~
U
e > '0
'" ~ '>
'" -5 0
~ ~
~ "3 .. 0.
~
00 u 0 B
.. '~fJ
~ ~ 0 "
'" ~ 2 'E
~ 0 " 0
~' ~ E
:2 -5
~ .D tj ~
~ MU ~ 0
:1 0 ~ .S
:.'2 ~
a '0 ..-: .~
~ .@:-:::
0. ~
- 0 Eo;;
:;;;: E ~ -
~ ~
~ ~
o ~
;;:::1 .
.. '" 0
~mz
:1'"
.
c ~
'i3 ~
'0 w
~ 0
0 '0
0. ~
~ >
<1.> '';:
-5 '"
~ '"
w
~ N
" g
u
~
" ~
b E
-5 8
0
'0 '0
0 ~
~ ~
~
:2 "
~ ()
M ~ ~
~ .D '"
:.'2 == w
U
a ~ U
.D ~
0. ~ 0
.
";:,""2
e ~
.~ ~
8:'~ c
<c:.~ bQ ~
U ~.5 €
<1.> >-."0 ro
8'0 ~ ;}
p..__cco
x
s
~
,8
" -
o.~
>'>
~ ~
~ ~
"''''
~E""O [J)
.~ 0 5 ~
g';:: <.8 u
::I~ ~.:: r..i
..D Q.J ro u.~
bJ}.~ '" ro 5.
.S g.~~ 0
m~":::8:
C <1.)....... ;>. ro
.D ~ '"
i '= ro
.~ ~ a 'B
~ ~] ~
~ g ~ ~
~~ ~]
~g~"O
o IlJ (I,) <1)
''::'+-< ......"0
~ ~ ~-~
~ 1::: 0..> ('j ro
_ jg a bl) <1)
;oO<1)'E~
""0 ~ g ~:-;::
.~ 5. E c ~
-;615~
> 0 ~
o u .8 ro
OJ
';::
o
U
15
0.
I'
'"
'"
u
'"
;::>
o
'"
'"
'"
...I
<(
u
G
o
...I
o
_ 0
"'f-<
w
tj
~
0.
g
N
~ ~.q
.~";:: u
~ ~ '0
Ii~c@ E
~._ QJ OJ
...... ~E gpgpe
~ ~ ~ 'c ~ a
"2.f' 2- ] ~ ;}
o...U 0.0.. cc 0.
x
e
w
E w
U U
g ~
EEgE
~ E Co) Q.J
V) 8'o~
o
g
U
w
0.
~
~
.2
E.
we;
gp ~ <'3_ ~
'0 ~ ~ 2"
~:<;:: 2.;:::" (JJ
4.:. ~ ;:j u....-5
Cd' 0....: 4-<
U ...... C ~ .~ 0
c5D~iL~~g
~ Eo "2' g 0-
<J.)._ 0... ~.;:! =-~
v..D Q) ~.s:2
~ ] iJ v.8 .5 -;::
_::: ~ >,..D \- t:
"'t; ~ >"- 0 ru
ro [J) (]J ~ ~;<;:: C
IJJ C ...... c...r:: !=: Q)
'-'-- " ~ v ....... 0 OJ)
o~1:"'os<J.)
c J2""d<5
<J.)3:~~c~~'"
E""d..::~o;..:::J::
~~a.~;ag'z
c:.2"20... c: 0"5
e8==v(lj(lj"'O
~Z'~~.~E5
8 c .S ....... 'c ""d Z
E .5 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
5 g ~ .~ ~ '5 .s
g: Q..~-g 8:9'0
~
-:g t>J).c
~ C:.-
.~.t: U
_v-...""d
8:~c@ c
<r:'bi) E Of} Of} E
-u !=: ...... c: S .......
Q) ~ @';::""d @
'2'.q g. ~ '5 g.
o...UQo...CCJQ
x
c
U
E U
v u
u ~
~ ~
E~~~
.B 0'-;;
i:i3 U 0 v
e
,8
1:5
u
p.
.g
~
,8
E.
oiJ
~
'u
o
~
'0
~
'5
0'
~
v~-5
.5 0 E ~
..... >-........""d v ~
';g [) ~ ~ a.~
~ ~ ~'g.~~
c"Eg~~~
u ~ ~~-=~
~ 0.. e ~:L3
Q) ~ 6]'313
g--~~g-;.::::
.. __ ,,......... .... c..
.!:~""OB....o..
~ U1 S '0' o~ ~
tl) II) (j)" r.IJ.......
,-~Of}c..~c
o c: "'0 <J.) 0.. ~
C .~ ~ <5 .:: ~
E~V1c~r139
tl) ::.; ~'';:: E 0..
go~~o~
II) a. 0... ""d ""d ...r::
S II) v e<:I .-::: ~
c Q.)...c: c..c Il)
5~"""'-:.c-
UI ~~2a
EE~~;:-c
0:.0 VJ <J.)'@
,- ~ ~ Q).s E
O:::I:<2c':v~
.,.
en
~
c
~
E
~
5
0,-
~
c-
O
23
N
~
E.I
~l
ct I
~I
~I
~I
~I
.C
.8
'c
o
~
c
o
~
~
~
..
u
..
:ED:
~~
C)D:
0:::
D:O
~~
~ g
D: '9
o E
D. ..
w~
D:O
o i::
z ..
~ 2
C) E
~ ..
D:I-
o ~
~.E
z-
OE
:E :-
zD.
o :g
~:J
C) ~
i= 0
-;::
:E:;:;
c
o
o
~
1:
~
E
E
o
CJ
'C .!!
.s g
~-
E !!!
o .!!!
CJ "
.5
~
:c
'in ~
ct:
o ~
0.0.
~
~
'"
D .
co
;:c
_ I: ;:, 0
0.2 cu
",1U
.!:.!:!~
E~ .,.i
;:: >111 ! ~
0.0
U
-
_ c
o 0
-0:;::
o 1j
~!E '
:;~
>
00
~
-
"
00
~
~
:;:
c
.~
1U
'"
'"
:E
c ~
0_
~~ci
~~Zl
:E:;
g ~.q
U'C U
;='1):::,"'0
&~5a '5
~ .~ E bi} ~ E
g ~ ~ "2 -6 ~
'2'.f' ~ ~ 'S 8-
o..UQo..OOQ
8-;
0.,3
-
x
x
x
'"
"
~ ~.q
~5:::-a
g;~~a c
<r:: "50 E OJ) bJ) E
t)Ct::.St
r.J ~ C'd C -0 (ij
'2'.q2"~5 8-
o...uOp...p:JO
x
'"
~ ~,q
.~ '5:::""d
]:gc@ c
<c~ E .~ ~ E
~U4~i::~~
2'.q~]:g g.
o...U 0 0..000
x
c C ~ ~ c ~ ~ c ~
.g ~ u .~ v u ,g v u
E e E e E ~
13 "
u v u ;;; u ~ ;;;
v u 00 v u v u
a. ~ d: '" 5~ 0. C "
.3 B v B 00 B v '"
- E v C 5 - ~,s C .5 " ~ v C
'" .~ 5 -5 ~ '" ~ ~ '" 0 -5 ~
i/J 5- 0 - > i/J 5- 0 - > i/J c 0 - >
u 0 v u 0 v 0. u 0 ~
on
5
:c- IJ.)
bJ),;j oj) >. .Li
~5~ ~>. =::
8.;::::ro@oo.2
.g g ~ ~ i3 B -~ ~
:~ .~ e.2 ~ ~ ~.S
'g ~ 2: ~ .= ~:: ~ '"
'" ~(fj ~ e ~ o~:;:: ....
~ Q !: t).D ~ 'i: E ~
~ ._ ('j c""- > 0 .:j 4-
_u~Eo-at::.-ao~
o ~.~ (\) ~ r: :; [J).~
c""~~gp~~~B
ESM"C'''=(\)0~~
~] c2 ('j i1-5 C'd i3 8-
........... 1lJ .~ EO."
E'S (3 U -;.. 0 .5 9- ~
E-9~~:E~u6-5
o v1"'O{1;:j"'Oe-IU
uuoc~~;.a>;u
v..Dorotr.lvc::::::-6
~ ] ~ -.~ i ~ ] .~ ~
.... ~.;:: E a.l2 5 .<;:: "'0
.S cd ~ .~ E :2 (5 :g ~
d: p,p:: ...=: ~ ~ p., <e: ;:j
~
v [J) .2 (\)
.Li ('j ",..D (IJ
c;;""8 s.: Cd -5
{Sg ~~B~ 'o~
'-0 ~ ...c; - bJ) !::_
1'--"'0 :~Doc 0-
~ ~ "d a ~ ~ 'g .~ ~
........ ('j ~ ."'S ~ t) ~ ('j
Q W 0 ~ ... ~ <:,) .~ -0 W
{/} @ P.. @ ~<:::::> of: e w @
~ OJ) p.. ';: ~ ~ n a. -5 B
c ('j co ~ t'\ i: ] o'~
'i:: 'o..~ >.~ c' 0) ..... r..=. V1
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '@ :.s ~
u '2"d ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ 0 e E ~
c=: ,S9 ~ 6 0.. -2 "': J: '-5 ~ :2 ~
~ ~@oo~86'<:,)~,"@~u
o ('j...- w a.~ ~ 2;.;:; ..:: u e
rJ'J ""d 0...... >. tJ ~ 4-< V1 ('j
~ wo:::l"d"'uo]-oo~
c=:u:::::..::b.O::I~t"j .....c;z~
.;:: ..... w: t) ::::: e::: c .... cd OJ)
,..;j c E c: - ~ _ 0..> 0..> v .13
<( 0..> 0 0 S '-' t"j E -g.~ V1 -
ct: "0 r..I::: .- V1 ::::: tV ;:::I OJ) ::I ::I
.; -0 "'2 CJ) ~ .S: u ..2 ~ ""0
;:i rJ tV ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ 13 8 g 13
:3 @5btVgEE~cdb3
~ ~E~-5~~gt;-5~..s
u f-< ~::::: @ <r::.E.: u.S 3 ~ c;;
'.0
.... c: ~
tV '@ tV .:L'Vi
-0.....0..> "'2E .1:"J gtV
<!)5~~:;I~""O'"@tVb-5
g>....."d c;:-E tV
<1:!~<'J'o~""@cdV1tV~9
tV a. ~ c;; ~ @ cd ~'r:: '"
.DB cdJ.~""03 ~..::.e 53 w
""@c-~oo ~EtV~2:Jo~
~ ~ ~ o..>~ V1 tV';;;~'<n ~.~
.D tV @ ~ ~ '5b > ~ t;; ~ ~ ''8
~ g :E ~ ~.a ~.~ '~~ a E
~ ~ .~ ~ .3 ~ ~ ~ ] .~ ~ t
,,-., (.) Il) I1J C 8 .... I',).J:'-:: >-.
~4-<;:cd~ ~-5~"d<IJ.D
eno.....:: t:~ -,cW
.....wQ)~;:~~o::;-o
..c ..... 0 <IJ ~ '~ r:: OJ) u u - Q)
~5.sE 2W50..>1l)~g
2 E OJ)~ . Cl...c .... '0'.5 ~
-5 ~ C:._ -6' ~ .:::: -5 p.. ....0 ~ .~
C 5'-.-0 :::I ..... 0 U W ..... ..... -
iiI ~u r:: 8 tJ 4-< c: 12 ..c '2 1i! J::o
p .....c...-OOcdf-<oOcu
- V1 <2 13 c ',g b . E ..... ~
\2 0 E w '50 ,9 .... c:: "d 0""0 w
cuuo..cot)::I(<:jw.....c>
u B<l= 00 ~~.~ t:JE tV~-g
g u..... W'- ..c v. ""0..........
o!Ecd..c"d.....w-::Ic:o
~ ,_ cd W U W .... -0 .c .E ~ c:
t-< P.. b @ @ -5 <2 & E cd w.~
c-
c-
o
23
N
;:r
~l
gl
~
Q..
01
<::
t
~I
~I
~I
~l
~I
~l
01
:E
:2
I I
I
~
1:
w
E
E
0
U
'C .!!
.
w a
;; -
Q.
E -
0 ~
u :5
.. w
U :c
CO ';;;",
:;; [t: ct::
"0 0..
~ 0.0-
co ~
0 w
C> ~ '"
0 -
-
0:=0 ~.;
Q. "9
C>~ ...8
z .. I--
i= I:
0 "'"'
0:= "11 0_
.0
o E _0 ~ .
Q. CO o ,9 aU
w~ 0>10 -
0:=0 .: .!:!
C ~ E1:
i=~ .-
Z co ~ C
0..
~ 5 U
C> ~ -
;!!:: .. "
0:=1- "
0 ~
!::: 0
-
Z -
0 "E _ c
00
:;; ~ "O~
.. o ~
z n. "' .-
0 Q) Qi1:
.. ::E ~
~ ::;) >
co
C> I:
E 0
:;:;
:;; '5
I:
0
0
~
~,
::;
~
~'
~
"
c
.2
10
g
:ij
c ~
o ~
:;:: ~
ctI II) 0
gmz
:ij::E
~ ~.f'
u';:: U
:":::IJJ:::,"O
8:~5@ '5
-< "bi) E gf ~ E
~ Jj 'fa '2 .g ~
"S'.f' ~] '5 &
c..UQc..~Q
x
c
o
'CO
u
v
0.
~
E
1:
v
E 0
o u
u ..
c ~
v..c
~ ~ '5
o ~ >
u 0 v
8
~ .~
V3 D..
~ .g.~ ~ ~ ~
~~E"'~~o
c ~.~ .g .~ '0 c
C,) c c - OJ) n..> ~
:::2 <B <'...I B..9 p.., ::
~~[';2o>'~'
.~;::::: D.. e %:;.~
~.g ~ ~ e:; IJ.)
;:3 ...... C 'l) ro c.,s
O~IJ.).r::t)ror:
;.. ro :> ~ Il) UJ ;j
.f. u (\) '0' ~ '"
~~~~D..1:;5
roSbrog3O)<2Q
~';n ~ a ~ ~ ~
..sGM~ <+-.;1
(f] cd 4.-<.-......: 0';::
._ P 0 :t;; 6 c g-
ro t: ...... C . 0 .....
1::: ~ c OJ 00 .- 0..
58.E~~~g.
~ ~ g ~ ~.2 ~
2@(1)'-gi.i:~:g-d
uE~g~$1J.)
~ g 15 0.."0'';:: ~ ~
\jQ.uovc......:;;
< 'Vj B .5 g ~ .5 :0
00
g ~.q
U';:: U
~~1=~
0.. c ~ cd 5
<( "51 E OJ) b{) E
-uCtESt
IJ.) ~ ro c"O cd
'0' C g. @ ~ B-
~uoO:~O
x
><
c
.E
t>
o
~
E
E
~
~ .~
(/jD..
~
~
o
'5
~ @
.~."
~'~E
]-E]
a ~ B
0"2 "g
ci) ~ E
~~~
00-
E g:2
. ~ ~
.~tE
-5 "E "[j)
5~'E
"..c""
bi):; 8
;.@.8 ~
e~u
b{)cd~
>>0.",
c; ~ ....
< 0. 0
a.
"
v
E 0
v u
g 2
o..c
E u ~
E a3 ;3
o ~ >
u 0 0
~ ~
.8 cd IJ.)
cd "0 ~ .::!J.s
c ~ IJ.) ~.~.~
u~'~5B~
~ c:g E >- ~
~ ~ u c ki- 0
S ....,..D 0 ;;> ~
4-< 0::::: ca 8 I-
.:: '8 ~ .~ ~ '0
c 0 :<;::: (<j C
(l) E 13 S ca 0
E v I- -::: Q'-g
v.r:: ='...
g ~ ~ ~ ~ 6
(l)..8 E ~ ~ 13 ~
~~(l)-~o.a.::!
o 5.~.-"~ '5 ~
~~......9~,..DE
......<'.);3-oE~^~
(5 -:s ~ @.- .9 .9
'~.E .~.~ :~ g. i
~ c'<Ij ~ 0 ;3 :~
gr 9;q-:s t..~"O
"0 ca (<j ~ ~ uJ (l)
(l) @',p (<j uJ u t:
E 0.5..2 ~ 8..<2
u~o~~S2
@ 0. 0.. v t::._ a.
-:g OfJC
.~ g (3
.....v__.."O
2:~E@ C
<C '5iJ E 0fJ 0fJ E
u Jj t .S .S t
(l) ro t::"O ro
'2'.qe-~~ 8-
c..UQo..(:QO
><
;:: 0
E e
o
u ~
c~
8 u
~2~.s~
U)c.8t;~
c
.g
u
o
0.
~
.5
13
~
at
u 0
~::::: e-
'<1) ro....
~..c""
~ uJ C
o E :n
0'[3 g
gf E ro
,....'-- U
~ ~.Q
S .~~
'00;'
0fJ ~ (<j
.S {3 E
oa~i-
"2 ~ <E 0
o ...... .- v
~ j~f ~ -:s
-:s.g g ~
OfJro..... 0fJ
.2 [~~
a~=@~
o
-
r-
-:g 0fJ;>'
ro t:: .-::
U';: U
;.::::v~'"O
~.~ ~ ~ 0fJ ~
U t:: _ t:: S.....
v u.J @.;:: '"0 @
'2'.qB-~~ g.
c..uOc..c:o.o
x
x
u
u
"
~
~ ~
.9 ~
"
~B
';: E
o 0
> ~
~
o
'C
0.
, ~
0<8 (l)
(/)'"0'"0 .;::
4-< ~ ~
o (<j (l) ,.J:::
OfJo.;;>@gf
.S ~ 8 ca 2
~ v ~ '"O-s
~::~~'E
-c;<Ea~
gfo51"€ ~ ~
.~ ~; (l) 0
'"0 'C (";I.L:J 0
."Ol.+-;;:::u
(l)'-:: 0 ~ u
QJ g 6 "';:::
6 E '!;': g:-;::
u OJ) ~',p 3:
~C;:lC:!"O
~.~ U ;:I a .
.S!-o <l.iu ci:!
B"E ~~~.~
ro..........uu>
E ~ .8 .!:: <E ~
c;::S uJ 5-~.E
.3 :: ~ ~ .~ ~
""5 0 ro,..D g. 0
u;f:E::as.c
~ ~ g.~ firO
-
I"-
co
o
Co!
~
~I
II
il
&1
!I
c
~l
~I
il
~I
I
i
I
~
'E
~
E
E
0
t,)
~
'C .
2 c
-!i-
E .
0 ~
t,) :5
CD ~
u :c
co "iij >-
:;: D:: ct:
"0 o ~
~ 0.0..
co ~
0 ~
C) D:: '"
.
0 :=
II:: 0 --'
~~ . .
00
0.0
Z '" -
~ c::
0 co-'
II:: .~ " .
"""
o E '0.2 ~o
Do co co
W.c:: "',. -
11::0 .~ .!:!
~ ~ E~ 010
i=~ ~ "
0.0
<( a 0
C) ~ -
~ CD ,.
11::.... ,..:
0 ~
!::: 0
-
z -
0 E _c
o 0
:;: ~ -c;:;
CD o ~
Z a. ;:!E
0 CD ~ ~
'" ::E ~
~ :J >
co
C) c::
E 0
:;: :e
"0
c::
0
0
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
::E
c
0
'"
~
g
i
c ~
o ~
:Z;::::I
It! 111 6'
gmz
i::E
~
c ~.q
.~.;: U
!5..~~] C
D...:: fi ro (,)
:: g'E ~~E
~ CIJ ~'t:; ~ @
'2'.f' 2- ] ~ B-
o..UOo...Ii10
><
><
><
'"
~ >
o 2
" 0-
o 0-
'''<r:
:.00...
5;:0
uu
." '"
c ~ u
~ <8 ~
..Q ~ ~ a:::
U ~ .~ ~
.5~<c~6
E >< ~ v
0:0:.01::.9
B ~ e eJa '"
-088:(1)5
~ c ~ ~.;:: ~
8. -~.S ~ fi a
V)22""8~~~
=~~~tJo...e
O-B>-C~5E-<
00....... 2 ~....... -,;:: (1)
Q 0 a...- 0 :::I g
;zc;; g.~ 5~a:::
..0( 5 - "'.- 0... 0..
>- ...."'@p.. (;j.....:..2
o 2:~ ;:E c ~ ~
o ro ~ Ii) E ~.:::
..J B (]J 8 (l) 0...
O~=-o.E~
~ .S ~ d E O..c
OP:~~GcI)U
N
-
I
:g bfJ ~
od >= .-
~ "5 u -0
D.. IV"':;;.> c ......
p.,CCro c:
-< '5iJ E DO bfJ E
u ~ 1:: ,S.5 1::
Q) ('J C:"'O (':j
...,.., >-- 0.. c:::: 0...
0....... <1) ('I:! ::I (1)
ctiJoO:coo
><
><
><
'"
~ >
o 0
~
C 0-
.:2 0..
,,<r:
"'0..
5;:0
uu
en
...j
-<
g:
,t.>
'.....
-<
::0
,en
';:J
o
::2
-<
N
-<
::
'Q
:z:
-<
en
::2
-<
N
-<
::
u<
~ > ~
~[]
u ~~
.s-g~
. ~ c
0.. ~ .-
;:Ow'"
u":; ~
"E ~ .~
~ - u
&] :9
o ~ ~
5.", (':j
w -" ~
..c ::; 0...
-;:<:2
'oucc
~:g~
o ~ '"
s..e:: c
g. 0 w
o 0 ~
:: t) '@
,9 ~ C
d:08
c::
c bf) >.
ro C ~
~5~'"O
p.. Q,) ...... c =
c...5 5 cd IJ.)
:: ~E ~bf)E
U CIJ t::.-.s t::
(1) ro C:"'O ro
'2'.f' e- ~ :s e-
o..UO 0... coCJ
><
><
><
."
~ >
o 2
c 0-
e~
"'0..
5;:0
uu
C I- '@ bi}
i3<8~-3C: ~
~.~ ~ ~] _ 5]
c'dt1J>oo~.Bg>,
....... P-.;> s::: <;::. 0 ;:j.- bO_
~(I)IJ)S-O"""'-t;~.B~
.0'u.J ~ i:: @ ~ s::: ~ ~ ~
p,Ob t1J bDS:::uo_r:i5 (I)
~ ;> s::: CJ - U
w Z M v._ !;: !-< ~ l/)
...c: _!-<!-< "" o..c - N'\
....... s::: U 0... :J...c~ (fJ~""'" l/)
,,~ C3 e::. s::: -0 "3 ...... P-. _ U ~
...... o..s::: ......- P-. c'd ~ .....
~ .s: ~ .;:: b . E p-. ..;: ;3: (l)a
u.s(/)..2...o~[j~ (/)
].g EO""CI:-eo...{/)] v ~
....... "0 2 P- ~ .::: Cd (I) ro -= .5
4-0 s::: 4--i 4- .- ...... ..... ~ bO cr'
o ro >,0:= ~ gr- s:::.3 ~
Cd ......... .~ S:::;:j Q). :..::: ......
>0 >.S t1J ~o"2 c..S:::.~
2 :z: .-8 0....0 ~ t1J .::: ~ ~ OJ
2: @ <r:: .6 -8 ~ -5 g. (/) ~ 0...
~.';::13~~~'o~[j8.13
..s::: E..c: -0 .~ 4) V"J .~ 'E ~..c:
.......,..ourouus::: >(/)O
o ;:j ;:j c..> ro C3.S Q;> <r:: ;:j
::: ~ t; -g b. ~ -~.~ E (/) ~
.S c'd 5 u -0 o].B 0 ~ 5
P: ~ u .s @ -3 8 <r:: cI) ~ U
:!
OJ
... on >,
@ s::: ~
.~ ;:::: u
c..~~""CI ~
p-.= &3 @ OJ
<r:: bO E 01) 01) E
U ~ t::.8.8 t:
v ro ~ "0 ro
.2'.qe-~~ e-
o...UOo...COQ
><
><
><
."
~ >
o 0
= 0.
.g P-
~<r::
5:3
uu
~
'is
_ c
o ~
Q.g 2:
.- 0 <r::
u u =
II..> s::: .-
-:5 .~ 13
1)o~notH
!~:::J t).';::
':3 U CJ 5
-< "0 ;;:g
':J ~ !-< [J')
ia oo..ro
g.g-~
:fj b.]~
f- t1J c'd CD
! -< -5 ::: s:::
I;;.;>: 4- t1J 0
<: o.~.v:;
>Cde2
~ > - II..>
o 2Cd]
..J 2:~ ro
o ~ Q) ~
" ....... g ~
'Q ,,'5J, ~
>- ..... c: t1J .
:: 0.. UJ a <r:
~
c-
o
23
N
~
-
~I
~I
D'>
c
t
o
D-
Q)
Il::
!I
c
~
c
o
::;:
c
~I
~l
i
I
I
CD
U
r;.
~-g
a: 0
CIa:
0:::
a:O
~~
~ ~
I- 0
a: .~
o E
II.. ..
W.<:
a:<.>
~ ~
c( ~
CI E
~ CD
a: I-
o ...
1=.2
Z~
o E
:E :;;
zll..
Q ::
1-::1
c( ..
CI c
E 0
:E~
c
o
<.>
~
c
~
E
E
o
(J
~
"9, ~
'" 0
-5.-
E "
o .!!:!
(J '"
E
~
:c
'iij >-
ct:
o ~
c.1l.
~
~
a:
co...
c.
't:c
_ C::::I 0
0.2 co
010
.=.!:l-
E~
;:: >dI !: ~
..0
"
>--
_ c
00
,,:;:;
o ~
.z~
~ ~
:; ~
>
~
~
!;
~
~
~
:;
c
.2
10
g
:i!
c ~
o ~
~~ci
g:gz
:i!:;
"" ",;"
;3 ~.~
u';:: U
:":::<l)~"'O
p.. ~ c: @ E
c. v v
::: .~ g ~ gf ~
~ u.1 @"j;; ~ a
"2'.f' e- ] ~ g.
o...,uoo...~a
--'
. .
c c
.."
-
x
x
x
"
~
"" ",;"
@ c:.';::
u '':; u
~~~E
p., c: c: ro E
<t: "50 E Of) I;.Q Ev
...... c: t c: c:
~ ~ ro ":;: :e ~
"2' ,f' e- ~ ~ 2-
o...,uoo...ro.o.
x
""
a ~.q
~"6 u "'0
g;g~ a c
< "51 S en bI) E
...... c: t.5 c: t::
~ W ro c: i5 cd
"2' ,f' g. ] '5 g.
o....uoo...COO
x
"'
~ ~.q
U';:: U
~~'<:;:.-g ~
c. c: c: ro ....
-< 'SO E bI) bJ) E
...... c: t: S c: t
~ u.1 (';I c:..a cd
'2.qg.]~ g.
o...,U00... c:HJ,
x
x
x
E E E
Vi Vi Vi
E c "" "" c "" c
u C u u
Vi .g v .g v .2 u .g
.c .c .c
.~ "" u U u U U U u
u u v u v
Jj C. ~ C. c C. c '"'
u ~ ~ ~ ,5 ~
"- u .E 0: .E 0: 0: .5
Eo] [/) b[) cd
13<-<=< </)0 c: I!)
~ "2 ~ ~ '3 c: v
g: ~ e: g.2 - .g .g
...... 0..::$ c:] ca g.5 SD_
~ VJ U) .2 -g B [/) 5; ~ ~
.O'~ ~ E ro 8 c: -a e ~
lip... ~ ~1G8=aU)o
<l):z: ~ <l)._ t '-..c: [/)
-;5 cU 5. 5...c <2 [/).~co VJ
cd 0:: c:"'O "9 _ 0........... u_
~ c ;:<2 .s ~ .~ "- g ~ 5
u'fi[/)~].g~~~(/) ~
v-2Eoi3 _iflCCl)
-B "'0 2 p.. N:~ cd v cd .s .~
'0 a~~~ ~ ~t: ~B ~
ca 0 "; .S! ~ >. OJ -ci :..::: ......
~ z .- ..... .D cd 0 <l) E: a E
0. c ~S ,2 8.E~ c:5 ~ ~
g-;,:C[/)[/)C':I'+-<<l.J\.;5.C:
..... 0 ~ <u '- 0 '- <u 0
~ .8..... ~.g 'V 13 .~ c;:; V;'';:::
'c; -g ~ <u ~ ~.2 .c ~ <t 2
.... '" ~,"2 5. ~ :':::';;: ~ r:./) 'in
.2"@ s::: u "0 0 ""2 '';::: 5:3: s:::
3: {J 8 .S: a 2: 8 ~ if} 88
o
-
~
~ ~ <l) ~
<l) t':J ~.s '<:::'
..s~ .......~
:>.3-5000
..Q '-> ~ s:::..s:::
a e. E.2 g
'';::: c:: (;:j <11
U _ .Q -0::2
Q) '- -''''''' $::
~-B Ii ~::I
s::: ro "0 !:::"O
.~ ':$- c ~ ~
- E ro~,~~
~og:a.g
t; if)'.g 5 <u
~""2@~..c"Z
[('jg~~2E
~ -- ~
1o.~~~~
'" ':$- .:.S: ~ 8
'-> 0 <l) .-
~::;;:s:::~<l).b
U..Q 0.... U '-
i..ci: 'r::::::: ~ g.
0.. '" ~ . "'~ 2
~ ~ BE p., 0..
.c ..... 0 >-::;:; ~
!-- U U a..> c:c ro
"'
-
..
'0 v 0
[; ..c.c
.... "@U
$::~..c <l)
E c: ~.s
o..<u:::::
..... .... ._ "0
g.8.~@ch
Il.J 0.... '" ~
0...... @"~ ~
:::1"0 u:::: 0
8 8 ~ b:::::
~ ~ 6b..s '5.
U <l)..... ::I <11
>''-VJ~..s:::
:gs .~g
s::: <'..I ~ _ <11
.:3 :D '5. 5. ;q
<11~ 2! <11 2
'" .- "@ 0.. 6
c ~"j:; 0.. 0
<l) ('j <l) ('j <11
~ ~ C;:;] ;q
<'..I E..... ro
~"@ ;g B .~
~{J 0"2>
c <11"'2 t ro
.~ ~ ~ 8.]
QG..ceu
00
-
"'...
~ 0
.c '-
o ~ '-
.'@ E ~
E ~ ~ c
'- <l) E ~
<B13o~
~.g,c15 u
~ ~
(;:j]~..c
~ro""U
'5 E B ~
"O~13.8
<l) c"O '-
..c <l)';;:.g
~~ ~o..
.c c
~ ~ ~.g
~::;:; '"@ ~
~CC{JVJ
o..<+-< C
-008<'..1
~'a ~ ~
"@ 2-g,bIJ
::I '-..c 'g!
0"'"0 U ('j
<r:: 8 ~ ::;:;
'"
t-
o
23
N
~
~I
o
ct
Q)
~
0,
&1
~I
.~1
~I
~'
51
il
~'
~
'E
~
E
E
0
0
~
'0 .
~ c
;; '-
C.
E .
0 ~
0 ]
G> ~
U :c
.. "ijj >.
:E CI:: ct
." 0..
~ 0.Q.
.. ~
0 ~
C> CI:: a:
0 :::
II: 0 --'
~] . .
00
"u
Z II) -
i= r:::
0 "'-'
II: "E c.
,;: c
o E '0.2 ,,0
D.. .. cu
W.s: 0>10 -
II: 0 c u
~ ~ "E !E -'
i=~ ~ .
"0
"0
<I: ~ u
C> E ~
:!!: CI> "
11:1- ,..:
0 ~
!:: .2
z -
0 'E _c
00
:E ~ -c:O::
G> o ~
Z D.. .c.u::::
0 CI> (j)';::
II) ::E ~
~ j >
C> ..
r:::
E 0
:;::;
:E :;;
r:::
0
0
~
~
:;
~
..
~
::E
c
0
~
g>
:iE
c ~
0_
..~
('II II) ci
~~z
:iE::E
~ bI)>-.
cd c::::
u';:: u
~~~] ....c
p..t: t: cd
~ .~ s .~ ~ ~
~w~t:-6@
'2.f: g. ~:; g.
c...UClo...OOQ
><
><
><
.86'0
i$:.r::<+-<
u U U
";; ~ E
Q).~ u
~ ~ v Q)
s::: VJ....c.~
cdQ.l':"O
;:;:-500...
u
"'O....c ....cd
.... ~.::: ~ ~ t:)
0000 .,g:;
.~ a. t ~ ~ ~
2 9-.;g .... --
c..."'VJ:-:::u2~
]~]'sa-:Su
...... 0 .... ~ 0 >-''''0
A.......8 _ ~:::: (L)
c.. t: _ <J.) .... s
~(';jarop.,G'-
uo..'i:~Q~;g
"'0 >-.0... t::.- 4-< t:
~.-;:1J~5o~
o :5'- p.., U C 4-<
a.u'U>-.~2;:
~~<l)'E'o]15
ro u ;:::I .... 'C E
V).s~;g~<J.) ;j
~-ro y,.D.~c
U '+-< o..c... <u E "'0 "'0 13
- ~ ~.~ ~ ~ e @ "5
~ 2~::U>.s~""[
~ o....c: _ C ~ <l) ~
rJ'l 0.. '" ;:::I <U "" bI) > {:j
U cdE6~E"'O~<1)$3
::3 .s~]62'~~ ~ ~
~ .g a."" 0 ] is :;; ~
~ Q.. ~ Eu '0 a.-5 8..
6
N
E bI) >-.
cd c.-<;::
.~";:: U
_~~"'O
2:cc~ C
<( "5b E OJ) bI) E
t),fitC5t
<1)"'"" C<j't:"'O cd
'2.qB-~:; e-
c...UQc..roO
x
><
><
B C
:s: 'B ~
"; ~:.c
u ~ U
~.~ ~
t: VJii:
:0;:1<1).......
0:-50
C
~ S:....... "'0
U U~~oc; T1a ~>=u
~-g&:"'~Bc~ a15 ~~.~
"2 ~ ~ E > E'Z v E E '+-< C 1:: 0
~.~ ~"~ G'E'- ~~ 6 ~ 0] g.~
..r::"O>I-C:c:d'::UI-Oc~<lJQ==
~Ero~~~~E~i::U~~,Dc -
0: -... '3 a Q) tl G ~ 8 '0 ~ 5 ~ ~ .~
;:J n..c 8":0 - 8 ~ 1)
U g U gp ~ 2 ~ ~E ~ .S c:d c: ~ ~ .;::
"0 ~ ~ 0 '- P- ~ ~ ~ .,g ,;:! ~ '" - ........
~ 'e?..c E 0 ('.) c,- >-- U "0 ~ D... ~ U
(;) Q) ...... <<:I Q)..c.- o..D ~ Q) "0 Q)"> c:
P-EE~~~~]c] 28 a~~~
~ c: a3 '.a ~_ ~ 6'-~ ~ i1"'g E I- ~ <<:I
('.) ro ;> ~ ~ <IJ 0.. @ 2; E <<:1'0;:; ~ 0 ~
~ ~ 2~"'5 >--6;> I- 0 b 8~"OP:) vi
<0 [ 8:] 2 ~ ~] ; ~ ~ c > ~ "2 i::
.-~<<:I<IJ<IJ~,D"""~,Du8.('.) roro~
roP-O)c~cr'o;gc:.a<IJ~~t)>--('.)
>.-,Drou('.)......oi3('.)i::I-~2:'c('.)
2] .9 0.. g -g ~'-8 E ('.) ~6 <<:IEo. U
g:", c~ >--0 "5"'0..5 >--~ ~"O:2 0 ~
~ C %1- g:; 2 6 '" gee ('.) <( U c:d
......~>..~~<lJU~~~~E '~bJ)
I- ._ ...... 'QJ 1-'- <IJ P- U I- ~ ::I 0 E c !::
.90..~.-('.)::IeE.~Q)......~~.0;:;~.~
Q: g.~6 B [~.g ~ E~ ro::l @ ('.)"'0
-
N
o
M
1:: bJ)>--
ro c: ~
.;:! ;:u
_('.)--."0
8: ~ 1:: ~ 1::
<( 'EiJ E bJ) bJ) E
~ c: t S c: ~
~ P-1 ro c: -5 @
.2.f'~~~ ~
o..UDo..Q:)O
><
x
><
B
Vi
'"
U C
~ .9
U~
C 0.
" ~
i:L:..s
I- .f'
0; ~ '"
v....-u1::
E '"@ ~'o
'i:!:: P-
8. ~ ri ~
o..-.~ ~ e
;:J "'.- u
U.~ gp..::
~i::UJ""@
<:;:; Il.I >--~
o ('.).-<;::: <<:I
c....r::U"O
o -+-' ('.) E
is.-g.s 0
';;2'0;;
'- "" C,D
o c.9 ==
""@~t)1i::
;> 0 <oS '" r:.J
2 ~.~ "0 ~
P-Il.IEEo;
g.,D '" <IJ ..c
1l.I:::=] 8.:
-E~'C;~6
B gp-~2~
I- ._ <IJ 0 ::I
.g g ~ ~ 2
0.. <B 0.. 0..-5
...;
N
t-
o
23
'"
~
~I
E'I
(L
",I
~I
ftl
~I
c
ro
'"
.S
.8
'c
o
:2:
c
.Q
ro
g
~
.,
u
'"
:oil:
~~
C)II:
oi:.
g:~
C)i:
~ ~
I- 0
II:~
o E
Q. '"
w~
11:0
~ ~
c( ~
C) E
~ .,
11:1-
o ~
1::.2
Z~
o E
:0 :-
zQ.
Q :
~::I
C)~
i= 0
..
:E:g
I:
o
o
~
'E
~
E
E
o
u
.
~ 10
_ c
~~
E ~
o !!
U '"
.5
~
:c .
.~ l:
ct:
o ~
C,Q.
~
~
a:
~ ~.q
.~";: u
0.. ~ ~"8 c
o..~ii3ro Q)
-< "00 E "'"'' E
...... c: .8 c:
~~~2";~
'0' C e- @ ~ g-
d::UQO::~O
~~ ><
...3
-
'" .
c.
""c
_ C ~ 0
o.Q cO
01-
.=.~I-
e:c
i= ~ ~ ~
"0
u
f--
:;;
"
c '"
'0 0 Ui
-c:O::; :;a
oi:! u c
~ 8
.c .- '"
Ci}:C u 1:>
:;;~ ~ v
0.
> '" .s
p:
~
~
~
~
~
~
:;;
c
.2
~
:ii'
c ~
o ~
:;~ci
OI~Z
"' ~ -I'
:ii::E I
'0 Q) Q) Q)
5.sg-S
0.......<84-
0.. O..c: 0
oQ)~..l:
g gp u biJ
OC~~
........ 0._
>-. <l::..c .g
.Dr.Jgc
"0",9 ~ 1)
2 B -- OJ
u ro-E
~ ~ c:~ c:
2.... 0 2
0..00:';::
wc::g
..D..2 ro'~
"'",
~
"3' v
E
~ '"
'0",
C
t1B
'0 ~
~ u
'" C
~ 0
o u
~
. v
c<j........ ~
Q).g ~
@ u ro
'0_'0
eve
;g B.;9
~VJ~
c'" c
~.~ ~
~
N
~ """,
c: C <;::
.~ ;: U
0.. ~ ';:,] ~
o..c c: ro .....
<r:'- Q) Q)
.... ~E ~~E
~ ~ ~ ";:: .,; ~
"2'.f: 8' ] "5 B-
p-.UQp..coQ
><
'"
Ui
:;a
u c
~ .S
u~
g ~
;:;:.=
v
u
'"
'0 ~
~ @]
c_':::
..:2 g 0
0. C C
-a 0 !::
u ~ v
~ ~~
E-o-5
-0 @ ~
~ c ";:
o v ~
o.E"O
g..9- G
v ~ ~
'" 0' v
..... OJ C.
,..e"'@ OJ
:<;::: U..D
~~-
i3E~
@ G' ~
"2 c: c:
o v '"
ij 25>"5 -E
C';! v..D dJ
c: E E ;>
......... u cd Q)
..f
N
~ ~.q
U";: U
;"::'<.1___"'0
0. Q) C c: C
0...= Q) ro Q)
:: ~E ~~E
tl ~ ~ "a ;; ~
"8'.f: e- ~ ~ e-
o..uOo..ooQ
><
'"
Ui
:;;;
u c
] .g
u ~
~ ~
~.5
v
"'
,..C:::.
'0 ~
"'-
. u
C C
'" C
o..~
c:U
;: 0.. .
~ '" '0
u _ v
<1.)";::"'0
~ ~ v
'0 U V
V V C
> ~ ~
o v '"
c."'cd Q)~
0...;:::::.
~ c.~
'" '0 0
;;a]
:':: oJ..) C'J
:::.-.~ u
Q)C;:<:::
g 0.. ~
'" '0 0
'Ov'O
o E g
g <8 .g
c:";::; 11
- " ~
~
N
rl
rl
ct;.()>'
cd 1:::';:::
.~.i: U
c.~-.::.""g
a.CCC'd C
~ .51 E bI.! bI.! E
"g ~ 1a.8.a 1a
.S'.q e-]"5 e-
A,..UQA,..I!:IQ
><
'"
Ui
:;a
u C
~ .g
u ~
C 0.
'" ~
0.:"=
o 0) .....n,"o <h .....
~:E-B5~a~bi)
0) 0) ,",-<,..c._..;= C C
--a U bI.! 0 ..J. ~ ~.a:.g
0)'"O.....~c~5~~~)u
.s 3 --a ::;.g C'd.C'd 0 ..... 0.. ~
.....2(/),",-<u.sEO)O)o~
~C'd~O~~~g.s~O)
>~..... "'..;:: "'::::..... bI.!~-B
0).= ::;.~ C'd c.- '"0 C -
O)u'-+=<I::"'<I.)~@~O,.)~t;
UC~OO,.)_", C'd-......
C'd~ E~.s--a 0,.) I::"C)..D C
..... C'd- ,..C-ovt!u
g.~?~; :~.~ ~ ~~
~ ~ ~ bI.!~ @C'dEc[..2 g.~
o - c C'd.~ ~ '" '" --a
c 2. :;; .u "t:; c.:::: D. E .- v
1J.)p..C'dcca.C'dO)~c.s
~ 3 ~ ~ .~ ~ E .~.: E ki
g ~ ::::, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~;;
0).';: ~ 3: C'd u.;: ~.- '"0
E"'vv,..C....:g;:j>--a~
E ;:j > [/.) '" ~ '"0..........:>
oEO.....-o c"2 ",,..c 0) 0
u ..... (,) 0 C ._ ..... u bI.! ~ -
C u i5. C'd bI.! U E.il) IJ.)--a
E.~:g ~ ~~.~..;:: ~ ~~
.~ 0. @ E .u ~ ~ --a ~.s
0: g. E .5 ~ (5 g ~ ~ '0 .~
o
N
c-
o
2;
N
;0
~I
0)
o
~I
il
a:
-0
C
ro
0>
C
'C
g
C
o
:::;
c
.Q
ro
~
:::;
~
'E
~
E
E
0
()
'0 21
.
~ a
Q; -
a.
E .
0 ~
() 1:
'" ~
u :c
CO 'in",
::E ~ 01:
"C o ~
~ 0.0.
CO .
0 ~
C) ~ I<
0 ::::
!E~ --
. .
00
C):<: "u
z .. '--
i= "
0 '"-
IX: 'Q c.
':0
o E _ 0 ~o
11. CO o .2 au
Ws: 010 ~
~o .S .!:!
C ~ E~
i=~ ~.
~ c
Z co "0
c( ~ 0
-
C) E
~ '" '"
~I- ,.:
0 ~
t: 0
-
Z ~ _ 0
0 E o 0
::E ~ '0:0::
'" o ~
Z 11. =!E
0 CD ~ ~
.. "'~
~ :;:) >
ii
C) "
E 0
;:;
::E '5
"
0
0
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
'"
0
0,
~
:ii
o ~
o ~
..::I
rei II) ci
~~z
:ii'"
'i: bJ):>'
G.~ 8
:':::ILI~'"O
8:.5 ~ @ \::
<r: bJ) 8 bJ) bi) E
t) ,f, t C == t
<1.)........ <;\j -2 '"0 r:d
"2'.2 8- ~ '5 2-
o...U oc...c:Q 0
><
><
><
~
U)
::;,
u 0
~ .g
u ~
o C.
ro ~
0:.5
N
M
2 -:; ~ 2~ rJJ,j
E '"0;';> C'3 "'::I 0...> ~ IU C
8 @ @ ~ '"0 bJ) ] ::I .~ .5 r:d
o 'V Ii';;; a 2 .~ U g ~ ~ S -c:i g
S >> .... -0 ~ ~ ~ :D .5 ILl E c... .~ ~ ~
g G 6 ~ ~ .g ~ 5. &; ~ -g e E "5 ~
:~:] 8 ~ ~ ~~c; ~ ~~~ e~.~
5'~~~~~.g~'i]~U~~5~
u U-o @u u ~ ~ ~~ ~ co'';::: u :5: ...... t::___
_ ...c_-.....uor:d_.......E::::Or:d
'-0 ....... :-:: ~ "@)'"O ...... -...c C ro 0 >= U
~ (l)'"04-<"'<1.)bJ)v~O"......<l)......~==<l)
-< 8. 8 ~ -5 -0 ~ ~ g o'~ ;:; r-- u'~ 1:;
a:ouo'+-<ro~_I1.)_.....bJ)bJ)U!.i=< v
~ p. <':I "B ~ B ~ ~ ~ C .5 .5 t:: ~
z v.5 ro c'"O :::1:-;::: ~ 8 ~ ~ ;;, ~
o .;:: ~ ~ UE B ~ ~ ~ ~..... OJ)...... c
~ ....... ............ .~ -0 ...c ..... !:B"E !1) ~ cd
r;- 0 ~ iJ! ~.S <1.).S::! 0 E! 0 ...... ro [J)
-< --a ILl ILl p.:J -.........c............ 0 If) [J) lI)
t( >.......s::: o~~>.<l)ukJ<1.)~
o ~; B ~ ; ~ .~ ~ ~ c8 ~ -_= ~
c.. cd == ~.- J::i '"0 ;> en on ~.... ,~
VJ 0 cd .5 ~ <l)- bb ILl t) >. 0 p., ~-5
Z ...... "5'] v ~ "'0 C -0 "\: ~"m ~.~ ~
;;2 .g ~:2 C ~ :e. ] E -g .~ t ~ S;
Eo- ~ 0.. 5hO .5 15; "0 E 2 5. ~..g 5
,-.:
N
'"
o
~
'"
~ _ c.
~ - ~
~ .~ {:
~ 2 c:
>'@:.g
g -g .~
~~ ~
~ '" u
S 0 e.
~ - "
~OJJOJJ
-" C C
:;:g~
C '" '"
'" 0.. C.
,-...
o
23
N
;:r
Attachment ^ Appendix A
IMPLEMENTATION OF BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
FOR
STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION
AT THE PROPOSED
CHULA VISTA RACEWAY SITE
The Chula Vista Raceway site improvements are scheduled to be completed by June of 2007, with
the initial racing event scheduled for June 9th and 10th, 2007. There is an additional race event
scheduled for Sept. 29th and 30th, 2007. Improvements associated with the production of race
events will be temporary, and will be removed upon completion of the final race event. A site-
specific Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) has been developed, and will be used
during the grading phase and also will be followed during all race events held at the site.
It is the intention of James P. Baldwin and Associates and CORR Racing to take all necessary
precautions to prevent any instances of storm water pollution from occurring due to activities at this
site. In order to achieve and maintain compliance with all applicable storm water regulations,
operations at the site will incorporate the use of Best Management Practices as described in the
SWPPP as approved by the City of Chula Vista, as well as any additional requirements imposed by
the City.
After all construction related activities at the site have been completed, a Notice of Termination will
be filed with the State of California, leaving discharges associated with future operations at the site
subject to regulation under the jurisdiction of the City of Chula Vista Storm Water Ordinance,
County of San Diego Hazardous Waste Storage and Disposal Regulations, and current NPDES
regulations.
Best Management Practices have been developed for racing events at the Chula Vista Raceway
site, and will be implemented before any vehicle traffic is permitted on the race course. A
description of these BMP's would include the following:
EXISTING I PRE RACE EVENT BMP's
Erosion / Sediment Control- Improvements at the site will consist of a temporary gravel race track,
placement of temporary bleachers, fencing, vendor facilities (trailers), portable sanitation, gravel
access roads, parking lots, storage areas, vehicle maintenance facilities (pit area), vehicle wash
station, hazardous waste containment area, and trash storage areas. All temporary improvements
will be removed from the site at the conclusion of the final race event.
During the construction phase, any sediment laden runoff will be directed to one of two existing
desilt basins. The outlets of these basins will be capped to eliminate any discharge to the Otay
River.
An existing perimeter berm at the southern boundary between the site and the Otay River will be
reinforced to prevent any inadvertent runoff from reaching the river.
In addition, the racetrack will be graded along ridge lines, or elevated such that all runoff from the
track drains toward an infield retention area designed to capture run off from the track surface and
hold it to allow for infiltration or future removal. Treatment BMPs such as bio-swales, hay bales, etc
will be used in areas of minor slopes where runoff does not drain directly to a retention basin.
Dust control will be accomplished by the use of water trucks during the earth moving stages of
construction.
Silt fences are used at the perimeter of the site, with gravel bag reinforcement in all areas of
concentrated flows. In natural watercourses, additional gravel bags are used to supplement silt
fences, providing additional erosion control and velocity reduction. The locations of erosion control
BMP's are shown on the Erosion Control exhibit in the SWPPP.
A stabilized construction entrance will be provided at the entrance to the site. Street sweeping will
be performed as needed to keep mud from accumulating on paved entrance roads leading to the
site.
BMP's for erosion and sediment control may also include the use of geo-textiles, erosion control
blankets, tackifier and bonded fiber matrix (BFM).
All disturbed areas will be temporarily stabilized, until permanent methods of stabilization can be
utilized. Temporary and permanent examples of BMP's for sediment control include the use of silt
fences, gravel bags, fiber rolls and retention basins.
RACE EVENT BMP's
Hazardous Material Containment Areas - BMP's utilized during Race Events include secondary
containment at vehicle maintenance (pit) areas, hazardous materials storage areas, vehicle wash
stations, portable bathrooms, trash disposal and materials storage areas. Additionally, any fuel
drum storage and used oil storage areas will be contained and also bermed. Hazardous materials
are to be placed in closed containers to prevent contact with runoff and to prevent spillage to the
storm water conveyance system. Secondary containment, such as berms or dykes, will also be
provided. Vactor trucks will be used to remove runoff from the containment areas and the collected
runoff will be disposed of in accordance with City standards. Hazardous Waste containers will
remain covered at all times. Run-on from adjacent areas will be prevented from coming into contact
with the containment areas. Attached lids are provided on all trash containers to minimize direct
precipitation.
Site Runoff - Two desilting basins will be used as retention basins. Outlets will be blocked off so
that no runoff will be allowed to discharge from these basins. At the conclusion of each racing
event, accumulated debris and pollutants will be removed from these basins and disposed of in
accordance with City standards. A temporary chain link perimeter fence will be located at the
perimeter of the site to prevent the escape of wind blown trash and debris. There is an existing
earthen berm along the southern edge of the proposed race track facilities that will also prevent
any direct run-off Into the Otay River.
