HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Reports /2006/10/18
AGENDA
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
6:00 p,m,
Wednesday, October 18,2006
Council Chambers
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA
CALL TO ORDER:
ROLL CALUMOTIONS TO EXCUSE:
Planning Commission: Felber_ Vinson_ Moctezuma_ Bensoussan_ Tripp_ Clayton_
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE and MOMENT OF SILENCE:
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: PCS 04-06; Consideration of a Tentative Subdivision Map to
divide a 2,06 acre project site into 10 residential lots, Villas Del
Mar, LLC. (Quasi-Judicial)
Project Manager: Jeff Steichen, Associate Planner
2. PUBLIC HEARING: GPA 07-01; Proposed General Plan Amendment Mobile Home
Overlay District (Legislative)
Project Manager: Ed Batchelder, Advance Planning Manager
3. PUBLIC HEARING:
PCM 06-10; Consideration of a miscellaneous application to
rename the northern 2,000 feet of Hunte Parkway to Salt Creek
Drive. Applicant: Salt Creek Golf, LLC(Quasi-Judicial)
Project Manager: Brian Catacutan, Assistant Planner
4. PUBLIC HEARING:
PCC 06-70; Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit to
construct and operate an unmanned wireless
telecommunications facility at 4340 Main Street. Applicant: T-
Mobile. (Quasi-Judicial)
Project Manager: Kim Vander Bie, Associate Planner
Planning Commission
- 2-
October 18, 2006
5.
PUBLIC HEARING:
PCM 06-03; Considering certain amendments to the Chula Vista
Auto Center Master Plan, Auto Park North Specific Plan, and
Auto Park East Specific Plan. The proposed amendments
consist of changes to the plans intended to make the three
documents consistent with each other, in terms of the policies,
regulations, and procedures contained therein. (Quasi-Judicial)
Project Manager: Miguel Tapia, Sr. Community Development
Specialist
DIRECTOR'S REPORT:
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
ADJOURNMENT:
To a regular Planning Commission meeting on October 25,2006.
COMPLIANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
The City of Chula Vista, in complying with the American with Disabilities Act (ADA), requests individuals who require
special accommodations to access, attend, and/or participate in a City meeting, activity, or service, request such
accommodations at least forty-eight hours in advance for meetings, and five days for scheduled services and
activities. Please contact Diana Vargas for specific information at (619) 691.5101 or Telecommunications Devices
for the Deaf (TDD) at 585-5647. California Relay Service is also available for the hearing impaired.
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT
Item' L.
Meeting Date: 10/1 II/lOti
ITEM TITLE:
PUBLIC HEARING: PCS-04-06; Consideration of a Tentative
Subdivision Map to divide 2.06 acre project site into 10 residential lots -
Villas Del Mar, LLC.
This is a request by the applicant, Villas Del Mar. LLC, to divide the 2.06 acre project site into a 10
lot standard residential subdivision ("Project"). While the previous project requested 12 residential
lots with one common lot. the request was revised based upon issues raised at the May 10, 2006
Planning Commission. Along with the reduction in number of lots, the originally requested rezone
and precise plan are no longer necessary. The Project is located on the west side of North Del Mar
Avenue, north of C Street ("project site").
The Environmental Review Coordinator had reviewed the proposed project for compliance with
the California Environmental Quality Act and has conducted an Initial Study (IS-04-022) in
accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Based upon the results 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-04-22.
The Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the changes to the currently proposed
project are minor with no additional environmental impacts or issues that are not already covered
under the Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-04-022 addressed in the previous project. Therefore,
pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15073.5(c) recirculation of the Mitigated Negative
Declaration is not required.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt attached Resolution PCS-04-06A recommending that the City Council I) rescind previous
action taken on original project at the meeting of May 10, 2006 and 2) approve the proposed
Tentative Subdivision Map based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained in the
attached City Council Resolutions.
DISCUSSION:
Background
On March 6, 2006, the Resource Conservation Commission (RCC) determined that the Initial
Study IS-04-022 for the Project was adequate, and recommended adoption of the Mitigated
Negative Declaration IS-04-022. For reasons stated above. the redesign of the project does not
Page 2, Item:
Meeting Date: 1 Of! RjOfi
require any additional environmental review.
On May 10, 2006 the Planning Commission considered the previous project. Following staffs
presentation, public testimony was held which expressed concerns over potential negative impact of
the previously proposed development on the surrounding area. Following public testimony, the
Planning Commission also expressed concerns over the compatibility of the previous project with
surrounding existing development. Specifically, the commission was concerned with I) the
number and size of proposed residential lots and 2) requested deviations from development
standards needed to develop the project. The Planning Commission then proceeded to vote (5-0) to
recommend denial of the project to the City Council (see attachment 3)
Following the Planning Commission meeting, the applicant has worked with staff in an effort to
develop a revised project which addresses the concerns of the Planning Commission and the
surrounding residents. As a result, the applicant has I) reduced the number of lots to ten; 2)
increased the average lot size to 7,040 square feet and 3) eliminated the need for a rezone or precise
plan.