Maintenance - Dust and trash control measures are included as well. To further inhibit sediment
migration, the track will be watered between races. Access roads and parking areas will be
routinely watered as well. Onsile trash collection will be performed throughout each event. Parking
areas are graded, with silt fences and bio-filters along the perimeter to treat oil and grease from
parked vehicles.
There are no permanent utilities at the site. Generators, water trucks, a vactor truck, and portable
bathroom facilities will be utilized. No temporary facilities will remain on site after the final race
event. Long term maintenance of all remaining BMP's are the responsibility of James P. Baldwin
and Associates and CORR Racing, who guarantee performance of proper BMP maintenance by
the posting of a performance bond as required by the City of Chula Vista.
2
Access Roads _ There is one proposed access roads into the site. This will be used for public
access and emergency access during race events. The main entrance to the facility is from the
intersection of Main Street and Heritage Road and runs eastward on Wiley Road toward the
existing rock quarry. The main access road will have a crushed asphalt base 6" in depth, for the
first 200' from the point of entry. Maintenance will be continuous during race events. James P.
Baldwin & Associates and Championship Off Road Racing (CaRR) will be responsible for the
maintenance of these construction entrances and all other BMP's described herein.
Trackinq _ To insure that no tracked sediment reaches the storm drain system, a sweeper truck will
be employed to remove any sediment deposited onto Main Street or Heritage Road due to
increased traffic during race events. All efforts will be made to prevent mud from being tracked
onto public roads. In no case will vehicles be permitted to drive on, or park in muddy areas, or to
leave the site without first removing any accumulations of loose mud. In the event of rain, all race
events will be rescheduled.
Wind Erosion/Dust Control - Silt fencing and temporary chain link fencing will be provided at the
site perimeter to prevent escape of trash, debris or sediment to the surrounding area. This BMP is
designed to capture wind-blown pollutants. To enhance the dust control efforts, the track will be
watered extensively between races. To enhance trash control efforts, onsite trash collection is
provided throughout race events.
POST CONSTRUCTION BMP's
Des"t Basins - Runoff from the track drains to at least three infield retention basins. These basins
are designed as retention basins. In other words, no runoff is allowed to discharge from these
basins. The remaining portion of the track facilities will drain to two retention basins located near
the southern boundary. These basins will have no outlets, and will serve as treatment for runoff
from the remaining portion of the race track and areas to the west of the track. The two pre existing
basins at the south boundary with the Otay River will remain after race events have concluded.
Site Runoff - A perimeter berm is located at the grading limits to prevent the discharge of trash,
debris or sediment to the surrounding area, and will remain in place post race events.
Veqetation _ Existing vegetation has been retained where ever possible. As the site is currently in
use as a rock quarry, a large percentage of the site has been previously disturbed. The site will
revert to the existing use as a rock quarry after the final race event.
FUTURE SITE CONSIDERATIONS
BMP's for the prevention of Storm Water Pollution, including but not limited to the above described
items, will remain in place until the conclusion of race events at this location.
The site will revert to its current use as a rock quarry at the conclusion of scheduled racing eyents.
A site specific SWPPP along with approved BMP's will be implemented for future rock quarry
operations.
RH 4/16/2007
3
..:S-Ift.-
:--r::
CllY OF
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM CHUlA YISTA
1. Name of Proponent:
James P. Baldwin
2. Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of Chula Vista
Planning and Building Department
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
3. Addresses and Phone Number of Proponent:
610 West Ash Street
Suite 1500
San Diego, CA 92101
4, Name of Proposal:
Temporary Championship Off-Road
Race
5. Date of Checklist:
April 19, 2007
6. Case No.
IS-07 -030
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS QUESTIONS:
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
ISSUES: Signilicant Mitigation Signilicant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
I. AESTHETICS. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic 0 0 [2] 0
vista?
b) Substantially damage scemc resources, 0 0 [2] 0
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a
state scenic highway?
cJ Substantial1y degrade the existing visual 0 0 ~ 0
character or quality of the site and its
sunoundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or 0 0 ~ 0
glare, which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?
4/20/07
ISSUES:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
No
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact
Comments:
a-d) The proposed project will be limited in scope and duration, and involves only minor site preparation
for the proposed dirt track, and parking, spectator and race-participant areas. Security lighting will be
provided iu the pit areas and the proposed camping area. While the proposed activities may be visible
from some existing residential areas the track and pit areas would be located within portions of an
existing rock quarry not currently subject to active mining, and would be temporary, and therefore would
not permanently alter the aesthetic or visual character of the site
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
n. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are
significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land
Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an
optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project::
a) Convert Prime FannJand, Unique Farmland, or
Farnlland of Statewide Importance (Farmland),
as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
FannJand Mapping and Monitoring Program of
the California Resources Agency, to non-
agricultural use?
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 location or
nature, could result III conversIOn of
Farmland, to non-agricultural use"
Comments:
a-c) Portious of the project site have been historically farmed, including the parking area within Village
Three and the camping area in the Otay River Valley. The proposed project is not expected to interfere
significantly with agricultural practices on the project site, due to the limited duration and scope of the
project. The proposed parking would be located in areas that were previously used for agricultural
activities; but have an approved SPA plan for urban uses, and therefore continued use for agriculture on
the Village Three site is uot anticipated in the long term. The camping area is located within an area that
is planned for active recreation uses. Preparation of the camping area would be limited to mowing of the
site. Mowing activities would clear the site leaving the roots intact and therefore, implementation of the
project would not preclude future ongoing agricultural use of the active recreation areas.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
o
o
~
o
o
o
o
o
~
~
o
o
III. AIR QUALITY, Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality
management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.
Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the 0 0 ~ 0
applicable air quality plan?
4/20/2007
2
ISSUES:
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected alf
quality violation?
c) Result m 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 F
cl) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a
substantial numher of people?
Comments:
a-e) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section G.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
o
o
o
o
Lcss Than
Significant
Impact
~
~
~
~
No
Impact
o
o
o
o
Miti2ation: The mitigation measures contained in Section H of the Mitigated Negative Declaration
would mitigate potentially significant air quality impacts to a level of less than significance.
IV, BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES, Would the
project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, eithcr 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 tbe Califomia Department
of Fish and Game or US. Fish and Wildlife
Servi cc '?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional plans,
policies, regulations or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or US. Fish and
Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effcct on federally
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited
to, marsh, vemal pool, coastal, etc.) through
direct removal, filling, hydrological
intetruption, or other means?
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
~
[gJ
[gJ
o
4/20/2007
3
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of
any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife
species or with cstablished 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?
I) 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:
a-I) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section G.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
o
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
o
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
No
Impact
~
ISSUES:
o
o
~
o
o
o
~
o
Mitil!ation: The mitigation measures contained in Section H of the Mitigated Negative Declaration
would mitigate potentially significant biological resources impacts to a level of less than significance.
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES, Would the
project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change ill the 0 ~ 0 0
significance of a historical resource as defined
m S J 5064.5')
b) Cause a substantial adverse change 111 the 0 0 ~ 0
significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to S 15064.5')
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a umque 0 0 ~ 0
paleontological resource or site or umque
geologic feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including those 0 0 0 ~
interred outside of [annal cemeteries?
Comments:
a-d) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section G.
Miti!:!ation: The mitigation measures
would mitigate potentially significaut
significance.
contained in Section H of the Mitigated Negative Declaration
impacts to paleontological resources to a level of less than
4/20/2007
4
ISSUES:
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -- Would the
project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects, including the risk of
loss, injury or death involving:
1. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Eal1hquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based on
other substantial evidence of a known fault"
Refer to Division of Mines and Geology
Special Publication 42.
\1. Strong seismic ground shaking?
111. Seismic-related gro11nd failure, including
liquefaction?
IV. Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss
oftopsoij?
e) 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, as defined in Table
18-I-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994),
creating substantial risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supp0l1ing
the use of septic tanks or alternative
wastewater disposal systems where sewers arc
not available for the disposal of wastewater?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
!Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
o
o
o
o
~
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
Impact
~
~
~
~
o
~
~
o
No
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
~
4/20/2007
5
ISSUES:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
No
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact
Comments:
a-e) The project consists of a temporary use, and involves no grading, excavation or cutting/filling of
slopes, and involves only minor sitc preparation for the dirt track. The project is a temporary event taking
place over two separate weekends, and no permanent structures are proposed. Therefore, the project
would not expose people or structures to potcntial substantial adverse effects involving seismic ground
shaking, seismic-related ground failure or landslides; nor would it be affected by potential unstable soils,
or cause soils to become unstable, or result in or be affected by liquefaction or collapse. Further, the
project does not propose the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. Site
preparation would have the potential to result in erosion impacts. Erosion control measures and erosion
Best Management Practices will be identified in the Implementation of Best Management Practices for
Storm Water Pollution Prevention at thc Otay Ranch Championship Race Track Site and are further
detailed in Section G of the MND. With implementation of the proposed measures, impacts would be
less than significant.
Miti\!ation: The mitigation measures contained in Section H of the Mitigated Negative Declaration
would mitigate potentially significant impacts to geology and soils to a level of less than significance.
VII, HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS. Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
envlrorunent through the routine transport, use,
or disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving thc
release of hazardous materials into the
environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous
or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or
waste within one-qumier mile of an existing or
proposed school"
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code section 65962.5 and, as a
result, would it create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment?
e) For a project located within an airport Jand 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 residiug or working in the
project area"
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private
airstrip, would the project result in a safety
D
i:';;;J
D
D
D
i:';;;J
D
D
D
D
i:';;;J
D
D
D
i:';;;J
D
D
D
D
i:';;;J
D
D
D
i:';;;J
4/20/2007
6
ISSUES:
hazard for people residing or working in the
project area?
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere
with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant
risk of loss, injury or death involving
wildland fires, including where wildlands are
adj acent to urbanized areas or where
residences are intermixed with wildlands?
Comments:
a-h) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section G.
Miti\!ation:
Lcss Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated 1m pact Impact
0 0 0 [8]
0 0 0 [8]
Thc mitigation measures contained in Section H of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant hazards/hazardous material impacts to level of less than significance.
VIU. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY.
Would the project::
a) Result in an increase in pollutant discharges to
receiving waters (including impaired water
bodies pursuant to the Clean Water Act Section
303(d) list), result in significant alteration of
receiving water quality during or following
construction. or violate any water quality
standards or waste discharge requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge such that there would be a net deficit in
aquifer volume or a lowering of the local
groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate
of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a
level which would not support existing land uses
or planned uses for which penruts have been
granted)? Result in a potentially significant
adverse impact on groundwater quality?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern
of the site or area, including through the
alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a
manner, which would result in substantial
erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern
of the site or area, including through the
o
[8]
o
o
o
o
o
[8]
o
o
~
o
o
o
o
[8]
4/20/2007
7
ISSUES:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
alteration of the course of a stream or river,
substantially increase the rate or amount of
snrface runotf in a mamler which would result in
flooding on- or off-site, or place structures
within a 100-year flood hazard area which
would impede or redirect tlood tlows?
c) Expose people or structures to a significant risk 0
of loss, injury or death involving flooding,
including flooding as a result of the failure of a
levee or clam?
f) Create or contribute runoff water, which would 0
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stonnwater drainage systems or provide
snbstantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
Comments:
Comments: (a-I) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section G.
Miti!!ation:
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
o
o
Less Than
Significant
Impact
~
o
No
Impact
o
[8J
The mitigation measures contained in Section H of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant Hydrology/Water Quality impacts to a level of less than significance.
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the
project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
b) Contlict 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 zarting ordinance) adopted
for the pUI]Jose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation
plan or natural conm1unity conservation plan?
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
~
~
~
o
4/20/2007
8
ISSUES:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
!Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Comments:
a-c) The proposed project would not permanently alter land use or propose any changes to existing or
planned uses. As such, the project would not divide an established community or conflict with any land
use plans or policies adopted for the purposcs of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. The
project would not conflict with the City of Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, (see Section IV, Biological
Resources). Therefore, the project would not result in any impacts on land use and planning.
Mitil!ation:
No mitigation measures arc required.
X. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known 0 0 t8J 0
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- 0 0 t8J 0
important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan, specific plan
or other land use pIano
Comments:
a-b) The track, pit and grandstand areas of the project arc located within the reclaimed portions of an
existing rock and aggregate quarry. However, resource extraction has already occurred within the portion
of the quarry where the uses are proposed. Portions of the project that are not located within the quarry
would not involve extensive excavation or earthwork (including import or export of materials) that would
have the potential to result in a loss of resources. Therefore. no substantial loss of mineral resources are
anticipated.
Mitil!ation:
No mitigation measures are required.
XI, NOISE. Would tlie 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 gencration of
excessive gronndbome vibration or groundbome
noise levels?
c) A substantial pennanent increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity above levels
cxisting without the project?
o
o
t8J
o
o
o
t8J
o
o
o
o
~
4/20/2007
9
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in
arnbient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project?
e) Fora project located within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the project expose people residing
or working in the project area to excessive noise
leveJs?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private
airstrip, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
Comments:
(a-f) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section G.
Less Tila"
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
0 0 [8J 0
0 0 0 [8J
ISSUES:
o
o
o
[8J
Mitie:ation:
The mitigation measures contained in Section 11 of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant Noise impacts to a level o[ less than significance.
XII, POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would
the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, 0 0 0 [8J
either directly (for example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or indirectly ([or
example, through extension of road or other
infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing 0 0 0 [8J
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, 0 0 0 [8J
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
Comments:
The proposed project would not change land uses or propose activities that would affect population or
housing growth.
XIII, PUBLIC SERVICES, Would the project:
a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or
4/20/2007
10
ISSUES:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
physically altered governmental facilities, nced
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 perfonnance objectives for any
public services:
Fire protection? 0 [8J 0 0
Police protection') 0 [8J 0 0
Schools? 0 0 0 [8J
Parks? 0 0 0 [8J
Other public facilities? 0 0 0 [8J
Comments:
The proposed project would not involve changing land uses that would result in increased pennanent
demand for public services personnel, equipment and facilities or result in changes in service levels. Thc
proposed project has the potential to result in hazards associated with accidents during the race events and
therefore create a temporary increase in demand for police and fire services. In order to reduce impacts
associated with accidents, security and safety, measures will be implemented that will mitigate potential
impacts to less than significant. Implementation of the accident prevention and security/safety measures
during site preparation and operation of the CaRR events will reduce impacts to less than significant.
XIV. RECREATION. Would the project:
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and 0 0 0 [8J
regional parks or other recreational facilities
such that substantial physical deterioration of
the facility would occur or be accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational facilities 0 0 0 [8J
or require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which have an adverse
physical effect on the environmcnt?
Comments:
a-b) The proposed project would not involve changing land uses that would rcsult in increased demand
for recreational facilities or services.
Miti2ation:
No mitigation measures are required.
XV, TRANSPORT AnON / TRAFFIC.
Would the project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial
in relation to the existing traffic load and
o
[8J
o
o
4/20/2007
11
ISSUES:
capacity of the strcet system (i.e., result in a
substantial increase in either the number of
vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on
roads, or congestion at intersections)
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a
level of service standard established by the
county congestion management agency for
designated roads or highways?
c) Result m a change in aIr traffic pattems,
including either an increase in traffic levels or a
change in location that results in substantial
safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design
feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity?
gJ Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or
programs supporting altemative transportation
(e.g., bus tumouts, bicycle racks)?
Comments:
(a-g) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section G.
Mitigation:
Potentially
Signifieant
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
o
o
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
[2;J
o
No
Impact
[2;J
[2;J
[2;J
[2;J
o
[2;J
The mitigation measures contained in Section H of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant Transportation impacts to a level of less than significance.
XVI. UTIUTIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS.
Would the project:
aJ Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of
thc applicable Regional Water Quality Control
Board?
b) Require or result in the constl11ction of new
water or wastewater treatment facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the constl11ction
of which could cause significant environmental
effects?
c) Require or result in the consll11ction of new
stann water drainage facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the constl11ction of which
could cause significant envirorunental effects')
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
[2;J
[2;J
[2;J
4/20/2007
12
ISSUES:
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve
the project from existing entitlemcnts and
resources, or are new or expanded entitlements
needcd?
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider which serves or may serve
the project that it has adequate capacity to serve
the project's projected demand in addition to the
provider's existing commitments?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
o
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
o
No
Impact
t?SJ
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
t?SJ
I) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted 0 0 t?SJ 0
capacity to accommodate the project's solid
waste disposal needs"
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes 0 0 t?SJ 0
and regulations related to solid waste?
Comments:
a-g) The proposed project would not involve changing land uses or activities that would result in
increased demand for utilities.
Miti2ation
No mitigation measures are required.
XVII. THRESHOLDS: Will the proposal adversely impact the City's Threshold Standards"
A) Librarv
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 of Interstate 805 by
buildout. The construction of said facilities shall be
phased such that the City will not fall below the
citywide ratio of 500 GSF per 1,000 population.
Library facilities are to be adequately equipped and
staffed.
B) Police
a) Emcrgency Response: Properly equipped and
stalfed police units shall respond to 81 percent of
"Priority One" emergency calls within scven (7)
minutes and maintain an average response time to
all "Priority One" emergcncy calls of 5.5 minutes
or less.
b) Respond to 57 percent of "Priority Two" urgent
calls within seven (7) minutes and maintain an
averagc response time to all "Priority Two" calls
o
o
o
t?SJ
o
t?SJ
o
o
4/20/2007
13
ISSUES:
of 7.5 minutes or less.
C) Fire and Emergency Medical
Emergency response: Properly equipped and staffed
tire and medical units shall respond to calls
throughout the City within 7 minutes in 80% of the
cases (measured annually).
D) Traffic
TIle 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. Signalized
intersections west of 1-805 are not to operate at a
LOS below their 1991 LOS. No intersection may
reach LOS "E" or "F" during the average weekday
peak hour. Intersections of arterials with freeway
ramps are exempted from this Standard.
E) Parks and Recreation Areas
TI1e .Threshold Standard for Parks and Recreation is
3 acres of neighborhood and community parkland
with appropriate facilities 11 ,000 population east of
1-805.
F) Drainage
The Threshold Standards require that storm water
flows and volumes not exceed City Engineering
Standards. Individual projects will provide
necessary improvements consistent with the
Drainage Master Plane s) and City Engineering
Standards.
G) Sewer
TI1e Threshold Standards require that sewage flows
and volumes not exceed City Engineering Standards.
Individual projects will provide necessary
improvements consistent with Sewer Mastcr Plane s)
and City Engineering Standards.
H) Water
The Threshold Standards requITe 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 off-set program
4/20/2007
Potentially
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
o
Less TI...n
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
~
~
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
1m pact
o
o
o
o
o
o
No
Impact
o
o
~
~
~
~
14
ISSUES:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Lcss Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
the City of Chula Vista has in effect at the time of
building permit issuance.
Comments: See conunents under section XIII and XIV.
XVIII, MANDATORY FINDINGS OF
SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade 0 0 ~ 0
the quality of the environment, suhstantially
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 cxamples of the
major periods of Califomia history or
prehistory"
b) Does the project have impacts that are 0 0 ~ 0
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of a project
are considerable when viewed in cOIlllectlon
with the effects of past projects, the effects of
other current project, and the effects of probable
future projects.)
c) Docs the project have environmental effects 0 0 ~ 0
which will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Comments:
Due to the limited scope, temporary nature and time hame for the proposed activities, it is not anticipated
that the project would result in significant environmental effects. The project would not have direct
effects on habitats or species, and the identified indirect effects have been found to be less than
significant. Cumulative impacts are not considerable due to the fact that the project is short-tenn in
nature, and that its individual effects are either less than significant, or mitigated to a less than significant
level. Based on the analysis provided in the MND, it is not anticipated that the project would cause
environmental effects that would result in direct or indirect substantially adverse effects on human beings.
XIX. PROJECT REVISIONS OR MITIGATION MEASURES
See MND
412012007
15
XX, ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project,
invoJving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant
Unless Mitigated," as indicated by the checklist on the previous pages.
o Land Use and Planning ~ Transportation/Traffic
o Population and Housing ~ Biological Resources
~ Geophysical 0 Energy and Mineral
Resources
~ Public Services
o Utilities and Service Systems
o Aesthetics
o Agricultural Resources
~ Hydrology/Water
~ Hazards and Hazardous
Materials
~ Cultural Resources
o Air Quality
o Thrcshold Standards
o Noise
o Recreation
o Mandatory Findings of Significance
16
4/20/2007
XXI. DETERMINATION
On the basis ofthis initial evaluation:
r find that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the 0
environment, and a Negative Declaration will be preparcd.
r find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the l8J
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the
mitigation measures dcscribed on an attached sheet have been added to the
project. A Mitigated Negative Declaration will be prepared.
1 find that the proposed project may bave a significant effect on the 0
environment, and an Environmental Impact Report is required.
r find that the proposed project may have a significant effect(s) on the environment, 0
but at least onc 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 tbat
remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the 0
environment, there will not be a signitlcant cffect in this case because all potentially
signitlcant 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
ErR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed
project. An addendum has been prepared to provide a record of this detennination.
I
/ .7'1
€IT~n L 'u:e
Environmental Projects Manager
City of Chula Vista
~.Izo /07-
Date
4/20/2007
17
Comments on DRAFT MND IS-07-030 as of May 17, 2007
(30-day public Review Period: April 20, 2007 through June 21,2007)
A. Theresa Acerro
PO Box 8697 Chula Vista
Letter provided May 7, 2007 at RCC Hearing
Comments/Responses A-I through A-I 0
B. SIERRA CLUB
San Diego Chapter
3820 Ray Street
San Diego, CA 92104
Letter postmarked May II, 2007
Comments/Responses B-1 through B-Il
C. FRANK OHRMUND
2433 Fenton Street, Suite A
Chula Vista, CA 91914
Comment received via e-mail dated May 9,2007
Comments/Responses C-I through C-4
D. MICHAEL BEHAN
Letter received via e-mail dated May I, 2007
Comments/Responses D-I through D-5
Dear MT. Laube,
Please consider this letter a formal response to the MND for this project.
The InteIDitv ofthe OVRP ..." ~ ;-~ \A ~ c.\"
I have always believed that one of the most important goals of the OVRP is to
keep open a wildlife corridor enabling species to move freely from the bay area along the
riparian lands east to the Otay Mountains. The selected active recreation sites were never
intended to preclude this wildlife function nor to impact upon the passive uses of the park
for wildlife observation, hiking, biking, etc. There has never been any consideration
given to Off Road Vehicle (ORV) use along this park corridor, Motorized vehicle use is
inconsistent with the park mission and vision, the Multiple Species Conservation
Program (MSCP), and the Otay River Watershed Management Plan. In fact much time
and effort are spent keeping ORVs out of the park and off old dirt roads and trails.
The Specific Area Management Plan (SAMP) has not been completed for the J
Otay Watershed yet but certainly activities like ORV use will not be consistent with the A. "1-
SAMP, Motorized vehicles (except emergency vehicles or wheelchairs) are not allowed :.J
on any trails in open space areas in Chula Vista with good reason.
I am concerned that this event could set a precedent allowing other inconsistent
activities within and adjacent to the OVRP. The proposed event clearly has more than
adjacency impacts. There is a section of the MSCP lands that is directly impacted on the
north side ofthe river. One could also consider that driving through the MSCP lands in
Wolf Canyon and the river bottom are also direct impacts even though the dirt roads
being used are easements and fenced on both sides. The amount of use for shuttling
during the days ofthis event will be many, many times the use by Border patrol or SDGE
or other authorized public authority in a year's time. I am concerned that this event will
be used to collect data and set precedence for a pennanent use of this type,
The biological restoration projects undertaken in or around endangered species
habitat have in the past taken six months or longer to receive the agency permits and
complete the studies necessary to begin the project. We now have detention basins and
drainages in Chula Vista that need cleaning for maintenance purposes and have been
awaiting permits for some time. Submitting an application on March 28 and having pre-
race activities begin on June 7 is outrageous and unheard of.
Also the MSCP supposedly has very strict prohibitions against any kind of a
disturbance during breeding season, generally March 15 through September 15. This has
held up many construction projects. The construction along highway 94 requires a ten-
foot or higher thick plywood wall all along the riparian corridor in order to continue
during breeding season, This preferential treatment for this applicant is totally
unacceptable and a very bad precedent.
i.
',. "...,""'"
......\. -...:
~.;.
::;;' .
!VIr. Glen Laube
Environmental Projects Manager
276 Fourth Avenue
Chub Vista, Ca 91910
.-'(
\ ~'\. o.i..
t-' C
RE: Conditional Use Permit for Temporary Championship Off-Road Race 2007, Case
#IS-07-030
A
A-I
A-2
A.~
A.s
A.t,
Biologv
The biological letter indicates there are breeding Gnatcatchers and Vireos in the
area. Allowing this use with the only precaution being putting plywood on the backs of
the bleachers really sets a very bad precedent for preventing future disturbances during ^- t~
breeding season. It is commendable that there will be a survey of camping and parking ff'3
areas for burrowing owl nests and any found will be protected, but by June there are apt
to be other babies being cared for by animal mothers as well, which also deserve
protection, whether they are a sensitive species or not.
Domestic animals and unauthorized access to preserve areas are mentioned as
potential negative impacts, All domestic animals have to be prohibited from this event
unless there will be strict monitoring and enforcement ofleash laws. How strict and how
many monitors will be on hand to prevent people using both the parking and the camping
areas from not waiting for the shuttle but just walking or straying beyond the 3 strand
fencing is not specified in the MND. The number of and the placement of monitors is
critical to evaluating how well intrusions will be prevented, As now written protection is :.. A.:-t
totally inadequate and not mitigated to below the level of significance. USFWS has a - T
huge amount of evidence indicating how poorly fencing and signs alone prevent
intrusions in sensitive habitat. Since an educational program is difficult if not impossible
for a four- day event, there must be numerous well- trained security guards. It must
explicitly be explained to guards and monitors what behaviors they are on hand to
prevent. There is now no specific mitigation requiring a set number of guards/monitors or
speciJying where they will be stationed,
NOISE
The noise letter says the event will provide structural elements for sound
attenuation but only mentions the plywood behind the bleachers. Fireworks are
particularly frightening to wildlife since they sound like gunshots and are unique light
displays. They are also a fire hazard adjacent to tinder dry habitat. Fireworks should be
prohibited entirely.
The biological report on page 8 says that the noise analysis measurements "in
portions of the quarry adjacent to sensitive habitat areas in the Preserve indicate noise
level of up to 78 dB Leq," Looking at the chart on page 5 in the noise letter one sees that
this location is in the MSCP preserve above the quarry or considerably north of the race
venue and the Vireo nesting sites to the south, There was no measurement taken from the
preserve area to the south or the west or the east. Since the level measured near the quarry
scales was 68 one can assume that across the river from the quarry (over l,OOO feet
south), which is separated from the quarry by the entire span of the race venue (a no <:/
longer used portion of the quarry) the ambient sound is less than 68 dB, but certainly A- 6
would not be anywhere near the 78 above the quarry or within the quarry itself. One
wonders why the measurements were taken where they were unless for the express
purpose of trying to prove the birds were accustomed to high decibel noise. The reality is
most likely that the birds avoid the area above the quarry where the 78 dB measurement
was taken and hang out south of the river and to the west in Wolf canyon where the noise
from the races will be highest. Least Bell's Vireo is a riparian species. The recorded
nests above the quarry are for Gnatcatchers. There are no recorded locations of vireos
nests above the quarry, which is almost 3,000 feet from the riparian corridor, according to
Figure 5 of biological letter. There is no date given for the historical nests, Since there is
one for a Gnatcatcher in the quarry itself I wonder if some of them might predate the
quarry or at least be from the beginning days of the quarry.
Pal!:e 12 of the noise letter states that "The proposed project would c:enerste
noise levels I!:reater than 60 dB hourlv LeQ noise level within portions of the adjacent
biolol!:ical habitat areas. On page ten it states the P A system would generate noise of
70dB or less in habitat areas, On page 9 it states the 85dB race noise would be reduced by
plywood and elevation difference to 75 dB "on sensitive habitat to the immediate south
of the facility," where one would expect to find Vireos. This is clearlv an unmitil!:ated
nec:ative impact upon sensitive suecies. June is the time when eggs are likely to have
hatched and a bird being frightened from a nest will result in the death of the young.
Air Oualitv
The report admits that the emissions of CO are above emissions thresholds. It is
questionable whether this would be a "hot spot" or not, but it certainly makes one wonder
about Coors events that draw even more traffic. The PM emissions are a concern because
mitigation requires frequent watering down ofthe roads and venue, which is a tricky
proposition since one does not want to have mud,
Lil!:htinl!: J
Lighting is a tricky proposition too since the camping area and the parking area
are in the middle of the MSCP land, It is doubtful if pointing lights down and away from A.tO
habitat will reduce the impact to a level below significance for wildlife,
Sincerely,
)
//
\, / >,z___/~_.
,_"/1/
Theresa Acerro
PO Box 8697
Chula Vista, CA 91912
(619) 425-5771
A-~
I
'A.~
B
'l,
"I
~~/'-~)"S I E RRA
'. .... CLUB
... ,P . "i,;';'"",
Chapter Chair:
Joe Zechman 619-709w6168
Administrative Assb'tlmt:
Martha Coffman 619-299-1743
mcoj!man@:;ierraclubsulltliego.org
Administrative & Volllnteer Coordinator:
Cheryl Reiff 619-299-1741
creijj@flerracluhsaffdiego.org
www.sierraclllbsafidiego.org
Sierra Club, Sail Diego Clmpter
3820 Ray Street
San Diego, CA 92104
Mr. Glen Laube
Environmental Projects Manager
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, Ca 91910
glaube(mci .chula - vista. ca. us
RE: Conditional Use Pennit for Temporary Championship Off-Road Race 2007,
Case #IS-07-030
Dear Mr. Laube,
Part of the mission of the Sierra Club is to explore, enjoy and protect the
wild places of the earth and practice and promote the responsible use of the
earth's ecosystems and resources. Please consider this letter the Sierra Club's
formal response to the MND for this project.
The Intee:ritv of the OVRP and MSCP
The Sierra Club has been led to believe that one of the most important
goals of the OVRP is to keep open a wildlife corridor enabling species to move
freely from the bay area along the riparian lands east to the Otay Mountains. The
Sierra Club and its members wholeheartedly agree with this goal. As the wildlife
of San Diego County are increasing confined to smaller and smaller habitats these
wildlife corridors become more and more critical to their existence. The location
of this active recreation area has been a concern for some time since the corridor
to the north is so narrow. It has been our understanding that the use of these
active recreation areas would be a matter for much community discussion and
analysis. after they were dedicateo10 the preserve, in oroer to insure the
protection of the adjoining preserve lands. In complete disregard of this process a
camping area has arbitrarily been placed upon one of these active recreation
parcels for the duration of this proposed event with less than 45 days for any
conlnlent. This is an unacceptable procedure.
There has never been any consideration given to Off Road Vchicle (ORY)
use along this park corridor. Motorized vehicle use is inconsistent with the park
mission and vision, the Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP), and the
Otay River Watershed Management Plan. The Specific Area Management Plan
(SAMP) has not been completed for the Otay Watcrshed yet but certainly
activities like OR V use will not be consistent with the SAMP. In fact much time
and effort are now spent keeping ORVs out of the park and off old dirt roads and
trails. To allow the shuttling of 10,000 people a day for four days through the
,
II
'1
I
Ii
II
:'
&- \
~-L.
Otay River and Wolf Canyon on existing dil1 roads is not an adjacency issue. It is
setting a terrible precedence for inappropriate use of preserve lands and surely
causing significant direct negative impacts, which were not analyzed. Motorized
vehicles (except emergency vehicles or wheelchairs) are not allowed on any trails
or dirt roads in open space areas in Chula Vista with good reason. The amount of
use for shuttling during the days of this event will be many, many times the use
by Border Patrol, SDGE or other authorized public authorities in a year's time. R..
There is absolutelv no analvsis of this inappropriate use in the MND. Fencing U'~
with three-wire fence both sides of the roads may confine tlle people to the roads,
but does nothing to mitigate the effect upon the roads themselves or the negative
effect of the traffic upon the preserve lands. There should be an analysis of Land
Use impacts since clearly there lli significant negative impacts in further
compacting the land and legitimizing trespass. This is a huge failing of the MND.
Wolf Canyon and this section of (he Otay Valley are 100% preserve lands
according to the MSCP. There is also a section of the MSCP lands that is directly
impacted on the north side of the river-a section, which was an important paI1 of
the corridor until a previous owner degraded it. This section is scheduled to be D.
returned to habitat in tile future. Generally lmy kind of activity witllin a preserve IJ
area-even restoration-requires a lengthy process to obtain pennission and pennits, II
but this applicant submitted an application on March 28 and expects to hold pre-
race activities on 6/7. This makes us suspect that a thorough enough analysis
could not possibly have been done to reach the conclusion that all negative effects
have been identified, much less mitigated.
Biolo2V
Even though the Chula Vista MSCP identifies a shorter period oftime for
breeding season than what is commonly used this weekend in June is within the
dates where activities are prohibited in order to protect breeding animals. The
sensitive species in this case would be the Gnatcatchers and Least Bell's Vireo,
which historically nest in this part of the preserve, It is another extremely bad B- t:
precedent to allow this event in the middle of preserve land during breeding J
season with the only precaution being putting plywood behind the bleachers. It is
noted that a survey will be made in the parking and camping areas for burrowing
owl nests, and any nests found will he protected. This is definitely an appropriate
mitigation.
The Sierra Club was (old that domestic animals have been prohibited but if
people show up with them the leash laws will be strictly enforced. It is critical that
more details be included in the Mitigation Monitoring program as to the training
the security guards will receive, the rules that will be enforced, the number of
guards and where thcy will be stationed. Without this information there is B.I _
absolutely no way of detcl111ining if the mitigation is adequate to prevent the ~
negative effect or not. There is a great concern that people will not wait for the
shuttle but take off on foot through the preserve to the event from the camping
and/or parking areas. USFWS has a huge amount of evidence indicating how
poorly fencing and signs alone prevent intrusions into sensitive habitat. There is
also the possibility of people and vehicles bringing seeds of invasive non-native ~
plants into the preserve on tires and shoes, which is ignored in thc MND. -.1'
Noise
Because this is a temporary event the letter states that it is exempt from the
Chula Vista noise analysis. Bccause there is an intention to use data collected to
apply for a permanent permit there is an attempt to show that the noise will meet B 1
city standards at the nearest residential homes. The analysis completely ignores ..
section B of the Chula Vista Exterior Noisc Ordinancc, which surely will apply to
off-road races,
Noise is recognized as an adjacency issue for the wildlife and the
conclusion is that in the habitat areas to the south the noise will reach 75dB after
mitigation. This is completely unacceptable and an unmitigated negative effect of
the activity since the accepted threshold is 60 dB. The lame attempt to change the
threshold to an ambient noisc level of 78 dB Leq uses a measurement taken in
habitat above the quarry, considerably more than 3,000 feet away from historical
vireo nests. 68 dB ambient noise was measured ;tl"the scales located in the VIP
parking area over a I ,000 feet from the historic nests. No measurements were
taken in the habitat area to the south, so there is NO justification for not using the Q. , ~
usually accepted threshold of 60 dB for negative noise impacts in habitat areas. D
Blasting cannot be considered since it is not an event that occurs on an hourly
basis and is of very short duration.
Paee 12 of the noise letter states that "The proposed proiect would
eenerate noise levels ereater than 60 dB hourlv Leq noise level within
portions of the adiacent bioloeical habitat areas. On page ten it states the PA
system would generate noise of70dB or less in habitat areas. On page 9 it states
the 85dB race noise would be reduced by plywood and elevation difference to 75
dB "on sensitive habitat to the immediate south of the facility," where one would
expect to find Vireos. This is clearlv an unmitieated ueeative impact upon
sensitive svecies.
In Summary
The Sierra Club considers the MND for this project to be inadequate
because: J
1. There is no analysis as to the long and short-term negative impacts of thiS. D.. Ct
land use upon Land Use policies associated with the various Resource U . J
Management Plans for this area and the MSCP.
2. The potential for Significant Negative effects caused by domestic animals,
human intmsion and the introduction of exotic, invasive species is
acknowledged, but there is no detailed mitigation indicated showing how
these intrusions will be prevented. Saying no one will deliberately plant an
invasive spccies docs not mean that a tire or a shoe will not carry seeds Q
into the preserve area. (This is just one problem with allowing people to \J - <<1)
pass through the preserve to get to activities not related to the preserve
function.) Saying there will be private security does not show where that
security will be located or how that security will prevent, exactly which
negative behaviors. Signs and fencing are not adequate deterrents when "".'
people are surrounded by preserve land and allowed to cross it several -J'
times a day. .
3. It is predicted that the noise threshold of 60 dB will be surpassed in the 1'2_ "
preserve, thus causing an unmitigated negative impact. I':>
:i
Ii
!i
Sincerely,
(~~/%fl
i Landa L. flri~gs
\... / Conservation Chair
SielTa Club, San Diego Chapter
:i
II
:i
"
'I
"
I,
Ii
Ii
II
II
II
I
II
I
Ii
'I
I,
I'
Ii
i:
"
I:
"
II
II
Ii
Ii
Ii
Ii
"
Ii
II
Ii
I'
II
i
I
Page 1 of 3
G~en Laube
C-
From: Frank Ohrmund [frank@otayrealestate.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2007 10:09 AM
To: Marisa Lundstedt; Glen Laube
Subject: FW: Resource Conserv. Commission meeting last night.
Marisa/Glen,
My modified comments are below.
I [~f
,
I
Frank Ohrmund
Broker/Owner
Otay Real Estate
2433 Fenton Street, Suite A
Chula Vista, CA 91914
619-397-5300 voice
619-397 -5370 fax
858-945-4974 cell
From: Frank Ohrmund [mailto:frank@otayrealestate.comj
Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2007 9:31 AM
To: 'Marisa Lundstedt'
Subject: FW: Resource Conserv. Commission meeting last night,
Marisa,
Your request to identify deficient items in the environmental document supporting a Mitigated Negative Declaration
should include the following. Please pass this on as my objections to the environmental document.
1. Glen explained the true extent of the study and its relevance for a temporary use] C -,
2. After quick archeoiogical review, the camping site was now reduced to half its size. If this is enough land, still,
then why was the entire area desired in the first place. Based on typical processes for consultants to complete
their work, this process for them and staff and the public to review each environmental issue is not adequate.
Consultant's work must have been rushed and appears to be incomplete when compared to typical reports for G """
similar projects. Not enough mention of alternatives have been made. The campground should have been . ~
moved to the parking area and should have been studied as an alternative. With such a quick review and study
by the consultants, with current modification still being made, this environmental document supporting the
mitigated negative declaration was completed in haste and more time should be allowed for alternatives to be
developed.
3. No typical delays are being made for breeding season. The. truly, higher noise than quarry operations is an u:J C':3
mitigated impact whether or not its breeding season. 'J
4. No plan has been made to limit the non-native plants from dominating the camping site area after the current~
grasses are trampled down to a bare dirt lot. These non-native plants will re-establish themselves quicker than C .....
native plants and will then disperse their seeds. A plan to spray or weed these plants needs to be completed fo "
next winter's growing season.
The following are comments on th(projectas a WIiDI", that question staffs authority to support this project based on
plannmg documents approved by tlie developer. I thmk a legal opinion needs to be made on the conversion of any use
within the Preserve prior to dedication to the Preserve Owner/Manger or City of Chula Vista.
1. We have no declaration from the POM (Preserve Owner/Manager) for Otay Ranch on what their recommendation is
Page 2 of 3
for CORR's proposal, and what its affect on the Preserve land, they manage, would be. This is for the unauthorized
use of land at the south end of the Quarry that is south of the Quarry property line (in the MSCP) and the proposed
Camping site. The camping site is talked about in the Otay Ranch General Plan. Resource Management Plan 1 &2 as
being suitable for "active recreation" within the Preserve. This use would only be allowed to be converted from its
current use after its dedication into the Preserve. At that time. the POM would oversee, with the JEPA, what active
recreational uses could be developed by the park or a private enterprise. This can only happen after its dedication to
the Preserve. Until the property is dedicated into the Preserve, language in Otay Ranch's own, self-imposed, planning
document states that only existing farming can continue as a use in the Preserve. Vie neeJ1AJeg.aLopiniolltQ
(letermjne if the Q.!i!y. Ranch Planntng documents p@clude 11:!~ ch.lflge iR..!!",e RrjQ!'tojl~L(ledicatiol'-.1Q the City
Preserve.
2. The Chula Vista's MSCP calls for the "camping site" as a "Planned Active Recreation Area - Subject to RMP
Policies and OVRP Planning". This same area is identified as a "Park Study Area" and that is because Figure 3-3 in the
MSCP has determined that there is Tier I, II and III habitat to be impacted by development. Driving on and clearing this
land hap-hazardly will most likely increase non-native plants in this area without a better plan. This would only matter if
they somehow can support skipping #1 above.
3. The owner's of the Property have not shown that what they are planning is a net benefit to the community. They
have essentially stopped quarry operations, which has increase material costs in the South Bay by 10-15%. Material
for concrete, road base, and asphalt now needs to be trucked from north Lakeside. By closing the Quarry or operating
it at a small fraction of its capacity is costing the community millions in trucking costs. The use would only be for a
handful of millionaire racers and their sponsors. The public will not be able to use the facility. No local racers came to
support this use at the public meetings. This is a playground for the elite period No contribution to the park has been
offered. No net benefit has been supported.
>
> 4. This CUP is just a placemat that would allow them to process the "real" project later. Which now have admitted
that they will soon do. Why let them do this with little review, when all the planning documents call for more study and
involvement with the POM and OVRP JEPA. The owner's of the Property, CORR and Otay Ranch Company have
plenty of land available for this facility and/or can hold the races at one of their other tracks this year. Their land in Otay
Ranch has held this race before and I am sure they can do it again. This land is farmland away from the Preserve and
it would be a better option to give them permission to grade this area while we process any application for a permanent
use at the Quarry Property. This way all those responsible can properly review and comment on their project. This
project should be completely outside the Preserve.
5. No changes to a quarry operation can be made without modifying the Major Use Permit and/or completing the
Reclamation Plan. Since there is no Major Use Permit, and we are changing the use, the City should now require the
quarry to be permitted under a use permit. Or they can close the quarry, complete the Reclamation Plan work and then
process their Conditional Use Permit. At the very least, they need to deal with the Reclamation Plan before changing or
modifying the use. City Staff stated that the Reclamation Plan allows for dirt to be moved and that is their justification
for allowing them to move it into the form of a racing track. This is just bad logic and can't be defended by any sane
person. This project needed a grading permit. The State Office of Mine Reclamation will have something to say about
that reasoning.
Respectfully submitted,
Frank Ohrmund, Secretary
Friends of Otay Valley Regional Park
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVO Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.467/ Virus Database: 269.6.6/794 - Release Date: 5/8/20072:23 PM
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVO Free Edition.
Yersion: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.6.6/794 - Release Date: 5/8/2007 2:23 PM
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVO Free Edition.
Page 301'3
Yersion: 7.5.467/ Virus Database: 269.6.6/794 - Release Date: 5/8/20072:23 PM
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVO Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.6.6/794 - Release Date: 5/8/2007 2:23 PM
Date: May 1,2007
To: OVRP Citizen Advisory Committee via the Established Sub -committee
From: Michael Behan, Committee Member rep. City of Chula Vista
Subject: Review of the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Championship Off-road
Racing
I've read the Mitigated Negative Declaration document and find myself, for the most part,
in favor of the Championship Off-road Racing event taking place. As a retired Recreation
professional (34 years in the field) I believe that this event is consistent with providing
recreational service to support the greater public good. The event, as stated, is proposed
for four days with a planned attendance of 10,000 each day. Simple math tells me that
approximately 40,000 people will visit the site allowing, what must be considered, one of
the larger recreational opportunities to take place in Chula Vista this calendar year. The
fact that the event is commercial and admission is charged has no bearing on the potential
for the average citizen to enjoy attending. One has only to look a few hundred yards
from this proposed CORR venue to find Knott's Soak City and the Coor's Amphitheater,
both providing needed and sought out recreational opportunities. I don't find allowing
the CORR's temporary 4-day event to be onerous and of great impact to the trail users in
the area. The walkers and riders will still have 361 days in the year to enjoy the peace and
solitude that can be found adjacent to a working stone quarry.
The document on page 9 of36, section E. Compliance with Zoning and Plans states:
"Because the use is temporary and subject to a Conditional Use Permit, a consistency
determination relative to General Plan land use designations is not applicable." This
statement alone seems to render most of the arguments I heard expressed last week at the
Citizen Advisory Committee and Policy Committee moot, especially when one considers
the fact that the proposed venue is on privately held land with high levels of mitigation
proposed.
Protection of the Otay Valley Regional Park's environment from any mistreatment from
outside impacts is of primary concern. At this time, however, there is no empirical data,
no proof, to substantiate any allegations that this specific event will negatively impact
the park's environment or surrounding neighborhoods. Although, minus the data, one
can certainly surmise some of the potentials impact to the area: I) Air Quality, 2) Sound
Pollution 3) Hydrology and Water Quality, 4)Drainage/Toxics, etc. I believe that the
document appears to respond to each of these issues with viable answers on surmised
Issues.
I strongly suggest that before the event is permitted the applicant provide a plan to
document the impacts of the temporary event on the surrounding environment and
community. The plan should include but not be limited to:
. Sound checks measuring db's in the communities on the south rim during the race
event.
. Air quality checks measuring particulate matter during and immediately after each
race.
. Base level samples of the rivers prior to thc first race day and immediately following
D
Vi
D-2..
D.~
\).~
the final day of racing for any heavy metal or petroleum based impacts on the watcr
shed.
Once these tests are completed they should be presented to the City of Chula Vista in a
report that fully discusses the baseline methodology and findings prior to and after the
event. Once the impacts are fully vetted, understood, and agreed upon by professionals
in each discipline, a full formal report should be presented to the OVRP Policy
Committee for comment and agreement.
This data should then be included as part of any future application for the use of the
venue for an Off-road Vehicle Racing. The data included in the report wil1 provide
needed information to allow the OVRP Committees to make an educated, fact-based
decision on any future use of the site.
I am concerned with Page 12 of 36, section F. Public Comments section. The fact that
the applicant met the minimum notification responsibility". . . Notice was circulated to
property owners and residents within a 500-foot radius of the proposed project site." is
not enough. Given the potential for disruption of quality of life (sound mostly) for the
homes/residents located on the south rim of the valley, the applicant should have taken,
and should be required to take, the extra steps to notify these residents of the potential
disruption.
1)-1.(
D-S
Response to Comments on DRAFT MND IS-07-030 as of Mav 17, 2007
(30-day public Review Period: April 20, 2007 through June 21,2007)
Theresa Acerro
PO Box 8697 Chula Vista
Letter provided May 7, 2007 at RCC Hearing
A-I. Summary of Comment:
Active Recreation Use area poses concerns relative to wildlife movement through
the Otay River Valley not enough time or consideration has been given to
determine appropriateness of camping in the active recreation area. (See second
full paragraph, Page I).
Response:
The proposed project is a temporary use (two non-consecutive weekends only),
and as such, temporary use of the active recreation areas for camping would not
pern1anently impede wildlife movement through the Otay River Valley. It is
acknowledged that establishment of any permanent use within the designated
Active Recreation areas of the river valley will require a more thorough
consideration by the City, OVRP Citizens Advisory Committee, and the Otay
Ranch Preserve Owner/Manager. However, following the events that are
proposed with the current application, the existing conditions of the Active
Recreation areas will be the same as they are currently. Therefore, the project
would not affect or preclude any future use of these areas.
A-2. Summary of Comment:
Off Road Vehicle use is inconsistent with the OVRP, the MSCP and potentially
the Otay River Valley Watershed Management Plan (WMP). (See third full
paragraph, Page I).
Response:
The project proposes off road racing on a closed course in a controlled venue in
an area that is already disturbed and is not in the Preserve. Similarly, access to the
race venue from the parking and camping areas will be provided via existing, dirt
access roads. As stated in the MND, use of personal ORV and pedestrian access
through Preserve areas is strictly prohibited. The applicant shall provide shuttle
service to and from the parking and camping areas in order to restrict the
movement of people through sensitive areas. As stated in the MND, these
conditions will be monitored and enforced in accordance with the security plan to
be reviewed and approved by the City's Environmental Review Coordinator and
City Chief of Police.
Page I of 13
A-3. Summary of Comment:
The Specific Area Management Plan (SAMP) has not been completed for the
Otay Watershed but will likely deem ORV activities within the OVRP to be an
incompatible use. (See second full paragraph, Page).
Response:
As noted the SAMP is not complete. Until the SAMP had been completed and
formally adopted, any analysis of the adverse physical effects would be
speculative, and is not within the scope of the project's CEQA analysis.
However, the intent and goal of a SAMP is to protect water quality and sensitive
natural (particularly wetland riparian) resources. As stated in the MND, potential
impacts to water quality will be mitigated and there are no anticipated direct
impacts to riparian resources.
A-4. Summary of Comment:
Project-related use of shuttle buses within the Preserve would result in direct
impacts on the Preserve, including further compacting the dirt roads and
legitimizing trespass. (See first partial paragraph, Page 2).
Response:
The use of dirt roads by shuttle buses is identified as part of the proposed project
activities in the Project Description in the MND. The project would not widen or
in any other way improve the existing dirt roads. The use of shuttle vehicles is
temporary, as is the nature of the entire project. Shuttle buses will be used to
restrict uncontrolled pedestrian traffic, which may have the potential to impact
surrounding sensitive areas. Private security will also be provided by the
applicant to patrol the perimeter of the parking, race track area and camping areas
to ensure that pedestrians and vehicles do not access preserve areas. Fencing is
also provided at the race track, camping, parking and access roads to restrict
access to preserve areas.
A-5. Summary of Comment:
A thorough analysis of impacts on the Preserve could not have been completed
within the time frame of the analysis that was conducted for this project. (See first
full paragraph, Page 2).
Response:
This comment indicates that, due to the timing and process schedule for the
proposed project, the analysis is incomplete, but the comment does not indicate
any specific deficiencies of the analysis. As required under the City's typical
process, technical reports were required to evaluate project impacts on noise, air
quality, cultural resources and biological resources. These reports were prepared
by the project applicant and were reviewed by the City of Chula Vista and the
City's outside consultants for content, accuracy and completeness. Since no
specific deficiencies were identified in the comment, a more specific response is
not possible.
Page 2 of 13
A-6. Summary of Comment:
The dates of the first race are within a time frame where activities are prohibited
in order to protect breeding animals. Approval of the race sets an extremely bad
precedent. (See second fu1l paragraph, Page 2).
Response:
The Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan does not specifica1ly prohibit noise
generating uses in or adjacent to the Preserve; however, the MSCP does require
that excessively noise activities adjacent to the Preserve incorporate noise
reduction measures or be curtailed during the breeding season of sensitive bird
species. The MSCP does not provide a specific numerical threshold for
operational noise impacts. Refer to comment A-8 below.
A-7. Summary of Comment:
Enforcernent of leash laws and restriction of access into the Preserve are of great
concern. Impacts from the transfer of non-native plant seed into the Preserve was
not analyzed in the MND. (See last paragraph, Page 2, as continued on the top of
Page 3).
Response:
The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program wi1l provide adequate
assurances that security staff will be trained, properly positioned, and will
adequately prevent unauthorized access into the Preserve. Access of race patrons
will be limited to existing dirt roads, the camping and parking areas, and the race
venue itself. A1l of these areas are either devoid of native vegetation, or covered
predominately in non-native plant species (former agriculture areas). Therefore, it
is not anticipated that disturbance of these areas, and/or the slight chance of
transfer of non-native plant seeds would have any measurable effect, either inside
or outside of the Preserve.
A-8. Snmmary of Comment:
Noise impacts on sensitive habitat adjacent to the project wi1l result in significant
Ullli1itigable impacts. (See first full paragraph, Page 3).
Response:
The issue of project-generated noise and its effects on adjacent Preserve areas is
analyzed and documented in the MND. The noise analysis prepared for the
project (Environmental Noise Assessment for the Temporary Off-Road Race
Track, Dudek & Associates, April 16, 2007) provides an estimate of noise levels
generated by the proposed project. In order to quantify potential impacts to noise
sensitive receptors, including sensitive biological resources, the noise analysis
applied noise levels obtained during the 2006 racing events. Utilizing that data
and applying it to the proposed project, the unattenuated noise levels at the closest
sensitive habitat location within the Preserve, immediately adjacent to the south of
the proposed track, are estimated to be 85 dB hourly Leq.
Page 3 of 13
As stated in the MND, taking the existing terrain topography into consideration,
and providing the maximum sound attenuation available through structural design
features (enclosure of the rear of the stands located between the track and the
Preserve), the noise analysis concludes that areas having potential to support least
Bell's vireo and coastal California gnatcatcher are expected to be exposed noise
levels of approximately 75 dB hourly Leq noise level during the racing events.
The City's MSCP Subarea Plan does not provide a numerical threshold for
operational impacts. For comparative purposes, ambient noise measurements were
recorded within the project area. Ambient noise within the project area is
primarily associated with the existing rock quarry operation, including rock and
gravel extraction, earth moving equipment, and rock crushing activities. Ambient
noise measurements in portions of the quarry adjacent to sensitive habitat areas
within the Preserve indicate noise levels ranging between 68 to 78 dB Leq.
Due to the short-term nature of the proposed project (two consecutive days during
the nesting season), and similar operational noise levels between existing ambient
noise conditions and the anticipated, attenuated noise levels it is not anticipated
that the project will result in significant indirect impacts on these noise sensitive
speCles.
A-9. Summary of Comment:
Carbon Monoxide levels are above threshold levels, and it is questionable whether
this would be a "hot spot". Particulate emissions are also a concern because
watering of the track will create undesirable mud. (See second full paragraph,
Page 3).
Response:
The air quality analysis indicated that, in the initial screening, CO impacts were
identified to exceed the screening threshold. Therefore, the next level of analysis
to determine significance was applied (the CO "hot spot" analysis). That analysis
indicated that no significant impacts relative to CO would result. Mitigation
measures that involves watering to reduce dust are applied in a controlled manner,
such that only small amount of water are needed and are applied, to ensure that
dust control is maximized, while not saturating the soil.
Page 4 of 13
A-tO. Summary ofCommellt:
The comment questions the effectiveness of lighting controls within the portions
of the project located in the middle of the MSCP Preserve. (See last full
paragraph, Page 3).
Response:
The issue of lighting its effects on adjacent Preserve areas is analyzed and
documented in the MND. Temporary safety lighting associated with the project
would be limited to the pit area, spectator area and camping area. The lighting for
these areas would be directed downward, and away from the Preserve. Light
spillage into the Preserve would be considered significant.
As documented in the MND and MMRP, to ensure potential impacts associated
with project lighting are mitigated to a level ofless than significant, the Applicant
is required to submit, prior to the commencement ofrace activities, a lighting plan
to the satisfaction of the City's Environmental Review Coordinator. The lighting
plan shall clearly demonstrate that all temporary security lighting shall be directed
away and/or shielded from the Preserve to prevent any potential indirect impacts
due to night lighting, Additionally, low-pressure sodium lighting shall be used to
reduce these potential effects.
SIERRA CLUB
San Diego Chapter
3820 Ray Street
San Diego, CA 92104
Letter postmarked May II, 2007
B-L Summary of Comment:
Active Recreation Use area poses concerns relative to wildlife movement through
the Otay River Valley - not enough time or consideration has been given to
determine appropriateness of camping in the active recreation area. (See second
full paragraph, Page I).
Response:
Refer to Response to Comment A-I above.
B-2. Summary of Comment:
Off Road Vehicle use is inconsistent with the OVRP, the MSCP and the
potentially the SAMP. (See third full paragraph, Page I).
Response:
Refer to Response to Comment A-2 above.
Page 5 of 13
B-3. Summary of Comment:
Project-related use of shuttle buses within the Preserve would result in direct
impacts on the Preserve, including further compacting the dirt roads and
legitimizing trespass. (See first partial paragraph, Page 2).
Response:
The use of dirt roads by shuttle buses is identified as part of the proposed project
activities in the Project Description in the MND. The project would not widen or
in any other way improve the existing dirt roads. The use of shuttle vehicles is
temporary, as is the nature of the entire project. Refer to Response to Comment
A-4 above.
B-4. Summary of Comment:
A thorough analysis of impacts on the Preserve could not have been completed
within the time frame of the analysis that was conducted for this project. (See first
fun paragraph, Page 2).
Response:
This comment indicates that, due to the timing and process schedule for the
proposed project, the analysis is incomplete, but the comment does not indicate
any specific deficiencies of the analysis. Contrary to the implications of the
comment, thorough technical reports were required to evaluate project impacts on
noise, air quality, cultural resources and biological resources. These reports were
prepared by the project applicant and were reviewed by the City of Chula Vista
and the City's outside consultants for content, accuracy and completeness. Since
no specific deficiencies were identified in thc comment, a more specific response
is not possible. Refer to Response to Comment A-5 above.
B-5, Summary of Comment:
The dates of the first race are within a time frame where activities are prohibited
in order to protect breeding animals. Approval of the race sets an extremely bad
precedent. (See second full paragraph, Page 2).
Response:
The Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan does not specifically prohibit noise
generating uses in or adjacent to the Preserve; however, the MSCP does require
that excessively noise activities adjacent to the Preserve incorporate noise
reduction measures or be curtailed during the breeding season of sensitive bird
species. The MSCP docs not provide a specific numerical threshold for
operational noise impacts. Refer to Response to Comment A-8 above.
B-6. Summary of Comment:
Enforcement of leash laws and restriction of access into the Preserve are of great
concern. Impacts from the transfer of non-native plant seed into the Preserve was
not analyzed in the MND. (See last paragraph, Page 2, as continued at the top of
Page 3).
Page 6 of 13
Response:
The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and project conditions of
approval provide adequate assurances that security staff will be trained, properly
positioned, and adequately prevent unauthorized access into the Preserve. Access
of race patrons will be limited to existing dirt roads, the camping and parking
areas, and the race venue itself. All of these areas are either devoid of native
vegetation, or covered predominately in non-native plant species (former
agriculture areas). Therefore, it is not anticipated that disturbance of these areas,
and/or the slight chance of transfer of non-native plant seeds would have any
measurable effect, either inside or outside of the Preserve.
B-7. Summary of Comment:
"The analysis completely ignores section B of the Chula Vista Exterior Noise
Ordinance, which will surely apply to off-road races." (See first full paragraph,
Page 3).
Response:
It is unclear what is meant by this comment. The referenced section of the
Municipal Code (19.68.030 (B)), provides for corrections to the exterior noise
limits, as follows:
B. Corrections to Exterior Noise Level Limits.
1. If the noise is continuous, the Leq for any hour will be represented by any
lesser time period within that hour. Noise measurements of a few minutes
only will thus suffice to define the noise level.
2. If the noise is intermittent, the Leq for any hour may be represented by a
time period typical of the operating cycle. Measurement should be made of
a representative number of noisy/quiet periods. A measurement period of
not less than 15 minutes is, however, strongly recommended when dealing
with intermittent noise.
3. In the event the alleged offensive noise, as judged by the enforcement
officer, contains a steady, audible sound such as a whine, screech or hum,
or contains a repetitive impulsive noise such as hammering or riveting, the
standard limits set forth in Table III shall be reduced by five dB.
4. If the measured ambient level exceeds that permissible in Table III, the
allowable noise exposure standard shall be the ambient noise level. The
ambient level shall be measured when the alleged noise violations source
is not operating.
If the implication that a higher (stricter) standard should be applied to this use
because it is continuous (reference Section B. 1.), that would not be appropriate,
because the use is not continuous. If the implication is that the noise is
intermittent (reference Section B. 2.), is it unlikely that use of a shorter
measurement period would yield a result that is more accurate. However, such a
measurement may result in noise estimates that are lower than predicted in the
Page 7 of 13
MND. If the implication is that the noise may be detem1ined by the enforcement
officer to have characteristics described in Section B. 3., that determination would
need to be made at such a time that the enforcement officer detects and evaluates
the sound, which cannot be determined prior to project commencement. Finally,
if the implication is that the measure ambient noise level exceeds the exterior
standards (reference Section B. 4.), data presented in the project Noise report and
the MND confirm that is not the case.
In reference to the project and compliance with Section .68.030 (B) of the Chula
Vista Municipal Code, the responses are as follows:
Section B. I: The proposed project will not bc a continuous operation.
Therefore, use of a higher (stricter) standard is not applicable.
Section B. 2: It is it unlikely that use of a shorter measurement period would
yield a result that is more accurate. However, such a measurement
may result in noise estimates that are lower than predicted in the
MND
Section B. 3: This determination would need to be made at such a time that the
enforcement officer detects and evaluates the sound, which cannot
be determined prior to project commencement.
Section B.4: Data presented in the project Noise report and the MND confirm
that ambient noise levels do not exceed the exterior noise
standards. Existing ambient noise conditions at the nearest
residences, including the industrial park, were not collected.
However, the MND evaluated a worse-case noise level of 93 dBA
Leq at 100 feet from the race track. Applying the distance,
atmospheric, and stand shielding resulting noise levels at the
nearest residential receptors was calculated to be between 46 to 48
dBA, which is below the City's Noise Ordinance threshold of
55 dB 7 a.m. and 10 p.m. on weekdays, and between 8 a.m. and
10 p.m. on weekends. Similarly, the calculated noise levels at the
nearest industrial land use was calculated to be between 63 to 65
dBA, which is below the City's 70 dBA tlueshold for industrial
uses.
It should be noted that the above information has been provide for comparative
purposes. As stated in the MND, Chapter 19.68 Section 19.68.060 of the City of
Chula Vista Municipal Code exempts occasional outdoor gatherings, public
dances, shows and sporting and entertainment events, provided the events are
conducted pursuant to a pennit or license issued by the city relative to the staging
of the events. Noise associated with race activities would be intenl1ittent during
the day, are classified as an occasional outdoor gathering and are therefore less
than significant due to its temporary nature.
Page 8 of 13
B-8. SlJImmary of Comment:
The noise standard that should be used for evaluating potential indirect impacts on
habitat areas to the south should be 60 dB. (See second and third full paragraphs,
Page 3).
Response:
The issue of project-generated noise and its effects on adjacent Preserve areas is
fully analyzed and documented in the MND. Refer to Response to Comment A-8
above.
B-9. Summary of Comment:
There is no analysis of the long and short-term negative impacts of this land use
upon land use polices of the various resource management plans, including the
MSCP. (See #1 in Summary on Page 3).
Response:
The Environmental Checklist for the project indicates that the project would not
conflict with relevant land use/planning policies. The primary reason for this
conclusion is the fact that the project is temporary, and would not preclude future
uses contemplated in planning or resource management documents. The MND
included a full analysis of the MSCP provisions related to Adjacent Management
Guidelines. The biological resources section of the MND summarizes the
project's consistency with the City's MSCP Subarea Plan Adjacency Guidelines.
Issues related to drainage, noise, invasives, toxins, lighting, and erosion control
have been adequately addressed in the MND and implementation of the MMRP
and adherence to the project's conditions of approval will ensure that adjacency
impacts are reduced to a level ofJess than significance.
B-I0. Summary of Comment:
Concern is reiterated over unauthorized access to the Preserve. (See #2 In
Summary on Page 3).
Response:
Refer to Response to Comments A-2, A-3, and A-4 above.
B-l1. Summary of Comment:
Noise impacts will be unmitigated and negative. (See #3 in Summary on Page 3).
Response:
Refer to Response to Comment A-8 above.
Page 9 of 13
FRANK OHRMlJND
2433 Fenton Street, Suite A
Chula Vista, CA 91914
Comment received via e-mail dated May 9, 2007
C-l. Summary of Comment:
Stated that the project manager explained the true extent of the study and its
relevance for a temporary use
Response:
Comment noted.
C-2. Summary of Comment:
"After quick archeological review, the camping site was now reduced to half its
size. If this is enough land, still, then why was the entire area desired in the first
place. Based on typical processes for consultants to complete their work, this
process for them and staff and the public to review each environmental issue is
not adequate. Consultant's work must have been rushed and appears to be
incomplete when compared to typical reports for similar projects. Not enough
mention of alternatives have been made. The campground should have been
moved to the parking area and should have been studied as an alternative. With
such a quick review and study by the consultants, with current modification still
being made, this environmental document supporting the mitigated negative
declaration was completed in haste and more time should be allowed for
alternatives to be developed."
Response:
The size of the area proposed for camping was reduced to avoid impacts. It is
assumed that the camping use will be more compact, to fit the same use on a
smaller area.
This comment indicates that, due to the timing and process schedule for the
proposed project, the analysis is incomplete, but the comment does not indicate
any specific deficiencies of the analysis. Contrary to the implications of the
comment, thorough technical reports were required to eyaluate project impacts on
noise, air quality, cultural resources and biological resources. These reports were
prepared by the project applicant and were reviewed by the City of Chula Vista
and the City's outside consultants for content, accuracy and completeness. Since
no specific deficiencies were identified in the comment, a more specific response
is not possible. Refer to Response to Comment A-5 above.
This comment also states that project alternatives should have been analyzed in
the MND. CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6 requires that project alternatives be
identified and analyzed in environmental impact reports (EIRs). There is no
requirement for an analysis of project alternatives in an MND. Since there is no
Page 10 of 13
substantial evidence of an envirom11ental impact associated with the project after
mitigation, an EIR is not required. It would, therefore, be inappropriate to
analyze project alternatives.
C-3. Summary of Comment:
"No typical delays are being made for breeding season. The, truly, higher noise
than quarry operations is an un-mitigated impact whether or not its breeding
season. "
Response:
The issue of project-generated noise and its effects on adjacent Preserve areas is
fully analyzed and documented in the MND. Refer to Response to Comment A-8
above.
C-4. Summary of Comment:
"No plan has been made to limit the non-native plants from dominating the
camping site area after the current grasses are trampled down to a bare dirt lot.
These non-native plants will re-establish themselves quicker than native plants
and will then disperse their seeds. A plan to spray or weed these plants needs to
be completed for next winter's growing season."
Response:
The entire area proposed for camping is dominated by non-native species in its
existing condition. Therefore, it is not anticipated that the slight chance of transfer
of non-native plant seeds resulting rrom access by race patrons would have any
measurable effect, either inside or outside of the Preserve.
Additional Comments 1-5 provided by Mr. Ohrmund relate to the project as a whole and
question staffs authority to support this project based on planning documents approved
by the developer. Supplemental questions 1-5 are noted but do not address the adequacy
of the mitigated negative declaration.
MICHAEL BEHAN
Letter received via e-mail dated May 1, 2007
D-l. Summary of Comment:
The first paragraph on the first page of the comment letter expresses support for
the proj ect.
Response:
Since the comment raises no issues relative to the adequacy of the MND, no
further response is required.
Page II of 13
1Ji-2. Summary of Comment:
The second paragraph on the first page of the comment letter indicates that the
conclusions of the MND relative to consistency with planning documents
addresses most of the concerns raised by the OVRP Citizen's Advisory
Committee and Policy Committee.
Response:
Comment noted. This comment does not challenge the adequacy of the mitigated
negative declaration. (The commenter referenced page 9 of36 of the draft MND-
due to formatting/textual changes the referenced section can be found on page 12
of 36. No additional impacts occurred as a result of the formatting/textual
changes.)
D-3. Summary of Comment:
The third paragraph on the first page summarizes the commentor's agreement
with portions of the analysis provided in the MND.
Response:
Since the comment raises no issues relative to deficiencies of the MND, no further
response is required.
D-4. Summary of Comment:
In the last paragraph of the first page of the letter, the commentor suggests the
fol1owing:
. Sound checks measuring db's in the communities on the south rim during
the race event.
. Air quality checks measuring particulate matter during and immediately
after each race.
. Base level samples of the rivers prior to the first race day and immediately
following the final day of racing for any heavy metal or petroleum based
impacts on the water shed.
InfoD11ation from these monitoring efforts should bc reported to the City and the
OVRP, and should be used in any future analyses.
Response:
Sound monitoring will be conducted and the data will be used in the manner
suggested in this comment - to provide data that can be used in future studies.
PM10 air quality impacts are measured and considered on a regional basis. There
are no specific thresholds for localized impacts, therefore measurements of
particulates taken at distance intervals would not provide any meaningful data
from which conclusions could be drawn. Typically, PMIO is modeled for total
impact. There is no reasonable method available by which PMIO concentrations
taken from samples could be extrapolated to a total project level equivalent. What
Page 12 of 13
can and will be monitored are the BMPs that include dust control measures to
ensure that the assumptions relative to reduction of fugitive dust are realized.
The project will not be permitted to discharge any runoff into the Otay River,
therefore, monitoring of water quality in the River will not be necessary.
D-S. Summary of Comment:
Given the potential for disruption of quality of life (sound mostly) for the
homes/residents located on the south rim of the valley, the project notification
requirements should have been expanded.
Response:
On April 20, 2007 a Notice of Availability of the Proposed Mitigated Negative
Declaration for the project was posted in the County Clerk's Office and circulated
to property owners and residents within a 500-foot radius of the project site as
well as adjacent businesses, property owners, and tenants along Nirvana Avenue
and Energy Way, who are located beyond the 500-foot radius. (The commenter
referenced page 12 of 36 of the draft MND - due to formatting/textual changes
the referenced section can be found on page 15 of 36. No additional impacts
occurred as a result of the fonl1atting/textual changes.)
Page 13 of 13
DRAFT
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE
RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION
May 7,2007
Ken Lee Building Conference Room
430 'F' Street
MEETING CALLED TO ORDER by Chair Reid at 4:31 p.m.
ROLL CALUMOTION TO EXCUSE
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Chair Doug Reid, Vice-Chair Stanley Jasek, Commissioners
Georgie Stillman, Lynda Gilgun, Eric Mosolgo, Richie Macias, Jr.
and Brett Davis
STAFF PRESENT:
Marisa Lundstedt, Environmental Projects Manager
Maria Muett, Associate Planner
Silvester Evetovich, Principal Civil Engineer
Glen Laube, Environmental Projects Manager
Caroline Young, Assistant Planner
Harold Phelps, Associate Planner
Ed Batchelder, Advance Planning Manager
Linda Bond, Recording Secretary
OTHERS PRESENT:
Theresa Acerro, 3730 Festival Court, Chula Vista
John Willett, 97 Montebello Street, Chula Vista
Frank Ohrmund, 12144 Proctor Valley Road, Chula Vista
Ranie Hunter, The Otay Ranch Company
Joe Monaco, Dudek & Associates
Tony Ambrose, Burkett & Wong
Total of 11 guests in the audience
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: April16,2007
Chair Reid questioned the vote for Item #3. Ms. Linda Bond (RCe Secretary) provided
clarification to Chair Reid's question.
MSUC (Jasek/Gilgun) to approve the minutes of April 16, 2007. Vote: (7-0)
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None.
DRAFT
DRAFT
RGG Minutes
- 2 -
May 7. 2007
INFORMATION ITEM
1. Drainage Training
Mr. Silvester Evetovich (Principal Civil Engineer) handed out an outline of his presentation.
He discussed Engineering's requirements for drainage studies and how the studies are
analyzed. Mr. Evetovich addressed the following topics:
. Basic purpose for drainage studies
. Levels of review by Engineering staff
. Conformance standards required for drainage studies
. Key elements to look for in drainage studies
Commission Comments
Chair Reid asked the following questions:
. In most cases, detention systems would be required for excessive flows. Under what
conditions wouldn't one be required?
. Aren't a lot of the detention facilities in open space maintenance districts, and they
are actually maintained by the districts themselves?
Commissioner Mosolgo asked for clarification about a circumstance when a development
that is upstream of a deficient system increases flows to these systems. Commissioner
Mosolgo also had the following question and requests:
. Has the City put any thought into potentially making all of these developers within the
drainage basin pay through a fee for future upgrades to facilities?
. He asked Mr. Evetovich to touch briefly on the City's floodplain ordinance, some of
the larger floodplains that the City deals with, and also the upcoming hydro-
modification changes.
Commissioner Stillman asked if the concrete culverts were buried deep? Is that a big
expense? Is there planning for it with the age of the west side?
Commissioner Macias inquired as to what grade of concrete the City uses now compared to
what the City used in the 70's?
Mr. Evetovich satisfactorily provided information and clarification to the Commissioners
questions.
NEW BUSINESS
2. 15-06-020 -- Napa Place, 445 First Avenue
Ms. Maria Muett (Associate Planner) presented the proposed project, which consists of
subdividing a 1.7-acre site into nine single-family parcels.
DRAFT
DRAFT
RCC Minutes
- 3 -
Mav 7,2007
Commission Comments
Commissioner Gilgun noted the following and had a question:
. On page 26 under Environmental Factors that are potentially affected, noise was
highlighted, but there was nothing about noise in the report.
. When the report talked about compliance with zoning, it says the General Plan has it
zoned as RLM, which is supposed to be 3-6 dwelling units per acre, which is being
consistent with the General Plan. But there are nine units in just over an acre. On
page 4 it says 1.17 -acre site.
. Are there plans to save some of the trees on the site?
Chair Reid noted that, given that the trees cannot be saved, is there a need to modify the
mitigation measures for fencing around the trees to be retained?
Commissioner Macias asked how many dwelling units are currently in this area?
Commissioner Mosolgo asked to be shown areas of underground detention. Commissioner
Mosolgo then asked the following questions:
. How are you going about proving medium to high treatment of water quality for this
project?
. Do you consider this to be medium to high removals?
. Where is the brow ditch located?
Chair Reid referred to page 5, Air Quality, 1., that makes reference to the City's
Environmental Review Coordinator. Should that now be Environmental Projects Manager?
Staff and consultants satisfactorily provided information and clarification to the
Commissioners questions and concerns.
Staff will make noted corrections to the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
MSUC (Jasek/Davis) that the RCC find that the Initial Study is adequate and
recommend that the Mitigated Negative Declaration be adopted. Vote: (7-0)
3. 15-07-030 -- Conditional Use Permit for Temporary Championship Off-Road Race
2007; east of the existing terminus of Main Street, east of Heritage Road
Commissioner Mosolgo recused himself during this item.
Mr. Glen Laube (Environmental Projects Manager) presented the proposed project
Conditional Use Permit and Mitigated Negative Declaration. The proposed project is
scheduled for the Planning Commission on May 23, 2007 and the City Council on June 5,
2007.
DRAFT
DRAFT
Ree Minutes
- 4-
May 7,2007
Public Comments
Ms. Theresa Acerro (3730 Festival Goult, Chula Vista, GA 91911): You say signs are 150
feet, but in the MND it says 200 feet. You also say no light in parking, but in the MND says
there is minimal light in the parking area. You say the only thing that will be lit are the
parking area and camping area. And it also says that pets will be allowed. Now I have
always believed that one of the most important goals of the OVRP and now the MSCP, for
that matter, are open wildlife corridors and they allow species to move freely from one area
to another. These selected active recreation areas are not intended to preclude this wildlife
function or impact passive uses of a park. But in this case, if you look at how it's right next to
it, it appears that this will have an impact. It's very questionable, because we are right up
against the river here. This is the corridor. And also the Multiple Species Conservation
Program, the Otay River Watershed Management Plan say that motorized vehicles are
simply not allowed. Motorized vehicle use is inconsistent with the park's vision, Multiple
Species Program, and also the Chula Vista's policy for open space doesn't allow motorized
vehicles on the trails even if they are dirt roads. And this unfortunately sets a precedent for
allowing that kind of thing other than emergency vehicles or motorized wheelchairs. And
that's unfortunate to have this kind of a precedent. I think the proposed event has more than
adequacy impacts because you are actually allowing this motorized use within the preserve
area, which is not allowed, theoretically, by regulations. There is also the problem of
biological restoration projects even if they are undertaking around endangered species. It
takes around 6 months to get a permit. And here, they put in an application on March 281h,
and they are going to have a race on June 7'h This seems like kind of an outrageous and
unheard of departure from normal procedures. The MSCP supposedly has very strict
provisions against any kind of disturbances during breeding season, which is usually March
15 to September 15. And this has held up lots of construction projects. This again seems to
be very preferential treatment for an applicant and I think a bad precedent. As far as biology
goes, the letter indicates that there are breeding gnatcatchers and vireos in the area. And
allowing this use with only the precaution of putting plyboard on the back of the bleachers is
another bad precedent for preventing future disservices during breeding season. It is
commendable that there will be a survey of camping and parking areas for borrowing owl
nests. That will be protected. But by June, there will be other animals that will have babies
here, and they need some kind of consideration, also. The question about how strict the
monitors will be to prevent people from walking from the parking areas or the camping areas
or outside of the three-strand wires for that matter... you said that they are going to train
security guards, and they are going to specify and specifically look for and enforce that.
Hopefully, that will help. I think it should specifically say in the Mitigation plan the number of
guards and where they will be stationed and to specifically control this kind of behavior
because Fish & Wildlife can assure you that signs don't help, fences don't help. Now, as far
as the noises goes. Again, it's not really a study; it's a letter. It says the event will provide
structural elements for sound attenuation, but it only mentions the plywood behind the
bleachers. Fireworks are particularly frightening to wildlife. They sound like gunshots. The
light is something that's unique. And there is also a fire hazard. I think fireworks need to be
prohibited entirely. Now, let's look at the biological report. The biological report, on page 8,
says that the noise analysis measurement in portions of the quarry adjacent to sensitive
habitat in the preserve indicate noise level up to 78 decibels. But if you look at the chart on
DRAFT
DRAFT
RGG Minutes
- 5 -
Mav 7, 2007
page 5 in the noise letter, you see that this location is in the MSCP area that is above the
preserve. That is almost 3,000 feet away from where the vireos will be nesting. It's not
appropriate to use that figure as ambient noise and say that we are meeting the noise level
because there is no way that the ambient noise down here is 78. There was no
measurement taken from the preserve area to the south or, for that matter, to the west,
which is where there are historical vireo nests. Since the level measured near the quarry
scales was 68, you can assume that across the river, almost 1,000 feet away, that it is going
to be a whole lot less than 68. And so it's not going to be anywhere near where they are
saying it's 78 above the quarry or even for what they gave for inside the quarry. It is most
likely that the birds will avoid the area that is above the quarry where it is so noisy, and they
will actually be to the south or to the west away from where it is less noisy. Page 12 in the
noise letter says that the proposed project would generate noise levels greater than 60-
decibel hours within portions of the adjacent biological habitat area. Page 10 says the PA
system noise would be 70 decibels or less in the habitat areas. Page 9 states 85-decibel
race noise would be reduced by plywood and elevation differences to 75 decibels, 75
decibels is clearly an unmitigated negative impact on sensitive species if we are taking 65
decibels to be the criteria, which is normally done in these kinds of reports for sensitive
habitat. Now June is the time when the eggs have likely hatched. The birds being frightened
away from the nests are going to result in death of the young. It would destroy their whole
breeding season, and so I think that makes it a very significant affect.
Mr. John Willett (97 Montebello Street, Chula Vista, CA 91910) had a handout to pass
around. I would like to make one comment about the noise level and the birds. I have been
out at the quarry when they have dynamited the area out there and used almost 900 pounds
of dynamite and watched a bird in a nest in the camping area that just kind of looked
around. So they do get used to it. I chair the Otay Valley Regional Park Citizens Advisory
Committee. At the last meeting, after much discussion, we came up with the following
comments: 1) The applicant should rigorously adhere to all conditions set forth in the final
version of the MND. 2) The applicant should provide at its' sole expense impartial monitors
that will measure and document the baseline conditions and the actual sound, air and water
impacts to the Otay River Valley by all aspects of the races. Further, sound monitoring
should also take place at the edge of the property line of private residences south and
southwest of the race area. 3) The CAC's "CORR" subcommittee approval is not to be
considered as an endorsement of any future proposal by CORR, whether temporary or
permanent. One of the things the previous speaker talked about was the water. I co-chaired
the development of the Watershed Management Plan for 2 years. I also coordinate the
clean up of the Otay River Valley. Five months ago, Public Works did some water sampling.
I was afraid that the water was contaminated. We basically have nine ponds that have water
throughout the year, and we took the first sample all the way down at the west end. Not one
of the four was above the danger limits. We propose and recommend and approve the work
that has been done for the races.
Mr. Frank Ohrmund (12144 Proctor Valley Road, Chula Vista, CA) stated that he is Vice-
Chair of the Otay Valley Regional Park Committee, but my comments are my comments. I
don't represent the group. My comments come about because I read the Otay Ranch
General Development Plan, and they have certain things in place that would allow us to
DRAFT
DRAFT
Ree Minutes
- 6 -
Mav 7,2007
develop this park, which is what I'm interested in is putting this park together. I've gone
through and talking with Rick Rosaler. I'm curious on how they can turn this quarry into an
off-road park and he said, well, the Reclamation Plan allows you to push dirt around, and so
they are going to push the dirt around and create an off-road track. But when you have a
quarry like this, and you reclaim it, it's going to look like a racetrack. And if you are going to
use the Reclamation Plan as an excuse for doing the grading for a track, it's not a
reclamation plan. A grading permit is probably required to do just the track. And nothing has
been evaluated as to how the grading, if there is real grading, they are just using the
Reclamation Plan as an excuse to be doing the grading. Also in the Otay Ranch Plan, as
explained by CORR representatives that they consider the active rec areas to be areas that
they can develop, that it necessarily doesn't need to be transferred into the preserve
system. But their own documents in the Resource Management Plan talk about a preserve
system of over 11,000 acres. And it says here, of this amount, up to 400 acres may be used
for active rec. So it describes this active rec as being part of this preserve. The Otay Ranch
properties would convey land and fee to the Preserve Owner/Manager, and the Resource
Preserve Owner/Manager would hold title to land and permit through a lease or some other
instrument of the Regional Park to operate in the Resource Preserve. They want to take
land that is active rec and convert it before it has been transferred into the preserve. To me,
that is a horrible precedence that will allow a private property owner property rights within
the preserve when it should be transferred to the public, to be designed by the public as
they see fit through a public process. The Citizens Advisory Committee is part of that
process. The POM, which I don't think there is a Preserve Owner/Manager really in place
other than the County and the City working together on implementing it, they haven't
commented on what they would want in the active rec areas because they are supposed to
work with the Citizens Advisory Committee to figure out what the community wants. I just
think it's a bad precedence here to allow the conversion to the use when the project
proponents' own documents state that no conversion of use within the preserve is allowed.
Only existing agricultural operations can continue. Well, by allowing camping on the
preserve, that's a conversion contrary to their own documents. And the little skinny strip of
preserve land that is right in here should also be avoided. If you want to do the track, just
stay outside the preserve. I really think there should be a legal opinion. I think the City
Attorney should make an opinion on whether or not preserve lands should be donated into
the preserve before their uses are converted.
Commission Comments
Commissioner Gilgun was disappointed because the RCC dealt with this issue last year and
were reassured that this wouldn't come up again. She was yery concerned about the
precedent that this is setting. She was very concerned about it running through the preserve
areas, which are not designed for uses like this. She had every reason to believe that the
RCC will be looking at another Conditional Use Permit or a permanent permit at some point
in the future, and that really concerns her.
Commissioner Macias asked the following questions:
. Why was the track chosen to be so close to the preserve area? Why not over more
to where the actual quarry is?
DRAFT
DRAFT
RCC Minutes
- 7 -
Mav 7, 2007
. What are the owners' plans after the races?
. What are they actually going to do with the land?
. Is there any plan in the near future for that land?
. How is the City going to benefit?
. In 2006, how much revenue did the City receive from the previous race?
Vice-Chair Jasek stated that it's very commendable everything that is being done to
minimize the impacts, but the impact is still there. We are playing with a resource that for the
longest time didn't get any recognition whatsoever. Now that it is, we are not fulfilling the
promises that we have made for that area. He listened to the comments on the noise study,
and didn't think the numbers actively reflect the noise levels that a person would suffer
walking down Auto Park Way or sitting in the parking lot at Coors Amphitheatre. He thought
that the manipulation of information makes things a little bit suspect. He also thought the
speed at which this has been pushed through makes things a little bit suspect. He felt that a
private property owner should be able to do, within reason, anything he wants to do to his
property provided that it doesn't have a negative impact on the surrounding community. This
has a negative impact on the surrounding community.
Commissioner Davis was concerned with the camping area being so close to the preserve.
He really don't see a value of doing it.
Commissioner Stillman stated that, with the multiple species area, there is an issue of
unauthorized use of that terrain. She is not against the CORR racing project at all. It is no
secret that the Baldwins are committed to this type of event, and would like to make it
permanent. They would have liked to of brought it forward as a permanent plan for that site.
Over the last couple years she has become concerned that these studies of impacts: noise,
air quality, etc. There are so many ways of doing it that the science is not exact. So, she
was not concerned that an impact may have been mitigated to a threshold below a certain
level because not only didn't she trust the threshold, she didn't think it's the point here. This
preserve is like a green necklace around an urban center. It represents our link and the
animals' link with a very important aspect of our past, present, and it should be part of our
future. This is not the right spot for this. If it was truly going to be temporary, one might
consider the issue of the parking, but we know that a permanent request is coming. We
need to go forward with this effort to preserve the wildlife and the fauna. We can come to a
decision as a community about how that preserve can be used by us. Being as natural as
possible is where she felt she had to be committed. The CORR racing is simply going in the
wrong direction when we have come so far back. If we are going to have a multiple species
preserve, we have an obligation to keep going forward.
Chair Reid noted the following:
. In the Negative Declaration on page 7, Discretionary Actions, second bullet.
"Amendment to Chula Vista Municipal Code, Chapter 5.44.101, for allowance of
vehicles with internal combustion engines." This amendment will be required in order
to implement the proposed project.
DRAFT
DRAFT
Ree Minutes
- 8 -
Mav 7, 2007
. On page 17, 5th paragraph, "There is an existing earthen berm along the southern
edge..." Could you explain that in a little more detail?
. Page 20, cultural and paleontological resources are identified. There has only been a
cultural resource study done. Nothing has been done on paleontological. To identify
paleontological on page 20 and again on page 4 of the checklist is not correct. The
impact to paleontological to less than significant is not true because there are no
impacts.
Staff, consultants and the applicant responded to the Commissioners questions and
concerns.
Staff will make noted corrections to the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
MSC (Stillman/Gilgun) that the Mitigated Negative Declaration be found insufficient.
Vote: (4-2-0-0) with Reid and Jasek opposed and Mosolgo recused.
Commissioner Stillman felt that the mitigation studies are not sufficient for me to make a
decision about the real impacts. Ms Acerro made a point about where the noise monitors
are being made. She didn't think the mitigation to a threshold is the point. She thought we
needed to eliminate negative impacts in a preservation area. We should be going forward
and eliminating impacts in this very special urban greenbelt.
Commissioner Gilgun did not think that the mitigations are adequate especially about the
noise threshold because of where the measure was taken and the ambient noise. To use
that as a guide is a deficiency. The thresholds may be fine for an urban area.
Commissioner Macias thought the noise estimation is not accurate. Monitoring from the top
of the quarry is not the actual area where the race is going to be. They are just too close to
the preserve. He loves development. He is business minded. But something like this, they
should keep the area the way it is now.
Commissioner Davis stated that the preserve is an issue for him. We need to find something
in a different way than they propose today. You only get one chance to cut a diamond, and
he is for keeping it the way it was and the way it is.
Vice-Chair Jasek stated that this is something that he personally does not believe in, but our
job is not to bring our personal emotions to the table. Our job is to determine whether the
City has done their job. The City has done their job in looking into and mitigating the
problems that are going to be created with this. It's hard to look at that area and isolate one
specific event and say that that one specific event is going to have a detrimental effect on
the preserve. This alone is not a detriment to the preserve.
Commissioner Mosolgo returned to the meeting.
DRAFT
DRAFT
RCC Minutes
- 9-
Mav 7, 2007
ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS MANAGER COMMENTS
Ms. Lundstedt reported the following:
. The Commission was emailed the website link to the "Assessment of Civic Engagement
in Chula Vista". It is going to the City Council for consideration on May 15th
. On May 16th, the Planning Commission is going to have a workshop. It will be on
processing procedures the City undertakes including overviews of the Brown Act,
charter, noticing, legal requirements, and the CEQA process. Planning staff is going to
give the presentation.
. The Boards and Commissions recognition event (this is not the Beautification Awards) is
going to be Monday, June 18th, at 6:00 p.m. in the Montevalle Recreation Center.
Invitations will formally go out the last week of May.
CHAIR COMMENTS: Chair Reid wanted to remind everyone of the June 6th combined meeting
with the City Council, Planning Commission, Design Review Committee, RAC, GMOC, etc.
regarding the infrastructure presentation.
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS
Commissioner Gilgun handed out a brochure entitled "Working Today For a Walkable
Tomorrow" from Walk San Diego.
Commissioner Gilgun stated that she and Commissioner Mosolgo went to a briefing by City staff
regarding redevelopment planning.
4. Redevelopment Advisory Committee (RAC) Update
Commissioner Gilgun reported that the two main projects were the KOA campground
redevelopment and the Bay Vista residential development off of Palomar. The majority of
the meeting was public comment on the Riverwalk (aka KOA) planned community. She
highly encouraged the Commissioners to read as much information as they can about that
project because she is their representative on the RAC and would appreciate any input that
the RCC has. What was interesting is that it seemed to be one of the first RAC meetings that
really did what it was supposed to do as far as giving the public a forum. Riverwalk is a
project that RCC needs to look real closely at, just like the off-road racing. At issue is taking
an area that has been zoned as open space in the General Plan Update for most of the
property and putting in high-density residential near a residential area. One of the key issues
is that the only entrance into the project would be off of Second Avenue.
ADJOURNMENT: Chair Reid adjourned the meeting at 7:00 p.m. to a regular meeting on
Monday, May 21, 2007, at 4:30 p.m. in the Ken Lee Building Conference Room, 430 "F" Street,
Chula Vista, CA 91910.
Prepared by:
DRAFT
Ree Minutes
Linda Bond
Recording Secretary
(J :IPlanningIRCC\2006IRCC050707Mins)
DRAFT
- 10 -
Mav 7.2007
DRAFT
ACTION AGENDA
Resource Conservation Commission
Chula Vista, California
Monday, May 7, 2007
4:31 p.m.
Ken Lee Building Conference Room
430 'F' Street
CALL MEETING TO ORDER
ROLL CALL/MOTION TO EXCUSE: Chair Douglas Reid e, Vice-Chair Stanley Jasek e,
Commissioners Georgie Stillman e, Eric Mosolgo e, Lynda Gilgun e, Brett Davis e and Richie
Macias, Jr. e
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: April 16, 2007
Approved (7-0)
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None.
INFORMATION ITEM
1. Drainage Training
No Action Required.
NEW BUSINESS
2. IS-06-020 --- Napa Place, 445 First Avenue
Approved (7-0)
3. IS-07-030 --- Conditional Use Permit for Temporary Championship Off-Road Race 2007;
east of the existing terminus of Main Street, east of Heritage Road
MSC (Stillman/Gilgun) that the Mitigated Negative Declaration be found insufficient.
Vote: (4-2-0-0) with Reid and Jasek opposed and Mosolgo recused.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS MANAGER COMMENTS
CHAIR COMMENTS
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS
ADJOURNMENT: At 7:00 p.m. to a regular meeting on Monday, May 21, 2007, at 4:30 p.m. in
the Ken Lee Building Conference Room, 430 'F' Street, Chula Vista, CA 91910
The Otay River Valley _ A Regional Park Reality
Date: May 7, 2007
From: Jim Lovewell, Vice-Chair, Otay Valley Regional Park Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC)
Championship Off-Road Race (CORR) 2007 Race Season Subcommittee (Subcommittee)
To: John Willett, Chair, Otay Valley Regional Park Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC)
Subject: Recommendations to CAC from Subcommittee
As you know, the CAC first became aware ofCORR's 2007 Race Season proposal upon receipt ofa letter
from the City ofChula Vista's Planning Director's memorandum dated April 19, 2007. This memorandum
outlined CORR's proposed activities and the City's Conditional Use Permit (CUP) process. Because of the
quick turnaround necessary for City's review/approvals ofCORR's proposal, you convened a special CAC
meeting on April 25, to discuss the proposal and the CUP process. The CAC subsequently met at the
regularly scheduled meeting on April 26. It was decided at this meeting that more time was needed for the
CAC to review all documents related to CORR's proposal, particularly the draft Mitigated Negative
Declaration. Expecting this need for more review, you had previously appointed a CAC Subcommittee to
study the issues and bring back recommendations to the CAC for a possible vote at the next meeting, which is
to occur on May 18. This Subcommittee met on May 4. The following represents the Subcommittee
recommendations to the CAC:
A fter much discussion and at times serious debate an10ng the members of the Otay Valley Regional Park
Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC), the CAC Champion off-Road Races (CORR) Subcommittee, voted on
May 4,2007, to recommend to the CAC (at a meeting to be held on May 18,2007) approval for a
Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for the temporary Championship Off-Road Races (CORR) 2007 Race Season
(June 8-10 and September 29-30, 2007) to be held in the Rock Mountain Quarry area on privately owned land
in the Otay River Valley (Valley) with the following comments:
I. The applicant should rigorously adhere to all conditions set forth in the final version of the Mitigated
Negative Declaration (MND). (The CAC subcommittee was able to review the draft MND dated April 21,
2007)
2. The applicant should provide at its' sole expense impartial monitors that will measure and document the
baseline conditions and the actual sound, air and water impacts to the Valley by all aspects of the 2007 Race
Season. Further, sound monitoring should also take place at the nearest edge of the property line of private
residences south and southwest of the race area.
3. The CAC's "CORR" Subcommittee approval is not to be considered as an endorsement of any future
proposal by CORR, whether temporary or permanent.
Respectfully,
Jim Joueweft
Copy to:
OVRP CAC "CORR" Sub-Committee Members
Resource Conservation Commission Meeting Members, May 7,2007
Chula Vista Planning Department, Jim Sandoval, Ed Batchelder, Rick Rosier, Frank Herrera-A
San Diego County Park's Department, Chuck Tucker
..
The OT A Y RIvER VALLEY
A Regional ParJ..< Reality
Y"-:-
.
Date: May 7, 2007
From: Jim Lovewell, Vice-Chair,
OVRP CAC Championship Off-Road Race, Sub-Committee
To: John Willett, ChaIT
Otay Valley Regional Park (OVRP) Citizens Advisory Committee (CAe)
Subject: Mitigated Negative Declaration, "Conditional Use Permit for Temporary Championship
Off-Road Races 200T'
After much discussion and at times serious debate among the members of the Otay Valley
Regional Park Citizens Advisory Committee (CAe), the CAC Champion off-Road Races (COOR)
subcommittee, appointed by the CAC Chair, on April 24, 2007, after receipt of a letter from the City
ofChula Vista's Planning Director's memorandum dated April 19, 2007 voted on May 4, 2007, to
recommend to the CAC (at a meeting to be held on May 18,2807) approval for a Conditional Use
Permit (CUP) for the temporary Championship Off-Road Races (COOR) 2007 race season (June 8-10
and September 29-30, 2007) to be held in the Rock Mountain Quarry area on privately owned land in
the Otay River Valley (Valley) with the following comments:
I. The applicant should rigorously adhere to all conditions set forth in the fInal version of
the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND). (the CAC subcommittee was able to review the
draft MND dated April 21, 2007)
2. The applicant should provide at its' sole expense impartial monitors that will measure and
document the baseline conditions and the actual sound, air and water impacts to the Otay River
Valley by all aspects of the Races. Further, sound monitoring should also take place at the edge
of the property line of private residences south and south west of the races area.
3. The CAC's "COOR" subcommittee approval is not to be considered as an endorsement of.
any future proposal by COOR, whether temporary or permanent.
Respectfully,
Jiln ..i!OUEWELL
Copy to OVRP CAC "COOR" Sub-Committee Members
Resource Conservation Commission Members
Chula Vista Planning Department, Jim Sandoval, Ed Batchelder, Rick Rosier, Frank
Herrera-A
San Diego County Park's Department, Chuck Tucker
OT A Y VALLEY RIVER I' ARK
"SPECIAL SUBCOMMITTEE CAC I\mETING"
"Meeting Notes"
b. Karen requested that they have no camping. Karen is concerned about the shuttle trips.
Karen requested that they move the camping site to another location.
c. Karen is concerned about the noise [or the gnatcatchers. She mentioncd that the males
build the nests and start the process.
d. Reference is made to the attached list (attachment).
3. Wayne Dickey
a. I appose to the June time frame and am ok with a time frame outside o[ the nesting
between April and June.
b. Wayne identified that one life cycle is concerned about the
4. Don - Jim Baldwin owns the company I work for. It was requested that this temporary event
be supported. Jim Baldwin has promised to bring designers to the table when developing.
5. Dr. McCoy
a. The program is not consistent with the OVRP and the Management Plan.
b. This creates an impacts that goes against the Fish and Wildlife's protection of species.
c. March 15 to Sept 15 is required by Fish and Wildlife as a law and should not be
allowed
d. Direct and indirect impacts need to be taken into consideration.
e. The Watershed Management Plan took about 2-years with many jurisdiction signing off
on it. It was identified that the intent of the OVRP would be maintained. The Resource
Management Plan and the SAMP should all be compliant with the Watershed
Management Plan. If so, the plan will preclude this rrom happening.
f. The above need to be considered before this item proceeds forward.
6. Two people are not here that are part of the subcommittee.
a. Frank 0 (see attached) - Jim summarized as follows:
i. No.3 ~ The rock crushing plan is a cover up for future development of a
permanent facility.
b. Mike Behan (see attached) - Jim sununarized the following:
1. Mike supports this item to proceed forward.
11. Recommends the following:
1. Dust noise
2. Noise
3. Water
4. Test should be done during the event by a neutral 3cd party.
The recommendation is as follows without knowing the Resource Agency's position or findings:
. Land owns the land
. This proposed plan is an entity that someone will be dealing with liS for many more
years.
. MND actual impacts are not identified.
. Impacts should be measured (Noise monitoring, water sampling, dust control...)
. Use this as an experiment for the future proposal.
3 of 4
OTAY VALLEY RIVER I'ARK
"SPECIAL SUBCOMMITTEE CAC MEETING"
"Meeting Notes"
Dr. McCoy docs not support the Chairs recommendation becausc it does not go with the OVRP plan.
No motOlizcd vehicles are intcndcd to be part of this park. This park is to be sercnity not a place for
loud noiscs and piece. It is meant for animals to mib'Tatc.
Karen stated that she supports Mike with the idea that there are no trails in this area today. She does
not support the time of this event and does not suggest a permanent.
Frank read the concept plan and identified that this is private land and that we do not have the right to
prevent a private owner from developing a project on his land. The public process will determine
what this owner can do with this land.
Robin mentioned that this proposed proiect is located within the proposed b011ndaries of the OVRP
and the CAC is an advisory bodv for the park and can comment on proposed proiects based on what is
written in the approved OVRP Concept Plan.
A motion is called to support this temporary event with environmental monitoring:
. 5 in favor
. 2 opposcd.
This will be recommended to the CAe.
40f4
REGIONAL PARK
May 3. 2007
Dear Sir/Madam:
CHAMPIONSHIP OFF-ROAD RACING PROJECT COMMENTS
On April 26, 2007 the Otay Valley Regional Park Policy Committee/Citizens
Advisory Committee held its quarterly meeting at the Chula Vista Public Works
Building. At this meeting a presentation was given by the City of Chula Vista
staff and the project applicant on CORR Off-Road Racing about a conditional use
permit for two events.
During the meeting the Policy Committee took action to forward the comments
made verbally at the meeting by the Policy Committee, Citizens Advisory
Committee and the Public in reference to the CORR application to the Resource
Conservation Committee, Planning Commission and Chula Vista City Council for
consideration.
Attached are a summary of the comments.
~S:~-1l~
SABRINA HICKS ( 7 .
Administrative Secretary
County of San Diego, Department of Parks and Recreation
Attachment
cc: Supervisor Cox, District 1
Councilman Hueso, City of San Diego
Councilman McCann, City of Chula Vista
Citizens Advisory Committee Members
(JfA\'~
~
~
REGIONAL PARK.
OTAY VALLEY REGIONAL PARK
JOINT POLICY-CITIZENS ADVISORY
COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES
April 26, 2007
2:00 P.M.
3. Championship Off-Road Racing (CaRR) Proposal _
· John Willett, CAC Chair - I have fonnulated a subcommittee to evaluate this
issue, the chair of this subcommittee is Frank Ohrmund. I've asked Frank to
summarize the input at yesterday's CAC meeting on this proposal.
· Frank Ohrmund, CAC Vice Chair - I have worked on quarries before and I
understand that with this specific quarry there is not a major use permit because
the quarry was grandfathered in. It seems to me that we are skipping a few
steps in trying to use this active quarry and put a motorcycle track in. I think that
there needs to be a reclamation plan for this area. I think that we need to have
fair play and if this quarry is to be a benefit to the community it should be
perfonning to a level that would provide net benefits the community. The Otay
Ranch General Development Plan talks about general permitted uses for the
area, and we are supposed to have an 11,325 acre preselVe and 400 acres for
active recreation, but nowhere does it talk about a private owner being able to
have an active recreation site. It is my understanding that the active recreation
areas were to be operated by the Otay Ranch Preserve Owner Manager (POM),
and that the POM is supposed to comment on uses in the preselVe. How can
the CAC make evaluations if the Preserve Owner Manager is not functioning
properly? There will be activity within the OVRP as part of the race track site and
the camping area would be completely in the OVRP in an active recreation site. I
think that there needs to be a lot more study on this type of use before a site is
selected. Do we really want to let this set the standard for the future? I would
like to take a straw vote as to who in the CAG supports this project as is? We
should take time to look at other locations, and consider moving the camping
area to where the parking is. I'm not necessarily against the use in concept, but
it needs to be brought back in a larger discussion where the CAC has adequate
time. (Note only 1 of 19 CAC members present raised their hand)
OVRP PC Meeting Minutes
Page 2
April 26, 2007
· Jim Lovewell, CAC Member - I was unable to attend yesterdays meeting, which
is unfortunate, but I do think that this activity does deserve to have a site for this
event. I think that we need additional information to be able to make an informed
decision about this. This request for a temporary use could act as an
experiment. I would like to know what comments the wildlife agencies have
made on this. I just think that at this time we are not able to make a
recommendation as there are just not enough facts to make a decision one way
or the other about this project.