Pursuant to Chula Vista Municipal Code Section 2.04.570(B), the revised project is being brought
back to the Planning Commission with a two part request: I) that the Planning Commission rescind
their previous action of May 10. 2006 and 2) that the Planning Commission consider the revised
project proposed by the applicant.
On September 7, 2006, a neighborhood meeting was conducted with residents of the area
surrounding the project to discuss the revised tentative map proposal. The neighbors concerns can
be put into the follow categories: I) guest parking and its enforcement 2) private road access 3)
traffic. Each of these issues will be discussed in detail in the body of this report.
Project Site Characteristics
The project is an elongated shaped parcel located on the west side of North Del Mar Avenue.
The site slopes downward from the street frontage to the west. Except for the existing occupied
single-family residence on the easternmost portion of the site (near North Del Mar Avenue), the
site is vacant. It is currently enclosed by chain link fencing.
Surrounding Land Uses
The project site currently contains one (1) single family residence, which the applicant proposes
to remove. The predominant surrounding land use is single family residential. Apartments and a
mobile home park abut the southwest and western portion of the site (see Locator Map).
2
Page 3, Item:
Meeting Date: 1 'VI RfOl;
Site
General Plan Zoning Existing Land Use
Designation
Residential- Low RIP6 (except SFDNacant
Medium (RLM) easternmost 200 feet
currently zoned RI)
Residential - Low RI Single Family
Medium (RLM) Residential
Residential-Low Rl/R3GD Single Family
Medium/Residential - Residential! Apartments
Medium (RLMIRM)
Residential - Low RI Single-Family
Medium (RLM) Residential
Residential-Medium Mobile Home Park Mobile Home Park
(RM) (MHP)
Location
North
South
East
West
Project Description
The Tentative Subdivision Map proposes subdivision of the 2.06 acre lot into a total of 10 single
family residential lots ranging in size ITom 5,805 to 7,205 square feet. The average lot size will
be 7,309 square feet. The project no longer requires a rezone or precise plan development
standards in order to develop the site. The project has been revised from previous proposal
presented to the Planning Commission on May 10, 2006 based upon concerns expressed by both
residents and commissioners.
Comparison between original and revised project
The previous tentative map contained 12 residential Jots ranging in size from 4.29] to 5,061
square feet with an average lot size of 4,650 square feet. An 8000 square foot park site was
included at the lower end of the project. The easternmost 200' (flag portion) contained three
5,000 square foot lots. Just west of these lots, southeast of the proposed private road, were an
additional three lots. The currently proposed tentative map reduces the number of residential lots
from ]2 to ]0 with sizes ranging from 5,805 to 7,205. The easternmost portion now contains two
7.000 square foot lots. Just west of these lots, southeast of the proposed private road, are an
additional two lots. No deviations in development standards are now being requested, nor are
they required.
Page 4, Item:
Meeting Date: 10/1 RjO/i
Existing Topography and Grading
The subject parcel contains slopes of various gradients, but is generally characterized by flat or
nearly flat terrain near North Del Mar Avenue on the east end, transitioning a gentle 10% slope
westward, and thence further westward to steeper slopes in the range of 16-23% past the middle
of the site. The western third of the slope is characterized by a mix of steep slopes (30 to 40%)
and flatter slopes (4-12%). The property contains an 74 foot grade differential, with a high
elevation of 90 feet at the eastern edge, to a low of 16 feet to the west. In order to accommodate
the proposed 26 foot high pad elevations for Lots 8, 9 and 10, a series of two retaining walls (4
and 6 foot in height successively) are proposed along North 3'd Avenue which have a combined
height of 10 feet.
In order to minimize the impacts to the eXIsting topography while at the same time
accommodating the proposed private road through the project, the developer has proposed seven
"split level" lots whereby the retaining walls will be incorporated into the proposed homes. All
seven of the proposed split level lots (Lots 4-10) contain a 12 foot difference in elevation
between the upper and lower pad for each of the lots.
The project proposes 1,500 cubic yards of cut and 12,500 cubic yards of fill for a total import of
11,000 cubic yards. The fill dirt is required in order to primarily in order to provide level and
split level building pads large enough to be compatible with the surrounding existing
development.
The applicant proposes a development which will provide the community with similar and
complementary grading character, with the use of terracing and interior retaining walls, and by
avoiding any significant impact in the steepest portion of the lot. The resulting terrain will not,
therefore. tower over or below the adjacent properties, while still lending itself to desirable
westerly views for most residents.
ANALYSIS
Sltp. rnnstr::Jlnts
The proposed project is constrained by the following factors:
. ~onfiElIr"tion- The parcel is long (661 feet) and narrow(l55 feet wide), with only 80 feet
of frontage along North Del Mar Avenue.