· Jack Bransford, CAC Member - I share some of Jim's comments. I feel that I
would vote for it currently as a temporary activity based on the presentations that
staff have made that the appropriate considerations have been made. I do
believe that we should've had more time to go over the details of this and I think
it is a good example of how we don't want projects to come forward in the future.
· Ellen Rawolle, CAC Member - I think that I would vote no at this point because
we don't know enough and I don't want to have something permanent like this to
end up in the OVRP.
· Ruth Schneider, CAC Member - As you know Bob Filner, Pat McCoy and I got
together and decided that this area needed to be preserved and we have worked
and continued to pursue this park for all the people's benefit. If we wanted
something that was for race tracks, camivals and beer can stadiums, we wouldn't
have continued our efforts to have a park in the OVRP. Coors has not been an
example of a good neighbor. I will protest this to the end and go to Jerry Brown if
I have to. This is the beginning of a set-up that they want to have year after year
and it will not be just limited to these two weekends and it will become year
round. We are a committee that is supposed to review and recommend because
it is our area and we are concerned about the wildlife and habitat in the area. We
have not had enough time to do this. There has also been no consideration for
the residents in the area. I say no, this is something that will take over the area.
I was told that many of these quarries were being closed down and that when
they closed they should be made into something that can benefit the community.
We need to promote park friendly pedestrian type activities and recreation, not
the motor kind. I adamantly say no, this is not the place for this event.
· Sally Bartlett, CAC Member - To be fair to the CORR organizers I decided to
take a survey to help and represent the interests of the citizens of Chula Vista. I
talked to 20 different people and got 8-yes, 11-no, 1-undecided. I think that
many people are just like me and have some questions and issues, and I would
say no at this time Some of the questions are - what will the real impact be,
what's the benefit or not, what can be done to lessen the noise (last time it could
be heard in Del Rey canyon), will the tickets be reasonably priced" and in the
future will there only be races or other uses?
· Mike McCoy, CAC Member - I just wanted to comment that we have to look at
the OVRP plan, Specific Area Management Plan, and watershed plan before we
move forward with any of this. This is right next to the MSCP and if you want to
make a sham of the MSCP and these other plans you would put something like
this in this area. I think that there are better places to have this type of activity,
and this is being shoved down our throats
OVRP PC Meeting Minutes
Page 3
April 26, 2007
· Michael Dedina, Public - We are in a war and when we are using gasoline we
are funding the war making activities of our enemies. This race track will
promote the use of gasoline, therefore indirectly supporting our enemy.
· Georgie Stillman, Public - I am also a member of Chula Vista's Resource
Conservation Commission and I have two questions - how often are the current
easement roads used, the one that will be used to access the camping area as
well as the two shuttle roads from the parking and camping areas to the race
track? How disturbed are these areas today?
· Kevin O'Neill, CAC Member - Recreation means different things to different
people and we are talking about a two race series that would give us the
opportunity to see how this would affect the area. I think that we should work
with them and I think that it is a good idea that would not have long term impacts.
I think that there should be an off-road facility in the county so that we can get
many of the off-roaders out of the preserves. I think that we should move
forward with this.
· Theresa Acerro, Public - comments on the notice for environmental preparation
were due on 4/19 and the draft MND went out on 4/20? That's absurd. I think
that things are being rushed and I have a big concern about why the camping
area is proposed in the MSCP
· Jo Hanlon, Public -I agree that we absolutely need somewhere for off-roading to
keep them out of our preserves and I think it would be wonderful to get a
camping area somewhere for the future. I do think the location is atrocious. I
agree with the comments on the maintenance roads and the usage levels.
· Supervisor Cox - Referencing Frank Ohrmund's comment about the fact that
11,375 acres were allotted for the OVRP and that there was 400 acres allotted
for active recreation- that is now somewhat smaller perhaps 250 acres due to
MSCP refinements. it will be my suggestion that these minutes are forwarded to
Chula Vista's Resource Conservation Commission, Planning Commission and
City Council to assist them with their review. All of the property is currently in
private ownership and as I understand the camping area is currently slated as an
active recreation site In the MSCP. I don't understand why the camping area has
not been suggested near the parking area or at the amphitheater or water park.
I'm also irritated on the short time frame. I do believe that we need a place
where we can have off-road activity or we will continue to have the current
problems that we have.
· Councilman Hueso - I concur and I think that we heard some excellent
comments today and I would like to request to get a copy of the environmental
document J would like to see if it adequately covers the issues. I'm also not
ready to vote on anything.
MOTION TO FORWARD THE COMMENTS MADE BY THE PC, CAC AND
PUBliC IN REFERENCE TO THE CORR APPliCATION AT THIS MEETING
TO THE RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMITTEE, PlANNING
COMMISSION, AND CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL FOR THEIR REVIEW _
Councilman Hueso, 2"" Councilman McCann
ALL IN FAVOR - 3-0-0
OVRP PC Meeting Minutes
Page 4
April 26, 2007
· Councilman McCann - I think that the timing is difficult for everyone and
appreciate all of the comments made today. If anyone would like to talk with me I
can be reached at (619) 691-5044 or jmccann@chula-vista.ca.us
· The conditional use permit process meetings are as follows: The Resource
Conservation Commission on May 21 at 4:30 pm at the Ken Lee Building at the
Chula Vista Civic Center (there is a possibility that the RCC meeting may be
moved up to May 7 to ensure time to make it to the Planning Commission
meeting), Planning Commission May 23 at 6:00 pm at the City Council chambers
and the Chula Vista City Council on June 5 at 4:00 pm also at the City Council
chambers. Chula Vista will contact members to confirm if the RCC date is
moved to May 7.
OT A Y VALLEY RIVER PARK
"SPECIAL SUBCOMMITTEE CAC MEETING"
"Meeting Notes"
Date: Friday April 25, 2007
Attendees:
. See sign in sheet
Copies of Joint Staff Attendees:
. Steve Ron
. Bill Saumier
. Chuck Tucker
. John Barone
. Frank Herrera
. Robin Shifflet
Special Guest:
. Casey Trumbo rrom County of San Diego Resource Development
INTRODUCTION
Jim Lovewell clarified that this meeting is for two agendas the Mace Street, Beyer Way Regional
Staging areas, and CORR Racing subject.
MACE STREET / BEYER WAY REGIONAL STAGING AREAS
. Bill Saumier identified the handouts starting with the location of each staging area then moving
onto the presenting the Order of Magnitude estimate that is provided as a courtesy and not to
be used as a high or low value.
o Beyer Way South Regional Staging Area
. Design, Environmental & Construction = $9.6 million
. 3 to 5-112 years to construct with funding
o Funding Allocated $200,000
o Mace Street
. Design, Environmental & Construction = $1.1 million
. 2 to 3 years to construct with funding
. Jim Lovewell stated the two options: rccommends:
o Provide equestrian parking at Mace Street Staging Area that will give the equestrians a
staging area sooner then Bever Wav and the cost will be less expensive.
o OR Continue with the design of Bever Wav South Regional Staging Area
o Is there anv downside and what do subcommittee members think?
. John Willet identified that the sewer linc under the Mace Strcet that mav be a conflict and
nceds to be considered in thc dcsih'1l.
.~.steve-R{}n ideutified-that-iHs-the-.int_t-tIK-on"tr-Hct trails-before the sta!:iu!: areas.
lof4
OTAY VALLEY RIVER PARK
"SI'ECIAL SUBCOMMITTEE CAC MEETING"
"Meeting Notcs"
. .Jack Bransford - How true are the cost estimates and timeframes for the two locations? What
do the Equestrian Users want?
. ,Jim Lovewell said that he understood [rom Mark Kukuchek that getting cquestrian parking at
Mace Street would be preferrcd at this time because of the cost and time frame for the Regional
Staging Area.
. .Jim Lovewell said the Subcommittee should make a motion and take the motion to the CAC
and then the PC for approval of how to spend the money.
. .Jack Bransford - made a motion to move the $200,000, which was given by Cox for the
Regional Staging Area, to the design and construction of Mace Street Staging Area in order to
providc equestrian parking.
o 7 in favor of the motion.
o 0 obiections
. .Jack Bransford - stated that the Bever Wav South Regional Staging Area should still be built
in the future when there is funding to complete the proiect.
. Robin Shifflet - stated that the equestrian design at Mace Street would need input rrom the
equestrian users and that the amenities should be prioritized in order of preference so that due
to budget the highest prioritv items would be included in the base bid.
PART 2 OF THIS MEETING
Meeting started at 3:10 PM
CHAMPIONSHIP OFF-ROAD RACES CORR RACING
Jim started reminding the group that we represcnt the members of the OVRP when commenting on
this item and asked that we put our personal
. Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration is up for discussion.
o No resource agency comments at this time.
o Reference was made to the James Sandoval letter dated April 19, 2007.
o Jim Baldwin is the owner of the land.
o Grading is already taking place on the site.
o May 20th is the last day of the review period for the Resourcc Agency.
. Page 12 of the MND is in error with the date reading April 21, 2007 instead of April 19,2007
as currently read.
. The Chair of the CAC, John Willet will check with the PC to sce how the Supervisor wants to
handle a reporting of the upcoming CAC position on this issue.
o Conunents from this meeting will need to be forwarded to Harold Phelps to bring
forward to the City o[Chula Vista Planning Commission's meeting.
Items that arc concerns or issues that might intcrface with the OVRP. The open comments were
requested:
I. .Jack is fine with suppo11ing this group
2. Karen is fine with supporting this event with prohibiting pets to the event.
a. Pircworks were identified ancl it was noted that
2 of 4
TO: THE CHULA VISTA RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION, THE
CHULA VISTA PLANNING COMMISSION, THE CHULA VISTA MAYOR
AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: PATRICIA AND MICHAEL MCCOY
RE: IS-07-030 --- Conditional Use Permit for Temporary Championship Off-Road Race
2007; east of the existing terminus of Main Street, east of Heritage Road
Patricia and Mike McCoy have been involved with the Citizens Advisory Committee for
OVRP over the past 19 years. Patricia was appointed in 1988 and served until 1998 then
resigned when she was elected to the Imperial Beach City Council. Mike was appointed
to fill Patricia's seat after her resignation.
In 1978 we started working with the US Fish and Wildlife Service to acquire South San
Diego Bay as a National Wildlife Refuge. The refuge was established in June of 1999.
In 1979 the Southwest Wetlands Interpretive Association (SWIA) was founded and
established as a cooperating association with the California Department of Parks and
Recreation.
SWIA and the California Coastal Conservancy acquired the Egger/Ghio property which
was transferred to the USFWS, the County of San Diego, the City of San Diego and
Swiss Park. Thc property was incorporated into the San Diego Bay National Wildlife
Refuge and thc Otay Valley Regional Park west of Interstate 5.
In addition to serving on the CAC for OVRP Mike served on the advisory committee that
fonnulated the Otay Watershed Management Plan.
It has been our intention to utilize this greenbelt land as a wildlife conidor enabling
species to move freely from the bay area along the riparian lands east to the Otay
Mountains. The park was also established to fulfill the need for passive recreational
opportunities enabling people to get away from the hassle, noise and stress of everyday
life in an urban area. Selectcd active recreational sites are also available for soccer and
basehall fields.
There has never been any consideration given to Off Road Vehicle (ORV) use along this
park corridor. This is inconsistcnt with the park mission and vision, the Multiple Species
Conscrvation Program (MSCP), and the Otay River Watershed Management Plan. Thc
Spccitic Area Managcment Plan (SAMP) has not bcen complcted yct but aetivitics like
ORV usc would not be consistent with the SAMP. The biological, hydrological and
human impacts in addition to disruption o[ soils, noise and lighting create an untenable
situatioll.
W c arc concerned that this event could set a precedent allowing other inconsistent
activities within and adjacent to the OVRP. We are extremely conccrned that OR V
facilities might be incorporated permanently into the park plan.
The proposed event directly impacts MSCP lands. It is interesting to note that if a
biological restoration project is undertaken in or around endangered species habitat it can
take six months or longer to receive the agency permits and complete the studies
necessary to begin the project.
In addition, work could not be undertaken between March 15 and September 15 to
protect against encroachment on nesting birds like the California Gnateatcher or the Least
Bells Vireo. In this case it would denigrate these rulings if such an invasive and
destructive event were allowed to proceed.
We think there are better alternatives. There are designated areas for events like this in
San Diego County like the Ocotillo Wells site. This is an appropriate area for such an
event.
We strongly oppose utilizing the proposed quarry site.
F;ank Ohrmund, 5/3/07 3:59 PM -0700, Re: CORR CAC Subcommittee Meeting Frida
1
From: "Frank Ohrrmmd" <frank@otayrealestate.com>
To: "'John Willett'" <jawillett@cox.net>,
<ebatchelder@ci.chula-vista.ca.us>
Cc: "Jim Lovewell" <jlovewell@earthlink.net>,
"'Dena & Jack'" <denajack@cox.net>
Subject: FE: CORR CAC Subcommittee Meeting Friday, April 6
Date: Thu, 3 May 2007 15:59:10 -0700
Thread- Index: AceNBkrx06Py45dESPul IeEBWzbqgAxCml Q
John/Ed,
Here are a few main points that of serious concern.
1. We have no declaration fram the POM (Preserve Owner/Manager) for Otay
Ranch on what their rec01Tlm2.ndation is for CORR' s proposal, and what its
affect on the Preserve land, they manage, would be. This is for the
unauthorized use of land at the south end of the Quarry that is south of the
Quarry property line and the proposed Camping site. The camping site is
talked about in the Otay Ranch General Plan, Resource Management Plan 1 & 2
as being suitable for "active recreation" within the Preserve. This use
would only be allowed to be converted fram its current use after its
dedication into the Preserve. At that ti..Ire the p(M would oversee, with the
JEPA, what active recreational uses could be developed by the park or a
private enterprise. This can only happen after its dedication to the
Preserve. Until the property is dedicated into the Preserve, language in
otay Ranch's own, self-imposed, planning document states that only existing
farming can continue as a use in the Preserve.
2. The Chula Vista's MSCP calls for the "camping site" as a "planned .Active
Recreation Area - SUbject to RMP Policies and OVRP Planning". This same area
is identified as a "Park Study Area" and that is because Figure 3-3 in the
MSCP has determined that there is Tier I, II and III habitat to be impacted
by development. Driving and clearing this land hap-hazardly most likely
increase non-native plants in this area without a better plan. This would
only matter if they scmehOW" can support skipping #1 above.
3. The owner's of the Property have not shown that what they are planning
is a net benefit to the community.
They have essentially stopped quarry operations, which has increase
material costs in the South Bay by 10-15t. Material for concretel road
base, and asphalt now needs to be trucked fram north Lakeside. By closing
the Quarry or operating it at a small fraction of its capacity is costing
the community millions in trucking costs.
The use would only be for a handful of millionaire racers and their
sponsors. The public will not be able to use the facility. No local racera
came to support this use at the public meetings. This is a playground for
millionaires period. No contribution to the park has been offered.
4. This CUP is just a placemat that would allow them to process the "real"
project later. Which now have achnitted that they will soon do. Why let
them do this with little review, when all the planning docum=nts call for
more study and involvement with the POM and O\TRP JEPA. The owner's of the
Property, CORR and Otay Ranch Corrpany have plenty of land available for this
facility and/or can hold the races at one of their other tracks this year.
Their land in otay Ranch has held this race before and I am sure they can do
it again. This land is farmland away from the Preserve and it would be a
better option to give them premission to grade this area while we process
any application for a permanent use at the Quarry Property. This way all
those responsible can properly review and corrment on their project. This
project should be completely outside the Preserve.
5. No changes to a quarry operation can be made without modifying the Major
Use Permit and/or completing the Reclamation Plan. Since there is no Major
Use Permit, and we are changing the use, the City should now require the
quarry to be permitted under a use permit. Or they can close the quarry,
Printed for John \rVHlett <jawiUett@coXaiiet>
.
1
Frank Ohrmund, 5/3/07 3:59 PM -0700, Re: CORR CAC Subcommittee Meeting Frida
2
complete the Reclamation plan work and then process their Conditional Use
Permit. At the very least, they need to deal with the Reclamation Plan
before changing or modifying the use. City Staff stated that the
Reclamation plan allows for dirt to be moved and that is their justification
for allowing them to If()ve it into the condition of a racing track. This is
just bad logic and can't be defended by any sane person. The State Office
of Mine Reclamation will have something to say about that reasoning.
Enough said,
Frank Ohrrmmd
Broker/Owner
Otay Real Estate
2433 Fenton Street, Suite A
Chula Vista, CA 91914
619-397-5300 voice
619-397-5370 fax
-----Original Message-----
Fram: John Willett fmailto:iawillett@cax.net]
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 3:20 PM
To: michele x
Cc: Jim Lovewell; Dena & Jack; Frank Ohrmund
Subject: Re: CORR CAC Subcommittee Meeting Friday, April 6
Michele
Thanks for the effort you put into the drafting of your carrnents, as
they are along my lines of thoughts also. To date the City of Chula
Vista has not received various agencies written response's. If I do
receive copies of the agencies comments I will forward copy to you
and Jim.
Related subject, the COOR's suject will be an action item at regular
CAC Meeting on May 18th at 2:00 p.rn.Chuck Tucker, Counties OVRP Staff
called me
about an hour ago and wanted my recamendation, I said yes make it an
action item as we had it as an information at the last CAC Meeting
before the PC and then an "information formation at the PC meeting so
the requirements have been met already and will discuss the same this
Friday.
Have a good vacation
John W...
No virus found in this inccming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.467 / virus Database: 269.6.2/784 - Release Date: 5/1/20072:57
PM
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.6.2/787 - Release Date: 5/3/2007 2:11
PM
Printed for John Willett <jawillett@cox.net>
2
Page 1 of2
Harold Phelps
From: Harold Phelps
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2007 9: 11 AM
To: Harold Phelps
Subject: Comments from Frank Ohrmund on CaRR CUP
Importance: High
-----Original Message-----
From: Frank Ohrmund [mailto:frank@otayrealestate.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2007 10:09 AM
To: Marisa Lundstedt; Glen Laube
Subject: FW: Resource Conserv. Commission meeting last night.
Marisa/Glen,
My modified comments are below.
o
Frank Ohrmund
Broker/Owner
Otay Real Estate
2433 Fenton Street, Suite A
Chula Vista, CA 91914
619-397 -5300 voice
619-397 -5370 fax
858-945-4974 cell
From: Frank Ohrmund [mailto:frank@otayrealestate.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2007 9:31 AM
To: 'Marisa Lundstedt'
Subject: FW: Resource Conserv. Commission meeting last night.
Marisa,
Your request to identify deficient items in the environmental document supporting a Mitigated Negative Declaration
should include the following. Please pass this on as my objections to the environmental document.
1. Glen explained the true extent of the study and its relevance for a temporary use.
2. After quick archeological review, the camping site was now reduced to half its size. If this is enough land, still,
then why was the entire area desired in the first place. Based on typical processes for consultants to complete
their work, this process for them and staff and the public to review each environmental issue is not adequate.
Consultant's work must have been rushed and appears to be incomplete when compared to typical reports for
similar projects. Not enough mention of alternatives have been made. The campground should have been
moved to the parking area and should have been studied as an alternative. With such a quick review and study
by the consultants, with current modification still being made, this environmental document supporting the
mitigated negative declaration was completed in haste and more time should be allowed for alternatives to be
developed.
3. No typical delays are being made for breeding season. The, truly, higher noise than quarry operations is an un-
mitigated impact whether or not its breeding season.
4. No plan has been made to limit the non-native plants from dorninating the camping site area after the current
grasses are trampled down to a bare dirt lot. These non-native plants will re-establish themselves quicker than
native plants and will then disperse their seeds. A plan to spray or weed these plants needs to be completed for
05/15/2007
Page 2 of2
next winter's growing season.
The following are comments on the project as a whole that question staffs authority to support this project based on
planning documents approved by the developer. I think a legal opinion needs to be made on the conversion of any use
within the Preserve prior to dedication to the Preserve Owner/Manger or City of Chula Vista.
1. We have no declaration from the POM (Preserve Owner/Manager) for Otay Ranch on what their recommendation is
for CORR's proposal, and what its affect on the Preserve land, they manage, would be. This is for the unauthorized
use of land at the south end of the Quarry that is south of the Quarry property line (in the MSCP) and the proposed
Camping site. The camping site is talked about in the Otay Ranch General Plan, Resource Management Plan 1 &2 as
being suitable for "active recreation" within the Preserve. This use would only be allowed to be converted from its
current use after its dedication into the Preserve. At that time, the POM would oversee, with the JEPA, what active
recreational uses could be developed by the park or a private enterprise. This can only happen after its dedication to
the Preserve. Until the property is dedicated into the Preserve, language in Otay Ranch's own, self-imposed, planning
document states that only existing farming can continue as a use in the Preserve. We need a legal opinion to
dQteIII11neif the Otay Rancl1PlannJog ctOCUI11Qots preclygetl1is_ change in use prior to its dQdication to the City
Preserve,
2. The Chula Vista's MSCP calls for the "camping site" as a "Planned Active Recreation Area - Subject to RMP
Policies and OVRP Planning". This same area is identified as a "Park Study Area" and that is because Figure 3-3 in the
MSCP has determined that there is Tier I, II and III habitat to be impacted by development. Driving on and clearing this
land hap-hazardly will most likely increase non-native plants in this area without a better plan. This would only matter if
they somehow can support skipping #1 above.
3. The owner's of the Property have not shown that what they are planning is a net benefit to the community. They
have essentially stopped quarry operations, which has increase material costs in the South Bay by 10-15%. Material
for concrete, road base, and asphalt now needs to be trucked from north Lakeside. By closing the Quarry or operating
it at a small fraction of its capacity is costing the community millions in trucking costs. The use would only be for a
handful of millionaire racers and their sponsors. The public will not be able to use the facility. No local racers came to
support this use at the public meetings. This is a playground for the elite period. No contribution to the park has been
offered. No net benefit has been supported.
>
> 4. This CUP is just a placemat that would allow them to process the "real" project later. Which now have admitted
that they will soon do. Why let them do this with little review, when all the planning documents call for more study and
involvement with the POM and OVRP JEPA. The owner's of the Property, CORR and Otay Ranch Company have
plenty of land available for this facility and/or can hold the races at one of their other tracks this year. Their land in Otay
Ranch has held this race before and I am sure they can do it again. This land is farmland away from the Preserve and
it would be a better option to give them permission to grade this area while we process any application for a permanent
use at the Quarry Property. This way all those responsible can properly review and comment on their project. This
project should be completely outside the Preserve.
5. No changes to a quarry operation can be made without modifying the Major Use Permit and/or completing the
Reclamation Plan. Since there is no Major Use Permit, and we are changing the use, the City should now require the
quarry to be permitted under a use permit. Or they can close the quarry, complete the Reclamation Plan work and then
process their Conditional Use Permit. At the very least, they need to deal with the Reclamation Plan before changing or
modifying the use. City Staff stated that the Reclamation Plan allows for dirt to be moved and that is their justification
for allowing them to move it into the form of a racing track. This is just bad logic and can't be defended by any sane
person. This project needed a grading permit. The State Office of Mine Reclamation will have something to say about
that reasoning.
Respectfully submitted,
Frank Ohrmund, Secretary
Friends of Otay Valley Regional Park
05/15/2007
FW: RE: CORR CAC Subcommittee Meeting Friday, April 6
Page I of2
Harold Phelps
From:
Sent:
To:
Harold Phelps
Tuesday, May 15, 2007 2:51 PM
Glen Laube
Cc: Rick Rosaler
Subject: FW: RE: CORR CAC Subcommittee Meeting Friday, April 6
FYI
-----Original Message-----
From: Office Of McCann On Behalf Of John McCann
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2007 2:27 PM
To: Harold Phelps
Cc: Rick Rosaler
Subject: FW: RE: CORR CAC Subcommittee Meeting Friday, April 6
Hello Harold
I was informed that you are the person receiving all the CORR's comments, which is why I am emailing them to you.
Thank you
Zaira Roa
From: Frank Ohrmund [mailto:frank@otayrealestate.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2007 10:42 AM
To: John McCann
Subject: FW: RE: CORR CAC Subcommittee Meeting Friday, April 6
>
>
> John,
>
Here are a few main points that of serious concern.
I. We have no declaration from the POM (Preserve Owner/Manager) for Otay
Ranch on what their recommendation is for CORR's proposal, and what its
affect on the Preserve land, they manage, would be. This is for the
unauthorized use ofland at the south end of the Quarry that is south of
the Quarry property line and the proposed Camping site. The camping site is
talked about in the Otay Ranch General Plan, Resource Management Plan I &2 as being suitable for "active recreation" within the
Preserve. This use
would only be allowed to be converted from its current use after its
dedication into the Preserve. At that time the POM would oversee, with
the JEPA, what active recreational uses could be developed by the park or a
private enterprise. This can only happen after its dedication to the
Preserve. Until the property is dedicated into the Preserve, language in
Gtay Ranch's own, self-imposed, planning document states that only
existing fanning can continue as a use in the Preserve. We need a legal opinion to determine if the Gtay Ranch Planning documents
preclude this change in use prior to
05/16/2007
FW: RE: CORR CAC Subcommittee Meeting Friday, April 6
Page 2 of2
2. The Chula Vista's MSCP calls for the "camping site" as a "Planned
Active Recreation Area - Subject to RMP Policies and OVRP Planning". This same area is identified as a "Park Study Area" and that
is because Figure 3-3 in the MSCP has determined that there is Tier!, II and III habitat to be
impacted by development. Driving on and clearing this land hap-hazardly will most likely increase non-native plants in this area
without a better plan. This would only matter if they somehow can support skipping #1 above.
3. The owner's of the Property have not shown that what they are planning
is a net benefit to the community. They have essentially stopped quarry operations, which has increase material costs in the South
Bay by 10-15%. Material for concrete, road base, and asphalt now needs to be trucked from north Lakeside. By closing the Quarry or
operating it at a small fraction of its capacity is costing the community millions in trucking costs.
The use would only be for a handful of millionaire racers and their
sponsors. The public will not be able to use the facility. No local
racers came to support this use at the public meetings. This is a playground for millionaires period. No contribution to the park has
been offered.
>
> 4. This CUP is just a placemat that would allow them to process the
"real" project later. Which now have admitted that they will soon do. Why let them do this with little review, when all the planning
documents call for more study and involvement with the POM and OVRP JEPA. The owner's of the Property, CORR and Otay Ranch
Company have plenty of land available for
this facility and/or can hold the races at one of their other tracks this year. Their land in Otay Ranch has held this race before and I am
sure they can do it again. This land is farmland away from the Preserve and it would be a better option to give them premiss ion to
grade this area while we process any application for a permanent use at the Quarry Property. This way all those responsible can
properly review and comment on their project. This project should be completely outside the Preserve.
5. No changes to a quarry operation can be made without modifying the
Major Use Penn it and/or completing the Reclamation Plan. Since there is no
Major Use Penn it, and we are changing the use, the City should now require the quarry to be permitted under a use penn it. Or they
can close the quarry, complete the Reclamation Plan work and then process their Conditional Use Permit. At the very least, they need
to deal with the Reclamation Plan before changing or modifying the use. City Staff stated that the Reclamation Plan allows for dirt to
be moved and that is their
justification for allowing them to move it into the fon11 of a racing track. This is just bad logic and can't be defended by any sane
person. This project needed a grading pennit. The State Office of Mine Reclamation will have something to say about that reasoning.
Respectfully subm itted,
Frank Ohnnund
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by A VG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.467/ Virus Database: 269.6.5/793 - Release Date: 5/7/2007 2:55 PM
05116/2007
Karen Smith - comments & Questions on CORR MND. 5-4-07
150 campsites
about 7400 parking spaces
expecting 10K people per day
All will be shuttled from parking or camp to race area,
how many shuttle trips?
what fuel do shuttles use?
what kind of shuttle vehicles?
All traffic limited to 15 mph, Even shuttle?
p, 7 states that there was a previous unauthorized disturbance of the preserve
area by the quarry operator and implies that therefore it is OK to use this
disturbed preserve land for the race. Reclamation plan says restoration will
occur in 25 years!
MND keeps says that all of this is temporary. Will their next MND then say we
did it before so therefore it is OK?
p, 20 suggests that gnatcatchers have become accustomed to noise because of
quarry ops, However, I don't hear the quarry from my house and I know I will
hear the race, MND says noise for two days during nesting season. But what
about practice days?
prohibit pets
can we ask that they prohibit the camp or move it to parking area?
Why ask for fireworks when all activity is scheduled to end by 7 PM and it is not
dark then?
Off-road riding and racing is very popular in San Diego, The area needs
facilities for the legal pursuit of these activities. What about using an existing
facility such as Qualcomm Stadium? I once saw off-road motorcycles race at
Anaheim Stadium, where huge amounts of dirt were trucked in and an entire
course built and then taken down.
Page 1 of3
Harold Phelps
From: Harold Phelps
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 20072:50 PM
To: Glen Laube
Cc: Rick Rosaler
Subject: FW: Comments on EIR for CORR Event form Mike Behan
FYI
-----Original Message-----
From: Office Of McCann On Behalf Of John McCann
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2007 2:24 PM
To: Harold Phelps
Cc: Rick Rosaler
Subject: FW: Comments on ErR for CORR Event form Mike Behan
From: michele x [mailto:mibmjb@yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 08,200712:18 PM
To: John McCann
Subject: Comments on ErR for CORR Event form Mike Behan
Date: Mon, 7 May 200712:41:29 -0700 (PDT)
From: mibmjb@yahoo.eom>
Subject: Comments on EIR for CORR Event form Mike Behan
To: jmecann@chulavistaea.gov
Chula Vista Council Member John McCann:
Please find attached to this e-mail my comments to the EIR for the Championship Off-
road Racing event as I presented them to the OVRP, CAC via e-mail May 1,2007.
They do not necessarily represent wbat the Citizen Advisory Committee for
OYRP is phm!ling to recommend. They are my personal observations after carefully
studying the Mitigated Negative Declaration. As your representative to the CAC I
wanted you to be aware of what I had sent to them.
I'd be please to discuss this with you further should you have any questions.
Mike Behan
NOTE: The following is the original string of e-mails starting with my e-mail to
those tasked with studying the Mitigated Negative Declaration. The attached
WORD Doc contains my response to the document itself,
Date: Tue, I May 2007 19:58:42 -0700 (PDT)
From: mibmjb@yahoo,com>
Subject: CORR CAC Subcommittees - This Friday, April 6
To: Dena & Jack <denajack@cox.net>,jlovewell@earthlink.net,
05/16/2007
Page 2 of3
"Dr. Mike McCoy" <mccoy4ib@aol.com>,
jearroll <jcarroll@mcmillinrealty.com>,
Karen Smith <karenvsmith@sbcglobal.net>, Kevin O'Neill <mkoeci@cox.net>,
Mark Kukuchek <mkukuche@nassco.com>, sunnyshy
<sunnyshy@pacbell.net>,
Wayne Dickey <diekeyl@cox.net>, Gary McCall Gary.MeCall@Hanson.biz
CC: John Willett <jawillett@cox.net>,
Bill Saumier <BiII.Saumier@sdcounty.ea.gov>,
fherrera-a <fherrera-a@ei.chula-vista.ca.us>,
rshifflet <rshifflet@sandiego.gov>
Hi Sub Committee Members,
I'll be out of town for the next week, spending time at and around Yosemite
National Park. That being so, I want to pass my comments along to you
regarding the Mitigated Negative Dec. for the CORR Event.
I understand that my comments are not naturally along the same lines that some
of you expressed at meetings last week. I want you to know why I see things the
way I do in this regard. The attached comments are based on personal
experiences as a retired Park and Recreation professional with more than 34
years in the field, trying to balance and define the greater public good versus
negative impacts that special events can bring to a community.
In my last position with the City of San Diego I was responsible for the City's
Regional Parks: Balboa Park, Mission Bay Park, all of San Diego's beaches,
Presidio Park and thousands of acres of undeveloped park land and Open Space.
So. . . please accept them and submit them as part of the sub-eomittee/CAC
process.
Mike Behan
Ahhh...imagining that irresistible "new car" smell?
Check out new cars at Yahoo! Autos.
ored stiff? Loosen up...
own load and play hundreds of games for free on Yahoo! Games.
hhh...imagining that irresistible "new car" smell?
heck out new cars at Yahoo! Autos.
...........-.............".........-......--..--......,............-...--.
..................."...-
.-. .......................--..........................-.................................".............................--,.--...-.
ueker-punch spam with award-winning protection.
ry the free Yahoo! Mail Beta.
t's here! Your new message!
05/16/2007
Date: May I, 2007
To: OVRP Citizen Advisory Committee via the Established Sub -committee
From: Michael Behan, Committee Member rep. City of Chula Vista
Subject: Review of the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Championship Off-road
Racing
I've read the Mitigated Negative Declaration document and find myself, for the most part,
in favor of the Championship Off-road Racing event taking place. As a retired Recreation
professional (34 years in the field) I believe that this event is consistent with providing
recreational seryice to support the greater public good. The event, as stated, is proposed
for four days with a planned attendance of 10,000 each day. Simple math tells me that
approximately 40,000 people will visit the site allowing, what must be considered, one of
the larger recreational opportunities to take place in Chula Vista this calendar year. The
fact that the event is commercial and admission is charged has no bearing on the potential
for the average citizen to enjoy attending. One has only to look a few hundred yards
from this proposed CORR venue to find Knott's Soak City and the Coor's Amphitheater,
both providing needed and sought out recreational opportunities. I don't find allowing
the CORR's temporary 4-day event to be onerous and of great impact to the trail users in
the area. The walkers and riders wi]] still have 361 days in the year to enjoy the peace and
solitude that can be found adjacent to a working stone quarry.
The document on page 9 of 36, section E. Compliance with Zoning and Plans states:
"Because the use is temporary and subject to a Conditional Use Permit, a consistency
determination relative to General Plan land use designations is not applicable." This
statement alone seems to render most of the arguments I heard expressed last week at the
Citizen Advisory Committee and Policy Committee moot, especially when one considers
the fact that the proposed venue is on privately held land with high levels of mitigation
proposed.
Protection of the Otay Valley Regional Park's environment from any mistreatment from
outside impacts is of primary concern. At this time, however, there is no empirical data,
no proof, to substantiate any allegations that this specific event will negatively impact
the park's environment or surrounding neighborhoods. Although, minus the data, one
can certainly surmise some of the potentials impact to the area: I) Air Quality, 2) Sound
Pollution 3) Hydrology and Water Quality, 4)Drainage/Toxics, etc. I believe that the
document appears to respond to each of these issues with viable answers on surmised
Issues.
I strongly suggest that before the event is permitted the applicant provide a plan to
document the impacts of the temporary event on the surrounding environment and
community. The plan Sh011ld incI11de b11t not be limited to:
. Sound checks measuring db's in the communities on the south rim during the race
event.
. Air quality checks measuring particulate matter during and immediately after each
race.
. Base level samples of the rivers prior to the first race day and immediately following
the final day of racing for any heavy metal or petroleum based impacts on the water
shed.
Once these tests are completed they should be presented to the City of Chula Vista in a
report that fully discusses the baseline methodology and findings prior to and after the
event. Once the impacts are fully vetted, understood, and agreed upon by professionals
in each discipline, a full formal report should be presented to the OVRP Policy
Committee for comment and agreement.
This data should then be included as part of any future application for the use of the
venue for an Off-road Vehicle Racing. The data included in the report will provide
needed information to allow the OVRP Committees to make an educated, fact-based
decision on any future use of the site.
I am concerned with Page 12 of36, section F. Public Comments section. The fact that
the applicant met the minimum notification responsibility". . . Notice was circulated to
property owners and residents within a 500-foot radius of the proposed project site." is
not enough. Given the potential for disruption of quality oflife (sound mostly) for the
homes/residents located on the south rim of the valley, the applicant should have taken,
and should be required to take, the extra steps to notify these residents of the potential
disruption.
Page 1, Item: ~
Meeting Date: 5/n107
CHULA VISTA
~
,_,~i' I
PLANNING
COMMISSION
AGENDA STATEMENT
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE:
PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF PCZ-07-06,
ZONE CHANGE FROM CTP ZONE TO R-3 ZONE, AND A
REQUEST FOR A DENSITY BONUS FOR A REDUCTION
IN THE REQUIRED PARKING AND OPEN SPACE, AN
INCREASE IN THE NUMBER OF COMPACT SPACES
ALLOWED, AND A REDUCTION IN THE REQUIRED
FRONT SETBACK FOR THE PROJECT "LOS VECINOS,"
LOCATED AT 1501 BROADWAY.
RESOLUTION: RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS-07-017,
AMEND THE ZONING MAPS ESTABLISHED BY
MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 19.18.010 BY REZONING
ONE PARCEL CONSISTING OF 1,46 ACRES LOCATED
AT 1501 BROADWAY FROM CT-P (COMMERCIAL
THOROUGHFARE WITH PRECISE PLAN) TO R-3
(APARTMENT RESIDENTIAL), AND APPROVE
INCENTIVES AND CONCESSIONS PURSUANT TO THE
DENSITY BONUS LAW FOR THE REDUCTION IN
CERTAIN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE
DEVELOPMENT OF AN AFFORDABLE FOR-RENT
PROJECT BY WAKELAND HOUSING DEVELOPMENT.
SUBMITTED BY: MARY LADIANA, PLANNING MANAGER
Page 2, Item:
Meeting Date: 5//3107
INTRODUCTION:
On December 18, 2006, Wakeland Housing Development (Applicant) submitted applications
requesting a zone change and design review for development of an affordable for-rent project on a
1.46-acre site located at 1501 Broadway, within the Merged Chula Vista Redevelopment Project
Area (see Attachments 1 and 2). The site is currently developed with the vacant Tower Lodge motel,
which had been the subject of significant code enforcement issues for a variety of violations and was
subsequently closed and hoarded up. The project proposes 42 multi-family affordable rental units.
State law (Government Code 65854-65861) and Chula Vista Municipal Code Section 19.12.030 and
following sections establish the process for adopting zone changes of property and require that the
Planning Commission hold a public hearing on proposed rezoning actions and provide a written
recommendation to the City Council.
The project also involves a request for three density bonus incentives or concessions of certain
development standards pursuant to California Government Code Section 65915. Specifically, the
applicant is requesting (I) a reduction in the parking space requirements including an increased
percentage of compact parking spaces, (2) a reduction in the open space requirements, and (3) a
reduction in the required front setback to facilitate the development of this project. The requests, if
approved, would permit the construction of 42 affordable residential units for very low, low-income
households.
Such development incentives are contemplated under the provIsions found in the California
Government Code Section 659] 5 and the Chula Vista Housing Element. As specified in Section
65915 (d)(2)(C), the applicant is entitled to receive three incentives or concessions for projects that
include 30 percent of the total units for lower income households, at least 15 percent for very low
income households, or at least 30 percent for persons and families of moderate income in a common
interest development.
The Environmental Review Coordinator reviewed the proposed project for compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act and prepared an Initial Study, IS-07-017, in accordance with
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Based upon results of the Initial Study, the
Environmental Review Coordinator determined that the project could result in effects on the
environment. However, revisions to the project made by, or agreed to, by the applicant would avoid
the effects, or mitigate the effects, to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur.
Therefore, the Environmental Review Coordinator has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration,
IS-07-017 (see Attachment 3).
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Plarrning Commission of the City of Chula Vista recommend that the City Council adopt
Mitigated Negative Declaration lS-07-017, amend the Zoning Maps established by Municipal Code
Section 19.18.010 by rezoning one parcel consisting of 1.46 acres located at 1501 Broadway from
CT-P (Commercial Thoroughfare with Precise Plan) to R-3 (Apartment Residential), and approve
incentives and concessions pursuant to the Density Bonus Law for the reduction in certain
development standards for the development of an affordable for-rent project by Wakeland Housing
Development.
Page 3, Item:
Meeting Date: 5/23107
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION:
On March 28, 2007, the Housing Advisory Commission voted to recommend approval to the City
Council to provide up to a maximum of $5,480,000 in financial assistance from the City's Low and
Moderate Income Housing Funds to Wakeland Housing for the financing of a proposed 42 unit
affordable housing project located at ISO I Broadway in Southwest Chula Vista.
On February I, 2007, the Redevelopment Advisory Committee recommended that the Chula Vista
Redevelopment Corporation approve the project proposal for Los Vecinos affordable housing
development, located at 1501 Broadway in the Merged Chula Vista Redevelopment Project Area. The
Committee members' support for the proposed project was based on the project's contribution to the
provision of needed affordable housing in this area of the City and on the project's good plmming and
architecture.
DISCUSSION:
1. Site Location and Snrronnding Uses
The 1.46-acre subject property is located mid-block on the east side of Broadway, between Palomar
and Anita Streets (see Attachment I). The site is irregular in shape and has approximately 281 feet
of frontage along Broadway and approximately 220 feet in depth.
The project site is located in an urbanized area of the city and is within the "Added Area" of the
Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plan (2004) for the Merged Chula Vista Redevelopment
Project Area. The project is also within the South Broadway District of the Southwest Area Plan of
the City's 2005 General Plan (see Attachment 4), which has a land use designation of Mixed Use
Residential (MUR). The site is currently zoned Commercial Thoroughfare with a Precise Plan
modifying district (CTP). The site for the proposed project was previously used as the Tower Lodge
motel, which is currently vacant and boarded up.
Existing uses and land use designations adjacent to the site are as follows:
Existing Uses General Plan Zoning Designation
Desi..-nation
Subject Site Closed Motel Mixed Use Residential Commercial
ThorouQhfare
North Auto Repair Facility Mixed Use Residential Commercial
ThorouQhfare
South Condominiums Mixed Use Residential One/Two-Family
Residential
East Storage Facility Mixed Use Residential Commercial
Thorow,.hfare
West Apartments across Commercial Commercial
Broadway Retail/High Density Thoroughfare
Residential /Anartment Residential
Page 4, Item:
Meeting Date: 5/23107
2. Project Description
The proposed project consists of the construction of 42 affordable rental housing units on a 1.46-acre
Jot. There will be 12 one-bedroom, 16 two-bedroom, and 14 three-bedroom units, a community
room, and a laundry room. Additionally, the project includes the construction of parking,
landscaping, open space, and access and circulation elements associated with the development (see
Attachment 5).
The project site is relatively flat and minimum grading will be required. The proposed 42 attached
rental apartments will be located in a three-story building structure that will form a U-shape around
an inner courtyard, which will provide common open space and recreation areas. A community room
and laundry room will be on the first floor facing the courtyard. The courtyard will contain a tot lot,
seating areas with tables and benches and a barbeque grills. A U-shaped driveway will provide
vehicular access from Broadway to the north and south sides, as well as the rear, of the building
structure. Pedestrian and vehicular access to the units is located on the street level. Landscaping
(approximately 11,735 square feet representing 2]% of the site) will be located around the perimeter
of the Jot, as well as in the interior of the site. Sixty-eight parking spaces will also be located along
the perimeter of the lot. Of the total parking spaces, 55 spaces will be provided in the surface parking
lots (36 standard; ] 9 compact) and ] 3 standard spaces will be located under the south wing of the
building structure.
3. Land Use and Zoning
The item being presented for the Planning Commission's consideration is the rezone of the] .46-acre
site from the current CTP zone to the R-3 zone (see Attachment 2). As indicated in the previous
table, the General Plan land use is Mixed Use Residential. The General Plan contains a vision and a
set of policies for the area, which envision the South Broadway District as containing additional
residential uses along South Broadway. The District focuses on increasing the viability of retail
shops, providing for nceded housing opportunities, and improving the appearance of this major
corridor.
The current Zoning designation for the subject site is Commercial Thoroughfare with Precise Plan
ModifYing District (CTP). Since this designation does not implement the vision and policies of the
2005 General Plan for Mixed Use with Residential, the Applicant has requested a zone change to
Apartment Residential (R-3) that would implement the General Plan policies and would allow the
construction of the proposed project at the subject site.
Other discretionary actions required for project implementation, in addition to the proposed rezone,
include a Density Bonus and Design Review. The ChuJa Vista Redevelopment Corporation will
review these required entitlements and also make a recommendation on the proposed rezone, which
will be forwarded along with the Planning Commission's recommendation to the City Council for
final consideration and approval.
Page 5, Item:
Meeting Date: 5/23107
4, Development Standards
The residential development has been evaluated using the R-3 zone development standards.
Assessor's Parcel Number: 622-092-05
Current Zonin" CTP - Commercial ThoromJhfare Precise Plan
Pronosed Zonin" R3 Anartment Residential Zone
General Plan MUR - Mixed-Use Residential
Pronosed Buildin" Coveraae 30% of site
Lot Area ] .46 acres
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS:
REOUIRED PROPOSED
Setbacks: Front Yard: IS feet 9 to 13 feet (Varies with building line in relation to
right of way line)
Side Yard: 5 56 feet min.
Rear Yard: ]5 52 feet min.
Parking (per CVMC 19.62.050):
] bd units (1 y, spaces/du) 18
2-3 bds units (2 spaces) 60
Total 78 snaces 68 snaees
Building Height: Three stories 137 feet)
Three and one-half stories or 45-feet
Residential Density (R-3 zone):
32 units ner acre 29 units ner acre
Open Space Requirements (per R-3 zone):
1-2 bds units: 400 sq. ft. (1 ],200 sq. ft.)
3 bds units: 480 sq. ft. (6,720 sq. ft.) 15,139 square feet
Total: ] 7920 so. ft. of usable onen snace
Residential Density:
Pursuant to CVMC 19.28.070, the allowable residential density of an apartment residential project is
limited to the maximum residential density permitted in the R-3 zone, which requires a minimWI1 lot
area of 1,350 square feet per dwelling unit on Jots greater than 7,000 square feet (32 dwelling
units/acre). Therefore, based on the area (1.46 acres) of the site, the maximWI1 number of dwelling
units that could be developed on the project site is 47 units. The project proposes 42 units, which
would be below the maximum number of units permitted by the R-3 zone.
Opns:ity Ronns: rons:irlpr~tions:
California Government Code Section 659] 5 requires jurisdictions to provide density bonus and/or
regulatory incentives to enable the production of affordable housing. The objective of the State
density bonus law is to enable significant contribution to the economic feasibility of lower-income
housing in proposed projects. Pursuant to Government Code section 659] 5(d)(2)(C), an applicant
Page 6, Item:
Meeting Date: 5//3107
shall receive three incentives or concessions for projects that include at least 30 percent of the total
units for lower income households, or at least IS percent for very low income households. Since all
of the units in the proposed project will be affordable to very low and low income households, the
applicant is eligible for three incentives or concessions.
As stated by the Department of Housing and Community Development, "Local governments have a
responsibility to significantly contribute to the feasibility of developing housing for lower- and
moderate-income households, including granting incentives or concessions even where an applicant
has not elected to accept a density bonus under SDBL [State Density Bonus Law]. This responsibility
is expressed in the intent of SDBL, Government Code Section 65917 as well as other State housing
and planning statutes including housing element law (Article 10.6) and more specifically
Government Code Sections 65583(c) 2 and 3. Further, subsection (g) of Section 65915 expressly
allows an applicant to clect a lesser density bonus. Although subsection (b) states a city or county
shall grant a density bonus and concessions or incentives for qualifying projects, an applicant is not
required to request both a density bonus and a concession in order to be eligible for the other.
Interpreting the statute to require a developer to implement both a density bonus and a concession or
incentive is clearly inconsistent with subsection (g) and contradictory to the intent of the law. This is
particularly true where requiring the additionally bonus units would jeopardize project feasibility."
Cost Analysis:
Staff has reviewed the requested concessions from the City's development standards. Based on
project financing gaps, the concessions are necessary to provide the maximum number of units at
affordable levels. Financing and development of Los Vecinos, as a rental community, is proposed as
a joint private-public partnership. Wakeland will be preparing an application to the State Tax Credit
Allocation Committee for funding to support the majority of the estimated $16,889,228 ($402,125
per unit). Due to the financing programs Wakeland will be pursuing, the project will provide rents
even lower than the 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI) required by the City's Affordable
Housing Program. As a result, units will be made alfordable to families at 30% to 60% of the AMI,
and income and rent restrictions will be maintained for a period of 55 years in keeping with the
Chula Vista Housing Element of the General Plan. With rents restricted at these levels and for this
time period, the net operating income is insufficient to support a loan large enough to cover thc
project costs. Therefore, there remains a financing gap of approximately $5,480,000. It is proposed
that the remaining financing gap be met by a loan from the Redevelopment Agency's Low and
Moderate Income Housing Funds.
IfWakeJand were required to meet City development standards for parking, open space, and building
setback, it would result in a loss of units that could be built on the site. A loss of units would result in
decreased net operating income for the project, which would generate an even greater financing gap,
and a larger loan amount from the Redevelopment Agency. The density bonus incentives of parking,
open space and building setback reductions help to offset an otherwise greater financing gap, which
could result in the infeasibility of the project.
Additionally, the concessions do not have any specific adverse impacts as noted in California
Government Code. The following three development standards qualify as density bonus incentives or
concessions: parking, building setback, and open space, as described below.
Page 7, Item:
Meeting Date: 5/n107
Parking:
The Applicant has requested that parking be one of the development standards concessions to be
approved through the density bonus under California State Law. The proposed project plans show 68
parking spaces will be provided on site. These spaces will be located along the outer perimeter of the
site. In accordance with the standards set forth by Section 19.62.050 of the Municipal Code, the
proposed project would require 78 on-site parking spaces. In addition, the zoning ordinance only
allows a maximum of 10% of the total number of parking spaces (8 spaces) to be compact. Standard
parking spaces measure 9 feet x 19 feet and compact spaces measure 7.5 feet x 15 feet. The applicant
is requesting a concession, as allowed under State Law, and is proposing to provide 68 spaces versus
78 spaces and 28% compact spaces versus 10% compact spaces.
Building Setback:
The Applicant is also requesting a front building setback deviation from the Zoning Ordinance. The
building setback requirement, as called for in the zoning ordinance, is 15 feet from the property line.
The building structure shown on the plans is located approximately between 9 feet and 15 feet from
the property line, representing a front setback reduction of2 to 6 feet.
Open Space:
Residential projects are required to provide on-site open space for residents to enjoy. The Chula
Vista Municipal Code Section 19.28.090 requires the provision of 400 square feet of usable open
space for 1 and 2-bedroom units, and 480 square feet for units with 3 or more bedrooms. The open
space may be provided in common usable open space areas, private patios, balconies, or common
recreational facilities. In accordance with the standards set forth by Section 19.28.090 and the
proposed unit mix (28 one and two-bedroom and 14 three-bedroom), the total usable open space
requirement for the project would be 17,920 square feet. The project's proposed open space is
15,139 square feet, which represents a di[ferenee of 2,781 square feet of useable open space, which
includes common exterior open space, a community room, and private patios and balconies.
5, Analysis
The project has been evaluated in accordance with the goals and objectives of the 2005 Chula Vista
General Plan, the 2004 Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plan's goals and objectives, and the
Zoning Ordinance.
RE>70np.
The project site is currently designated by the 2005 General Plan as Mixed Use Residential (MUR)
and it is zoned CTP. The General Plan Land Use and Transportation (LUT) Policies 42.3 and 42.9 for
this area state:
"Encourage the development of residential units. mixed with the appropriate retail and
professional office. in the area designated as A1ixed Use Residential between Palomar
Street and Anita Street"; and
Page 8, Item:
Meeting Date: 5/n107
"]n the South Broadway District, residential densities within the Mixed Use Residential
designation between L Street and Naples Street and between Palomar Street and Anita
Street are intended to have a District-wide gross density of 30 dwelling units per acre".
The 2004 Redevelopment Plan's goals are to:
"Provide low and moderate income housing as is required to sati~fj; the needs and desires of
the various age and income groups of the community, maximizing the opportunity for
individual choice, and meeting the requirements (if State Law. "
"Achieve an environment reflecting a high level of concern for architectural, landscape, and
urban design principles appropriate to the objectives of this Plan. "
The current CT-P zone does not allow the development of residential projects. The requested rezone
to R-3 would allow the construction of the proposed residential project at the requested density. This
would implement General Plan LUT 42.6 and the 2004 Redevelopment Plan by providing additional
affordable residential units in the area between Palomar and Anita Streets, which would achieve a
better balance with the existing commercial and industrial developments. In addition, LUT 42.9
states that the subject area is intended to have district-wide densities of 30 dwelling units per acre.
The project proposes 42 units on the 1.46-acre site, which results in a net density of 29 dwelling units
per acre. The residential density would provide a more urban, pedestrian-oriented project design that
would be compatible with the surrounding land uses.
In the late 1980's, a citizen initiative referred to as the "Cumming's Initiative" was passed by a
majority vote of the electorate and was incorporated as Chula Vista Municipal Code (CVMC)
Section 19.80 (Ord.2309 Initiative 1988). The purpose and intent of the initiative was generally to
ensure the quality oflife for the residents ofChula Vista through a variety of measures, including the
provision of adquate public services and facilities commesurate with new development. In order to
accomplish this, the Ordinance contains provisions that limit the rezoning of a property. Section
19.80.070 (D) states that:
"Rezoning commercial or industrial property to a residential zone shall be permilled only
to the maximum residential density corresponding to the potential traffic generation that
was applicable prior 10 the rezoning to residential. "
For the proposed rezone, the comparison would be between the existing potential traffic generation
associated with the development under the existing CT-P zone and the corresponding maximum
residential density. Based on standard traffic generation rates (SANDAG 2002 Brief Guide of
Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates for The San Diego Region), commercial and office uses generate
significantly greater traffic than residential uses. For example, the existing 1.46 acre site (63,500
square feet) zoned CT-P would have the potential to develop up to a 95,396 square foot building.
This is based on the CT-P zone's existing development standards which allow 50% lot coverage
(50% x 63,500 sq. ft. site = 31,799 sq. ft.) and up to a three story height limit (3 stories x 31,799 sq.
ft. per floor). Using SANDAG's standard traffic generation rates for commercial uses (40 trips /1,000
square feet), a total of 3,816 trips would be generated from a potential commercial building of that
sIze.
Page 9, Item:
Meeting Date: 5//3107
Based on the criteria in section (D) above, the maximum residential density could not be more than
the potential traffic generated by the commercial use (i.e. 3,816 trips). This equates to up to 636
multi-family units (3,816 trips/6 trips per multifamily dwelling unit) on the 1.46 acre site, which
equates to 435 dwelling units per acre. Because commercial and office uses generate significantly
greater traffic than residential uses, a zone change from commercial to a multi-family residential
category could never result in residential traffic generation greater than the corresponding potential
traffic generation from a commercial development. Therefore, zone changes from commercial to
residential would not conflict with Section 19.80.070 (D) of the ordinance.
n{1n~ity Ronll'"
Parking:
The applicant has requested that parking reduction be one of the development standards concessions
to be approved through the density bonus under California State Law. The zoning ordinance requires
the provision of 78 on-site parking spaces (representing an average of 1.86 spaces per unit). The
proposed project plans show 68 parking spaces (which represents an average of 1.62 spaces per unit)
will be provided on site, 19 of which will be compact spaces. In addition, the zoning ordinance only
allows a maximum of 10% of the total number of parking spaces (7 spaces) to be compact. The
concessions, as allowed under State Law, would allow 68 spaces versus 78 spaces and 28% compact
spaces versus 10% compact spaces.
The applicant has demonstrated that their affordable housing projects (located throughout San Diego
County) with similar parking reductions have not experienced parking shortages. In those projects, as
will be done in the proposed Los Veeinos project, property management assigns residents one or two
parking spaces according to the size of their unit and the number of vehicles they have. In
Wakeland's Beyer Courtyards project in San Ysidro and Vista Las Flores project in Carlsbad,
parking supply exceeds demand. Many families that qualify for affordable housing, particularly at the
very low and low income levels, only have one family car, or may not have a car. The table below
indicates that half to three-fourths of two-bedroom units and about half of three-bedroom units use
zero or one parking spaces. In other words, only one-fourth to half of all two and three-bedroom
units request two parking spaces.
Total Parking % 2BR with % 3BR with
Total Units Snaces Snaces Used o or 1 snace o or 1 snace
Beyer Courtyards,
San Y5idr~ 28 49 42 76% 53%
Vista Las Flores,
Carlsbad 60 115 74 53% 45%
Using these examples for the Los Vecinos project, and operating from the most conservative
assumptions, the number of parking spaces (68) provided would still exceed demand. Assuming that
all 12 of the one-bedroom units would require one parking space, and that half of the 30 two and
three-bedroom units would require two spaces, the parking demand would be for 57 spaces. That
would still leave a surplus of II spaces. The examples that the applicant provided are supported by
Page 10, Item:
Meeting Date: 5//3107
data from other affordable housing developments in San Diego County, as reported by the San Diego
Housing Federation.
Building Setback:
Section 19.28.070 requires a front building setback of 15 feet from the property line. The proposed
building setback ranges between 9 feet to 13 feet due to the buildings fa((ade articulation, which
includes recessed surfaces and projections such as balconies. The Applicant is requesting a front
building setback deviation from the Zoning Ordinance through the Density Bonus. While the
proposed setback would deviate from the Zoning Ordinance, the reduction in the setback would
afford the project a more urban and pedestrian-oriented character by being closer to the sidewalk, as
compared with a suburban type of development with larger front setbacks. An urban project is more
compatible with the urban character of the western part of the City. Thus, the reduced setback
provides the benefit of bringing the building closer to the street giving the project a more urban
character.
Open Space:
Section 19.28.090 of the Municipal Code requires a minimum of 400 sq. feet of open space per I to
2-bedroom dwelling unit and 480 square feet for the 3-bedroom unit. The open space may be
provided in the form of common usable open space areas, private patios, balconies, or common
recreational facilities.
Based on the proposed project's nwnber and type of dwelling units, the open space requirement is
17,920 square feet of usable open space or an average of 426 square feet per unit. As planned, the
project would provide a total of 15,139 square feet of usable open space in the form of common
exterior open space, a community room, and private patios and balconies. This represents an average
of approximately 360 square feet per dwelling unit. It should be noted that, while all the dwelling
units havc balconies, the open space calcnlation only includes balconies that meet the minimum
space requirement (60 square feet). Balconies that have less than 60 square feet in area are not
counted toward the open space requirement. Based on these calculations, the project's open space
deficit is approximately 2,781 square feet or an average of 66 square feet per unit.
The reduction in required usable open space at Los Vecinos will not affect the residents' quality of
life, as the proposed open space is well designed, and will be serviced by a variety of programs to
keep the residents active and involved. Each apartment will have either a private balcony or patio,
providing residents with their own usable outdoor space while also bringing them out of their units.
Thc common outdoor space will include a tot Jot for the children, open play space, and a barbecue
area with seating and tables for the residents' use. An 807 square foot community center will provide
resident services programs including computer classes, tutoring, arts and crafts, and outdoor
recreation activities.
6, Community Input
Several community meetings regarding the proposed project were held at various locations from
October 2006 though March 2007. The applicant conducted an initial community meeting near the
Page 11, Item:
Meeting Date: S//?,107
project site on October 9, 2006, and noticed the meeting to residents and property owners within 500
feet of the project site. The applicant also met with community groups; with Northwest Civic
Association on January I, 2007 and with Southwest Chula Vista Civic Association on January 18,
2007. The applicant received positive comments at all of the meetings, and the Southwest Chula Vista
Civic Association submitted a letter of support for the project.
Additionally, the Redevelopment Advisory Committee (RAC) reviewed the project at a public meeting
on February 1,2007. Both the Southwest and Northwest Civic Associations, and the public at large
expressed overwhelming support for the project at the meeting. The RAC voted to move the project
forward with a single review. The RAC meeting was publicly noticed, including notices to residents
and property owners within 500 feet of the project site. The project was reviewed at another public
meeting by the Housing Advisory Commission (HAC) on March 28, 2007. The HAC also
recommended project approval.
Recently, staff received a petition regarding the proposed project from several residents of the Villa de
Anita condominium complex (see Attachment 5). The residents who signed the petition were
included in the 500-foot radius noticing, as described above. In a continued effort to ensure that a]]
residents, particularly neighbors, have had an opportunity to learn about the project and provide
input, staff has planned an additional meeting for those residents who expressed concern about the
project. The meeting wi]] be held on Monday, May 21st at 5:30 PM at the project site. The applicant's
project team will also be present to provide infonnation regarding the project and to answer any
questions.
7. Conclusion
Based on the information and analysis contained in this report, staff finds the proposed rezone for the
subject site from CT-P to R-3 consistent with and implementing the goals and objectives of the
General Plan, as well as the goals and objectives of the 2004 Amended and Restated Redevelopment
Plan [or the Mcrged Chula Vista Redcvclopment Project Area. The proposed R-3 zone is an
implementing zone of the existing MUR land use designation and is therefore appropriate and
consistent with the designation. The proposed residential project is appropriate for the area because
it provides needed atTordable housing and it is adjacent to both commercial and residential
development, as we]] as adequate existing infrastructure. The Density Bonus should be granted
because it facilitates a project that would be infeasible without the reductions in open space, parking,
and building setback. Therefore, staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend
approval of the proposed zone change and the Density Bonus to the City Council.
8, Decision Maker Conflicts
Staff has reviewed the property holdings of the Planning Commission members and has found no
property holdings within 500 feet ofthe boundaries of the property which is the subject of this action.
A. tt~{'hmpnt~
1. Locator Map
2. Aerial Map with existing and proposed zoning designations
3. Mitigated Negative Declaration ]S-07-0] 7
4. General Plan Southwest Planning Area - South Broadway District
5. Site Plans
6. Petition from selected Villa de Anita residents
7. Development Application with the following appendices:
Appendix A - Project Description and Justification
Appendix B - Disclosure Statement
Appendix C - Development Permit Processing Agreement
8. Draft City Council Ordinance
Page 12, Item:
Meeting Date: S/?3107
A ITA CHMENT 1
)
1(11\\\
//.
UIIY /'-
----~
t-~
E ~;.~~
I-- l-
I-- I- r-:
I-- I- 1"--
c-- I-- __ ---r-.....
, --- -
- - - --
) = --
n- ,4W_ -
II '\ _~~I-- \\\l\ )
PROJECT _ \ ~~ t-~ \ \ \ \\J
LOC,ATIO,N 1\ "'al--nll ~e- ffiEE
U \ I I I I 1/ \
-- \ ~ \:\-j\jj ~.
\'U
~
, 0
\~
~
III
-
-
--- ----
- I I
-
r- II :=
III I I II I J -
-
I-- _
I--- _
I---
'-
-
-
I-
-
-
11 1+)
\
I
Anita St
(fJ
<
'"
en
5!2
I--
1=
1= =f- I-~
I- =f-
~ ::::1-
1= =f-
F
~ - I I"
J I III
~~
~I
l-
f-
==
f-
I-
I
-
r-
-
_I-
-
I I
-
-
-
-
r-
C HULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
'.OCATOR PROJECT Wakeland Housing & PROJECT DESCRIPI10N:
C) APPLICANT: Deveiopment Corp. DESIGN REVIEW
PROJECT 1501 Broadway Project Summary: Proposed: 42-uni1s of affordable, multifamily
ADDRESS: rental housing with a community center for residents.
SCALE: I FILE NUMBER:
No Scale DCR-07-27 Ratated cases: 1S-a7.Q17, PCZ.Q7-{)6 & PCC.Q7.Q37
J:\plann ing\ca rlos\Jocators\drc0727. cdr 12.28.06
.-----:--- "
. ' .'
11,{);.:M
;_7'~:~"~:~":'~.~
'-~'. ,'. .
: ,II. ,,-..:. ...: ';r~'"
. ..' 3t:
~.\ ~'t " ,
,.,. .-
C)
NORTH
City of Chula Vista
"LOS VECINOS" PROJECT LOCATION
- Project Location I Proposed
Zone Change
Existing Zones
L\Gabe FileslProjects by Requestor\Jose Dorado\1801 Roradwaylmain_file ai 05,10,07
ATTACHMENT 3
Mitigated Negative Declaration
PROJECT NAME:
Los Vecinos
PROJECT LOCATION:
1501 Broadway
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.:
622-092-0500
PROJECT APPLICANT:
Los Vecinos
Wakeland Housing and Development Corporation
CASE NO.:
IS-07 -017
DATE OF DRAFT DOCUMENT:
April 16, 2007
DATE OF FINAL DOCUMENT:
Prepared by:
Maria C. Muet!
A. Proiect Setting
The project site is 1.5-acres in size and consists of one parcel. The site is located at 1501 Broadway,
between Orange A venue and Anita Street. The site is within the Montgomery Specific Plan area of
the City of Chula Vista (see Exhibit A - Locator Map). The project site is relatively level and has
been previously mass graded. The site is developed with the existing vacant Tower Lodge Motel
including parJQng lot, paved driveways, parJQng areas, and swimming pool. A sewer lift station with a
holding tank is located on the northeastern portion of the site. On-site vegetation includes ornamental
trees, palm trees, grass, and shrubs (see Exhibit B-Existing Site Plan). The land uses immediately
surrounding the project site are as fol1ows:
North:
South
East:
West:
Storage Facility
Multifamily Residential/Condominiums
Mobile Home Park
Auto Repair Business and Multifamily Residential/Condominiums
B. Proi ect Description
The project proposal consists of an affordable 42 unit multi-family residential development including
a community center for use by project residents. The proposal includes a density bonus request
pursuant to Cahfomia State Law (Government Code 65915). The proposed mu1ti-family resIdential
units would be contained within one three-story building. PatIos and balconies are proposed adjacent
to Broadway and at the northwest and southwest corners of the project site. Onsite improvements
include landscaping, perimeter masonry walls and fencing, retaining walls, community patio and
barbeque area, tot lot, recreational turf area, sma]] recreational courts, security lighting, paved ground
level parJQng lot and other amenities.
Proposed site improvements include new driveways and sidewalks, emergency fire lane and services,
private interior roads, storm drain facilities/filtration systems, water service extensions, sewer facility
improvements, underground existing utilities, retaining wa]]s, open space sitting areas, landscaped
treatments, trash enclosure, tot Jot, security lighting and other amenihes. The proposed open space
area includes some balconies and ground level patios.
A total of 68 parking spaces would be provided onsite; four spaces less than the required City Parking
Code requirement. Please refer to the Traffic Section below for details regarding parking and Density
Bonus/State Law a!1owances.
C. Compliance with Zoning and Plans
The project site is designated CTP (Commercial ThoroughfarelPrecise Plan) Zoning and MUR
(Mixed-Use Residential). Project permitting inc1udes Rezone (to convert CT to R3) by the Planning
Commission, Design Review by the CVRC, and a Density Bonus by the Redevelopment Agency/City
Counci1.
D. PubJic Comments
On April 2, 2007, a Notice of Initia! Study was circulated to property owners within a SOO-foot radius
of the proposed project site. The pubJic review period ended April 11, 2007. No public comments
were recei ved during this time period.
E. Identification of Environmental Effects
An Initial Study conducted by the City of Chula Vista (inc1uding an attached Environmental
Checklist fOnTI) detenTIined that the proposed project may have potentia!1y significant environmental
impacts, however, mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project to reduce these
impacts to a less than significant leve1. This Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in
accordance with Section 15070 of the State of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Guidelines.
Air QuaJity
To assess potential air quaJity impacts of the project, an Air Quality Analysis for the Los Vecinos
project, Aprilll, 2007. was prepared by Eilar and Associates, Inc. The emission factors and threshold
criteria contained in the South Coast Air QuaJity Management District GuideJinesrrhresholds for Air
Quality Analysis and the current URBEMIS were utilized in the air quality analysis. The additio.n of
emissions to an air basin is considered under CEQA to be a significant impact. Due to demolition and
construction activities, mimmal grading and a previously developed site, the proposed project is
anticipated to create only short tenTI impacts as summarized below.
Construction Activity Impacts
It is anticipated that based on the project's emission factors and proposed construction activities the
proposed project will exceed the SCAQMD's daily tbreshoJd emission levels. Air quality impacts
resulting from construction-related operations are considered short-term in duration since
construction-related activities are a relatively short-term activity. The proposed project would result
in short-term air quality impacts directly related 'to demolition/cleanup, grading and construction
activities associated with the project. Worker and equipment vehic1e trips would create temporary
emissions of dust, fumes, equipment exhaust, spillover and other air pollutants associated with the
grading/construction and cleanup activities. Exhaust emissions would result from on and off site
heavy equipment. Dust control and emission controls are recommended for off-road construction
equipment as wel1. As a mitigation requirement, construction equipment exceeding 100 brake-
horsepower must meet Tier 3 emission Jimits during al! grading phases of the project construction.
AI! project emissions are anticipated to be at or below the standard thresholds. Implementation of the
Air Quality Mitigation Measure ~o. I contained in Section F below would mitigate short-tenTI
2
construction-related air quality impacts to below a level of slgmficance. These measures are included
as a part of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Project Operational/Long Term Impacts
The proposed project once developed would not resuH in significant long-term local or regional air
quaJity impacts. The project would result in a net decrease in vehicle trips. According to the project
traffic study, the previous mote] use generated 324 daily trips and the project would resuH in 252
daily trips. No area source or operational vehic1e emission estimates wi1l exceed the Air QuaJity
significance thresholds, nor create long-term air quaJity impacts.
Geology and Soils
To assess potential geological and soils impacts of the project, a Preliminmy Geological Investigation
for Proposed Residential Development, 1501 Broadway, Clzula Vista, California, October 17, 2006,
was prepared by Leighton and Associates, Inc. The results of this analysis are summarized below.
The project site is not located in an active Earthquake FauH Zone as created by the Alquist-Priolo Act
and associated FauH-Rupture Hazard Zones. The nearest active fauH is the Rose Canyon fauH
approximately 5 miles away. No known significant or suspected seismic hazards associated with the
project site have been identified. Any development must be constructed in accordance with the
CaJifornia Building Code or state-of-the art seismic design parameters of the Structural Engineers
Association of California. No significant seismic related impacts are anticipated as a resuH of the
proposed project.
Liquification/Subsurface Conditions
Liquefaction and settlement of soils is characterized by a loss of shear strength to the affected soif
layers, causing the soil to act as a viscous Jiquid not capable of supporting structures or creating
instabiJity. Based upon the subsurface explorations, overal1 Jiquefaction bazards to the project site are
considered low and no significant impacts are created.
According to the study based upon subsurface conditions, the topsoil and near surface s6ilSwere
previously disturbed by the existing site conditions and proposed demolition of the existing motel
buildings, were considered inadequate for supporting the fil1 or additional structural loads associated
with the proposed project buildings. During site grading this impacted soil area should be removed
within the building pads and pavement areas. In addition, any onsite soils that are to be used for
compacted fi11 must be free of any organic materials, debris or large rock fragments.
A final soils report is required to be prepared to satisfaction of the City Engineer, prior to the issuance
of grading and construction permits_ Erosion control measures will be identified in conjunction with
the preparation of the grading plans and implemented during the construction phase. Through project
design as recommended in the Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, and the mitigation measures
contained in Section F below, potential geological impacts would be mitigated to a level of less than
significance. These measures are included as a part of the Mitigation Measure Monitoring and
Reporting Program.
3
HazardslHazardous Materials
In order to assess potential hazardous materials impacts, a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
report was prepared by Leighton and Associates, Inc., on August 1. 2006, and addendum dated March
2007 for the project site. Please refer to the following summary below.
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
According to the Phase I, based upon historical records the project site has been developed with a
motel/motor lodge from approximately 1949 to the present. The site contains the motel, parking lot,
swimming pool, office and landscaped treatments. The motel is currently vacant and non-operational.
The proposed project includes the demolition of the motel and associated improvements, refer to
Lead! Asbestos Section.
On-site Investigation
On July 7, 2006 a site investigation and soil samplings were conducted. The soil samplings were
collected between the sewer lift station and motel to assess any contamination due to sewage spills
reported by the City of Chula Vista. The soil samples were analyzed for contamination. In the event
of contamination within the soil, the same threshold level is used for soil as for groundwater as was in
this case. No fecal colifonns exceeded the reporting unit threshold levels of the Regional Water
Qualty Control Board (RWQCB) groundwater discharge requirements. No other environmental
concerns including staining, Underground Storage Tanks (USTs), Aboveground Storage Tanks
(ASTs), undocumented fill or waste dumping were observed or reported during the site observation.
Off-site
In accordance with standard assessment procedures, regional database listings of hazardous wastes
and materials sites within the project site were reviewed. Based upon Leaking Underground Storage
Tanks (LUST) cases, three LUST cases at two locations were identified within ,;' mile of the site.
Two cases have been closed and one active case remains and is currently underway or pending
closure as regulated by the regional agencies; County of San Diego Department of Environmental
Health Services (DEHS) and the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). However,due to
the fact that this location is located at a lower level than the project site, no potential for significant
hazardous impacts is anticipated.
Asbestos and lead-based paint
The existing motel lodge, office and associated improvements are proposed for demolition and may
contain asbestos and lead-based paint which is a potential1y significant health hazard. Prior to any
demolition activities the presence of asbestos and lead-based paint must be ascertained and removed
if present by a licensed, registered, asbestos and lead abatement contractor in accordance with all
applicable local, state and federal laws and regulations, including San Diego County Air Pollution
Control District Rule 361.145, Standard for Demolition and Renovation.
The mitigation measures contained in Section F below would mitigate potential hazardslhazardous
materials impacts to a level of less than significance. These measures are included as a part of the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
4
Hydrology and Water Qualitv
In order to assess potential drainage impacts of the project, a PreliminGl)' Drainage Study for Los
Vecinos, Chula Vista, California, dated March 14, 2007 and addendum dated April 2007, was
prepared by Lintvedt, McCol1 & Associates. The study methodology is based upon the City of Chula
Vista Subdivision Manual, Drainage Design Section and County of San Diego Hydrology manual.
The purpose of the study included the analysis of the year floods up to the 100-year flows for both pre
and post development conditions, analysis and identifying any potentia! significant impacts. Upon
construction development and associated site improvements, there wil1 be a slight increase of
impervious area; 1.03 acres or 79% of the site. However, based upon project design, project
conditions or measures, and existing developed land conditions there are no significant drainage
concerns or significant changes to downstream flows anticipated.
Existing Conditions and Drainage Improvements
The project site currently drains west towards Broadway into an existing storm drain inlet (24" pipe)
that flows north along Broadway.
Proposed Drainage Improvements
Based upon review of the preliminary drainage study, the Engineering Department has determined
that through project design and conditions there are no significant issues or impacts regarding the
proposed drainage improvements.
The drainage analysis resu1ts verify that the project does not adversely impact the existing City storm
drain facilities. The proposed drainage improvements are designed to col1ect on-site drainage and
convey it towards the existing storm drain system along Broadway. The new storm drain features
include a storm drain connection consisting of an 18-inch pipe, gutter flows throughout the parking
areas, roof drain outlets, vegetated swales, new and replacement of impervious landscaped areas prior
to proper filtration systems.
During construction, implementation of comprehensive Best Management Practices wil1 control
construction-related erosion and sediment. Site Design BMPs focus on the use of landscaped areas as
part of the drainage system and shal1 detain and filtrate runoff to the maximum extent. A-detailed
summary of the construction BMPs wil1 be included with the required preparation of the Storm Water
Pol1ution Prevention Plan (SWPPP).
As a standard condition, a final drainage study wil1 be required in conjunction with the preparation of
the project grading plans. The proposed drainage improvements as described above would improve
the overal1 on-site drainage system and accommodate the proposed project. The drainage facilities
shal1 be instal1ed at the time of the site development to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
Water Quality
In order to assess potential water quality impacts created by the proposed project, a Water Quality
Technical Report was prepared by Lintvedt, McCol1 & Associates dated March 13, 2007 and
addendum dated April 2007. The study also includes analysis to verify that post-construction runoff
volumes have been maintained at the pre-construction volume levels. The applicant/developer wil1 be
required to implement post-construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) to the maximum extent
practicable, including the use of high pol1utant removal efficiency treatment BMPs. The City of
Chula Vista SUSMP requires a combination of site design, source control, and treatment control
BMPs. Site design BMPs W111 include landscaped treatment within the project areas, increased
5
building density, rooftop runoff onto pervious landscaped areas, runoff directed away from top of
slopes and al1 slopes landscaped to avoid erosion and natural vegetated swales.
The applicant will be required to comply with all requirements of the State Water Resources Control
Board (SWRCB), City of Chula Vista's Stonn Water Management Manual and implement Best
Management Practices (BMPs) to prevent pollution of the storm water systems during and after
construction. A Stonn Water Pol1ution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be developed and implemented
concurrently with the grading of the project site. The applicant wil1 also be required to comply with
the Nl'DES Municipal Permit, Order No. R9-2007-0001 and other permit requirements, identify
potential stonn water pollutants as wel1 as proposed BMPs that wil1 be used for treatment, and submit
a water quality study with submittal of final grading/improvement plans to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer. Storm or non-stonn water from such designated area shall not be discharged into City
storm drainage systems but disposed of in accordance with Federal, State, and Local laws and
regulations.
The mitigation measures contained in Section F below would mitigate potential hydrology/water
impacts to below a level of significance. These measures are included as a part of the Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Noise
A noise study was prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., Exterior Noise Analysis Report.
dated April 11, 2007, to assess potential noise impacts of the proposed project. The noise assessment
analyzed the project with respect to the regulations contained in the Chula Vista Municipal Code
(noise control ordinance). A copy of the noise study is available for review at the Planning and
BuiJding Department.
Existing Conditions
The project site is currently vacant and surrounded by residential and commercial land uses. The
project site !Tontage is along Broadway, between Orange Avenue and Anita Street. The existing noise
is primarily generated by traffic that travels along Broadway. Broadway has an existing average daily
traffic (ADT) volume of 18,400 vehicles (SANDAG 2007). One-hour sound level measurements
were conducted during the afternoon peak hour traffic period to identify the existing noise levels
created by the vehicle traffic. The posted speed for Broadway is 35 miles per hour, a four-lane major
roadway according to the General Plan update.
Existing Plus Project Conditions
The noise generators (traffic) wil1 remain the same, as the proposed project is a residential use similar
to the existing motel land use. Future ADT volume was calculated out to be approximately 27,500
vehicles (City of Chula Vista).
The future traffic noise will have a maximum noise level of 72 dBA CNEL at the proposed building
facades, including the patios/balconies facing west towards Broadway. Al1 remaining patios/balconies
facing north and south wil1 range !Tom 67 to 61 dBA and those patios/balconies within the interior
courtyards range from 37-33 dBA. The City's dBA CNEL exterior noise requirement for residential
land use is 65 dBA CNEL. The patios/balconies located along the !Tontage of Broadway facing west,
and those few units facing northwest and southwest corners with levels above 65dBA, as identified in
the noise study, will be impacted by the future traffic noise levels. Any balconies or patio areas that
are to be counted towards required open space will require mitigation. The mitigation recommended
IS a six-foot sound attenuation barrier along the perimeter of the patio. The wal1 barrier would be
solid in construction with no holes or gaps. In order to maintain a view, the barrier may include glass
6
or plexiglass with a minimum density of 3.5 lbs'/foot,. The mitigation measures contained in Section
F below would mitigate future exterior traffic noise impacts to the patios adjacent to Broadway and
any other balconies that are counted toward the required open space for the project.
An interior noise analysis evaluating proposed exterior wall construction, windows and doors would
be required once final building design plans are completed to ensure that the interior noise levels meet
the California Code of Regulations, Title 24: Noise Insulation Standard of 45 dBA CNEL or less.
Should the interior noise analysis determine that interior noise thresholds can only be met with
windows being cJosed, then the building plans will have to call out mechanical ventilation for
impacted units. The mitigation measures contained in Section F below would mitigate potential
interior noise impacts to below a level of significance. These measures are incJuded as a part of the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Short-Term Construction Noise
Pursuant to Section 17.2.050(J) of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, construction work (including
demolition) 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. Due to the presence of the
adjacent multi-family residential development and mobile home park, this provision of the Municipal
Code applies to the project and would ensure that the residents and occupants would not be disturbed
by construction noise during the most noise sensitive periods of the day.
Outdoor/Rooftop Mechanical Equipment Noise
Heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HV AC) equipment is proposed on the rooftops of the
residential building units. The noise generated by the HV AC equipment would vary depending on the
type and size of the mechanical equipment. Based upon the preliminary mechanical plans and lack of
complete noise assessment due to unavailability of final rooftop mechanical plans, the study
concluded that noise generated from the HV AC could exceed the City's noise standard. Noise
impacts related to the outdoor mechanical equipment are considered significant. Therefore, an
additional acoustical study will be required to ensure that the multiple floor interior noise levelSbf the
residential use would not exceed the 45 Leq standard. The mitigation measures contained in Section F
below have been included to mitigate HV AClor rooftop mechanical equipment noise impacts to
below a level of significance.
F. Mitigation Necessary to Avoid Significant Impacts
Air Quality
I. The following air quality construction mitigation requirements shall be shown on all applicable
grading, and building plans as details, notes, or as otherwise appropriate, and shall not be
deviated from unless approved in advance in writing by the City's Environmental Review
Coordinator. The City mitigation measure monitor will ensure compliance of the following:
. Minimize simultaneous operation of multiple construction equipment units.
. Use low pollutant-emitting construction equipment.
. C;se electrical construction equipment as practical.
. Use catalytic reduction for gasoline-powered equipment.
. Use injection-timing retard for diesel-powered equipment.
7
. Water the construction area tWlce daily to minimize fugitive dust.
. Stabilize graded areas as quickly as possib1e to minimize fugitive dust.
. Pave permanent roads as quickly as possib1e to mmimize dust.
. Use electricity from power poles instead of temporary generators during building, if
avai1able.
. Apply stabilizer or pave the last 100 feet of intema1 travel path within a construction site
prior to public road entry.
. InstaH whee1 washers adjacent to a paved apron prior to vehicle entry on public roads.
. Remove any visible track-out into trave1ed public streets within 30 minutes of occurrence.
. Wet wash the construction access point at the end of each workday if any vehicle trave1 on
unpaved surfaces has occurred.
. Provide sufficient perimeter erosion control to prevent washout of silty materia1 onto public
roads.
. Cover haul trucks or maintain at 1east 12 inches of freeboard to reduce blow-off during
hauling; and
. Suspend all soi1 disturbance and travel on unpaved surfaces if winds exceed 25 miles per
hour.
. Restrict the type of architectural coatings to only compounds with low reactive off-gas
characteristics, such as SCAQMD "clean air" or "super compliant" low VOC paint and/or
stucco.
Geology and Soi1s
2. Prior to the issuance of construction permits, the appJicant shaH provide evidence to the City
Engineer and the City Environmental Review Coordinator that aH the recommendations in the
Preliminmy Geological Investigation, dated October 17, 2006 have been satisfied.
3. Prior to the issuance of grading permits a final soils report shaH be prepared to satisfaction of the
City Engineer.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
4. During any demolition activities, a licensed and registered asbestos and lead abatement contractor
shall perform asbestos and 1ead-based paint abatement in accordance with all applicable local,
state and federa1 Jaws and regulations, including San Diego County Air PoHution Control District
Rule 361. ]45 - Standard for Demolition and Renovation.
Hydr010gy and Water Quality
5. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a final drainage study shall be required in conjunction
with the preparation of final grading pl;3.ns. The City Engineer shall verify that the final grading
plans comply with the provisions of California Regional Water Quality Contr01 Board, San Diego
Region Order No. 2001-01 wIth respect to construction-related water quality best management
practices. If one or more of the approved post-construction BMPs is non-structural, then a post-
construction BMP plan shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to the
commencement of construction. Compliance with said p1an shaH become a permanent
requirement of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
6. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, including clearing and grubbing aCl1vities, temporary
desilting and erosion control devices shall be instaHed. Protective devices, as determined by the
City Engineer, will be provided at every storm drain inlet to prevent sediment from entering the
8
storm drain system. These measures shall be reflected in the grading and improvement plans to
the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Environmental Review Coordinator.
Noise
7. Prior to the issuance of building permits, construction plans shall be submitted that depict a six-
foot sound attenuation barrier along the perimeter of the patioslba1conies that are to be counted
toward the required open space for the project. The wall barrier shall be solid in construction with
no holes or gaps. In order to maintain a view, the barrier may inc1ude glass or plexiglass with a
minimum density of 3.5 Ibs./foot,.
8. Prior to the issuance of building permits, an interior noise analysis evaluating proposed exterior
wall construction, windows and doors shall be completed in order to ensure that the interior noise
levels meet the California Code of Regulations, Title 24 Noise Insulation Standard of 45 dBA
CNEL or less. If the Title 24 noise analysis indicates that windows must be c10sed in order to
achieve interior noise levels of less that 45 dBA CNEL, construction drawings must inc1ude a
mechanical ventilation system that meets UBC requirements to provide a habitable interior
environment with windows closed in impacted units.
9. Pursuant to Section 17.24.050(J) of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, project-related grading or
~ construction activities shall be prohibited between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Monday
through Friday and between 10:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. Saturdays and Sundays.
10. All construction equipment shall operate and be maintained to minimize noise generation.
Equipment and construction vehicles shall be kept in good repair and fitted with "manufacturer-
recommended" mufflers.
II. Prior to approval of building permits, the applicant shall submit a subsequent noise study to the
satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator demonstrating that the final roof-mounted
HV AC and other roof mounted equipment complies with the City's noise control ordinance at tbe
property boundaries of 45 dBA Leq (one hour) during nighttime hours and 55 dBA Leq (one
hour) during daytime hours or ambient noise levels, whichever is greater.
12. All rooftop pumps, fans, and air conditioners/heating units on the project buildings shall include
appropriate noise abatement and be screened by a minimum three-foot high rooftop parapet that
blocks the line-of-site view from nearby residential properties to the exposed roof and mechanical
ventilation systems.
G. Agreement to Implement Mitigation Measures
By signing the line(s) provided below, the Applicant and Operator stipulate tbat they have each read, understood
and have their respective company's authority to and do agree to the mitigation measures contained within
Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-07-017, and win implement same to the satisfaction of the Environmental
Review Coordinator. Failure to sign the !ine(s) provided below prior to posting of this Mitigated Negative
Declaration with the County Clerk shall indicate the Applicant's and Operator's desire that the Project be held in
abeyance without approval and that the Applicant and Operator shan apply for an Environmental Impact
Report.
Rebecc&>- Lou',e-, P"'O~~<..:t ~(Jf:fY
Printed Name and Title of Applicant
(or authonzed representative)
4.Itg.o-=t
Date
9
_~ , ~) pro'~t"'Ct ~IJ.~
Signature of Applicant
(or authorized representative)
N/A
Printed Name and Title of Operator
(if different from Applicant)
N/A
Signature of Operator
(if different from Applicant)
H. Consultation
I. Individuals and Organizations
City of Chula Vista:
Steve Power, Planning and Building Department
Luis Hernandez, Planning and Building Department
Garry Williams, Planning and Building Department
Miguel Tapia, Community Development
Jose Dorado, Community Development
Mandy Mills, Housing
Sarah Johnson, Housing
Silvester Evetovich, Engineering Division
Jim Newton, Engineering Division
Frank Rivera, Engineering Division
David Kaplan, Engineering Division
Ben Herrera, Engineering Division
Hasib Baha, Engineering Division
Khosro Aminpour, Engineering Division
Rima Thomas, Engineering Di vision
Michael Maston, Engineering Division
Gary Edmunds, Fire Department
Justin Gipson, Fire Department
Lynn France, Conservation and Environmental Services Department
Others:
Dee Peralta, Chula Vista Elementary School District
Sweetwater Authority
10
4.IlD.o"T
Date
Date
Date
2. Documents
City ofChula Vista General Plan Update, 2005.
Final Environmental Impact Report, City ofChula Vista General Plan Update, EIR No. 05-01,
December 2005.
City ofChula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, February 2003.
Final Air Quality Report - Los Vicinos, 1501 Broadway, ChuJa Vista CA, dated April 13,2007
Preliminary Geological Investigation for 1501 Broadway, Chula Vista, CA dated October 17,
2006 (Leighton and Associates, Inc.)
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment for Los Vecinos, Chula Vista, CA dated August I, 2006
and addendum dated April 3, 2007 (Leighton and Associates, Inc.).
Preliminary Drainage Study for Los Vecinos, Chula Vista CA dated March 14,2007 and
addendum dated April 2007 (Lintvedt, McColl and Associates, Inc.).
Preliminary Water Quality Report for Los Vecinos, ChuJa Vista CA dated March 13, 2007 and
- addendum dated April 2007 (Lintvedt, McColl and Associates, Inc.).
Preliminary Sewer Study for Los Vecinos, ChuJa Vista CA dated March 19, 2007 (Lintvedt,
McColl and Associates, Inc.).
Noise Study for Los Vecinos, Chula Vista, CA dated February 28,2007 and addendum dated
April 2007 (Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.).
Traffic Site Access Analysis for Los Vecinos, Chula Vista CA dated February 8, 2007 (Kimley-
Horn and Associates, Inc.).
3. 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 Department, 276 Fourth Avenue,
Chula Vista, CA 91910.
Date:
Stephen Power, AICP
Environmental Projects Manager
J:\Planning\MARIA\lnitial Study\Los Velocinos Wakeland\!S-07-017DraftMND.doc
II
-- ------
\\c\~~CI7~g~
\ . ~ _I f I I I f l.L r ITT f T
\ ~ s;a~rnmE
\ ~J t
~ ~==~
l" m\:1 1 U V)C\ \ ~ = ~.....
f-1111 ~ == ~~
t= II ~ \ - = - .......:........
I = - __...-..._r-:..........
, _ _-...-...-v_
- -- --...-
= ) = -- ...-...-
y J --
--
\ IYI
-,,-\\\\V
LOCATION ~ =; tHE E
l I I I -rT 1 \
-v
11
-
)
1-
III I
f--
I--
I--
C-.
I--
-
-
-, "
I
]
I
Anita St
~ I I
f-
-
L..- -
- -
-
- --
= =- --
(f) = --
<: - -
"' = -
OJ>
(f) = -
~ - - -
=
~ - If 1/1 r I
I I I -
~~ -
f-
-
,--
C HULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DE PARTM E NT
LOCATOR PROJECT Wakeland Housing & PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
C) APPLICANT: Development Corp. INITIAL STUDY
PROJECT 1501 Broadway Project Summary: Proposed: 42-units of affordable, multifamily
ADDRESS: rental housing with a community center for residents.
SCALE: I FilE NUMBER:
~ No Scale 15-07-017 Related cases: PCZ-07-06, DRC-07-27 & PCC-07-037
J:\planning\carlos\locators\is07017.cdr 12.28.06
,EXHIBIT A
ATTACHMENT "A"
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM (MMRP)
LOS VECINOS -1S-07-017
This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program has been prepared by the City of Chula Vista
in conjunction with the proposed Los Vecinos project. The proposed project has been evaluated
in an Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration prepared in accordance with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and City/State CEQA Guidelines (IS-07-017). The
legislation requires public agencies to ensure that adequate mitigation measures are implemented
and monitored for Mitigated Negative Declarations.
AB 3180 requires monitoring of potentially significant and/or significant environmental impacts.
The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for this project ensures adequate
implementation of mitigation for the following potential impacts(s):
. 1. - Air Quality
2. Geology and Soils
3. Hazards/Hazardous Materials
4. Hydrology and Water Quality
5. Noise
6. Transportation/Traffic
7. Mandatory Findings of Significance
MONITORING PROGRAM
Due to the nature of the environmental issues identified, the Mitigation Compliance Coordinators
shaH be the Environmental Review Coordinator and City Engineer of the City of Chula Vista.
The applicant shall be responsible to ensure that the conditions of the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program are met to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator and
City Engineer. The applicant shall provide evidence in written form confirming compliance with
the mitigation measures specified in Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-07-017 to the
Environmental Review Coordinator and City Engineer. The Environmental Review Coordinator
and City Engineer will thus provide the ultimate verification that the mitigation measures have
been accomplished.
Table 1, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Checklist, lists the mitigation measures
contained in Section F, Mitigation Necessary to Avoid Significant Effects, of Mitigated Negative
Declaration 18-07-017, which will be implemented as part of the project. In order to determine if
the applicant has implemented the measure, the method and timing of verification are identified,
along with the City department or agency responsible for monitoring/verifying that the applicant
has completed each mitigation measure. Space for the signature of the verifying person and the
date of inspection is provided in the last column.
J :\Planning\MARIA \lnitial Study\Los Velocil1os Wakeland\I$-07-0 17MMRPtext.doc
E
i"
c:
~
c:
a
::;:
c:
.S!
ro
~
r--
o
r-'-
o
ch
en
o
c:
Ci
'"
>
en
o
-'
......
'"
.0
..
I-
:;;:
<(
c::
<-'
o
c::
Q.
...t'J
2
i=
c::
o
Q.
W
c::
C
2
<(
(!)
,2
D:::
o
!:::
2
o
:;;:
2
o
~
<-'
i=
:;
~
i:
~
E
E
o
(J
-g ~
;; 0
c. -
E en
o ]j
t,) 'c
"
:c
"in >.
c:-e
o ~
~o.
"
0:
_ c:
o 0
0:;:::
c: ~
:~~
.... "
>
,~,'t;
0..8
--'-
"'.
ciii
">: I::
" 0
0"
-
. .
" 0
a. 0
"
'--
~
"
00
~
0.
_c:
o 0
"0:;::
o ~
..I::.S!
--
Q;I 'C
:; "
>
"
~
~
~
"
:;
c:
g
~
g
~
>-
....
:J
<<
=0
o
0:
"
c: 0
OZ
;; Q)
~ ~
e>"
'"
.- ~
:; ~
:;
E
l"
c:
g
c:
o
:2
c:
o
~
co
~
t"-
O
,.:.
o
ch
on
o
c:
'u
'"
~I
'"
c:
i2
>> 'S
~ 5~
U OJ:g c C
:;::,.~ aJ ro w
c Ii5 E 0) E
.~ ~ 1ii'~ ~
8:'~~~at
4:woQ.O
-
x
x
~
'"
.0
'"
I-
x
x
2
en
:>
u c:
~ 0
..c:~
Ui;5
c: ~
m '"
0: c:
~
D",
rom
.c'"
'" c:
",,,,
co.. IJ.)
Q,J 01 :g.
E.S.. "S
~ g '* E
'~E'~ '5
~-ge c
c ro 0.. ,'2
o . ~
:.= CJ)ro
.~:6 ~
~ ~.~
.c~ ..c::
=-DO
~ i.3 II)
0"= ro
~~
"m ~ o.
"'- '"
.:;:05 2
~ a g
a c U'J"
';~~
.c.c~
>-"'"0
-
~ ui
11)~
~c:
o ~
"2 ro
~ u
E :.s
~ m "0
.~ 0. ~
~ ~ 3:
.Q C 8-
u Q.) cD
2 ~ ~
V} 'S 0
8 cr i!3
u ~ '"
~ .9 .E
::3 '0 c
"E 2 0
~ ~ ~
C 0 -6
rn u ~
~ n:i
"& .g
13
3 ~
.Q Qj
~ ~
'" '"
:::J :::J
"'''
o ~
~ E
c: ~
.E 'S
-sg
.~ c
",0
~'5
- ~
Hi
c: c:
~8
.
. . .
u
~--
- c:
m ~
rn E
u 0.
W"S
'" 0-
:::J~
"0
~
"
3
o
'?-
ID
'"
~
i3
.2
"
ro
~
'"
c:
E
~
Co
o .
~c
i;5 ~
"C' E
.- ~
w 'S
'" 0-
:::J ~
.
~
N
E
E
E
.8
~
'm
"0
~
u
1
m
~
ro
c:
o
13
2
;;;
c:
0_
u "'
~ ~
.c"O
- ~
~ >
%;:e
S2
.
.9 .9
~
:0
'in
'"
o
0.
"'
m
~
'"
u
S
0-
"'
ro
"' . on
m- "0
~ ~ C'O
ro "0 ~
"0 ~
aJ .2:
TI:'=
m '"
~ ~
"'-
~ ~
N .!:::!
E.~
m c:
(jj "E
~
:0
'in
"'
o
~
"'
m
~
'"
u
'S
0-
"'
ro
. .
"
~-
c: "'
m ~
E"O
~ ~
~ N
0.._
~ E
~ :~
0. E
~
m
(;
~
E
2
a
"0
ill~
~~
~.~
0_
~.-
~ci
~ c:
~:g
0.."3
ED
0'"
':::.!::
~~
:5 "'0
E ~
u 0
~rn
~ ~
~ ~
:::J1J,
rou
c=
~D
~ ~
,,~
;;:: 0
0-
w.Q
.:!!o..
o ~
O~
- "'
- c:
gj.2
-a;-g
.c~
-;ti)
> c:
2.8
~ m
o c:
wE
~.~
~:S ~
_ m_
"' ~c:
>.- ~
o..~-O
~~ e
.
.
.Q
0.
c:
o
0.
m
"0
~
>
m
~
m
o
::::: ui
c:"o
~ m
u 0
'" ~
iJu
\13=
D
"' 0
" ~
.c c:
'" 0
~ ~
w~
~
.c ~
3"
=:2
'" ~
;;; >
Eg
.
.~
:0
~
~
"0
~
wa.i
> u
~ ~
o ~
.s ~
So
90
TI ~
m_
bE
~ 'E
"r;iio
"S; C'")
>>.S
C:.c
ro:-=
~ 3
~JQ
~ ~
0:;;;
a
"0
c:
~
~"O
.c~
- >
-m
m~
- c:
.S ::J
o c:
~o
"'-
'" ~
~ >
u m
u ~
m ~
i5:Q
~J:
u ~ .
0>"0
~ ~
- >. ~
"' c: ~
8 ~ B
~";: 0
~ m"'
-"0 m
..c-tJ::
"' 0 "'
~ ~ ~
wf5~
> '" ~
> ~"'
.
.
N
o
bD
m
0.
"
~
>
~
0.
.8
:g.g
c: m
o 0
u ~
c: u
,2 :5
"' 0
o~
:;; 0
(Dc
_ 0
~-
.s .~
Q52
~m
" E
~ ~
'[5~
~~
~ 0
~S
"00
":; i5
e '"
0.3
3
'0
'0 -g .1d~
II) ~ >>7i.i c
~ g- ~2:[
gciJ:::J...:ggE
.- C C:J '- 0
N=OOtnroU
::: ~ Qj:: .~-5 OJ
1I)..c: > aJ ro (/) a.
roO)~o..8m~
~_i; - U) ?P"
~,-"OaJ_::t::'-
~i5i5E~~.a
.[ij:t:: Cl) l!) t5 >.::
c9gN2t~
ro ~ ctlv E ro ro 0
E.Q-8~~~~8
.......c .3 u ro 3 y.3
O~.~~oooVJ
(/):J"O -.....
-D<J:::~(I)5:2J2
:J ~ 0 c ~.-:;: 0 <J
..... (/).-.....;>0 <( C
::: g ro ~ Cl) (f)U rn
~~"O~:s-g(f.).S
::~~B]5~~
ilJ..c C,.rn'::: o...>=.u
6lli~s:f?~go
U..:::CfJ(/)a:t)(/)>
.
.
.
.
E
e
'E
.8
.C'
o
::<
c:
o
~
~
r--
o
,.:.
o
ch
'"
o
c:
'u
'"
>
'"
o
--'
~
0>
C
!2
'S >-
tD~
E-o~
~ ~ ~ g>c
iij g E ':i3 E
,g'c~~15
~~ ~g2"
<:(o...DWD
~
.c
CO
f-
~
~B
.~ Q)
-a..-E c
~-g (!) (1J ~
(!) ro J:::"-.D
:5Q);;~~
2-~~g~
'E'5J~CJ CD
ID~:: c8
D.>,O('tJN
c:.~ ro.S r--.,-
.Q().~E.--
uQ)"E~,-
.s,s8a:15
~Bu(!)..9
0a)::::50
.:: ~ -~.~"O
o (D Q) U) ID
QJ:Qo:::C-ro
g6;-ro2-O
ro w..... ro c:-
~ :g ai -g.Q
.~ 6 E w q; .
0'- c E .~-g
~ -=-J; E"'V; ~
.Q ro E 8 ~:;:;
o:-5iw~..srn
N
'"
c
::g
"5 >.
rn~
E-g~
~ rn ~
c '" E
rnc_
.~'c rn ro
Cica.5:I
a..!!! Q) c: Q)
<(o...owO
x
'"
c
:Q
'S >.
CD:':::
c-oU
U c::g 01--
~ro(Dcc
c: 0) E'~ E
,g'~ ~.~ ffi
8:~ ~ ~ g-
<(o...owo
x
x
x
2
en
"
u c
~ 0
.1:::;:
U U
~
C ~
rn '"
D:E
" .
0"
~~
~ ~
" c
(I) 'OJ
= c
gw
- ~
('0:':
cu
~1!
",-
'-='0
E c
~ 0
0.+=
",g
c-
.- '"
"0:..:;
rn rn
6>'"
- ~
O~
~E
ffi~
o "
'" rn
.~ 0..
~ ~
5"-
E15
.12 ~
o:~
a: ~
ID E g 5
."0 o~ 15 ~
Q)'t: 0"'0:;:; 0
~l1)uC~E
-0 o..u ro""6 Q)
c:::=::(lJU)o...O
ro ~.~ ~.: .....
-gUJc=<t..2
g?.9E~~~
<1) UI1>-o =:5"'0
,g~ro20@
roC.D",ou.......
.0 ctI c: 0 (/)
~~cro2'1
~~.ro20~
.~ E 0..2:1 c:'--
UQ}-OU)ro""":
ro ro :grtiiJ.HO
C..o ro U 01(")
.2 ro.D 0 c W
=-0-0-15:3
OE~m~~o:::c
11)--rogug
-0 -g-g g '-.E ro
>. ro ro a. U) U) >
@V)U)g-ao~
00 -- _ Q)
g>iii UJ ~ ro e c:::
';::1515:5~cu
8~~'~~8~
co
~
'"
c
~
'S >.
co:':::
E-g ~ 0)--
~ ro a5 c c
c: 01 E ~ E
.~.~ ~ ~ 1ij
8:~ ~'g g-
<(o...owp
Q.J5 _
01:;::; C 0
~~.~~c -"~ ~
'[ijrn>oro CD.. !IJ
-D ~~:~Cf)_ ID-o, ~.E
D..~6'E.9~g;13ID ~--
.~ ~ .... a. ~ t5 ~ e 0.= ID ~ E
~ -- 'ffi ID co ~ c ~ ro .9 ID g ~ rn
__- ~ .~ = (5 !IJ roE ro c -0 = .~ E en
'E3tJ)..c:.t:~ ID~IDOc.IDe
w5tiJ~5~~=:-~~~'SO-
o..=;:;':;...,U 3..0 0 ro aJ';:::U CJ"~
01 g U 0..;:;'''''' :;..., ID :s 0.. 0.. ~:.;::;
.~:::JaJErocr~ot5lDQ5cco
-g 'c..c 0 ~ ..... ~ E 2 ..0 ID 02 Q,) 0.
.... of- wOo o-....-:;;;.S13 c aJ
o;w !IJ....~....O~t'\]CI::JC\1O::
m.~ u; ~2 .2 ID 5-ffiLD~ E-g
-- c-roOrocl:: aJ
o -g ~ o..s Z ~ 0 iii .?- 5 0. ro
aJ.,= 0..01 ....-o~.r[!c..u- u ro 01
(.):J01~roaJ(I) r/J --.~
I:: cr C '0 c'2 -'-:"'0- a.. (I) 0 a;o ....
~ ~'6 ~.20~~~2:5c E..g
~a;o~O>OJc~~coa:J.oID8:s
.-.c O>(ij ~.Q c aJ C c E ilJ ~
~rn(ij.g ro ~g-gg.Q~;;; C
~~& ID'CCt: ~ ~ g ~t5 ~~-Q
:: :;...,aJ-E.E o.t:g.bb~ E!lJro
.Q3-Erorn~~iii~~~ERig
O:tno:5uo8a.88~8o..~
.n
'"
c
:g
'S >-
a:J.~
,q-g:5 0)-"
~ro~cc
c: OJ E ~ E
~.~ t aJ t
._ C ro C ro
8:~ g-'~g-
o::x::a..owo
x
x
x
"'
x
~
co
rn
0..
2
en
"
u c
~ 0
..c:.;::;
UU
~
c ~
rn '"
o.::E
"C "''''
~!IJ C ~ ~
aJQJilJ::J_
g~E;..o.S:{J ~
._:.;::; U - -0 QJ C
3~~~~E(!)
u aJ e ___ (!) E-o
Cl:lO"....C!IJIDc
:.;::; i::' ffi aJ (!) 6 ro
=." ~-o.~ ~~ D-~
E 8.~ ~D. "s'~
(!) E -- W.9 E -0 (!) .
~2.S,qw* ~'6,.9
'~III-ilJUCGJO)c~
1:J ID..o 11i'- C W._
ro:.;::; =:..c.S c::o >,"E
~'> ctJ -" ctJO(ij t'\];::;: 0
rot3~E-D.a enU8
-ro!IJ1:JEE(!)Q,)
o c>>aJ(!}..........c-E3:
Q) C _u coo ~ __ Q)
(.):.0 5'Etnu;.S 0"5
Ri.g~QjC(!}1:J6~
~ .... _ _ (l)..c Q).-
~C>>QQ,)>-;t5uro
'-1:J-E'D (!) c22c
(!) C Q :{J ro 'i:: ID.:2 Q)
== ro U --02..... ro E
..9 OJ C III (!) C Q,) If) c:
.....2.Q~~Q)::Q,)e
.Qro~'>6Ern:S'>
O:~ Qj~ c.~-5i..9~
cO
E
!;'
c:
]
'c
o
::;;
c:
.!2
rn
"'
:'I
.--
~
o
,.:.
o
ch
'"
o
c:
'co
'"
>
'"
.31
co
c:
~
'S >-
CD.'!::
~TIU
B ~:g gc
~ OJ E ~ E
.~.~~~~
8:~ g:g ~
<(Q...owo
co co CO
c: c: c:
:Q ~ :2
.s>. "s>, 's
CO .-= OJ ~ CD
~"'Ou 2';-~~ .2>0
uffi:ggc0rocgc~ffi~
:gO)E'~E~OJE~ECOJE
r5.=t Wt:: B.=t:: Wt rc C_
._ c ru c rc ._ c ro c:: ro .~ .;:: ro
8:~ ~'g Cl) 8:~ g-.~ (!) g~ ~
<(o...owo <(D...DWO <!Cl..O
CO
c:
i2
.S >-
m::=
"::-uu
U c:;:, 0)-
:;:, ro a3.S ai
ffi g> E w.s
u'- t (lJ '--
= C ro.!: rn
g~ g- ~ g-
<(o...DWO
...,.,::,r;
a\:3 X
D..;.Q
;;;;;""'"
x
x X
X X
X X
X X
.2) .2)
Ui Ui
:;, :;,
u c: u c:
ill 0 ill 0
-c:;::; -c:,;:::
U u U u
c: ill c: ill
0. 0.
0 W 0 '"
0: c: 0: c:
't7i:;;
Ci:""
~J5 X
C,U
X
......
OJ
..0
ro
I-
X
X
.2)
Ui
:;,
u c:
ill 0
..1:::;::;
u~
c:o.
0",
o:c:
~2 ~ _~o~:g~(f)J!J c:ga3
~ ~~ .~~~(l)~~.~~m _~uo9'.~
OD (l)~ -'---0 M' "SE ,y-. ~
:,;:::c w"EO N~~(l)O~*~~_ ~- (l)~
~~ ~.crcE,--~.~~gOOu~~2~~~~~~
-(f) D OO~~~.~~~CC-'C C(f)"'O-o
~~(l)ro~~~~.5o"'OEroE-OE(lJi~o~ffic
8~~~3i~~~u~S~~~~2~~.c~~>-~ffiwDE
_ X 0 _ w ;:>~"0 _ ~.!: '@ 2 g:..~ 2 ~~ ro U 0 ID .{g -0 (I) C g"
~.~'--"'O~o"'OM~3DUOO~fi~(f)~E~~5.c::c~.QOJ"'O
Erc22 (f)~_~'--2wccrccc~._-'-c~rc,--~c~
,--_wc~IDuo~_g~5g~g8g~.~~~~~(f)~~=5
w.~E::;(.)o.=...""WD... .....~ ro,y -"",""" 0....0...-
~o.-ow~~~a.~E~~.~~~=~~~~~~~_~wE
g~~~~oro~~wow~o~wEro~6~w~~~~~E
~~R.n~~EID.5~UEcc~ZWID~~S~~:~IDIDO
~'V~ ~ u~~~~-v O>uDo~~~,vW~~D
~EES~~~ES~D~~NE<~'5~~~wro~c~=~
D~~w~~E~D~=>'6!um.~e~~~~~~illC~
owcrnocroEoo~~z,-wuca.~~u~o .Ew~~
-0 -OD_ ~ ~~ ro ill ~roa.N ~
~~~~W~ cmo.~w~wo~~BE '~e~o-'~~-
CD W :5 ~ g l;'"E g ~ ~'6 N :5 u ~ :1311 ~ 5 0.. a. E I? 6-.- ~ ~
ro ::::J._ ~ a..=. _ ro rn ~ 0 c ~ __ w ro E c ~ '8 _ w . co w'~:.c 'S
::::J~~m~~~ ::::Jro~~~-D~ m~wmDro~cEwc
~~2~ccw:5~~ ~~~~-mE wu=oc~o>rn
m_c8~85'i~~~~~~::::JE~~.~EB8~I?~U;5~
_~o_ocro~~wroco- ~::::J::::JW -~~E2w'-
=~~ro -c~- ~-_~~_~~EEro~u .-c~S
o~roe~B'ffi~O.~~w~o~ocwcrn.~~c ~~::::J'i
~~~~'~~E.~~~o:5~~wo~=~e~.2~~oOE~u
o C w ~ ::::J ~ _ x 0 rn "'C - ~ u w ~ U'5 ~ C ~ E I? U._ c w
~ro=rn~wrnW'ccErnwZ.~>::::Jmc::::J::::Ju o=ctlo-
~Ectla.~~E-~ro~:5~u~WE~w~~ro~~<Eu~
~
ai
'"
co;
X
X
X
"
~
on
ro
X c..
.2)
Ui
:;,
u c:
ill 0
.r:~
U ~
c: 0.
o '"
0: c:
ill
_:5 ~-;:-w
~o~u -2.~~
~ a~-E g~~
c~C:::::J_~c~
f3i:6~o2<..s.3
D..1n~Ecm~u}
g-~~g8;g-5~
w~~::g;::<(~
.,s~ww'oocnw
_-u~c<l)u~
.~2Bo_<I).~~'g
E -6rn -g .~~ -g C
w::::J.~roocroW
~~"2UQ.Jgrn:.a
~~g<C:5..oS~
:Q'6US::5t'~ ~
'5c~u'imwo
..oc.~2~g.E~
O~~3~a.Ei3
rn 0-0::: 0 a. m ~..c:
>w-EE..c:::.-(!)
e~.!9~o=cE
a.::::JcouroQ)~
c..!I) (\,) o'E we>. .
roroE-=wu'~.gw
.9~5~E~-aCJro
o15'5;;:'~'~~'~ ~
it ~ ~ l; g ~ 2 ~ .<1)
;:
J
g]
1
g
c
o
2
c
.2
ro
~
r0-
o
~
o
J,
w
o
c
'0
Q)
~I
..--
~
..c
'"
I-
0>
C
~
co
~TI
c3 C -
ro c
:0 Q)
C 0> ~
~.:= -E
.- c: ro
CiCo-
C-~ Cl)
<1:0.0
x
x
x
x
2
~
~
u c
Q) 0
~ t5
u Q)
c ~
ro w
D:E
~ E
'c Q) e
:Jw......_-o
OJ'o :5 ~ c
.~ C"I W ro
rooDQ}"5o
~~~.~ e
(fJ 0...-- <f)-O
QieE'5~
C a..:J , 0
o a... E Q) 0...
i6~:~~~
6"0 E ~ (l)
u.2ro--:5
.:::g>.~o ~
rn"-..c u..... E
-oITjv..Qd)2
C J:: 1J)..o:;:; <f)
ro_ V) aiii5 ID ~
~ t!1 ~,s g- c
ro c u...... '- 0
-.- <f) W 0..:';:;
-:g Q) 0._ ro
~-S.D ~.~~
E..o-oroc~
:JUC:a.(!)>
a. QJ C'IJ 0-32 _
a.'o"CB IJ) r5
.9 a.. w '0 ~"c
ow~eE~
2=-ro.crou
;.x: s -g F ~ E
N
~
~
u
'"
ro
0.
u
o
TI
:D
Ii:
'"
:;0
:;0
~
"
~
'?
~
:;;
o
.
"
~
o
"
"
o
o
U
o
"
>
~
^
TI
o
co
~
:<
"
-<
'"
i
;;
0::
A TTACHAfENT c'
6]~ Cti!:a
~~Vision
2020
LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT
CHAPTER 5
Design
LUT 41,13 Prior to or concurrent with the approval of the first specific plan or other
zoning regulations in the South Third Avenue Districi establish a design code
that reinforces the safety and serenity of the area, and seeks to establish a
cohereni aesthetic, international character to the Southwest Planning Area.
LUT 41.14 The specific plan or other regulations prepared to guide developrnent in this
area shall address design issues that create a sense of place, a pedestrian-
friendly environmeni enhanced pedestrian linkages, and compatibility with
the scale and feel of a cohesive neighborhood community.
LUT 41.15 A specific plan or other regulations in the South Third Avenue District shall
require of wide sidewalks, through-block paseos, and other appropriate design
features that enhance the pedestrian environment to link high-use areas,
such as the post office; library; park; or a concentration of shops, with transit
stations or transit stops.
Amenities
LUT 41.16
Community amenities to be considered for the South Third Avenue District as
part of any incentives program should include, but not be limited to, those
listed in Policy LUT 271.
8.4.2
South Broadway District
--------------_._-_._.-._------_.._.---------_._-~~-------------~
Description of District
The South Broadway District (Figure 5-22) extends from L Street to the City boundary at the Otay
Valley.
Existing Conditions
The South Broadway District includes automobile services, major retail stores, and locai-serving
services for adjacent residential neighborhoods. Automobile-related/service repair shops currently
exist on South Broadway from L Street to Naples Street and are not compatible with surrounding
uses
Page LUT-144 City of Chula Vista General Plan
LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT
- -
Vision for District
The South Broadway District includes additional residential
units along South Broadway, and the phased removal of
conAicting automobile-related service/repair shops from L Street
to Naples Street and from Palomar Street to Anita Street The
District focuses on increasing the viability of retail shops,
providing for needed housing opportunities, and improving the
appearance of this major corridor.
Automobile-related shops are focused within areas designated
as light industrial areas, west of Broadway and along Main
Street. This is a compatible location for necessary automotive services and avoids land use
conAicts on South Broadway, north of Anita Street
Revitalize land uses along South Broadway betvveen L Street and Anita
Street
Uses
LUT 42.1
Encourage the development of residential unit.s, mixerJ with appropriate retail
and professional office, ill the area designated as Mixed Use Residential
between L Street and Naples Street
LUT 42,2
Retain retail uses between Naples Street and the SDG&E utility easement
LUT 42.3
Encourage the development of residential units, mixed with appropriate retail
and professional office, in the area designated as Mixed Use Residential
between Palomar Street and Anita Street
LUT 42.4
Encourage the relocation of automobile-related service/repair shops from the
South Broadway District north of Naples Street and south of Palomar Street to
more appropriate areas, including within indust.rial areas west of Broadway
and within the Main Street District, with consideration to effects on adjoining
residential neighborhoods.
Page LUT-145
~w?-
---
'"'~
CHULAVlSTA
~~ Chl!la
"" VIsta
\~~~iEJ
~.~ Vision
. 2020
LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT
CHAPTER 5
LUT 42.5
Designate uses on the west side of Colorado Street as Light Industrial.
LUT 42.6
Strive for a distribution of uses within the areas designated as Mixed Use
Residential be1\^leen L Street and Naples Street to be retaii, office and
residential, as generally shown on the following chart:
~
o Residential
o Retail
. Offices
LUT 42.7
Strive for a distribution of uses within the areas designated as Mixed Use
Residential between Palomar Street and Anita Street to be retail, office, and
residential, as generally shown on the following chart:
C)
0 Residential
0 Retail
. Offices
LUT 42,8
Implement the Broadway Revitalization Plan, as adopted hy City CounciL
Intensity/Height
LUT 42.9 In the South Broadway District, residential densities within the Iv1ixed Use
Residential designation between L Street and Naples Street and be1\^leen
Palomar Street and Anita Street are intended to have a District-wide gross
density of 30 dwelling units per acre.
LUT 42.1.0 In the South Broadway District the commercial (retail and office) portion of the
Mixed Use Residential designation between L Street and Naples Street and
between Palomar Street and Anita Street is intended to have a Focus Area-
wide aggregate FAR of 1.0. Subsequent specific plans or zoning ordinance
regulations will establish parcel-specific FARs that may vary from the District-
wide aggregate (refer to Section 48.1, Interpreting the Land Use Diagram, for a
discussion of district-wide versus pa rcei-specific FAR)
LUT 42,1.1 Building heights on both sides of Broadway and along industrial Boulevard in
the South Broadway District shall be primarily low-rise buildings.
Page LUT-146 City of Chuia Vista General Plan
LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT
Design
lUT 42.12 Encourage the upgrading of older and/or marginal retail uses along the
South Broadway District
lUT 42.13 Prior to or concurrent with the approval of the first specific plan or other
zoning regulations for the South Broadway District between L Street and
Naples Street prepare specific guidelines for the development of mixed use
projects on South Broadway.
lUT 42.14 Concurrent with the approval of zoning for industrial uses at the northwest
corner of Colorado Avenue and Naples Street in the South Broadway District
ensure that light industrial uses on Colorado Street are designed and
constructed to: front on Colorado Street provide parking and entry door access
on the west side of buildings; and be appropriately buffered from residential
uses.
lUT 42.15 Prior to, or concurrent with the approval of the first specific plan or other
zoning regulations in the South Broadway District develop siting guidelines
and criteria for locating automobile-related service/repair shops in areas that
adjoin residential neighborhoods.
Amenities
lUT 42.16
Community amenities to be considered for the South Broadway District as part
of any incentive program should include, but not be limited to, the following,
and to those items listed in Policy LUT 27.1
. Community center or community-oriented gathering facility
. Sidewalk widening
. Pedestrian and landscaping improvements
. Streetscape improvements
. Recreational and computer rooms
. Mentor programs for education and entertainment
Page LUT-147
~\If?-
- -
=cr
CHULAVlSfA
:!
,\,
"'-.;
-5 :>
- -
..:::CQ
Uli:LD
i~iC>U~~ ~i;~, .""
LVI,[[)
i'OUS"'~:!AL~ fLS,
:...Cw.~....~:;D.
"'>'\I"",~
;NOd2<,; .t>.:- >,~~
.
eU'i.
-,: ",;, :'FU~L,::::
~:~!~I'~ F,~~~~~~' &
Southwest Planning Area
South Broadway District
>,
~
."
~
"-
(Q
,;-;
~
~,;
;.:
r;L:;.,..!i,(:ih ::
Ii"' "~
U' ""
~
?;:
RLT!,j,
~
:0"
l
,
,';;.:'
'"'
rTL.\:L..
Em'",
'-"
.v
R[3.
, ", ~
f:~';;L..
f';.:2-,;J',';.I,(:Ef,'.
~ ~
U:<t
L St.
Moss Sf.
Naples St.
Oxford Sf.
Palomar Sf.
~. ,,>~R:..'\I'L'"
~'.,."q"q>
4 "'q..
"E'.
,,\t'TLC
i'E;US;l~if\l f::.:.:. f'.L5.
~
NOT TO SCALE
'.1~~r
f-:<,
I,),;,
~:V;':L)
4_.
'~'rf<i $:
, t
~,,:';, ,"',,-
"",L L,~::' c.,
LEGEND
!ill
EAIST;NG T::O:ANS'T ST':"T;ON
:!-L-'~i:::<f:;..c..L
<:
Fig.ure 5-22
....... . . - FJTURS- TR,;,"./S,T RO..17E
AREAS OF C'-{A,"IGE
EX1ST!NG L.AND USE
Page LUT-148 City of Chula Vista General Plan
ATTACHMENT ()
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA - PLANNING & BUILDING D
276 fGaeth Ave., Chala Vista, CA 91910-2631
SUBJECT: Los Vecinos, 1501 Broadway
MAY 02 2007
~~ N,-\c*'Q. F
We the under-signed residence of the "Old" City of Chula Vista neighborhoo ,in the vicinity of Main
Street, Anita Street and Palomar Streets at South Broadway, ARE VEHEME to t e
construction of a the proposed, three (3) story high, "Los Vecinos", rental housing building in our
neighborhood.
This proposed three (3) story high building is being forcibly wedged into an existing residential area that
consists totally of only two (2) story structures, requiring extensive variances of the City of Chula Vista
Building Code requirements; Density, Parking, Building Setback, Open Space- naming just a few. We the
future neighbors of this monster DO NOT WANT IT IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD and ask that the
City of Chula Vist abide by its promise to our community when it annexed us, from the County of San
Diego over 30 years ago, to strictly enforce the Building Laws it has imposed on all of us equally all these
years. We love our community and work hard in keeping it a grate place to live and ask the City not to
abandon us.
EN ESP ANOL
Nosotros, que nuestros nombres y direcciones escribimos in este documento, somos residentes de la
ciudad de Chula Vista y vivimos cerca de las calles de Main Street, Anita Street, y Palomar Street y al sur
de la calle Broadway, ESTAMOS IN CONTRA de la construccion del edificio de tres (3) pisos altos, el
"Los Vecinos" proyecto, en nuestra comunidad.
A fuerza y in contra de la ley, se proponen a construir este proyecto, con su edificio de tres(3) pisos altos,
en nuestra comunida- entre medio de edificios de solamente dos (2) pisos altos. Esta construccion esta
contra la ley de construir edificos in esta zona par la ciudad de Chula Vista (City of Chula Vista Building
Code). Nosotros, los residendes de esta comunidad, quedamos de ser vecinos de este monstruo edificio, y
NO LO QUE DEMOS EN NUESTRO HOGAR. Le pedimos a nuestra Ciudad, al el alcalde, de Chula
Vista que cump]en con su promesa de tratar ]os a todos 10 mismo, quando empleando las leyes de la
Ciudad de Chula Vista. Eso los prometieron, ya hace mas que treinta (3D) anos, quando los anexo de el
Condado de San Diego. A nosotros Ios encanta nuestra comunidad, y trabajamos muy duro para continuar
ser orgullosos de nuestro vecino y Ie pedimos a la Ciudad de Chula Vista que no !os abandone.
NAME I NOMB_7RE~ DATE / FECHA ADDRESS! DffiECCION
~~~ _ '1-7-7- 0 7 /S"Li7 Mo10,DW-1Y 4"7'3
G ~q ~4 1/-;).9'-19 -;7 7;;< g-- aN~.;r':T'7
. ~~A ~ ' L -2 _ . ~s: ~~;:;q ~3
-:tJ:!:j1 tffp Gf'2-; u7 / <J'6 ~-;;t-'4r(JJ
~~ 'T--- i., l' cf) > '1----- jy-~1 ij-/~I/Ij- a:;- 9/
~ Ht.JAY- . / ~/.Z1-0! ~-3~ 'T~/;-:)j.Jl: 'Y9~
~^ -Arf2c ~ iJ~ '-W-tJ/ ~ J}/,I//q- ~6B
(.Jesus C~tvUVOk O/.f--;2q-oJ- 630I1N///rST#8if...
J.!)~L.J:;U t'o,rz.I't}6'G.. 0</ -:)...9-01- ~3:2 Av'fT1l- S!-j1f /tJ6
=feY ~~~ ~1~?~ S-32:~17~-J(#ldr
/ rA8(cel r' I f'* ~___ _ ~l ",<Jzr T 1/=111 /c7 1-:
F:\Personal-lofl\CV Condo\CV BLDO PhOlOS\CV NEW BLDO\LosVccinosLeucr.doc
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA - PLANNING & BUILDING DEPARTMENT
276 fourth Ave., Chula Vista, CA 91910-2631
SUBJECT: Los Vecinos, 1501 Broadway
We the under-signed residence of the "Old" City of Chula Vista neighborhood, in the vicinity of Main
Street, Anita Street and Palomar Streets at South Broadway, ARE VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED to the
construction of a the proposed, three (3) story high, "Los Vecinos", rental housing building in our
neighborhood.
This proposed three (3) story high building is being forcibly wedged into an existing residential area that
consists totally of only two (2) story structures, requiring extensive variances of the City of Chula Vista
Building Code requirements; Density, Parking, Building Setback, Open Space- naming just a few. We the
future neighbors of this monster DO NOT WANT IT IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD and ask that the
City of Chula Vist abide by its promise to our community when it annexed us, from the County of San
Diego over 30 years ago, to strictly enforce the Building Laws it has imposed on all of us equally all these
years. We love our community and work hard in keeping it a grate place to live and ask the City not to
abandon us.
EN ESPANOL
Nosotros, que nuestros nombres y direcciones escribimos in este documento, somos residentes de la
ciudad de Chula Vista y vivimos cerca de las calles de Main Street, Anita Street, y Palomar Street y al sur
de la calle Broadway, ESTAMOS IN CONTRA de la construccion del edificio de tres (3) pisos altos, el
"Los Vecinos" proyecto, en nuestra comunidad.
A fuerza y in contra de la ley, se proponen a construir este proyecto, con su edificio de tres(3) pisos altos,
en nuestra comunida- entre medio de edificios de solamente dos (2) pisos altos. Esta construccion esta
contra la ley de construir edificos in esta zona por la ciudad de Chula Vista (City of Chula Vista Building
Code). Nosotros, los residendes de esta comunidad, quedamos de ser vecinos de este monstruo edificio, y
NO LO QUEDEMOS EN NUESTRO HOGAR. Le pedimos a nuestra Ciudad, al el alcalde, de Chula
Vista que cumplen con su promesa de tratar los a todos ]0 mismo, quando empleando las leyes de la
Ciudad de Chula Vista. Eso 10s prometieron, ya hace mas que treinta (30) anos, quando ]os anexo de el
Con dado de San Diego. A nosotros los encanta nuestra comunidad, y trabajamos muy duro para continuar
ser orgullosos de nuestro vecino y Ie pedimos a la Ciudad de Chula Vista que no los abandone.
NAME I NOMBRE
~ r~GvJJ
,
DATE I FECHA
'1-:2 -0
LI.,,/ 9 ""-]
-- - o--/.-
2- .Le! ~ - 0 i-
t:- s))4 RzA )1-21-07
ADDRESS I DlRECCION
.s3 Z /711//74- .f:/:))o
S oS. r ria r/ -lJ5..P Jl
cS ar I/-rv{' ~:# Sf.
/S Y7 !3/2()ltlXu/t-7 # L/ /
F:\Persona!-1 of1\CV Condo,CV SLDG Pholos\CV NEW BLDG\LosVccinosLe:tler.doc
~!f?
---
p -
".TTACHMENT 7
P I ann
n g
&
Building
Planning Division I
Department
Developmenl Processing
C/IT OF
CHUIA VISTA
APPLICATION · DEVELOPMENT PROCESSING . TYPE B
Part 1
Type of Review ReQuested
o General Plan Amendment
D General Development Plan DNew (or) DAmendmenl
~D SPA/Specific Plan DNew (or) DAmendment
Zone Change DEC 1 4 2006
Tenlative Subdivision Map
D Annexation
D Other:
STAFF USE ONL Y
Case #: f'C2- 01- OVJ
F;ling Date: 12). \4 . 0 c." By: H.~
Ass;gned Planner: N.., '1~ 1'11' np't1
Receipt #:
Project Account: BjI, - d..\ ..,
Deposit Account: ,Yo 5"
Retated Cam: T '-,-0'" - 0, :' t'f'( -"1- dol'} P(C-Ol- 0:'1
A lication Information
Applicant Name: Wo. ~elu.r.~ ft6LJ':'\l'1g tJ.YVJ. DeVelCJ~ CO"'POY"oJ-\OIV
Applicant Address: 1..12.5 P,""Ot;d~'C), k. /000. ~ Dietp. LA q 2/0 J
Contact: ~e~cc/it L-DU'I~ '-' Phone: u.lliJ' 2.3,5. 22.orlJ )(,3/3
Applicant's Interest in Property (If applicant is not the owner. lh~ner's authorization signature at the end of this form is required
to process this reque~t.) DOwn ~ lease lAIn escrow D Option to purchase . ~ 'i:io1fJ-'
Engineer/Agent: Lt"-+-v"'.A+-,rnrf'.oII~A~c.t\C.. Address:ZBIO(AIY1.'na Del ~IOS.>5t200 GAGJ2.I~
Contact: h't no.. 5~ IoU Phone: I.A I q. zq 4 . 4l.f 4 ()
Primary contact is: I)a Applicant D Agent D Emall addressofprimarycontact:....OU.le~lUo.~Jhd(..clI....
~GeneLQJ:J>L()ie:c.LDe:siiip!jon:.ian-lypesJ u_ u.. n_ ...
Project Name: 1-05 Veuinos ProposedUse:l'hulfi-f(>t'I'\.ol:J reS:ld~c.J
General Description of Proposed Project: l.j Z. U" i ~ 0 of (). fh> V"cI~ 61 c- ) Yh u l-h-F~...... j J ~ r tn-t-tM
hov5'rn:B Wi~~~l'Y1tv'1t1""i~~..fe.v -f-c,. reJ,', d~"';:
?mfo er\ '. dVI..r\'i:)L c:\? 'to 'i:: ~ 7_o1\t:. \.0 ~\\()..u \e::"d€'II-h<:.1
~(:-r:nrdc..b\e. h~~
_ ._ __ _u_ ___
Subject Property Information [all types)
Localion/StreeIAddress:1501 e,\"o6ldl...)tA~. CJ-.Ulg. Vi5~. CA qrqll
1,4(, ~".,.~
Assessor's Parcel #: (jZ2, O'!2.', D 5. DO Total Aceeage: 1-33 net- Redevelopment Area (If applicable):
General Plan Des;gnation: mU ~ Zone Designation: [... ,p
Planned Community (if applicable): rV Pro
Current Land Use: GO ""'men:; cJ
Within Montgomery Specific Plan? 0 Yes ~ No
General Plan Amendment
Proposed land Use Designation: N A-
Justification for Genera! Plan change:
176 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista
Ca! do rn i a
91910
(619) 691.5101
APPliCATION · DEVELOPMENT PROCESSING . TYPE B
Part 2
OTY OF
CHULA VISTA
General Development Plan
General Development Plan Name: N Pr
Proposed land Uses / Tolcl Acres:
Commercial/Acres
Parks / Acres
Community Purpose / Acres
Public/Quasi / Acres
Industrial I Acres
Schools / Acres
Circulation I Acres
Open Space / Acres
Residential/Range:
Single Family Detached I to
Single Family Attached I to
Duplexes I to
Apartments I to
Condominiums / to
Units Acres
Units Acres
Units Acres
Units Acres
Units Acres
Units Acres
TOTALS I to
Annexation
... .----....----
__._______u_______ _. ___
-- . .---...----.....-.A.---
.:.=J'J:eZOniag'-~._'_'_P_
-iAFeG-Reference #.
Tentative Subdivision Map
Subdivision Name;~
Minimum lot size:
Number of units:
CV Tract #:
Average lot size:
Zone (ha nge
(2(Rezoning 0 Prezoning
Proposed zoning: ~ l~
o Setback
Authorization
""'""",.. "'"" Ken "<..... L. s"u du . Pre,,,'''''', "'.""...... ~""1~ \)eoI......_ ""rp.
Applicant Signature: jiq- ~-dr ~. Date: I).... - / (_ ~ _
'---"
Print owner name': Chu-v1es. JlJh~
Owner Signarure*: t..e+I-er D~ C4I"1Set'\-i- ~u.~~ Date:
.Proof of ownership may be required. Letter of consent maY.;..be provided in lieu of signature.
276 Fourth Avenue
ChuJa Vista
California
9l 91 0
(f, 1 9) 691 _ C; 1 n 1
November 16, 2006
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Ave.
Chula Vista, CA 91910
RE: Letter of Consent
Dear City of Chula Vista:
I am the owner of the property at 1501 Broadway in Chula Vista, CA (APN 622.
092-05-00). The property is currently in escrow for sale to Wakeland Housing
and Development Corporation. Wakeland is planning to construct an affordable,
multifamily rental housing development on the site,
This Letter of Consent is to authorize Wakeland Housing and Development
Corporation to submit the following applications to the City of Chula Vista for the
1501 Broadway site:
.-~-"_De:sjgrLReView-
· . Zoning Change
· Conditional Use Permit
· Preliminary Environmental Review
-- --------_._----~_._---- ---.-.----------.-.. ------~-
-----.-----
.__,______n_
---
Please feel free to contact me at 619.261.5887 !fyou have any questions.
Sincerely,
c>{
P I ann
n g
&
Building
Planning Division I
Department
Development Processing
CIlY OF
CHUIA VISfA
APPLICATION APPENDIX A
Project Description & Justification
Project Name: Los VeunOS
Applicant Name: AJo.~ d-v\ti. thJu :;.', n~ ().}'\().. ~d OfW1CJ'1-1- COI'"f'OI' QJ' O~
Please fully describe the proposed project, any and all construction that may be accomplished as a result of approval of
this project, and the project's benefits to yourself, the property, the neighborhood, and the City of Chula vista. Include any
details necessary to adequately explain the scope and/or operation of the proposed project. You may Include any
background information and supporting statements regarding the reasons for, or appropriateness of, the application. Use
an addendum sheet if necessary.
For all Conditional Use Permits or Variances, please address the required "findings" as listed in the Application Procedural
Guide.
See Af:l-~c..lWle~: A-f'f?ij1c(tX fr
--
276 Fourth Avenue
(hula Vista
Caljfornia
91910
(619) 691-5101
Attachment: Appendix A
Project Description and Justification
Preliminary Environmental Review
Project:
Applicant:
Los Vecinos
Wakeland Housing and Development Corporation
Proiect Description
Overview
Wakeland Housing and Development Corporation, an experienced developer of
affordable housing, is proposing to develop 42 units of affordable, family rental
housing on the former Tower Lodge Motel site located at 1501 Broadway within
the Merged Chula Vista Redevelopment Project Area. Wakeland has entered into
an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement (ENA) with the City for the development of
the site.
Los Vecinos will be a family project, providing the following unit mix: 12 one-
bedrooms, 16 two-bedrooms, and 14 three-bedrooms. One hundred percent of
the units will be affordable to extremely and very low income families, with rents
ranging from 30 to 60 percent of Area Median Income.
The project will be extremely well managed, and will provide high quality resident
services. All of Wakeland Housing's board of directors and staff are committed to
providing resident services programs that strengthen families and help them
reach greater levels of economic stability and personal growth. Wakeland goes
way beyond bricks and mortar to provide residents with award-winning programs
that nurture the potential of youth, adults and seniors living in our communities.
We seek out residents' input and guidance in tailoring meaningful and
comprehensive services to meet their needs and interests. And we do so with
respect and compassion. All of Wakeland's programs are free to our residents.
We do not duplicate services already offered in the greater community. Instead
we design and implement a customized program plan, collaboratively bringing
residents together with community groups.
Wakeland's Youth Programs provide educational support, activities and
structured sports with a goal of providing positive alternatives and strong role
models for children of all ages. Our Adult Programs strive to provide people with
practical skills in computers and literacy that will increase their financial potential.
1
Community Outreach
Wakeland has held one community meeting on the Los Vecinos project.
Residents, business owners, and community groups from the area were invited
to learn about and comment on the project. Meeting attendees were highly
supportive of the project, noting that it meets a strong demand for affordable
family housing in the area.
Zoning
The property has a General Plan designation of Mixed Use Residential (MUR)
and is within the South Broadway District. The zoning for the property is
Thoroughfare Commercial with a Precise Plan modifier (CTP) and is currently
inconsistent with the General Plan designation. To implement this designation a
rezone of the property will be required to allow a residential land use, which is
compatible with the MUR designation. While a mix of land uses are envisioned
for this district, development of anyone of these land uses separately will still be
compatible with the General Plan vision and policies for the district. This
approach would constitute "horizontal mixed use."
Financing
Financing and development of this project is proposed as a joint private-public
partnership. Wakeland is proposing to obtain Low Income Housing Tax Credit
financing to support the majority of the cost of constructing the project, with the
gap being closed by Wakeland's deferral of a portion of their developer fee and
funding of approximately $5,500,000 from the City's Redevelopment Agency.
Agency financial support will be essential to the successful completion of an
affordable project on this site.
Developer Qualifications
Wakeland was established in 1999 as a nonprofit corporation. Our mission is:
"To develop quality affordable housing projects with resident-education programs
for low-income families." With its for-profit and non-profit partners, Wakeland has
developed, acquired and rehabilitated over 5,000 units of affordable housing,
emerging as a leader in affordable housing communities in San Diego and
throughout California.
Wakeland works with a variety of municipaiities, developers and redevelopment
agencies throughout California. They utilize federal, state and local funding
resources including tax exempt bonds and tax credits and leverage other funds
from the private and public sectors.
Wakeland's board of directors is comprised of affordable-housing, community
and business leaders. Their team of highly qualified staff has expertise in both
affordable housing and on-site resident service programs that offer unique
opportunities for families and individuals to enhance their job marketability and
enrich their lives.
2
Justification
Benefits to Applicant
Development of the Los Vecinos project allows Wakeland Housing and
Development Corporation to meet its mission "To develop quality affordable
housing projects with resident-education programs for low-income families."
Wakeland is committed to providing safe, quality, truly affordable housing that
gives families the ability to gain stability and hope.
The Los Vecinos project allows Wakeland to:
Support Families - Stability breeds opportunity and prosperity. Residents of Los
Vecinos will be able to take advantage of on-site vocational programs. Children
will be able to sharpen their computer and reading skills. And more.
Support the community - Residents of Wakeland homes and apartments are
part of the backbone of our workforce - teachers, nurse's aides, firefighters,
security personnel, grocery clerks, to name a few. Affordable housing lends
stability so they can put down roots and support local businesses and the
economy.
Support businesses - Companies lose valuable employees because they can't
find affordable housing within reasonable proximity to their workplace. Los
Vecinos will allow let employees live close to where they work, reducing their
commute time. Businesses retain reliable employees.
Benefits to the Properly
The property currently houses an abandoned, blighted motel. When it was
operating, the motel had a high crime rate, as discussed above. Now that it is
abandoned, it is poorly lit, creating a dangerous area for residents. Additionally,
the site contains a large amount of trash, much of it from the old motel (old
mattresses, phones, etc.). And, the motel buildings are in extremely poor
condition.
The Los Vecinos project will dramatically revitalize the property, adding a well-
designed building, attractive landscaping, and site lighting. The project is being
designed by Carlos Rodriguez of Rodriguez Design Associates Architects and
Planners, who has a strong reputation for building high quality, award-winning
affordable housing, and extensive experience working in the City of Chula Vista.
Benefits to the Neighborhood
The Los Vecinos project will benefit the neighborhood in several ways:
· Providing new customers for area businesses
· Removing the blighted motel
3
. Revitalizing the area with the addition of a new, high quality, well-designed
project
· Providing affordable housing opportunities for residents
· Stimulating new development in a redevelopment area
· Increasing community safety with an "eyes on the street" design, on-site
management, and quality site lighting.
Benefits to the City of Chula Vista
This project meets the City's critical housing needs. and the production
requirements of the Redevelopment Agency for very low income housing.
Advances Redevelopment Agency goals
Additionally, the development of the former Tower Lodge Motel site represents
an opportunity to remove an existing blighted property. The motel has a long
history of community complaints, code violations, and police calls for service. In
2004, Tower Lodge had the highest calls for service per room ratio in the City
according to the Chula Vista Police Department, six times the median. Dating
back to 1987 the motel has been issued numerous Notices of Code Violations. In
2005 the motel was posted as a substandard building, all tenants were ordered
to vacate, and the owner secured the building, which has remained vacant since
that time.
And, the development of the Los Vecinos project helps the City meet its goal of
revitalizing and redeveloping Western Chula Vista, as described in its General
Plan and its Housing Element. Los Vecinos will be a vibrant addition to the
community, and will encourage further development in the area.
Finally, the project will provide much needed permanent, family rental housing in
the City. The City's draft Housing Element puts forth the following policy
objective: "Policy Focus 2.2 Support Housing Opportunities to Meet the City's
Diverse Needs: Utilizing available resources, seek to preserve and provide
sufficient, suitable, and varied housing by small and large family size, type of
unit, and cost, particularly permanent affordable housing that meets the diverse
housing needs of existing and future residents of Chula Vista.
Los Vecinos meets this need, providing housing for both small and large families.
And, the housing will be permanently affordable. .
4
~\rt-
-.-
. - -=
P I ann
n 0
"
& Building
Planning Division
Department
De\elopment Processing
em' OF
(HUlA VISfA
Disclosure Statement
Pursuant to Council Policy 101-01, prior to any action upon matters that will require discretionary action by the Council,
Planning Commission and all other official bodies of the City, a statement of disclosure of certain ownership or financial
interests, payments, or campaign contributions for a City of Chula Vista election must be filed. The following information
must be disclosed:
1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the property that is the subject of the application or the
contract, e.g., owner, applicant, contractor, subcontractor, material supplier.
ChOw I e S 0lJ"~ [011<.>....0')
IkIIMte\ ~ I-\-ou ~i "''0 /NAn...
Deli{.\ OI"'"",CV"-I- ,
(' LJ ,(-'o,...,,-t\ 0,"" C '" PI" " u-..-n- )
2.
If any person' identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals with
a $2000 investment in the business (corporation/partnership) entity.
3.
If any person' identified pursuant to (1) above is a non-profit organization or 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.
v:.~Y\r1e..J-1.... L. S,. uoY
Pves\~~
1N,.~I~iJ..- \1UVi,i"";:)~ \:)eUe1 o~ COy f'Oy~/) "-'
Please identify every person, Including any agents, employees, consultants, or independent contractors you have
assigned to represent you before the City in this matter.
4.
I"-,e.hnC.-I1. L.. 'f:>v..vO-eY ~o~+ ~Q"SCln
'/'!.,(j..Ift''':'\ 6-c.-t-~-c.\
t2.~u:.~ L-i)u',e;
Has any person' associated with this contract had any financial dealings with an official" of tbe City of Chula
Vista as it relates to this contract within the past 12 months. Yes_ No~
5.
If Yes, briefly describe the nature of the financial interest the official" may have in this contract.
6.
Have you made a contributio~ pf more than $250 within the past twelve (12) months to a current member of the
Chula Vista City Council? No ~ Yes _ If yes, which Council member?
--'---~------'
". --- -.- -----..
276 Fourth ,';venue
Chula Vista
California
91910
(619) 691-5101
City Of Chula Vista
Disclosure Statement - Page 2
7. HavE you provided more than $340 (or an item of equivalent value) to an official" of the City of Chula Vista in the
past twelve (12) months? (This includes being a source Df income, money to retire a legal debt, gift. loan, etc.)
Yes_ No+--- .
If Yes, which official" and what was the nature of item provided?
~ '--~
, Signature of CDntractor/Applicant
Date Dec.t'\Y"IbeY \\ ,2001.0
It,~nYJe;11,... L. SAudlj"'
Print or type name Df Contractor/Applicant
Person is defined as: any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint venture,association, sDcial club, fratemal
organization, corpDratiDn, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, any other county, city, municipality, district, or other
political subdivision, -or any other group or combination acting as a unit.
Official includes, but is nDt limited tD: MaYDr, Council member, Planning CDmmissioner, Member of a board,
commission, Dr committee Df the City, emplDyee, or staff members.
-'--. --- --.-'-
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista
California
91910
(619) 691-5101
~v~
-11-
-- -
P I ann
n g
& Building
Planning Division
Department
Development Processing
CIlY OF
CHUIA VISTA
APPLICATION APPENDIX C
Development Permit Processing Agreement
Permit Applicant:
Applicant's Address:
Type of Permit:
Agreement Date:
Deposit Amount:
'^-\I;..\Le.\u....-.ti fuu ~il'\~:' \:)eueJ 6 p'V>c:/1-! Co '-po ....-~(jf"\...
l.oZS IO....OI>-<1~~ ~+C.JOO6. Sli--VI "J:')i ~O , GJA q21 0 r
PyeJ 'l-y.ivm.- J vi yo....., tvle.V'~ 1Q.e..v',&0
\'2.II.Olo
~ '-1.000
This Agreement ("Agreement") between the City of Chula Vista, a chartered municipal corporation ("City") and the
forenamed applicant for a development permit ("Applicant"), effective as of the Agreement Date set forth above, is made
with reference to the following facts:
Whereas, Applicant has applied to the City for a permit of the type aforereferenced ("Permit") which the City has
required to be obtained as a condition to permitting Applicant to develop a parcel of property; and,
Whereas, the City will incur expenses in order to process said permit through the various departments and before
the various boards and commissions of the City ("Processing Services"); and,
Whereas the purpose of this agreement is to reimburse the City for all expenses it will incur in connection with
providing the Processing Services;
Now, therefore, the parties do hereby agree, in exchange for the mutual promises herein contained, as follows:
1. Applicant's Duty to Pay.
Applicant shall pay all of City's expenses incurred in providing Processing Services related to Applicant's Permit, including
all of City's direct and overhead costs related thereto. This duty of Applicant shall be referred to herein as "Applicant's
Duty to Pay."
1.1. Applicant's Deposit Duty.
As partial performance of Applicant's Duty to Pay, Applicant shall deposit the amount aforereferenced ("Deposit").
1.1.1. City shall charge its lawful expenses incurred in providing Processing Services against
Applicant's Deposit. If, after the conclusion 9f processing Applicant's Permit, any portion of the
Deposit remains, City shall return said balance to Applicant without interest thereon. If, during the
processing of Applicant's Permit, the amount of the Deposit becomes exhausted, or is imminently
likely to become exhausted in the opinion of the e City, upon notice of same by City, Applicant
shall forthwith provide such additional deposit as City shall calculate as reasonably necessary to
continue Processing Services. The duty of Applicant to initially deposit and to supplement said
deposit as herein required shall be known as "Appiicant's Deposit Duty".
2. City's Duty.
City shall, upon the condition that Applicant is no in breach of Applicant's Duty to Payor Applicant's Deposit Duty,
use good faith to provide processing services in relation to Applicant's Permit application.
2.1. City shall have no liability hereunder to Applicant for the failure to process Applicant's Permit application, or
for failure to process Applicant's Permit within the time frame requested by Applicant or estimated by City.
276 Fourth Avenue
(hula Vista
California
91910
(619) 691-5101
P I ann
n g
& Building
Planning Division
Department
Development Processing
CIlY OF
CHULA VISTA
Development Permit Processing Agreement - Page 2
2.2. By execution of this agreement Applicant shall have no right to the Permit for which Appiicant has applied.
City shall use its discretion in valuating Applicant's Permit Application without regard to Appiicant's promise to pay for the
Processing Services, or the execution of the Agreement.
3. Remedies.
3.1. Suspension of Processing
In addition to all other rights and remedies which the City shall otherwise have at law or equity, the City has
the right to suspend and/or withhold the processing of the Permit which is the subject matter of this Agreement, as well as
the Permit which may be the subject matter of any other Permit which Applicant has before the City.
3.2. Civii Collection
in addition to all other rights and remedies which the City shall otherwise have at law or equity, the City has
the right to collect all sums which are or may become due hereunder by civil action, and upon instituting litigation to collect
same, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees and costs.
4. Miscellaneous.
4.1 Notices.
All notices, demands or requests provided for or permitted to be given pursuant to this Agreement must be in
writing. All notices, demands and requests to be sent to any party shall be deemed to have been properly given or served
if personally served or deposited in the United States mail, addressed to such party, postage prepaid, registered or
certified, with return receipt requested at the addresses identified adjacent to the signatures of the parties represented.
4.2 Governing LawNenue.
This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California.
Any action arising under or relating to this Agreement shall be brought only in the federal or state courts located in San
Diego County, State of Caiifornia, and if applicable, the City of Chula Vista, or as ciose thereto as possible. Venue for this
Agreement, and performance hereunder, shall be the City of Chula Vista.
4.3. Multiple Signatories.
If there are multiple signatories to this agreement on behalf of Appiicant, each of such signatories shall be
jointiy and severally liable for the performance of Appiicant's duties herein set forth.
4.4. Signatory Authority.
This signatory to this agreement hereby warrants and represents that he is the duly designated agent for the
Applicant and has been duly authorized by the Applicant to execute this Agreement on behaif of the Applicant. Signatory
shall be personally liable for Applicant's Duty to Pay and Applicant's Duty to Deposit in the event he has not been
authorized to execute this Agreement by Applicant.
4.5 Hoid Harmless.
Applicant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, its elected and appointed officers and
employees, from and against any claims, suits, actions or proceedings, judicial or administrative, for writs, orders,
injunction or other relief, damages, liability, cost and expense (including without limitation attorneys' fees) arising out of
City's actions in processing or issuing Applicant's Permit, or in exercising any discretion related thereto including but not
limited to the giving of proper environmental review, the holding of public hearings, the extension of due process rights,
except only for those claims, suits, actions or proceedings arising from the sole negligence or sole willful conduct of the
City, its officers, or employees known to, but not objected to, by the Applicant. Applicant's indemnification shall include
any and all costs, expenses, attorney's fees and liability incurred by the City, its officers, agents, or employees in
defending against such claims, whether the same proceed to judgement or not. Further, Applicant, at its own expense,
shall, upon written request by the City, defend any such suit or action brought against the City, its officers, agents, or
employees. Applicant's indemnification of City shall not be limited by any prior or subsequent declaration by the
276 Fourth Avenue
Chu!a Vista
Caljfornia
91910
(619) 691-5101
~\f?
-11-
-
P I ann
ng & Building
Planning Division
Department
Development Processing
CIlY OF
CHULA VISTA
Development Permit Processing Agreement - Page 3
Applicant. At its sole discretion, the City may participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action, but such
participation shall not relieve the applicant of any obligation imposed by this condition.
4.6 Administrative Claims Requirements and Procedures.
No suit or arbitration shall be brought arising out of this agreement against the City unless a claim has first been
presented in writing and filed with the City of Chula Vista and acted upon by the City of Chula Vista in accordance with the
procedures set forth in Chapter 1.34 of the Chula Vista Municipai Code, as same may from time to time be amended, the
provisions of which are incorporated by this reference as if fully set forth herein, and such policies and procedures used
by the City in the implementation of same. Upon request by City, Consultant shall meet and confer in good faith with City
for the purpose of resolving any dispute over the terms of this Agreement.
Now therefore, the parties hereto, having read and understood the terms and conditions of this agreement, do
hereby express their consent to the terms hereof by setting their hand hereto on the date set forth adjacent thereto.
Dated:
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA
By:
Dated:
\ '2.. \ \ . /) Vi INlAY p~J.- \-\Gu<:"'''':{I>wV d (fY1Gr1r COr' rOV vJ-b t'1
~~ L3fD'T~~'.~~~OOO
~~n<.~ L-. S/)'uOif
By:
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista
Cal iforn ia
91910
(619) 691-5101
Attachment 8
DRAFT
ORDINANCE NO. 2007-
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ADOPTING MITIGA TED NEGA TIVE
DECLARATION IS-07-017, AMENDING THE ZONING MAPS
ESTABLISHED BY MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 19.18.010 BY
REZONING ONE PARCEL CONSISTING OF 1.46 ACRES
LOCATED AT 1501 BROADWAY FROM CT-P (COMMERCIAL
THOROUGHFARE WITH PRECISE PLAN) TO R-3
(APARTMENT RESIDENTIAL), AND APPROVING
INCENTIVES AND CONCESSIONS PURSUANT TO THE
DENSITY BONUS LAW FOR THE REDUCTION IN CERTAIN
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF
AN AFFORDABLE FOR-RENT PROJECT BY WAKELAND
HOUSING DEVELOPMENT.
I. RECITALS
A. Project Site
WHEREAS, the area of land, which is the subject of this ordinance is diagrammatically
represented in Exhibit "A"_ which is incorporated into this ordinance by this reference, and for
the purpose of general description herein consists of 1.46 acres of land located at 1501
Broadway, within the Merged Chula Vista Redevelopment Project ("Project Site"); and
B. Project; Application for Discretionary Approval
WHEREAS, on Deeernber 14, 2006 a duly verified application for a Rezone (PCZ-07-06)
and Design Review Permit (DRC-07-27) was filed with the City of Chula Vista on behalf of the
Wakeland Development Corporation ("Applicant") to allow the construction of a 42-unit
affordable housing project located at 1501 Broadway ("Project"); and
C. Plarrning Commission and Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation Record on
Application
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on the Project
on May 23, 2007, at 6 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at 276 Fourth Avenue, and after
hearing staff presentation and public testimony, voted _ to recommend that the City Council
approve the amendment of the zoning maps to rezone the Project Site from CT-P to R-3 and to
approve incentives an concessions pursuant to Density Bonus law; and
WHEREAS, the proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning
Commission at the public hearing on this project held on May 23,2006, and the minutes and the
resulting resol11tion, are incorporated into the record of this proceeding; and
Ordinance No.
Page 2
WHEREAS, the Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation held an advertised public
hearing on this Project on June 14, 2006 and voted _ to recommend that the City Council
approve the amendment of the zoning maps to rezone the Project Site rrom CT-P to R-3 and to
approve incentives an concessions pursuant to Density Bonus law; and
WHEREAS, the proceedings and all evidence introduced on this Project before the Chula
Vista Redevelopment Corporation at their public hearing held on May 23, 2007, and the minutes
and the resulting resolutions, are incorporated into the record of this proceeding; and
D. City Council Record on Application
WHEREAS, a duly called and noticed p11blic hearing on the proposed amendment of the
zoning maps to rezone the Project Site rrom CT-P to R-3 and to approve incentives an concessions
pursuant to Density Bonus law was held before the City Council of the City of Chula Vista to
receive the recommendations of the Planning Commission and the Chula Vista Redevelopment
Corporation, and to hear public testimony with regard to the same; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held an advertised public hearing on the project on June
14, 2007, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at 276 Fourth Avenue and, after hearing staff
presentation and public testimony, the Council voted x - x to approve the approve the amendment
of the zoning maps to rezone the Project Site rrom CT-P to R-3 and to approve incentives an
concessions pursuant to Density Bonus law; and
II. The City Council of the City of Chula Vista ordains as follows:
A. Compliance with CEQA
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed Project
for compliance with CEQA and has conducted an Initial Study, IS-07-017 in accordance with the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and
WHEREAS, Based upon results of the Initial Study, the Environmental Review
Coordinator detennined that the project could result in effects on the environment. However,
revisions to the project made by, or agreed to, by the applicant would avoid the effects, or
mitigate the effects, to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur. Therefore, the
Environmental Review Coordinator has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration, IS-07-017.
B. The City Council has exercised their independent review and judgment and
concurs with the Planning Commission and the Environmental Review Coordinator's
detemination that Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-07-017, in the fom presented, has been
prepared in accordance with the requirements of CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines and the
Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Chula Vista and adopts the Mitigated Negative
Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program IS-07-017.
e. The rezoning of the Project Site is consistent with the City of Chula Vista General
Plan, public necessity, convemence and the general welfare and good zoning practice support the
amendments to the Municipal Code.
Ordinance No.
Page 3
D. The City of Chula Vista Zoning Map established by Section 19.18.010 of the
Chula Vista Municipal Code is amended to rezone the Project Site as depicted in Exhibit "A"
from the CT-P (Commercial Thoroughfare with Precise Plan) to R-3 (Apartment Residential).
E. The City Council approves the following incentives and concessions pursuant to
Density Bonus Law for the reduction of certain development standards to allow the construction of
a 42-unit multi-family affordable housing project: (List Planning Commission and CVRC
approved incentives and concessions).
III. EFFECTIVE DATE
This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the thirtieth day from and after its
adoption.
Presented by:
Approved as to form by
Ann Hix
Acting Community Development Director
Ann Moore
City Attorney
J:\Attomey\ELlSA\ORDINANCES\Wakeland Los Vecinos Rezone and Incentives per Density Bonus_doc
/i"
(HULA VISTA
PLANNING
COMMISSION
AGENDA STATEMENT
Item: ..3
Meeting Date:05/23/07
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing: Consideration of the following applications filed by
Lorna Ratonel for a service station located within the commercial center
known as Terra Nova Plaza- 350 East H Street.
a) ZAV-07-06- A Variance application requesting approval of a 4ft
encroachment for the earwash building and a 5ft encroachment for the
vacuum canopy into the required front setback.
b) PCC-05-044- Conditional Use Permit for a earwash facility and
expansion/relocation of an existing convenience store.
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning and Building
INTRODUCTION
The applicant, Lorna Ratonel, on behalf of the new owner, submitted a Conditional Use Permit
application to install and operate a car wash facility and expand/relocate the existing
convenience store. The Applicant also submitted a Variance application to allow an
encroachment of the car wash building and vacuum canopy into the front setback. The service
station is located at 350 East H Street, within the Terra Nova Plaza Shopping Center (see
Locator, Attachment I).
BACKGROUND
On June II, 1986, the Planning Commission approved Conditional Use Permit PCC-86-33 to
build the existing gas station. On July 8, 1999, the Zoning Administrator approved a Design .
Review permit, DRC-99-52 to add a new earwash adjacent to the convenience store. The project
was never built and the permit expired.
On March 14, 2005, the applicant submitted applications for Design Review (DRC-05-41),
Conditional Use Permit (PCC-05-44), and a Preliminary Environmental Review (IS-05-015)
requesting to enlarge the convenience store and construct a new carwash building.
On June 5, 2006, the Resource Conseryation Commission (RCC) determined that Mitigated
Negative Declaration for the proposed design was adequate and recommended its adoption. On
July 24, 2006 the Design Review Committee approved the project. However, prior to the project
going to the Planning Commission, the subject property was sold (pending the close of escrow)
and the new owner decided to change the project design. As a result of the new design, a
Variance application (ZA V-07-06) was submitted on May 4,2007. Due to the modified changes,
the project will go back to the Design Review Committee for review and approval on
June 4, 2007.
ZA V-07-06/PCC-05-44
Page No.2
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with
the California Environmental Quality Act and has conducted an Initial Study (IS-05-015) in
accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Based upon the result of Initial
Study, the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the project could result in
significant effects on the environment. However, revisions to the project made by, or agreed to
by, the applicant would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no
significant impacts would occur; therefore, the Environmental Review Coordinator has prepared
a Mitigated Negative Declaration, IS-05-015 and associated Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program.
The Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the changes to the currently
proposed project are minor with no additional environmental impacts or issues identified that are
not already covered under the Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-05-015 addressed in the
previous project. Said changes requested to enlarge the carwash facility and expand/relocate the
existing convenience store. Therefore, purs11ant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15073.5(e)
recirculation of the Mitigated Negative Declaration is not required (Attachment 2).
RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission I) Adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-05-015; 2) Adopt
Resolution ZA V-07-06, allowing the carwash building and the vacuum canopy to encroachment
into the front setback; and 3) Adopt Resolution PCC-05-044, allowing a carwash facility and
expansion/relocation of an existing service station convenience store, based on the findings and
subject to the conditions contained therein.
DISCUSSION
Project Site Characteristics:
The project site is a .98-acre parcel located at 350 East H Street, within and along the
northwesterly section of the Terra Nova Plaza Shopping Center (Parcel Number 13). The site is
located approximately ten feet below adjacent street grade and does not have direct access from
East H Street. It is surrounded by the commercial center internal circulation system and parking
lot, which is available for all commercial center tenants, including the service station.
Proj ect Description:
The project site currently has a 24-hour service station consisting of six pump islands and a
756-square-foot convenience store. The Conditional Use Permit application, PCC-05-044,
requests approval to expand/modify the service station facility as follows:
a. Remove the existing 756 square-foot convenience store and relocate the building on
the western portion of the property. In addition, expand the size of the convenience
store to 2,553.6 square-feet (an addition of 1,797.6 square-feet);
ZA V -07-06/PCC-05-44
Page NO.3
b. Install and operate a full service car wash facility, which incl11des an approximately
2,160 square-foot carwash tunnel at the northern end of the existing service station;
e. Install a 816 sq. ft. vacuum canopy near the entrance of the car wash;
d. Re-locate three gasoline dispensers;
e. Re-align the center portion of the existing canopy roof to be flush with the side roof
facades to become a rectangular shaped canopy, and as a result relocate/redesign the
existing tower feature;
f. Operate the car wash from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. weekdays and 7:00 a.m. to 9:00
p.m. weekends, continuing to operate the service station and convenience store 24
hours a day; and
g. Add two employees for the car wash and three employees for the convenience store,
for a maximum of five employees working at one time.
Operational Profile
The site plan for the project indicates that there would be a vacuum area situated in front of the
entrance to the carwash tunnel. At the vacuum area, there would be two options for the
customers. For Option I, Full Service selection, customers would exit their vehicles and go into
the store to pay for the carwash. Carwash attendants would move the cars from the vacuum area
into the earwash tunnel, which can accommodate one vehicle at a time. Once the vehicles
emerge from the tunnel, they would be hand dried by the employees, if necessary, and customers
would return to their cars. If the customer is not available to pick up their vehicle as it exits the
carwash tunnel or additional drying is required, then an employee will park the vehicle in one of
the designated carwash customer parking spaces adjacent to the carwash exit. For Option 2, the
customers would drive through the carwash tunnel themselves, and bypass the vacuum and hand
drying service conducted by the employees. The site could adequately stack twelve vehicles
waiting to enter the earwash tunnel, four at the vacuum area, one vehicle within the earwash
tunnel, and four vehicles in the earwash customer parking spaces.
General Plan, Zoning and Land Use
The project is zoned PC-C (Planned Community - Commercial), and has a General Plan Land
Use Designation of Commercial Retail. The following table specifies the existing land uses
surrounding the parcel:
General Plan Zoning Current Land Use
Site: Retail Commercial PC-C, Planned Community - Service Station with Conv. Store
Commercial
North: N/A N/A East H Street
South: Retail Commercial PC-C, Planned Community - Bank
Commercial
East: Retail Commercial PC-C, Planned Community - Jack-in-the-Box Restaurant
Commercial
West: Retail Commercial PC-C, Planned Community - Taco Bell Restaurant
Commercial
ZA V -07 -06/PCC-05-44
Page No.4
Project Data
Assessor's Parcel Number: 592-200-1600
Current Zoning: PC-C, Planned Community - Commercial
Land Use Designation: Commercial Retail
Lot Area: .98 acres
PARKING REQUIRED: PARKING PROPOSED:
Parking spaces, broken down as follows: Standard Spaces: 14
1 per each 200 s.f of retail area (1,360 s.f) ~ 7 Compact Spaces: 2
1 per 1,000 s.f of retail storage area (1193.6 s.f) ~ 2 Disabled: I
1 per car wash employee ~ 2 Total: 17
3 per car wash stall ~ 3
Total: 14
SETBACKS REQUIRED: SETBACKS PROPOSED:
Front Yard: 25 feet 21120 feet*
Rear Yard: o feet 0
Side Yard: o feet o feet
· The carwash building has a 21-ft setback, and
the vacuum canopy has a 20-ft setback. A
Variance approval by Planning Commission
is required.
Regulations for uses within the Terra Nova Plaza Shopping Center are covered by the Terra
Nova Plaza Master Plan (PCM 85-4), which requires a Conditional Use Permit for both a service
station and a car wash. Development standards, including parking, are addressed in the Chula
Vista Municipal Code.
Analysis
Conditional Use Permit:
The addition of a earwash facility and expansion of the convenience store at the existing service
station site within Terra Nova Plaza Shopping Center would provide a convenient location to
serve the needs of the East H Street/Interstate 805 area. The provision of these services in
proximity to many of the homes in the area contributes to the general well-being of the
neighborhood and community by allowing residents to complete necessary, routine errands
without driving longer distances. There are no other car washes within 1.5 miles of the proposed
car wash.
The proposed use is located in a PC-C, Planned Community - Commercial Zone, which allows
carwash facilities and convenience stores as long as Conditional Use Permits are obtained. The
facility would comply with required development and operating regulations, including setbacks,
with the exemption of the rront yard setback that would require a Variance approval, height
restrictions and parking requirements contained in the Chula Vista Municipal Code.
ZA V-07-06/PCC-05-44
Page No.5
The use, as proposed, has been found to be consistent with the Chula Vista General Plan and the
Terra Nova Plaza Master Development Plan The project, as conditioned, would allow the
addition of a car wash and expansion of the convenience store to 2,553.6 square-foot without
adversely affecting any adopted plans.
Circulation/Access:
Circ11lation on the site for the carwash is U-shaped, with two points of ingress/egress to the seryiee
station and convenience store on the south edge of the site on an access road interior to the interior
to the shopping center. Vehicles for the car wash would enter the site from the westerly driveway
and exit from the easterly driveway, or pass through the fuel station area to exit through the
western driveway. The current site plan has been reviewed by Darnell & Associates in regards to
the Traffic Study and they have concluded that the proposed deveJopment wilJ be consistent with
the April 25, 2005 report and findings. Staff concurs with the findings.
Parking:
The addition of the carwash and expansion of the existing convenience store requires a total of
14 parking spaces, as described in the project data table, above. A total of 17 striped spaces will
be provided, including: Two compact and two regular parking spaces designated for the carwash
customers and four additional regular parking spaces on the east side of the site; eight regular
parking spaces and one full service handicapped space on the east and south side of the
convenience store.
Variance Permit:
The Terra Nova Planned Community District Regulation has a minimum 25-ft rront setback.
However, on June II, 1986, the Planning Commission approved a Conditional Use Permit to allow
the existing service station/convenience store to be located on the subject parcel with the canopy
for the service station being approximately 23 feet rrom the northern property line, encroaching
two feet into the 25- foot setback.
The carwash tunnel would directly be under the existing service station canopy, but extends
approximately 16 ft west on the existing building setback, encroaching 4-ft into the required
front setback. According to the applicant, the additional earwash length is required to
accommodate the drying equipment and increase carwash efficiency.
The vacuum canopy is also encroaching 5-ft into the required front setback. Both structures are
aligned on the same building setback, but the property line bends slightly south, creating a
shorter distance from the property line to the vacuum canopy (see Attachment 6, Project Plans).
Both of these structures would be located beJow the heavily landscaped down slope, with limited
exposure on East H Street.
ZA V -07 -06/PCC-05-44
Page No.6
The only place available to construct a carwash building and vacuum canopy from an operational
standpoint is in the northern portion of the site. Since the northern portion of the existing service
station canopy structure maintains a setback of 23-ft, the carwash building and vacuum canopy
must be built within the rront yard setback.
Although the existing and proposed structures are aligned and at approximately the same
distance from the property line, the previous approval for front setback encroachment is limited
to the structure(s) proposed with the original project. Any other structures within the required
setback area require approval of a variance application.
After reviewing the plans and visiting the project site staff concludes that the variance is necessary
to achieve an efficient vehicular circulation system and logical placement of the carwash building.
DECISION-MAKER CONFLICTS:
Staff has reviewed the property holdings of Planning Commissioners and has found no property
holdings within 500 feet ofthe boundaries of the property which is subject to this action.
CONCLUSION:
The project is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan and associated
documents. Based on the preceding information in this report, staff recommends the Planning
Commission approve Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-05-015, Variance, ZA V-07-06, and
Conditional Use Permit PCC-05-044, subject to the conditions listed in the attached Resolution.
FISCAL IMPACT
The application fees and processing costs are paid for by the Applicant.
A TT ACHMENTS
1. Locator Map
2. Mitigated Negative Declaration
3. Planning Commission Resolution ZA V -07 -06
4. Planning Commission Resolution PCC-05-044
5. Disclosure Statement
6. Project Plans
J:\Planning\Casc Filcs\-05 (FY 04-05)\PCC\ Public Hearing\PCC-05-044\StaffReports for PC Revised
Prepared by: Caroline Young, Assistant Planner, Planning Division
ATTACHMENT 1
Locator Map
LEGEND:
1 - Shoe Pavillion
2 - MarshaUs
3 - Vons
4 - Longs
5 - Big 5
6 - Miscellaneous Shops
7 - Bed, Bath & Beyond
8 - Sports Authority
9 - Kinkos, Radio Shack
10 - Mission Federal
11 - Jack in the Box
12 - Miscellaneous Shops PROJECT
1 3 - Gas Station
14 - Taco Bell -
15 - Washington Mutual LOCATION
16 - McMillin Realty
A:
:;,:>("~
~y
6'06"
C HULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DE PARTM E NT
LOCATOR PROJECT PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
C) APPLICANT: Lorna Ratonel MISCELLANEOUS
~~g~~~1 350 East H Street Request: Proposing the addition of a car wash facility and
expansion/relocation of the convenience store at an existing
SCALE: FILE NUMBER: service station.
NORTH No Scale PCC-05-044 Related cases: DRC-0541, IS-05-015, ZAV-07-0e
J :\planning\carlos\locators\pcc05044.cdr 04.10.07
ATTACHMENT 2
Mitigated Negative Declaration
Mitigated Negative Declar
PROJECT NAME: Terra Nova Service Station and Car Wash
PROJECT LOCATION: 350 East H Street
Chula Vista, CA
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.: 592-200-1600
PROJECT APPLICANT: Lorna Ratonel
DATE OF DRAFT DOCUMENT: May 16, 2006
DATE OF RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION MEETING: June 5, 2006
DATE OF FINAL DOCUMENT: June 16,2006 (Revised 4/23/2007)
PREPARED BY: Mary Venables, Associate Planner and Maria C. Muett,
Associate Planner
Revisions made to this document subsequent to the issuance of the notice of availability of
the draft Negative Declaration are denoted by underline,
Background
A Mitigated Negative Declaration (1S-05-015) was prepared for the Terra Nova Proiect. which
involves the commercial development of a car wash facilitv and expansion/relocation of an
existing convenience store within the existing service station located in the Terra Nova Plaza
Shopping Center. The Resource Conservation Commission recommended adoption of the
Mitigated Negative Declaration at their June 5, 2006 Meeting. On Julv 24, 2006 the Design
Review Committee approved design of the proiect. However. since that time the gas station
propertv has been sold and the proiect has been redesigned. Proposed improvements include
relocation of gas pumps, relocation and increased square footage of the convenience store to
2,553 square-feet pills a 2.160 square-foot car wash tunnel with vacuum canopv area of 816
square feet. The changes to the proposed proiect are minor and do not result in any additional
environmental impacts or issues identified that are not already covered under the Mitigated
Negative Declaration OS-OS-OIS). Pursuant to CEOA Guidelines Section 15073.5( c )
recirculation of the Mitigated Negative Declaration is not required.
A. Proiect Setting
The project site consists of an approximately .98 acre parcel located in the northern portion
of the Terra Nova Plaza Shopping Center. The Terra Nova Center is located south of East H
Street and east ofInterstate 805. The site is situated in an urbanized area in the north-central
portion of the City of Chula Vista (See Exhibit A - Location Map). The project site is
developed with the existing Terra Nova Service Station, including a 725 square-foot
convenience store and two fuel islands containing a total of 14 fuel pumps.
Land uses surrounding the project site consist of the following:
North: Multi-family residential
South: Commercial Retail
East: Commercial Retail
West: Commercial Retail
B. Proiect Description
The project consists of site improvements to the eXlstmg seryiee station, including the
addition of an ~ 90-foot-Iong enclosed car wash facility and associated equipment room.
The car wash and associated equipment room would total ~ 2,160 square-feet in area,
and be situated on the north portion of the parcel adjacent to East H Street. In addition, an
816 square-foot vaC11um canopv area is proposed adjacent to the car wash entrance.
In addition, removal of the existing 756 square-foot convenience store and replacement with
a 2,554 a 1,125 square-foot expansion and remodel of the oxisting convenience store is
proposed. (See Exhibit B - Site Plan). Partial Daemolition of the existing convenience store
would be required in order to accommodate the remodel plan. Most of the All work would
, occur within the confines of the current footprint of the service station complex and the new
structures w011ld be constructed under the exi~ting canopy or within the confines of the
existing propertv boundaries.
The proposed building materials would match the current structure, and the new elevation
design would be compatible with the existing structure. To accommodate the new car wash
facility, three fueling positions on the north fuel island would be relocatedeliminated.
Vacuum hoses and the vacuum canopy would be located on the northwest side of the facility
near the entrance to the carwash tunnel.
The existing seryice station and convenience store will remain in operation 24 hours per day.
The car wash hours of operation are proposed rrom 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. on weekdays and
8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. on weekends. The project does not involve the removal or relocation
of any existing underground fuel storage tanks.
e. Compliance with Zoning and Plans
The site is located in the PC-C (Planned Community - Commercial) Zone and CR (Retail
Commercial) General Plan land use designation. The project is consistent with the applicable
zoning regulations and the Chula Vista General Plan. The project requires the approval of a
Design Review Permit by the Design Review Committee and a Conditional Use Permit by
the Planning Commission.
D. Public Comments
On August 4, 2005, a Notice of Initial Study was circulated to property owners and residents
within 500-foot radius of the proposed project site. The public comment period ended
August 18, 2005. Staff received one written communication regarding potential noise and
traffic impacts related to the car wash operations. This issue has been addressed in the
attached Initial Study Checklist and the technical studies noted below.
7
On Mav 17. 2006. a Notice of Availabilitv of the Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration
for the proieet was posted in the County Clerk's Office and circulated to propertv owners and
residents within a 500-foot radius of the pro;ect site. The 3D-day public comment period
closed on June 15. 2006. One written comment letter was received from a nearbv propertv
owner with regard to noise and traffic concerns. These issnes are addressed in the Mitigated
Negative Declaration and further discussed in the attached response to comments (Exhibit
Q
E. Identification of Environmental Effects
An Initial Study conducted by the City of Chula Vista (including the attached Environmental
Checklist fonn) determined that the proposed project may have potential significant
environmental impacts, however; revisions to the project have been made or mitigation
measures have been agreed to by the proj eet proponent to reduce the impacts to a less than
significant level. This Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with
Section 15070 of the State CEQA Guidelines.
Air Ouality
Located within the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB), the project was analyzed using the Urban
Emissions Model URBEMIS 2002, a modeling tool developed by the California Air
Resources Board (CARE) to estimate air quality impacts trom land use projects. As
summarized below, impacts resulting from the proposed project will be mitigated to a level
less than significant.
Short-Term Impacts
A minor increase in air pollutants would occur during the construction and remodel phase of
the project. F11gitive dust would be created during the partial demolition phase as well as
during grading and construction activities. Because construction-related activities are
temporary, the impact to air quality ITom construction-related operations is considered short-
tenn in duration. Dust control measures required during construction operations would be
implemented in accordance with the rules and regulations of the County of San Diego Air
Pollution Control District (APCD) and the California Air Resources Board. The mitigation
measures contained in Section F below would mitigate short-tenn construction-related air
quality impacts to below a level of significance.
Long-Term Impacts
According to the Engineering Department, the proposed project would generate a minimal
amount of traffic and result in fewer daily trips than currently attributed to the existing
service station 11se. This would occur due to the reduction in the number of fueling positions
on the site. As demonstrated in the URBEMIS 2002 model, the emissions resulting [rom the
completed project would not exceed the Air Quality thresholds or result in significant long-
term local or regional air quality impacts.
Hazards/Hazardous Materials
Soil/Groundwater Contamillilllts
3
The County of San Diego, Department of Environmental Health (DEH), is the lead agency
evaluating an unauthorized release of contaminants at the project site. According to DEH,
the ongoing case is in the assessment phase and the extent of contamination in the soil and
groundwater has not been resolved. In 2003 a Phase II Real Estate Site Assessment was
conducted and detectable concentrations of contaminants were found in some of the soil
samples. In addition, three groundwater monitoring wells were installed on the site. Samples
collected from the wells contained concentrations of contaminants below laboratory detection
limits. DEH has approved the installation of two additional groundwater monitoring wells on
the south portion of the site. According to infonnation received from DEH on October 24,
2005, there do not appear to be any health risks to the occupants of the site and DEH has
indicated that the proposed site improvements may commence. A closure letter will be
issued by DEH upon completion of the assessment. No mitigation is necessary.
Asbestos and lead-based paint
The existing convenience store structure is proposed to be partially demolished and may
possibly contain asbestos and lead-based paint. Prior to any demolition activities the
presence of asbestos and lead-based paint must be ascertained and removed if present.
_ -Lieensed, registered, asbestos and lead abatement contractors in accordance with all
applicable local, state and federal laws and regulations, including San Diego County Air
Pollution Control District Rule 361.145, Standard for Demolition and Renovation, will
perfonn the abatement. The mitigation measure contained in Section F below would mitigate
potential hazardslhazardous material impacts associated with the release of asbestos and lead
to below a level of significance.
Wash water/solvents, waste
The car wash operations would involve storage and transport of hazardous solvents and
material nonnally associated with car wash facilities. As a standard condition of approval
any storage of hazardous materials or other pollutants must be under cover with adequate
containment in accordance with all federal, state and local regulations. These requirements
would mitigate potential impacts to a level ofless than significant.
Hvdrologv and Water Qualitv
The project site is located in the Otay Water District (OWD) service area and is served by a
10-inch potable water main on East H Street. The operation of the proposed car wash is not
anticipated to result in a significant increase in the consumption of water otherwise available
for public 11se or deplete groundwater supplies or quality.
On-site drainage facilities consist of an existing private stonn drain system that collects site
runoff and conveys the runoff to offsite public storm drain facilities. Off-site facilities consist
of a double 96" cast-in-place pipe in East H Street adeq11ate to serve the project.
The design of the proposed car wash includes a water reclamation system to conserve water
and limit discharge of pollutants into the storm drain system. The car wash area and tunnel
will retain all drainage on-site. The proposed facility will be equipped with a wash bay
pit/clarifier tank and a cyclonic separator. The separator extracts solid-rree liquid rrom the
reclaimed water and circulates it for reuse. The clarifier tank will require maintenance by a 4
licensed hauler approximately four times per year to remove and properly dispose of the
pollutants. In accordance with the County of San Diego Environmental Health Department
standards and regulations for water reclamation systems, filtered wastewater rrom this system
would be discharged into the City's sanitary sewer system.
The Municipal Code, the National Poll11tion Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
regulations and the City's Development and Redevelopment Storm Water Management
Requirements Manual, require the implementation of water quality Best Management
Practices (BMPs) to prevent pollution of storm drainage systems, both during and after
construction. The City Engineer will ensure that appropriate BMPs are implemented and are
sufficient to prevent discharge into storm drainage systems. Based upon the implementation
of standard engineering requirements and compliance with requirements of the BMPs, water
quality impacts would be reduced to below a level of significance. See Section F of this
Mitigated Negative Declaration.
As a standard Engineering condition, a final drainage and soils report will be required in
conjunction with the preparation of the project grading plans and must demonstrate that the
post-development peak flow rate does not exceed the pre-development flows. No significant
impacts to the City's storm drainage system are anticipated to result from the proposed
project.
Noise
To assess potential noise impacts of the proposed project, Acoustical Analysis Report, Terra
Nova Car Wash, April 10, 2006 and addendum dated April 27, 2007 was prepared by Eilar
Associates. The noise assessment analyzed the project with respect to the regulations
contained in Chapter 19.68, Performance Standards and Noise Control, of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code (noise control ordinance).
Noise Standards
The noise control ordinance does not allow activities that would create noise on property,
which exceeds the established noise level limits (C.V.M.C. 9 19.68.030(A)(4)). The noise
level limits vary by land use category, and time of day (nighttime versus daytime). In
addition, the noise control ordinance establishes the normal noise level as the noise limit
when the existing noise level exceeds the standard. Table III of Chapter 19.68 specifies the
following noise limits:
APPLICABLE NOISE LIMITS
[dB(A) Leq]
Land Use
Nighttime!
Dayttime2
Multiple Dwelling residential 50 60
Commercial 60 65
lNighttime = 10:00 P.M. to 7:00 A.M. weekdays; 10:00 P.M. to 8:00 A.M. weekdays
2Daytime = 7:00 .-\.ivl. to 10:00 P.M. weekdays; 8:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M. weekends
5
Surrounding uses potentially affected by project-generated noise consist of multi-family
residential adjacent north across East H Street and retail commercial businesses adjacent
south, east and west within the Terra Nova Shopping Center.
Noise associated with the project proposal would include short-term construction noise,
traffic noise, carwash, vacuum cleaners and outdoor mechanical equipment noise, and loud
car stereos in the driveways.
Construction Noise
Pursuant to Section 17.24.050(1) of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, construction work 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. Due to the presence of residential
development located north of the subject site, this provision of the Municipal Code applies to
the project and would ensure that residents would not be disturbed by construction noise
~ during the most noise sensitive periods of the day.
Traffic Noise
The predominant noise currently affecting the project site is traffic traveling on East H Street.
The report concluded that East H Street would experience a minimal increase in traffic
volume due to future growth in the area but did not anticipate any major new noise sources
that would impact the project site.
Car Wash & Vacuum
The proposed car wash utilizes a RYCO car wash system with drying fans enclosed within an
~ 90 foot drive-thru tunnel. The existing vacuum system will be removed to allow for the
installation of a new central vacuum system. With the dryer set back. the tunnel structure
also acts as an additional sound attenuation barrier. The noise study indicates that during
worst case combined noise levels the project would be in compliance with the City's noise
ordinance.
Outdoor Mechanical Equipment Noise
Heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HV AC) equipment is proposed to be located on the
roof of the convenience store. Based on the preliminary plans and manufacturer's data
provided for the mechanical equipment, the noise assessment concluded that noise generated
from the HV AC would not exceed the City's noise standards. However, until such time as
the final equipment is chosen and a subsequent noise study is prepared, the potential noise
impacts related to the outdoor mechanical equipment are considered significant. The
mitigation proposed in Section F of this Mitigated Negative Declaration must be
implemented in order for impacts to be reduced to below a level of significance.
6
Loud Car Stereos
Car stereos in vehicles wmtmg for car wash services could create noise in excess of
allowable levels depending on the specific sound system and whether the windows are open
or closed. The Municipal Code identifies noise created by stereos and radios as nuisance
noise and is enforced by the Police Department. The display of signs requesting car stereos
be turned off during cleaning would help to mitigate potential irrpacts.
T ransportati onlT raffi e
The Engineering Department estimated the weekday vehicle trip generation rate for the
proposed project to be 1,705 trips using the SANDAG Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic
Generation Rates. It was determined that the proposed project would result in a decrease of
535 daily trips due to the reduction in the number of fueling positions rrom 14 to 11 on the
site. In turn, a reduction of weekday trips on East H Street would occur thus resulting in a
less than significant traffic impact.
To identify potential on-site circulation impacts associated with the development of the
project, Traffic Review of Terra Nova Service Plaza, April 25, 2005, and addendum dated
. April 2007 was prepared by Darnell & Associates, Inc. The study assessed pedestrian walk
routes and travel patterns including customers parking off-site found the eirc11lation to be
adequate.
In addition, the traffic analysis assumed that fuel deliveries would continue to occur during
late evening hours when the car wash is closed thus limiting the potential for blocking
circulation on-site. The on-site circulation mitigation measure proposed in Section F below
must be implemented in order for impacts to be reduced to below a level of significance.
The applicant conducted an on-site and off-site parking analysis of the entire Terra Nova
Shopping Center. It was determined that adequate on-site parking exists within the
commercial center to accommodate the additional parking required as a result of the project
proposal.
F. Mitigation Necessary to Avoid Significant Impacts
Air Ouality
1. The following air quality mitigation measures shall be shown on all applicable grading,
and building plans and details, notes, or as otherwise appropriate, and shall not be
deviated from unless approved in advance in writing by the City's Environmental Review
Coordinator.
a) Minimize simultaneous operation of multiple construction equipment units
b) Use low pollutant-emitting construction equipment
c) Use electrical construction equipment as practical
d) Use catalytic reduction for gasoline-powered equipment
e) Use injection timing retard for diesel-powered equipment
f) Water the constmction area twice daily to minimize fugitive dust
g) Stabilize graded areas as quickly as possible to minimize fugitive dust
h) Pave permanent roads a quickly as possible to minimize dust
7
i) Use electricity rrom power poles instead of temporary generators during building, if
available
j) Apply chemical stabilizer or pave the last 100 feet of internal travel path within a
construction site prior to public road entry
k) Install wheel washers adjacent to a paved apron prior to vehicle entry on public roads
1) Remove any visible track-out into traveled public streets within 30 minutes of
occurrence
m) Wet wash the construction access point at the end of each workday if any vehicle
travel on unpaved surfaces has occ11rred
n) Provide sufficient perimeter erosion control to prevent washout of silty material onto
public roads
0) Cover haul trucks or maintain at least 12 inches of freeboard to reduce blow-off
during hauling
p) Suspend all soil disturbance and travel on unpaved surfaces if winds exceed 25 miles
per hour
Hazards/Hazardous Materials
2. During any demolition activities, a licensed and registered asbestos and lead abatement
- contractor shall perfonn asbestos and lead-based paint abatement in accordance with all
applicable local, state and federal laws and regulations, including San Diego County Air
Pollution Control District Rule 361.145 - Standard for Demolition and Renovation.
3. Outdoor storage of hazardous materials or other pollutants shall be under cover and with
adequate containment all in accordance with federal, state and local laws and regulations.
Hvdrologv/Water Oualitv
4. The applicant shall implement Best Management Practices (BMPS) to prevent pollution
of storm drainage systems, both during and after construction. Selection of appropriate
BMPs shall be site and activity specific to prevent discharge of trash, debris, or non-
stonn water to stonn drainage systems resulting from carwash or auto detailing activities.
5. The applicant shall complete the applicable City of Chula Vista Development and
Redevelopment Storm Water Management Requirements Manual forms and comply with
the Manual's requirements.
6. Design and construction of the car wash tunnel shall include features that prevent
tracking of non-stonn water to outdoor areas.
7. The trash enclosure area shall be covered and the site graded in such a way as to prevent
run-on into the trash enclosure area.
Noise
8. Pursuant to Section 17.24.050(1) of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, project-related
construction activities shall be prohibited between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.
Monday through Friday and between 10:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. Saturdays and Sundays.
8
9. Prior to approval of building permits for the development, the applicant shall submit a
subsequent noise study to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator
demonstrating that the final roof-mounted HV AC and other roof mounted equipment
complies with the City's noise control ordinance at the north property boundary of 50
dBA Leq (one hour) during nighttime hours and 60 dBA Leq (one hour) during daytime
hours and 60 dBA Leq (one hour) during nighttime hours and 65 dBA Leq (one hour)
during daytime hours at the south, west and east property boundaries or ambient noise
levels, whichever is greater.
10. All rooftop pumps, fans, and air conditioners on the buildings shall include appropriate
noise abatement and be screened by a minimum three-foot high rooftop parapet and shall
block the line-of-site view rrom the nearby properties to the exposed roof and mechanical
ventilation systems.
11. Signs shall be displayed requesting that car stereos be turned off while the cars are being
cleaned.
The noise mitigation requirements shall be shown on all applicable demolition, grading, and
building plans as details, notes, or as otherwise appropriate, and/or shall be made conditions of
project approval where appropriate.
T ransportationlTraffi e
12. Fuel deliveries shall not occur during car wash operating hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.
Monday through Friday and 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Saturday and Sunday.
9
G. A!2reement to Implement Mitio:ettion Measures
By signing the line(s) provided below, the Applicant(s) and/or Operator(s) stipulate that they
have each read, understood and have their respective company's authority to and do agree to the
mitigation measures contained herein, and will implement same to the satisfaction of the
Environmental Review Coordinator. Failure to sign the line(s) provided below prior to posting
of this Mitigated Negative Declaration with the County clerk shall indicate the Applicants'
and/or Operator's desire that the Project be held in abeyance without approval and that the
Applicant and Operator shall apply for an Environmental Impact Report.
jjJ!6NP /J.,RfJ1-tJ/.JI3L
Printed Name and Title of Applicant
[or authorized representative
5--- 1&-0(;
s:fglla u Applicant
[or authorized representative]
Date
Printed Name and Title of Operator
[if different from Applicant]
Date
Signature of Operator
[if different from Applicant]
G. Consultation
I. Individuals and Organizations
City of Chula Vista:
Marilyn R.F. Ponseggi, Planning and Building
Steve Power, Planning and Building
John Schmitz, Planning and Building
Jeff Steichen, Planning and Building
Carolyn Dakan, Planning and Building
Frank Riveret, Engineering
Silvester Evetovieh, Engineering
Dave Kaplan, Engineering
Sandret Hernandez, Engineering
Beth Chopp. Engineering
Ben Herrera. Engineerin~
q
Mark Caro, Parks and Recreation
Gary Edmonds, Fire Department
Richard Preuss, Police Department
Dave Byers, Public Works/Ops.
ApplicantIProperty Owner:
Lorna Ratonel
Applicant Agents:
Allen Sire, "\rchiteet Mr. Brian Sheena & Mr. Thomas H. Zolezzi
Others:
David T. Charles, Otay Water District
Dee Peralta, Chula Vista Elementary School District
David Gottfredson, RECON
Cheryl Johnson, RECON
Kathy Babcock, San Diego Gas & Electric
Jon Senaha, County of San Diego, Department of Environmental Health
.._ Mike Vernetti, County of San Diego, Department of Environmental Health
2. Documents
City of Chula Vista General Plan Update, December 2005.
Title 19, Chula Vista Municipal Code
Urban Emissions Model URBEMIS 2002, Terra Nova Car Wash and Service Station,
March 10, 2006 and addendum April 2007.
Acoustical Analysis Report Terra Nova Car Wash, Eilar Associates, April 10,2006 and
addendum dated April 25, 2007.
Traffic Review of Terra Nova Service Plaza, Darnell & Associates, Inc., April 25, 2005
and addendum dated April 2007.
Adequacy of Parking for Terra Nova Plaza Project (PCC 05-044) Memorandum, Jeff
Steichen, May I, 2006.
Site Assessment Report and First Quarter 2005 Groundwater Monitoring Report, Former
Shell Station, 350 East H Street, Chula Vista, California, NorthShore Engineering, Inc.,
January 27,2005.
Second and Third Quarter 2005 Groundwater Monitoring Report, Shell Service Station,
350 East H Street, Chula Vista, California, NorthShore Engineering, Inc., August 12,
2005.
Work Plan For Offsite Assessment At The Former Shell Service Station, 350 East H
Street, Chula Vista, California, NorthShore Engineering, Inc., August 15,2005.
II
3. Initial Studv
This environmental determination is based on the attached Initial Study, and any
comments received to the Notice of Initial Study. The report reflects the independent
judgement of the City of Chula Vista. Further information regarding the environmental
review of this project is available from the ChuIa Vista Planning and Building
Department, 276 F011rth Avenue, ChuIa Vista, CA 91910.
_/J1;~ /21/~
~teve Power II
EAvironmentafhojects Manager
Date:
b' ;/'1 it"
/ '/
Attachments:
EXhibit A - Location Map
Exhibit B - Site Plan
Exhibit C - Response to Comments
J:\P!anning\Mar::,:v\TerrJ. ~ova Service Station\lS-05-015 mnddoc
11
i
l
~ PROJECT
~ ~ LOCATION
LC)
NORTH
f:"f?((t-k
'1 r 80S
bhibit.-\
c{)
II'
I
I
f 1
II I
~ ,II! 1''- TI
'.~1 1~IY1! U;~, 1; B: " "j!I~II'I' ~,'. I ~I'I .....li.I~.'I.:'!
~; .'1: iE:; W:;; i :,;) i! iiiL: i. "k.. I ,:1
I~ I~~ :;~Hnii r~ :~:n~g~ ~~ :W;:dnH ~~Hnn~ I ~j'~ < I ~I ~IJ:I,'
I. ~'~t"~!UHhU~in; !;"iH;: !;,;;,!j,i":,:i:H!;"'!1";C z '~I )!~:,"
>-1 .- _ J~~o;:~~~!~~1"~~1
~')I <f1 r",\ "'1 R'"~~~~~(I~~
I:=-, 'y "- O~I~;~~r 00~~~
z
r
, ' I '"W~~'~ ~-"\3,~ I_::! ---- i " I 1,1 I. I '<~
r - -.- --- - 'j 0 - ---"',-- -- -0: ~ -- ---"',; 'i, ,! 'CD
' f-~~- 11~=;-:'--~~ S~~ ~ -~.~:~, (~H ~~-!I!:il~I;:
. .~. '" / o.c,' I' ,.
'~, ' r "d"" ~. /"~":" "
',i I~ D=f:'- --~ . ~-- - - >u ""_1"1 \,m~,!!;
I" ~c; '" = i~ " '8--8 1 ....1/1."'4 ~
~ G ~ -" ~CJjV;c~';'d D:d <- t ":, ~~ ~I~ ~~~~~I
1\ z., -,
:L_ 3' .1
I.... 1,
- '" '~II ~ .~ -, ' r" " 'J' il~' I > 1!li 'I"
I (0") '-- _ -- I ~. &---9 ~ " , '.;0 " ,
II -:T~- !iii- -.''''' -- ""~- ,,- -.1'", 1 I', - H~ !i11
I ~"r e= /=~===1=~1 · J I';' J r.'k.',~.'--t'~;,:,~ '1Ij!i!I' i!:11
:1' r. ' C -' ~ .. , i'~ : ;r--, ~I'-~l' -i,i" nm!!1
:r I " 1 !o,I'\,,,"I' ,.... 'I
I HHe/ill.... il;\~1
.. ... - ~II "':-1, _ -o/'ij "~ of " 'IIi' _j;; _.
. rrrBi
i -1 'HI ~~" ~~1 ~~ /Ji;',1:~I:~i"!
~! 'r ~..' 'I". . " ~I ~ ~ '!ly"H
i I ':I;I~I. "- ~if ~ ~ 8 ,~.~ ,t-r~"
:, ~, t ".'.' - __\~L ~_ _ '.~ tL" i'
! I J 1 Li""lf.J
'.: .. y t' ~: '''-_''~~ ~..~ ':?:;-, .-,->,1 1:'.L~~,,--.----:t"
I ' ,.:..1 ~- - r-~~,." ;. . -, -.c.:. ~:j,;_y./..'.-__-,'.,'.~,.,.I,'-.',.....,-~;.
;, ~ ;f'~1 c:! '~I """j'--l-'1:I ,',: .1/ .( i:' 7~~\, i!_
;:'.'1' /' I '" .. - ,n ,.v.ll d':~,~!.;} ,,"
!i"/i-',i~, ':1, - I - , ", c:.; e -J:~:_il~ i
~ l.-I-~L-J _ "
i ~-_///" ,';,- __~___L .;;;;r:;~~, :':_//1....{~~\.~.::i~;\ :: !
: I i~ I". :~...."-, .~~" ~:., ~.{~~~r-\ "0t'!f) i,
t <"'" '"""~,'-,,, - '''''..;'-1 ~ A..
! / , ---> /0
L _ _ _ _ _ _ _'f_ _ -.- _ _ _ _ _ _ __ .:..'---__~.._u_~._ _ _ _0__ _ --.:__ --__ ~ y'
'~ I IW~~~I'
+
t::
cD
-
~
tf\
',.10
~,~
~:::
2'~
-
I
II
,
II
"',~
c'
"
~I
ilii
n~~
; ~-;
~
. '. --."...--...-." -....-.
ATTACHMENT A
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM (MMRP)
Terra Nova Carwash. IS-05-015.
This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program has been prepared by the City of Chula Vista
in conjunction with the proposed Terra Nova Carwash project. The proposed project has been
evaluated in an Initial StudyIMitigated Negative Declaration (IS-05-015) prepared in accordance
with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and City/State CEQA Guidelines. The
legislation requires public agencies to ensure that adequate mitigation measures are implemented
and monitored for Mitigated Negative Declarations.
AB 3180 requires monitoring of potentially significant and/or significant environmental impacts.
The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for this project ensures adequate
implementation of mitigation for the following potential impac;ts(s):
_ I. Air Quality
2. HazardslHazardous Materials
3. Hydrology and Water Quality
4. Noise
5. Transportation/Traffic
MONITORING PROGRAM
Due to the nature of the environmental issues identified, the Mitigation Compliance Coordinators
shall be the Environmental Review Coordinator, and City Engineer of the City of Chula Vista.
The applicant shall be responsible to ensure that the conditions of the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program are met to the satisfaction of the Enviromnental Review Coordinator and
City Engineer. Evidence in written form confirming compliance with the mitigation measures
specified in Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-05-015 shall be provided by the applicant to the
Environmental Review Coordinator and City Engineer. The Environmental Review Coordinator
and City Engineer will thus provide the ultimate verification that the mitigation measures have
been accomplished.
Table I, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Checklist, lists the mitigation measures
contained in Section F, Mitigation Necessary to Avoid Significant Effects, of Mitigated Negative
Declaration IS-05-0l5, which will be implemented as part of the project. In order to determine if
the applicant has implemented the measure, the method and timing of verification are identified,
along with the City department or agency responsible for monitoring/verifYing that the applicant
has completed each mitigation measure. Space for the signature of the verifYing person and the
date of inspection is provided in the last column.
J:\PIanning\MaryV\Terra Nova Service StD.tion\IS-05-015mmrtextdoc
E
"'
2
D..
c
'g
0;
:2'
~
.Q
Ci
-
-
m
c;
,},
o
ch
.c
w
ro
~
ro
U
ro
>
o
';[
~I
.....
CI)
:0
n:
I-
~
"
~
E
E
o
u
"C ~
~ ro
-;; 0
c. ~
E ro
0 ~
u oS
m
0
~ ~
:c '3
~~ ro
Z'"C
.- 0
0", g",
0.0.
~ 0 m
" m 0
'" .~.'C ....:
c.. c a.
a.!!:! OJ
<(0.0
ut~ X
00
0.,-,
m-,
c.
C ';::e:: X
o.g = 0
0'-'
"'..
c "
"E !6 . .
. c X
i=Q; 0.0
'-' ,
> 0
'"
ro
:< 0.
,.:
:2
c2
C)
o
IX:
c..
C)
z
1=
IX:
o
c..
w
IX:
C
Z
<I:
C)
Z
C2
o
I-
Z
o
:2
z
o
1=
<I:
C)
1=
:iii
_c
00
-0:;::
o ::J
~!E
::E"
>
e
"
~
m
"
::E
c
.2
ro
g
~
ci
z
c ~
o ~
:;::; :J'
ro ~
Oro
:;::;<U
~::E
20
U).Q
:;;:0
" ~
o~o.
!!!.cUl
D..Uo
>-
!-
::J
<(
:::>
a
'"
4'
"C rn
~ .!:
o~
" ro
EO,
~
Ci.=
E '"
.- 0
" 0
.0.
-~
roo
':;;0
~ .
~ ro
O;~
~ ~
'" u
Q) m
EO.
0",
00
-'"
ro
~6
"E t5
"
rn.
0"
.~ 6
.Qu
:2 Q)"
o .
(1)";:: c:
t= -5 -[ ro
-
m
0.
.0
'S
E
c. "'@
II,) .!::!
E "
0. '" "'
.~ a. ~
~ ~ 3=
o c: 8-
13 Q) <b
2 ~.5
~ 'S g
o " ro
" " rn
Ol C ,9
'3 ~ ~
'E 2 ,2
0/ ~ g
c 0 -0
m (,) ~
:2 ro
""6 .g
0. "
m
W
m
.
:::>
'0
o
.Q
ro ~
ID'~
0.0
0"
<n"
" Q)
o E
~ .9-
'" "
"'''
" m
Eo
"w 0
~~
.- ,
E'"
.- ~
o 0
.- 0
:;; "
3
.Q
m
.
:::>
:OUTI
"
~~
_ c
'" ~
roE
"0.
OJ'S
~"
:::>m
'0
m
w
3
o
0.
-"
m
.
m
'0
.8
'0
ro
"Ii
rn
c
~
c
o
:;::;-c
~ m
'c E
.- 0.
(!) '3
. "
:::> m
"
Q)
N
E
.c
E
$
~
."
'0
m
o
~
'"
~
ro
c
.2
t5
2
"
c
0_
o .
~-5
- ~
. >
2'.;:;
rn "0,
$.2
Co
.8 .8
~ ~
::a ::0
'w .u)
<n .
o 0
0. 0.
~ ~
'" '"
~ ~
:;;;: 32
o 0
'S '5
" "
~ ~
'" '"
~ tJ ~
~" '"
ro 'U 2
'O~
Il).~
-o~
'" rn
. "
rn-
~ ~
~ "E
:g'r::
U5 "E
0) :2
c
m_
o ~
'" ,
E'O
. m
m N
0..-
m E
> c
"'.-
0. E
m
:is
'"
."
->
om
'0_
m.-
m .
_m
~ 0
.S :2
UI-S
m.o
Om
~.=
m.
3-5
o ~
0..
EE
o ~
':=m
~c
- ~
'(3 OJ
"e:-
u '"
~ .
-0
mo.
~ E
:::>2
'0.8
:E ,Q
;;Ci
Om
..--~
-~
~ 0
",,0
~:g
-;t;.E
iU~
0.8
" '"
. 0
.~~
:3::
"'.0
U)(Qc
~~"E
._ CD (!)
~~-g
.0-0
U ro '-
~ou
a..a;~
0.- ,
<:C..!: Q.
.-
.-
c
o
"-
'"
'0
~
>
'"
o.~
"''0
Be
co
Q)=
0.0
'" "
'6'0...
'" 0
<n 0
we:-
~c
'" m
3""
-"
:E:.2
.0 m
3 ~
:g:::
rn.9:
..sa.
:2
.O!
:c
"
0.
'0
m
W m
> 0
g&
0"
];8
'5~
'i' 0
'" .
~B
. "
-c
:5 "E
'wO
';;:'"
:>o..!:
0.0
ttI~
~ 3
~2
E ~
m~
"'"
-
o
"C
o
m
~"C
.0 ~
- >
_ m
'" 0.
_c
0"
'0 C
0.0
~ -
. "
m >
om
"'"
'" ~
5:2
,- .c
1:5 OJ-o
2>iJ}
- ~.
.0.
f5 ro a
u~ u
~ ~ 0
.o"'~
_'Om
..c:-=.J::
~ 0 ~
'" 3 m
3=..c: ~
(j}ut
0> "'''
o>m~
-
E
{: a
ro
o
O.
:::u
2i5
~~
o 0
oc
00
.~~
m "
."
~E
E~
.~ 'w
~o
0-
.~ 6
.!::!..c:
"'.
, '"
. 3
~]5
> >
o "
0:0..
'2 0
~
m
.0
o
,5 ~
('\1=
- '
-'"
~.o
"'rn
",,0
m'~
0'0
213
o '
'(ij ~
E:a
" ~
~~
0"'
2 ~
-0
~:e
.0",
.0
~.o
> m
o ~
U':=
'0
~
>
'"
0.
o
~ .
o ,
o 0
_.0
" .
~ ~
- ~
'O~
c:=
'" E
~~
gN
"'D
"'~
. ~
~ ~
'Ow
-~
.~~
_ 3
ctI:<::;
'0 .
C ~
~ U
0.'"
.'C
~ "
UJ .
c:
E
~
c
g
c
o
:2'
c
,!2
ro
,-
:2'
"'
~
o
.;,
o
r.h
.c
on
'"
~
il
il
.,...
~
.a
ru
I-
'" '" ~ '" ~ '"
c 0 0 0 0 0
'2 '2 '2 '2 '2 :2
0 0 0 0 0 '3
rn rn rn rn rn co
>oil: >oil: >oil: >oil: >oil: "",,,
B 0> ~c utng>c U OJ 0)...... C3g,~c G ~ i?c (3 0-
000 rno
:;:::..!: 0- ttJ :g'Ei5 Q) :::>"L: '6 (1) :;::.";:: i5 Q) :g ";:: "is a> '" '"
c:v;gE (1] w:::= E cw=E C a>= E m w= E ~ g E
mQ):;It; (.) Q) :;I 1:: ro(\):::It:: row::It:: uQ):::It::: 0'- 1::
g.S ID ro =.SDJ ro ,g.5 (IJ 9 g.5~ ? 'R'~~ ~ ._ C m
a... 0'1-0 0.. a. C>>-c c.. a.~" 2: g-g II) Cice.
a.CcQ) a.Cc(l) a..CcQ) a.Ct:ID c.~ ttJ
<(WroO <(WrnO <(UJroO c(WmO <(WmO ~a.D
--' -:n~ X
X :g:gX X X X 00
"-u "-u
~-' ~-'
o ~ O~
X ;:0 X X X X ;:0 X
0 0 ,0
"u "u
. ~ X . ~
X ~ 0 X X X " 0 X
"-0 000 N
U U
u
00
rn
" " a.
,..: ,..:
~
o
:g
'3
co
"""
,- 0
'5rn
O~
rnO
g'~....;
8:~ g.
~Q,D
0'
--'
~. X
o c
"-u
~-'
o .
;:: c X
, 0
"u
.
~ 5 ><
,,-u
"
,..:
o
.2
u
'"
2ft
we
2 0
Uj.Q
:;'u
c:rl~
'" .c ~
O:uc
"'
-'
~
oc
LU
~
:;;
"'
::J
o
o
'"
~
I
U5
o
'"
i'S
~
I
~E8-ga8 (u2~
(u.2~ro:g;g .s~m
........... 0 oO"~
.!!! w--e (/)"5 E Q) ID
arQ.g ~a. w ...-o(ij
'-=u~ 0 o<<JUj
1:1 m m .=:
~-;3.5~<(.E "*iE-ro
(!) >- .;:: :: ~
"'" oc-a c'E. Q) '"
O~-rnUE"'20:J..:2 ......-aD
.., E ~2
.~~~-go 2 :S
-;8-gmg,U) ~~.~
(/)-cc2'~ I .g 8 ~
.~ Q)"m mOlD ro C
~Eo..Uic::!. N'-ro
'5~-g--'"~cr; ~-g~~
m.nrn~ '" _:::I8.~
8m.2~g'1]J olDro~
~-g-6 uS ~,.Q.5~
o OJ ro~..:!O:: .....
E-~-g~uCg>==~
Q)"'O-a U'-'-.9 o~ (1]"'0
"DCe:::: -=\1i.....(/.I......c
;>. ('IJ m g;.u)_~ :::> rJ) <J) ~ ~
~~~rn.Q~goc~~
gU;ii)=E! 2~ 02 (ij-
';::EEra::lc""OB~cm
6~~~Lg~8;ij8~8g
N
C>
20
en .S!
:;'u
Orn:E ~
_.con
a.Uo
~
:J
~
::J
a
'"
ill
!;(
~
>-
CJ
o
-'
o
'"
o
>-
I
]5 ~o.8.85
E.~.~.g2(U
~~t5'~~o
~-o ~ 0. ..c
(UE~U)gU)
:2"'" :>.o<u
.8 . =: -;n ~
U) c.;:: , (U
U;.....Eu5u
Q) 0 U <U I:: E
CDc:::l ""'0
o.::::."'Oo~
i:::g~~t1iOJ
<l> = 0 .- c
EOu~.Q:';::
<l> a. a> (I) <l> -S
o.."E~Q)-o~
.1; ~ ~.c.g"'"
~ c = <U U)
=a.<u~;E
~.8 ~U)o,*
U) .;:: U) :>..
cn::)o.... ~U) in
.....0...."'0:2..... 11).-
c:2...cca <U OJ~
~cao f5<u1;
a. ---.c 2.~.~ g
a. U) ~ <U -0 .....
ra ~ E'~i::"'O ~
'f52e~E~
~~g!.8:~.8-a>
1-0.... U) ro Q.W""Q
.,.
20
U) .2
:;'u
u '"
0",,,-
"'.c ~
D:U.E:
rn~>o
?32Ci
B~~
_ u
~E"
B.8~
"'
'" on
:acE
rn '" 0
,gE.....
8: g-Cii
(1J Q) ~
'" > rn
5~~.E!
2~2~
~ c E
E--g E.~
8 ro.~ ~
o '"
~~ g;;;
~Ea::=--
i:: g-- ~
~ID~~
= 5:'i E:2
8:0 i!1~
rn rn-
I1)roc...c
~5~~
.;
20
U5 .2
:;'u
" '"
o",a.
rn .c on
B:uc
Cii2
.c rn
on ~
wE
2 0
0"
- C
.co
on 0
"'-
1: 0
rn~
" 0
(l)~
.ern
-",
oE
'"
o >
o '"
150..
,,-
~~
5:; ui
u ~ m
".3(ij
~ .m 0
co:o.g
.9:J-g "5
in (30
O.s.s
<D
20
en .2
:;'u
u '"
o",a.
~..cUJ
Q,Uo
",.c
=::(1)
w rn
",'"
.c '"
- .c
,,-
o 0
rnc
-0 .~
i" 0
~ c
0"
u~
",c
.0 '"
>
-'"
rn ~
.ca.
~ 0
",-
",on
-'"
rn~
i" rn
o ~
~ rn
-U-5ro
~ ~ ~
.c 0 '"
W .- '-
e -0 ~
-"'0
11)"(3
..c~c
>- ~ '"
,..:
ill
"'
o
z
20
en .2
:;'u
u '"
o ",a.
rn .c ~
C:UC
(UU'I"'OO
..... 11) co
5~~O
.cE-
(U g . c
?3 Co 11)
..ccoa>
uo~1:
:';::011) .
~~..-..Q~
:~o-g~
o :3 ~ ca 3
::::;-u 5 ~U)
o-g~:g-g
~"""..cu.ca
rn_ ~
-<i a;: c..c :::
NT Q) OJ rn
r---:t5 11) 5"E
"-11)3:.....=
.o-a> -5 ro
.Q o...c (j)
o "'0 ~E'
Q) Q)~2 -0 .
U}-g;gg~
.sU-32<?
0.. .aJ
...... Cii E-o
~.g.Eroc
" u rn
e'c'rnOE
ct~~i:;'
'"
~I
~
.~
"
c::
Ci
"
.2
o
:;;:
"
o
'"
.-
:;;:
"'
o
.;,
o
ch
i
1'1
~I
>,
01
-,
~,
"'I
':)i
H
'"
c
:g
'3
co
.2:''0
.~ c:......
~ro~
~ g E
u'- t
._ ern
Cice.
a.~ (!)
"'0..0
--
-
x
x
..-
Q)
:Q
CO
I-
x
2 c
U5 .Q
:;'0
u ~
C~c.
"'~ 00
a::Uc
Q) Q) L....... Q) cr ID "C' 0) >>
:SE~ 2.!!!.::l5:J E~
__ 0 _0 a......:
G.2.SQjc<:( ..c:-Bow
ID "O..c ene-v...........
E >.0-0 0-c.3 c:-c-a.~
-2'~8"t.'J~o<(.2..6ifj rn
~ II) ~Ol.Occ o-J:: ~.!!!
11)11)5:0 o-c~~ W:
-0 .!!l.!!:! <( Q) <> 0 -0 ::>
o:uo::>>=~(!)<(-c:Q)
-5 C:~:r:: ~-o1D g-m-5
'-...... .......c:cc-o~......:E
..2:E_3~::J(lJCI U)3=
U] :J..::9 0 ~ ..8 <f) <0 <( ~ -
~ eyr:; E t,;; a:I;;:o. (/)
j::QJ(1) (/)>,:J"C-o W
~~ E15.~"t:.,g ~l(J.c.-~
D...:J:5 e:a...~ I.D:=J-
~<I)'5(ij ~ e E 5-g ~.~
:Q CIS Wc ~ u a.~.,g III d) g
._..... J::::..c In
:J'E Q)..... t:.2J 11) ....:5-c
:::.a~:5 @ geE 6__.!!:!
..': ~-~ [a> ~~L: roE
~(ijo~-:J:5'~.g E ~ ro
2..c cO-.....-crn:B:Jo
Q.r.nC:o:::IDro..-.C.cOU')
g........Q Jg TJ 8 :s '5'~.c.!!:!
o~t5~<Dc:.,g-ocQ)E:;;
-- u.E 0 c:: ca rn-o
(3 'R.!!! E :J.S ID ~_s ~ 3
;r g-]i~ E~ ;S~~-{g.8
m
'" 0> 0>
C C c
:Q :Q ~
.3 .3 '3
CO CO CO
.2:''0 .2:''0 .2:''0
o~c 0 c- ~~~
'" c
'" ~ '" ~
~ g> E ~ g> E ~ g> E
U'- t u ,- t: U'- 1::
._ c ro ~E~ ._ c ro
a.Ca. ~~ ~
a..!!! ID a.2! Q)
"'0..0 "'0..0 "'0..0
X X X
X X X
X X X
2c
U5 .Q
:;'0
u~
c~c.
~...cU')
o..uc
(/) -u Q)-O
mw.J:: Q)
c c:....... U']
.- Q) I/) 0
32 (l)~ a.
's.... u x
.a~..Qw
~ .a ~
..c:w.......c
.....,Q\tI.....
c:"'O:5 0
oc.....--
(/)<0 Q) VI
... __ a. Q)
~ @ ~ '2 .
2E~~E
'52 a. e (!)
c ro 0 0. Iii
o..c .t:: >.
U ro 0 >. U]
.!::: Q) e -e c
~'6~mg
c c ,- c.E!!
ro(1]:::(1]:g
~~.2:S~
J!! g. d> ~ rn
iii 0.. ~ .;:,~
g-a..5;;ro
::J ~ E ,~fj
o.......::;).::>Q)
0."B E IV E
.gg:S:~~
0= Eo co
~rn ttI IDe
<(~E,S ~
6
~
00 ~
ttI ttI ro '-
~ .
a~~~
~~:a-
o c.
~:?ro 1;
IV:O ~ c..
.o'S,~ g.
=.0'-
. ~
~~ ~g
~ co g-'e
<DrniDa.
E,!::,~
,~~ ~'O
g. C5J1?
~ _ (5 ~
c g fI),2
~~~~
DJEoO
:: IV iii 0
E -0 Q) ,
IVIVoID2
,~::c c: ~,~
g~~Eg.
Q) 0.19 0..
..c o.ID Q) 0.
I-ro-onttl
~
.a
00
o
~
~
t;
.
u
ro-d
~~
-c
rnro
c ~
_ u
~g'
~.-
0'0)
~.a
- ~
-gm
~oo
~m
c.u
.!Q (1]
'05
~ ~
.0=
~
=ro3
~'"
~ 0
~"2
mE
U5.3
'"
,
~
'"
'"
0.
2"
en ,2
320
c 0 ~
ttI~ ~
O:uc
c
.2
o
~
2g.
en c
rn'O
c c
~ttI
~ ~
~ ro
c. '0
0';::
"-
~~
::Jo>
36>-
~~'"
ro~'o
0;:'5
~~ U)
';:: :5-g
-52ro
>,
u :s E~
B: 8 ci. 3
c{ 08 rn
0::: (5..U)
I:::: c ~ E
Z =roB ci.
o .c. '0
i= fI) Eo
~ <J) ct10
0:: .~ 8 ~
o ,~r:-:-:
Q. a;.......E
~ -0 ~ ro
4.:: a; 525
0:: ::J 0 ..
I- LL..c co
~
~
N
~
~(f?
-op---:
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
ON OF
(HUlA VI5fA
1. Name of Proponent:
Lorna Ratonel
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 Nnmber of Proponent:
1515 "L" Avenue
National City, CA 91950
4. Name of Proposal:
Terra Nova Service Station and
Car Wash
5. Date of Checklist:
May 9, 2006
6. Case No.
IS-05-0 15
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS QUESTIONS:
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
With
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
I. AESTHETICS. Would the project
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 0 0 0 .
b) Substillltially damage scenic resources, including, but 0 0 0 .
not limited to, tress, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic highway?
cJ Substantially degrade the e.'iisting visual character or 0 0 0 .
quality of the site and its surroundings?
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Th:m
Significant
'With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
d) Create a new source of substaDtilll light or glare,
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views
in. the area?
o
o
o
.
Comments:
a-b) The project site contains no scenic resources, vistas or views open to the public, and is not in proximity
to a state scenic highway, therefore, there would be no impact to the aesthetics of the area.
c) The existing gas station/convenience store is located within a funy developed commercial/retail center,
The proposed car wash and convenience store addition would occur within the confines of the current
footprint of the service station and would incorporate architectural designs and building heights
consistent with the existing structures, The project would not degrade the visual character or quality of
'the site or its surroundings,
d) The project win be required to comply with the light and glare regulations (Section 19,66,100) of the
Chula Vista Municipal Code (CVMC). Compliance with these regulations would ensure that no
substantial glare, or light would affect daytime or nighttime views in the surrounding area.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES, In
determining whether impacts to agricultural
resources are significant enviroD!11ental effects, lead
agencies may refer to the California Agricultural
Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997)
prepared by the California Dept, of Conservation as
an optional model to use in assessing impacts on
agriculture and fannland, Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmbnd, Unique Fa.nnland, or
Fannland of Statewide Importance (Fa.nnland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Fa.nnland Mapping and Monitocing Program of
the Califorola Resources Agency, to non-
agricultural use~
o
o
o
.
b) Conflict with existing zarling for agricultural use, or a
Williamson Act contract?
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
\Vith
Significant Mitigation Significant Xo Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
0 0 0 .
Issues:
c) Involve other changes in the e...asting environment,
which, due to their location o.r nature, could result in
conversion of Fannland, to non-agricultural use?
o
o
o
.
Comments:
a-c) The project site and surrounding land uses are fully developed, consistent with the Chula Vista General
Plan and zoning designation, and contain no agricultural resources or designated farmland. The
proposal would not convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance to
non-agricultural use and no impacts to agricultural resources would be created as a result of the
_ _ pr_oposed project,
Miti2ation: No mitigation measures are required.
IILAIR QUALITY. Where available, the
significance criteria established by the applicable
air quality management or air pollution control
district may be relied upon to rrulli:e the following
detenninations. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct ilnplementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
o
o
o
.
b) Violate any air qua1it'J standaId or contribute 0 . 0 0
substantially to an existing or projected aJI
quality violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase 0 0 0 .
of any criteria pollutant for which the project
reglOll 15 non-at:ta.inrnent under an applicable
federal or state ambient ill quality standard
(including releasing emissions, which exceed
quantitative thresholds for ozone preCUIsors)?
Issues:
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
eJ Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial
number of people?
Comments:
a-e J See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
Miti!!ation: See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section F.
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES.
proj ect:
Would the
aJ Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
through habitat modifications, on any speeles
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status
speeles in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the California Department of
Fish and Game or US, Fish and Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural coromumty
identified ill local or regional plans, policies,
regulations or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or US, Fish and Wildlife Service?
cJ 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
me:lils?
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
With
Significant i\litigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
0 a 0 0
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
II
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
d) Interfere substanlliilly v",th the movement of any
naave resident or migratory fish or wildlife species
or v",th established naave resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native
wildlife nursery sites?
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
With
Significant Mitigation Significant ~o Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
0 0 0 .
Issues:
e) Conflict with any local policies or orclinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
o
o
o
.
~ Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
reg;oruU, or state habitat conservation plan?
o
o
o
II
Comments:
a) The existing project site is fully developed as a gas station/convenience store. No candidate, sensitive or
special status species are present within or immediate1y adjacent to the proposed project site.
b) No local riparian habitat or other natural sensitive communities are present within or immediately
adjacent to the project site,
c) No wetland habitat present within or immediately adjacent to the deve10ped project area.
d) There are no wiJdlife dispersal or migration corridors existing within or immediately adjacent to the
proposed project site.
e) The project site is fully developed; no biological resources would be affected by the proposal and no
conflicts with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources would occur as a result of the
proposed deve1opment.
f) The proposed project site is located in a designated development area as defined by the City's MSCP
Subarea Plan. There are no biological resources present on the project site and the proposal would have
no impact to local, regional or state habitat preservation planning efforts,
Miti2ation: No mitigation measures are required.
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
~o Impact
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES, Would the
project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change 111 the
significance of a historical resource as defined in ~
15064,5?
o
o
o
.
b) Cause a substantial adverse change 111 the
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant
to ~ 15064.5?
o
o
o
.
c) Directly or inclirec11y destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique geologic
feature?
o
o
o
I!J
d) Disturb any human rematns, including those
interred outside of fonnal cemeteries?
o
o
o
.
Comments:
a) The existing project site is located within a fully developed area. No historic resources are known or are
expected to be present within the project impact area. Therefore, no substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defmed in Section 15064.5 is anticipated.
b) The existing facility is not listed in, or currently eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical
Resources, No historic buildings or structures are present within the previously disturbed project site and
no prehistoric or historic objects are known. Therefore, the potential for adverse changes to archaeological
resource as defmed in Section 15064.5 is not anticipated,
c) Based on the level of previous disturbance to 111e site and the relatively limited disturbance for the
proposed project, the potential to directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or
unique geologic feature is not anticipated.
d) The proposed project consists of limited site improvements to an existing, fully developed facility, No
human remains are anticipated to be present within the previously disturbed impact area of the project.
lVIiti2:ation: No mitigation measures are required.
VI. GEOLOGY AL'-fD SOILS -- Would the
proj ect:
a) Expose people or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects, including the risk of
Issues:
loss, injury or death invoh~g:
1.
Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist,Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning J'vIap issued by the State
Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
Potcntially
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
'\-Vith
~Iitigation
Incorporated
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
Impact
.
II
Ii
o
o
o
o
o
No Impact
o
o
o
II
II
Ii)
.
.
11.
Strong seismic ground shaking?
111.
Seismic-related
liquefaction?
ground
failure,
including
lV.
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, as defined in Table
18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994),
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 avalbble
for the disposal of wastewater?
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Comments:
a) The proposed project is located within a fully developed shopping center site. The Final EIR prepared
for the Rice Canyon EIR79-8 identified several trace faults located in the vicinity of the project site,
The trace faults were attributable to the La Nacion and Sweetwater Fault zones and were determined to
be inactive (Shepardson Engineering, 1977), The adopted EIR contained mitigation measures designed
to reduce or prevent the potential for geologic hazards, All prior grading associated with the Terra
Nova Shopping Center was performed in accordance with the adopted EIR mitigation measures and
approved soils report. Therefore, impacts to geological resources would be less than significant,
bod) The project site and the surrounding land uses are fully developed. All prior grading associated with the
Terra Nova Shopping Center, which included the proposed project site, was carried out in accordance
with the previously adopted mitigation measures and approved soils report,
e) The project does not propose the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. Sewer
services will be provided by the City of Chula Vista, Therefore, development of the proposed project
would not result in impacts associated with the use of septic tanks or alterative wastewater disposal
systems,
Mith~:ation: No mitigation measures are required.
VIT. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS. Would the project:
a)
Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
o
II
o
o
b)
Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into the
environmmt?
o
.
o
o
c)
Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous
or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or
waste w-ithin one-quarter rrille of an existing or
proposed school?
o
o
o
.
Issues:
d) Be loc~ted on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code section 65962.5 and, as a
result, would it create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment?
e)
For a project located ","thin an allport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public allport or public use
allport, would the project result in a safety hazard
for people residing or working in the project
area?
Less ThaD
Potentially Signific::mt Less Than
With
Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
0 0 0 .
o
o
o
.
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?
o
o
o
\I
g)
Impair implementation of or physically interfere
with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
o
o
o
II
h)
Expose people or structures to a significant risk
of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires,
including where wildlands are adjacent to
urbanized areas or where residences are
intennL'{ed with wildlands?
o
o
o
tI
Comments:
a,b) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
c-h) The project site is not located within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. The
project site is designated for commercial development according to the General Plan and Zoning
Ordinance and is not located within an airport land use plan or in the vicinity of a private airstrip
or wildlands,
Mitigation: See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section F,
Issues:
HYDROLOGY Al"ill WATER QUALITY.
Would the project:
a) Result in an increase in pollutant discharges to
receiving waters (including impaired water bodies
pursuant to the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) list),
result in sigoificant alteration of receiving water
quality during or following construction, or violate
any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer
volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table
level (e.g., the production rate of pre-exisring 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
sigoificant adverse impact on groundwater quality?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the
site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, in a manner, which
would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or
off-site?
d) Substantially alter the exisring 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
structuIes within a 100-year flood hazard area which
would impede or redirect flood flows?
e) Expose people or structures to a sigoificant risk of
loss, injury or death involving flooding, including
flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or darn?
Potentially
Signific::tnt
Impact
D
D
D
D
D
Less Than
Significant
\Vith
Mitiption
Incorporated
.
D
D
D
D
Less Than
Significant
Impact
D
II
II
.
D
No Impact
D
D
D
D
.
Issues:
D Create or contribute runoff water, which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff?
Comments:
a-f) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
Mitigation: See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section F.
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 w agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including, but not limited to the general
phn, specific plw, local coastal program, or zoning
ordinwce) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating w environmental effect?
cJ Conflict with wy applicable habitat conservation
plan or natural community conservation plw?
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
With
Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
0 0 . 0
D
D
D
II
D
D
D
I]
D
D
D
.
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated.
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Comments:
a) The project site and the surrounding uses are fully developed, The proposed project would not disrupt or
divide the established community therefore no impact would occur as a result of the proposal.
b) The project site is located in the PC-C (planned Community - Commercial) Zone and CR (Retail
Commercial) General Plan land use designation. The project is consistent with the applicable zonmg
regulations and land use designations, therefore; no impacts are anticipated.
c) The project would have no impact or conflict with any applicable adopted environmental plans or policies and
would not conflict with the adopted Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, which designated the proposed project
site as a Developed Area.
l\1iti1!ation: No mitigation measures are required.
MINE~ RESOURCES. Would the project:
aJ 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?
o
o
o
II
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?
o
o
o
.
Comments:
a) The project site and the surrounding land uses are fully developed and would not result in the loss of
availability of a known mineral resource of value to the region or the residents of the State of California, No
impact to mineral resources would result ITom the proposed project.
b) The State of California Department of Conservation has not designated the project site for mineral resource
protection and no impact would occur as a result of the proposal.
J'YIiti!!ation: No mitigation measures are required.
Lcss Than
PotentialIy Significant Less Than
With
Issues: Significant I\-1itig:ation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
NOISE. Would the project result in:
aJ Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels 0 0 . 0
in excess of standards established in the local general
plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of
other agencies?
bJ Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive 0 0 . 0
groundbome vibration or groundbome noise levels?
cJ A substantial penn.anent increase in ambient noise 0 0 II 0
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase ill 0 . 0 0
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project?
eJ For a project located within an airport land use plan 0 0 0 f}J
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) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise levels?
o
o
o
.
Comments: See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E,
Miti~ation: See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section F,
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING, \Vould the
project:
a) Induce substantial population grovith in an area,
either directly (for e,,<ample, by proposmg new
homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of road or other infrastructure)?
D
D
D
\I
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
D
D
D
\I
c)
Displace substantial numbers
necessitating the construction of
housing elsewhere?
of people,
replacement
D
D
D
II
Comments:
a-c) The proposed project involves minor expansion of the existing business, The proposal does not
involve residential housing and would not induce population growth in the area or require substantial
infrastructure improvements, No pennanent housing exists on the project site and no displacement of
housing or people would occur as a result ofthe proposal. Based on the size and nature of the proposal
no impact to population or housing would occur as a result of the project.
Mitie:ation: 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 rimes or
other performance objectives for any public services:
a) Fire protection?
D
D
.
D
Issues:
Potentially
Signific:lnt
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
;\"0 Impact
b) Police protection?
o
o
.
o
c) Schools?
o
o
.
o
d) Parks?
o
o
o
.
e) Other public faciliti~s?
o
o
o
Ii!I
Cemments:
a) Adequate fIre protection services and response times can continue to be provided to the site without an
increase of equipment or persOlll1eL The applicant is required to comply with the Fire Department policies for
new building construction and fire prevention, The proposed project would not have a significant effect upon
or result in a need for new or altered fire protection services, The City perfonnance objectives and thresholds
will continue to be met.
b) Adequate police protection services and response times can continue to be provided upon completion of the
proposed project. The proposed project would not have a significant effect upon or result in a need for
substantial new or altered police protection services. The City perfonnance objectives and thresholds will
continue to be met.
c) The proposed project would not induce population growth; therefore, no significant adverse impacts to public
schools would result. According to the Chula Vista School District letter dated August 18,2005, the applicant
would be required to pay the statutory building permit school fees for the non-residential
construction/proposed commercial buildings.
d) The proposed project would not induce population growth, therefore, the project would not have an impact on
or create a demand for neighborhood or regional parks or facilities or impact existing park facilities.
e) The proposed project would not have an impact on or result in a need for new or expanded governmental
services and would be served by existing or planned public infrastructure,
~Iiti2"tion: No mitigation measures are required.
Issues:
XIV. RECREATION. Would the project:
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and
regional parks or other recreational facilities such
that substantial physical deterioration of the
facility would OCClli or be accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which have an adverse
physical effect on the environment?
Comments:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
No Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
a) The proposed project would not induce population growth therefore no impact to existing neighborhood parks
or recreational facilities resulting in physical deterioration would occur.
b) The project does not include or require the construction or expansion ofrecreational facilities. The Parks and
Recreation E1ement contained the City's current General Plan does not identifY the site of the proposed project
as an area planned for any future parks, recreational facilities, or other recreational programs. No impact
wou1d occur as a resu1t oflbe proposal.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
XV. TRANSPORTATION I TRAFFIC. Would
the project
a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of
the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase
in either the number of vehicle trips, the v01ume 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 high'\vays?
o
.
o
o
D
D
.
o
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
With
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including D D D II
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in
location that results in substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature D D D II
(e.g" sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e,g" farm equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access? D D II D
0 Result in inadequate parking capacity? D 0 II 0
gY -- 'C~nflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
supporting alternative transportation (e,g" bus
turnouts, bicycle racks)?
o
o
D
II
Comments:
a-g) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E
Miti!!ation: No mitigation measures are required.
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS.
Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
D
D
.
D
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
D
D
.
D
Issues:
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm
water drainage facilities or e:...-panslOll of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the
project from e....asting entidements and resources, or
are new or expanded entitlements needed?
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment
provider which serves or may serve the project that it
has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected
demand 1!1 addition to the provider's existing
commitments?
f) Be' served by a landEll 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?
Potentially
Signific.:mt
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
With
:;\litigation
Incorporated
o
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
Impact
.
o
III
II
1'1
No Impact
o
.
o
o
o
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
'With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Comments:
a) The project is located within an urban area that is served by all necessary utilities and service systems
and would not exceed the wastewater treatment requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control
Board. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur as a result of the proposed project.
b) The proposed project would not require the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities
or the expansion of existing facilities. The project includes an automated car wash with a water
reclamation system and separator to divide liquids and solids in compliance with Storm Water
Management principles. Impacts to wastewater treatment facilities would be less than significant,
c) No construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities would be
necessary as a result of the proposed project. The project is required to implement Best Management
Practices to prevent pollution of storm drainage systems and comply with the City's Storm Water
Management Requirements therefore environmental impacts would be less than significant.
d) The project site is within the water service area of the Gtay Water District. There is a lO-inch water
~main located on East H Street currently serving the project site. No new or expanded entitlements are
anticipated therefore the proposed project would have a less than significant impact.
e) See XVI, a, and b. above
f) The City of Chula Vista is served by regional landfills with sufficient capacity to serve the project and
meet the solid waste needs of the region in accordance with State law. The proposal would have a less
than significant impact on regional landfills.
g) The proposal will be required to comply with federal, state and local regulations related to solid waste
and would have a less than significant impact on the environment.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required,
xvn. THRESHOLDS
Will the proposal adversely impact the City's
Threshold Standards?
A. libraxv
o
o
o
.
The City shall construct 60,000 gLoss square feet (GSF)
of additional library space, over the June 30, 2000
GSF total, in the area east of Interstate 805 by
buildout. The construction 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.
Issues:
B) Police
a) Emergency Response: Properly equipped and staffed
police units shall respond to 81 percent of ''Priority
One" emergency calls within seven (TJ 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 (J) minutes and maintain an average
response time to all ('Pciority Two" calls of 7.5 minutes
or less.
C) Fire and Emer[':encv Medical
Emergency response: Properly equipped and staffed fire
and medical units shall respond to calls throughout the City
within-7"mmutes in 80% of the cases (measured annually).
D) Traffic
The Threshold Smndards 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. Signalized intersections west of I-80S are not
to operate at a LOS below their 1991 LOS, No
intersection may reach LOS IIEr! or "F" during the average
weekday peak hour. Intersections of arterials with lieeway
ramps are e..':empted liom this Standard,
E) Parks and Recreation Areas
The Threshold Standard for Parks and Recreation is 3
acres of neighborhood and community parkland with
appropriate facilities /1,000 population east ofI-80S,
F) Drainage
The Threshold Standards require that stann water fIov,s
and volumes not exceed City Engineering Standards.
Individual projects '\Vill provide necess:u:y improvements
consistent with the Drainage Master Planes) and City
Engineering Standards,
Potentially
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
o
o
o
o
o
less Than
Significant
Impact
.
L'I
..
o
.
lS"o Impact
o
o
o
.
o
Issues:
G) Sewer
The Threshold Standaxds require that sewage Elo'W" and
volumes not exceed City Engineeffi1g Standaxds.
Indiv-idual projects \Nill provide necessary improvements
consistent with Sewer Master Pbn(s) and City Engineeffi1g
Standaxds,
H) Water
The Threshold Standards require that adequate storage,
treatment, and transmission facilities are constructed
concurrently with planned growth and that water quality
standaxds are not jeopardized during growth and
construction.
Applicants may also be required to participate in whatever
w~!.e.r_conservation or fee off-set program the Gty of
Chula Vista has in effect at the time of building permit
issuance.
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
With
Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
0 0 . 0
o
o
.
o
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
\Vith
l\[itigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Comments:
a) The project would not induce population growth; therefore, no impacts to library facilities would result. No
impact to the City's Library Threshold standards would occur as a result of the proposed project.
b) According to the Police Department, adequate police protection services can continue to be provided at the
project site. The proposal would not have a significant effect upon or result in a need for substantial new or
altered police protection services. No impact to the City's Police threshold standards would occur as a result
of the proposed project,
c) According to the Fire Department, adequate fire protection and emergency medical services can continue to be
provided to the site, The proposed project would not have a significant effect upon or result in a need for new
or altered fire protection services. No adverse impact to the City's Fire threshold standard would occur as a
result of the proposed project.
d) According to the Traffic Engineering Section, East H Street currently exceeds the LOS "c" threshold standard
however, the proposed project wi1l result in a reduction in weekday trips, No further impact to the City's
Traffic threshold standard would occur as a result of the project. '
e) Because the project site is a commercial land use, the Parks and Recreation threshold standard is not
applicable.
1) The applicant does not propose any new or improved drainage facilities on the project site, The applicant will
be required to implement Best Management Practices (EMPs) to prevent po11ution of storm drainage systems
both during and after construction and prevent discharge of trash, debris, or non-storm water to the storm
drainage systems. In addition, the applicant wil1 be required to comply with the City of Chula Vista's
Development and Redevelopment Storm Water Management Requirements Manual. Therefore, no adverse
impacts to the City's storm drainage system or City's Drainage Threshold standards would occur as result of
the proposed project.
g) The Engineering Division has determined that the existing sewer facilities are adequate to serve the proposed
project. No new sewer facilities are necessary and no adverse impacts to the City's Sewer Threshold
standards would occur as a result of the proposed project.
h) According to the Otay Water District, water service can be provided via a lO-inch water main located on East
H Street. Additional1y, OWD has determined that the existing water storage, treatment, and transmission
facilities are adequate to serve the project. The proposal would not result in a significant impact to the
City' s Water Threshold Standards.
Miti(!ation: No mitigation measures are required.
Issues:
XVIII, lYIANDATORY FINDINGS OF
SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quilliry of the envirooment, substancially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self-sustailling
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 individwilly
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means that the
- -. incremental effects of a project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other cuttent project, and the
effects of probable future projects.)
c) Does the project have enviroomental effects which
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
Comments:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Lcss Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
No Impact
Less Tban
Significant
Impact
D
D
o
.
D
II
o
o
o
II
o
o
a) The project site is currently developed and located within an established urbanized area within the designated
development area of tlle adopted Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan and there are no known sensitive plant or
animal species or cultural resources on the site. No adverse impacts would occur as a resuIt of the proposal.
b) No cumulatively considerable impacts associated with the project when viewed in connection with the effects
of past projects, other current projects and probable future projects have been identified. As described in the
Mitigated Negative Declaration, project impacts would be mitigated to below a level of significance through
the required mitigation measures.
c) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E. Potential impacts to humans associated with air quality,
hazardslhazardous materials, hydrology/water quality, noise and transportation/traffic generation would be
mitigated to below a level of significance,
Miti!!ation: See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section F,
XIX. PROJECT REVISIONS OR MITIGATION MEASURES:
Project mitigation measures are contained in Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-05-015, Section F,
Mitigation Necessary to Avoid Significant Impacts and Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program.
xx. AGREEMENT TO IMPLEIVIENT MITIGATION MEASURES
By signing the line(s) provided below, the Applicant(s) and/or Operator(s) stipulate that they have
each read, understood and have their respective company's authority to and do agree to the
mitigation measures contained herein, and will implement same to the satisfaction of the
Environmental Review Coordinator. Failure to sign the line(s) provided below shall indicate the
Applicants' and/or Operator's desire that the Project be held in abeyance without approvaL
1.0 f:-N t} ;B.J? tJfo f.} r;-l-
Printed Name and Title of Authorized Representative of
[Property Owner's Name]
esentative of
.j:/("O(;
Date
Printed Name and Title of
[Operator if different from Property Owner]
Date
Signature of Authorized Representative of
[Operator if different from Property Owner]
)LXI. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at
least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Unless
Mitigated," as indicated by the checklist on the previous pages.
D Land Use and Planning . Transportation/Traffic D Public Services
D Population and D Biological Resources D Utilities and Service
Housing Systems
D Geophysical D Energy and Mineral D Aesthetics
Resources
D Agricultural Resources
1'1 Hydrology/Water II Hazards and Hazardous D Cultural Resources
Materials
. Air Quality II Noise D Recreation
q .Threshold Standards D Mandatory Findings of Significance
XXII. DETERMINATION:
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the 0
environment, and a Negative Declaration will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the .
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions
in the project have been made or agreed to by the project proponent, A
Mitigated Negative Declaration will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project may have a significant effect on the 0
environment, and an Environmental Impact Report is required.
I find that the proposed project may have a "potentially significant impact" or 0
"potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one
effect I) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable
legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the
earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An Environmental Impact
Rep(jrt is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I fmd that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the 0
environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed
adequately in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable
standards and (b) have been avoided OT mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or
Negative Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed
upon the proposed project, nothing finther is required.
~k ;{}~
(Skve Power jI
'-Environmentaf Proj ects Manager
City of Chula Vista
r:, /;9 h(
Dajk' /
J:\PJanning\.i\1aryV\Terra Nova Service St<1tion\IS-05-0 15CKLST.doc
ATTACHMENT 3
Planning Commission Resolution ZA V-07-06
ATTACHMENT 4
Planning Commission Resolution PCC-05-044
RESOLUTION NO. PCC-05-044
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING
COMMISSION ADOPTING MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
IS-05-015, AND APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO
CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE A CARWASH FACILITY AND
EXPAND/RELOCATE AN EXISTING CONVENIENCE STORE AT 350
EAST H STREET. - Lorna Ratonel.
WHEREAS. on March 14, 2005, a duly verified application for a Conditional Use Permit
was filed with the City of Chula Vista Planning and Building Department by Lorna Ratonel
("Applicant"); and
WHEREAS, the application requests approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow
construction and operation of a carwash facility and expansion/relocation of an existing
convenience store ("Project"); and
WHEREAS, the area of land which is the subject of this Resolution is an existing
sub-parcel within the Terra Nova Shopping Center identified as 350 East H Street in the PC-C,
Planned Community - Commercial Zone ("Project Site"); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission previously approved Conditional Use Permit,
PCC-86-33 to build the existing gas station on June 11, 1986; and
WHEREAS, The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project
for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and has conducted an Initial
Study (IS-05-015) in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Based upon the
result of Initial Study, the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the project
could result in significant effects on the environment. However, revisions to the project made
by, or agreed to by, the applicant would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where
clearly no significant impacts would occur; therefore, the Environmental Review Coordinator
has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration, IS-05-015 and associated Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program.
The Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the changes to the currently
proposed project are minor with no additional environmental impacts or issues identified that are
not already covered under the Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-05-0 15 addressed in the
previous project. Said changes requested to enlarge the carwash facility and expand/relocate the
existing convenience store. Therefore, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section l5073.5(c)
recirculation of the Mitigated Negative Declaration is not required, and;
WHEREAS, the Director of Planning and Building set the time and place for a hearing on
the Conditional Use Permit application, and notice of the hearing, together with it purpose, was
given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City, and its mailing to
property owners and residents within 500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least
10 days prior to the hearing; and
Page 2
May 23, 2007
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely May 23,
2007 at 6:00 p,m. in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning
Commission and the hearing was thereafter closed; and
WHEREAS, after considering all reports, evidence and testimony presented at the public
hearing with respect to the Project, the Planning Commission voted to approve the
Project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission finds as follows:
That the proposed use at this locatiou is uecessary or desirable to provide a service
or facility which will coutribute to the geueral well beiug of the ueighborhood or the
commuuity.
Adding a carwash facility and expanding/relocating the convenience store at the existing
service station site within Terra Nova Plaza will provide a convenient location to serve
the needs of the East H Street/Interstate 805 area. The closest carwash facility to the
project site is approximately I 12 miles away, The provision of these goods and services
in close proximity to home and work contributes to the general well-being of the
neighborhood and community by allowing residents to complete necessary, routine
errands without the stress and traffic generation of driving longer distances.
That such use will uot, under the circumstances of the particular case, be
detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in
the vicinity or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity.
The proposed carwash and expansion/relocation of the convenience store will not result
in any negative impacts to health, safety or general welfare. All but 384 square feet of the
proposed addition of the carwash building will be enclosed under the existing service
station canopy. The vacuum canopy will be lined up with the carwash building, The
landscape/scenic corridor will still be preserved since the building is placed beyond an
area sloping down from East H Street. The ingress/egress to the site is designed so that no
vehicle stacking problems will occur at the main entrance into the commercial center.
That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions specified in
the code for such use.
The proposed use is located in a PC (Planned Community)lC (Commercial) Zone, which
allows the operation of a carwash facility and a convenience store to serve both a carwash
and service station, subject to issuance of a Conditional Use Pennit. The facility will
comply with required development and operating regulations, including height
restrictions and parking requirements contained in the Chula Vista Municipal Code with
an exception to the front setback requirement. The carwash building and the vacuum
canopy will be encroaching into the front setback, therefore requiring an approval of a
Variance application by the Planning Commission,
Page 3
May 23,2007
That the granting of the Conditional Use Permit will not adversely affect the
General Plan of the City, or the adopted plan of any government agency.
The operation of a carwash at this location is not inconsistent with any stated policies of
the General Plan and the Terra Nova Plaza Master Development Plan, Therefore the use,
as proposed, has been found to be consistent with the General Plan and the Terra Nova
Plaza Master Development Plan,
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION finds that the
Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (IS-05,OI5)
has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA), State CEQA Guidelines and the Environmental Review procedures of the City of
Chula Vista, and adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigated Monitoring and
Reporting Program, IS-05-015,
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION, BASED ON THE
FINDINGS ABOVE, approves the Conditional Use Pennit subject to the following conditions:
L The following shall be accomplished to the satisfaction of the City, prior to issuance of
building pennits, unless otherwise specified:
Planning
I. The applicant shall obtain approval of a Design Review pennit (DRC-05-41) for the
new buildings.
2, The applicant shall obtain approval for ZA V -07 -06 to allow the proposed car wash
building and vacuum canopy to encroach within the front yard setback,
3, Applicant shall implement, to the satisfaction of both the Planning and Building
Department and the City Engineering Department, the mitigation measures identified
in the Terra Nova Service Station and Car Wash Mitigated Negative Declaration
(IS-05-015) and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
4, If circulation or parking is compromised or negatively impacts other tenants of the
shopping center, additional conditions and/or restrictions may be imposed on the
project to remedy the problems. Planning and Building Department staff will review
the project one year after operation begins to ensure that such problems do not exist.
5, Hours of operation for the car wash shall be limited to 7:00 a.m, - 8:00 p,m, on
weekdays and 7:00 a,m, -9:00 p.m, on weekends.
6, The four parking spaces on the east side of the site shall be designated for the carwash
customers only,
Page 4
May 23,2007
7. The existing storage unit at the northeast corner of the site shall be removed from
premises.
8. The Applicant shall provide an approval letter from the property management
company for the shopping center approving the re-design of the plans, prior to
Building Pennit approval.
9. The Applicant shall obtain approval of a sign pennit for each sign by the Planning
and Building Department. Signs shall comply with all applicable requirements of the
Terra Nova Center and the Chula Vista Municipal Code, Chapter 19.60.
10, Any deviation to the carwash equipment shall require the approval of a modified
Conditional Use Pennit, and any other associated reports, by the Zoning
Administrator.
II. A Building Pennit is required, Plans shall comply with 2001 Handicapped
Accessibility Requirements, 2005 Energy Requirements, 2001 CBC, CMC, CPC and
2004 CEC requirements,
12. The Applicant shall submit a soils report prior to Building Pennit approval.
13. The Applicant shall submit Health Department approved plans, prior to Building
Pennit approval.
Engineering Department
14, The following fees shall be paid based on the final building plans submitted:
a, Sewer Connection and Capacities fees; and
b. Traffic Signal Fees
15, All onsite drainage facilities shall be private.
16, Any private surface flows shall be treated prior to entering into a public right of way.
If such treatment occurs in a street inlet then the Applicant shall provide a funding
mechanism for perpetual maintenance prior to the building pennit approval.
17. The Applicant shall submit and obtain approval of a Water Quality Study and
Technical Report and comply with all NPDES requirements, prior to approval of
building pennit. The Water Quality Report shall include full implementation of
NPDES best management practices to reduce the amount of pollutants entering the
City's stonn water conveyance system, including but not limited to:
a, The erection of signs near stonn drain inlets
Page 5
May 23, 2007
b. Providing storm drain system stenciling and signage; more specifically:
i. Provide and maintain stenciling or labeling near all storm drain
inlets and catch basins,
11, Post and maintain City-approved signs with language and/or
graphical icons that prohibit illegal dumping at public access
points.
18. The Applicant shall apply for Sewer Connection and Capacities fees to include the
car wash facility.
19. The Applicant shall apply for an Industrial Wastewater Discharge Permit, which is
regulated by the City of San Diego, Metropolitan Industrial Wastewater Control
Program.
Fire Department
20, The Applicant shall provide separate submittal depicting Fire Sprinkler plans.
21. The Applicant shall provide plans showing the following:
a. Location of emergency shutdown devices for all fuel dispensers;
b. Location of signs prohibiting smoking, dispensing into unapproved containers
and requiring vehicle engines to be stopped during fueling;
c. Plans for illumination of exit paths and signs; and
d. Provision for portable fire extinguishers throughout the convenience store,
22. The Applicant shall re-test shear valves on the pumps on the north side of the site to
ensure that they are working properly and blocking off.
23. The Applicant shall take all steps necessary to ensure that only one vehicle per pump
is allowed,
24. The Applicant shall comply with all other requirements of the Fire Department.
II. The following on-going conditions shall apply to the property as long as it relies on this
approval:
25. Construct the project as described in the application, except as modified herein, or to
accommodate one or more similar uses, and/or as approved by the Municipal Code, to
construction and operate a carwash facility and expansion/relocation of an existing
convenience store,
26. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans,
which include site plans, floor plan, and elevation plan on file in the Planning
Division, the conditions contained herein, and Title 19.
Page 6
May 23, 2007
27, All landscaping and hardscape improvements shall be installed in accordance with the
approved landscape plan.
28. The conditions of approval for this Conditional Use Pennit shall be applied to the
subject property until such time approval is revoked, and the existence of this
approval with conditions shall be recorded with the title of the property.
29, Approval of the Conditional Use Pennit shall not waive compliance with all sections
of Title 19 of the Municipal Code, and all other applicable laws and regulations in
effect at the time of building pennit issuance.
30. Any deviation from the above noted conditions of approval shall require the approval
of a modified Conditional Use Pennit by the Zoning Administrator.
31, This Conditional Use Pennit shall be subject to any and all new, modified or deleted
conditions imposed after approval of this Pennit to advance a legitimate
governmental interest related to health, safety or welfare which the City shall impose
after advance written notice to the applicant and after the City has given to the
applicant the right to be heard with regard thereto, However, the City, in exercising
this reserved right/condition, may not impose a substantial expense or deprive the
applicant of a substantial revenue source which the applicant, in the nonnal operation
of the use pennitted, be expected to economically recover.
32. If any of the foregoing conditions fail to occur, or if they are, by their tenns, to be
implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail to be so
implemented and maintained according to their tenns, the City shall have the right to
revoke or modify all approvals herein granted, deny, or further condition issuance of
all future building pennits, deny, revoke, or further condition all certificates of
occupancy issued under the authority of approvals herein granted, institute and
prosecute litigation to compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages
for their violation. Failure to satisfy the conditions of this pennit may also result in
the imposition of civil or criminal penalties,
33, It is the intention of the Planning Commission that its adoption of this Resolution is
dependent upon the enforceability of each and every tenn, provision and condition
herein stated; and that in the event that anyone or more tenns, provisions or
conditions are detennined by a Court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, i1legal or
unenforceable, this Resolution and the Pennit shall be deemed to be automatically
revoked and of no further force and effect.
34. The Property Owner and Applicant shall and do agree to indemnify, protect, defend
and hold hannless City, its City Council members, officers, employees and
representatives, from and against any and all liabilities, losses, damages, demands,
claims and costs, including court costs and attorney's fees (collectively, liabilities)
incurred by the City arising, directly or indirectly, from (a) City's approval and
Page 7
May 23,2007
issuance of this Conditional Use Pennit and (b) City's approval or issuance of any
other pennit or action, whether discretionary or non-discretionary, in connection with
the use contemplated on the project site, The Property Owner and Applicant shall
acknowledge their agreement to this provision by executing a copy of this
Conditional Use Pennit where indicated below. The Property Owner's and
Applicant's compliance with this provision shall be binding on any and all of the
Property Owner's and Applicant's successors and assigns,
35, This Conditional Use Pennit shall become void and ineffective ifnot utilized within
one year from the effective date thereof, in accordance with Section 19,14.260 of the
Municipal Code, Failure to comply with any conditions of approval shall cause this
pennit to be reviewed by the City for additional conditions or revocation,
III. EXECUTION AND RECORDATION OF RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL
The Property Owner and Applicant shall execute this document signing on the lines
provided below, said execution indicating that the property owner and applicant have each
read, understood and agreed to the conditions contained herein, and will implement same.
Upon execution, this document shall be recorded with the County Recorder of the County
of San Diego, at the sole expense of the property owner and/or applicant, and a signed,
stamped copy returned to the City's Planning and Building Department. Failure to return
the signed and stamped copy of this recorded document within 10 days of recordation shall
indicate the property owner/applicant's desire that the project, and the corresponding
application for building pennits and/or a business license, be held in abeyance without
approvaL
Signature of Property Owner
350 East H Street
Date
Signature of Applicant
Date
IV. CONSEQUENCE OF FAILURE OF CONDITIONS
If any of the foregoing conditions fail to occur, or if they are, by their tenns, to be
implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail to be so implemented
and maintained according to their tenns, the City shall have the right to revoke or modify
all approvals herein granted, deny, or further condition issuance of all future building
pennits, deny, revoke, or further condition all certificates of occupancy issued under the
authority of approvals herein granted, institute and prosecute litigation to compel their
compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their violation. Failure to satisfy the
conditions of this pennit may also result in the imposition of civil or criminal penalties.
Page 8
May 23, 2007
V. INVALIDITY; AUTOMATIC REVOCATION
It is the intention of the Planning Commission that its adoption of this Resolution is
dependent upon the enforceability of each and every term, provision and condition herein
stated; and that in the event that anyone or more terms, provisions or conditions are
determined by a Court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, this
resolution and the permit shall be deemed to be automatically revoked and of no further
force and effect.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this 23rd day of May, 2007, by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Bryan Felber, Chair
ATTEST:
Diana Vargas, Secretary
J:\Planning\Case Files\-05 (FY 04-0S)\PCC\Public Hearing\PCC05-044\Resolutions\PC Resolution for Terra Nova Carwash
Revised.doc
ATTACHMENT 5
Disclosure Statement
6.
~!/e-.
-r-
, -
& Building
Planning Division
p I ann
Department
Development Procsssing
n IT
b
CITY m
CHULA VISTA
APPLICATION APPENDIX B
Disclosure Statement
Pursuant to Council Policy 101-01, prior to any action upon matters that will require discretionary action by the Council,
Planning Commission and all other official bodies of the City, a statement of disclosure of certain ownership or financial
interests, payments, or campaign contributions for a City of Chula Vista election must be filed, The following information
must be disclosed:
1.
List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the property that is the subject of the application or the
contract, e.g., owner, applicant, contractor, subcontractor, material supplier.
dr~A' (?). f(()-~
2.
If any'person' identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals with
a $ 000 investment in the business (corporation/partnership) entity,
3.
If any person' identified pursuant to (1) above is a non-profit organization or trust, list the names of any person
serving as director of the non-profit organization Of as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust.
4.
Pease identify every person, induding any agents, emp1oyees, consultants, or independent cor.tractors 'lcu have
. assigned to represent you before the City in this matter,
!if p f, 1:2J ~il'1r' )
5,
Has any person'" associated with this contract had any finanda! deaiings witIJ..-Bn officia1** of the City of Chuia
Vista as it reiates to this contract within the past 12 months. Yes_ No~
if Yes, briefly describe the nature of the financial interest the officiai- may have in this contract.
Have y~u made a c8ntr.ibutio~more than $250 within the, past twe've (12) months to a current member of the
Chwa Vista City Counc,,? No _ Yes _ J yes, which Councr: member?
"::-..) r:.;i..j,:.l ~.\::::~:.J:::
(~;1 ill J vi j i-i
C.llii',HlliJ
'~ I'? : ,)
i) I ,".) I)') i -"); d 1
~\rc-
-,-
. -
p I ann
n a
b
& Building
Planning Division
Department
Development Proc-2ssing
CITY OF
CHUlA. VISTA
APPLICATION APPENDIX B
Disclosure Statement - Page 2
7, Have you provided more than $340 (or an item of equivalent value) to an official" of the City of Chula Vis;a in the
past twelve (12) ;nonths? (This includes being a source of income, money to retire a legal debt, gift, loan, etc,)
Yes_ No~
If Yes, which official" and what was the nature of item provided?
Date: d-Iz}- 05
~dC~)
Signature 0 CO~Or!APPIiB.
/.-- 0 R.. ^-1 t) ~. . 70 N bL-?rint or
type nam e of Contractor! Applicant
.
Person is defined as: any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint venture, association, socia! club, fraternal
organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, any other county, city, municipality, district, or other
political subdivision, -or any other group or combination acting as a unit.
..
Official includes, but is not limited to: Mayor, Council member, Pianning Commissioner, Member of a board,
commission, or committee of the City, employee, or staff members.
.:: - ')
;::')U~+:l ..!.,'. ~~lll:::
'=:1.,1..1 \;:1<.1
(,]1 i [.;rn:,l
c:J ; ~) : ,;
G i_~ ') ,)
-J.\