. TopoV'"phy-The existing site contains steep terrain which slopes downward to the west.
. A~~p.ss-Since the applicant only owns a portion of the joint easement at the northern edge
of the property, the proposed 24 foot wide private street. Villas Del Mar Court, contains a
portion centered along the existing easement and remainder entirely within the project
4
Page 5, Item:
Meeting Date: 1 ryt R/OIi
site. The easterly 220 feet of Yilla Del Mar Court is proposed to be centered within the
existing easements that combine to serve not only the subject property but also adjacent
properties to the north. The remaining approximately 300 feet is proposed entirely within
the subject site and tenninates in a cul-de-sac containing a 90 foot diameter turn-around
for service and emergency vehicles. This private street tenninates approximately 130 feet
in from the western edge of the project site. Although the western edge of the project site
is adjacent to North Third Avenue, at this point Third Avenue is a "paper street" and not
suited for improvement to provide access (see discussion under Access/On-Site
Circulation).
Si7e ::Inn nIJmher of l()t~
One of the issues raised regarding number and size of lots had to do with the Eastern 200 foot
portion of the site. The original proposal was for three 5,000 square foot lots in this portion of
the site, which would have necessitated rezoning this portion of the site to make it consistent
with the rest. This is no longer being requested and the applicant has now increased the lot sizes
in this area to 7,000 square feet, going ITom 3 to 2 lots in this area.
Overall, the applicant has reduced the total number of lots from 12 to 10 which has allowed the
average lot size to increase from 4,600 to 7,040 square feet. As a result, the project has changed
from what was considered a small lot subdivision to a standard subdivision. Although two of the
10 lots are below 7.000 square feet, this is allowed per section 19.24.080 of the CYMe. This
section specifies that up to 30% of lots (10% can be minimum of 5,000 s.f. and 20% can be
minimum 6.000 square feet) as long as the overall average is at least 7,000 square feet.
The existing surrounding lot sizes average about 7,000 square feet which is typical for the R-l
single family area. The revised project now contains lots sizes which average 7,000 square feet
and are now compatible with surrounding area.
Ar.r.e~~/nn-Sltp. ("lrr.ll1Ml0TI
Access to the project will be via a 24 foot wide private drive connecting to North Del Mar
Avenue. Due to the narrow width of this roadway, no parallel on-street parking shall be allowed.
A twenty foot wide driveway to each lot will be provided off of this private drive. The tenninus
of the private street will be a cul-de-sac containing a 90 foot diameter turn-around that has a
concentric 30 foot diameter planter area. The cul-de-sac standards proposed are the same as
those required for public streets. The Fire Department has reviewed the proposal and has
detennined that the proposed turn-around radius meets Fire Department requirements.
At the neighborhood meeting of September 7, 2006, some of the residents expressed concern
over allowing a private street for access through the subdivision. Section 3-404.1 of the City's
Subdivision Manual allows private streets subject to specific criteria: I) their use is logically
Page 6, Item:
Meeting Date: 111f1 RjOfi
consistent with a desire for neighborhood identification and control of access. and where special
overall design concepts may be involved; 2) the use of private streets shall be limited to cul-de-
sacs and to minor local streets not carrying through traffic and those with a projected traffic
volume not exceeding 800 ADT; and 3) private street designations shall be subject to review and
approval by the Planning Commission and the City Council.
Staff has determined that the above criteria will be met. The use of a private street minimizes the
impacts to the surrounding areas in order to help maintain the existing topography of the area.
Private streets allow for steeper grades than a public street would allow. As shown in subsequent
discussion. an additional 90 ADT's are projected with this project, well below the 800 ADT
maximum. By providing a private street ending in a cul-de-sac, there will be no concern about
through traffic. Finally, the proposed private street will be reviewed as part of the project by
both the Planning Commission and City Council.
Although North Third Avenue abuts the western edge of the property only half of the needed
right-of-way width for public residential street (30-feet) has been granted for a public street.
There are currently no street improvements in place. The applicant is not proposing and staff
does not support the use of Third Avenue as providing access to the development. Staff is
requiring twenty-foot paved access for sewer maintenance purposes beginning at the terminus of
the on-site cul-de-sac in a westerly direction to the property line and then in a northerly direction
along North Third Avenue approximately 500 feet. However. widening of the Third Avenue
easement in order to create a public road would be difficult due to both topographic constraints
as well as potential negative impact to the mobile home park located to the west. Further, if an
access road were to be provided by the applicant along North Third Avenue, there is no room to
provide a turn around that would meet the requirements of the Engineering. Fire and Public
Works Departments.
Tr"ffidOff-Sitp C'irclIlMion
A number of residents living near the project site have expressed concerns both in writing and
verbally at the neighborhood meeting of September 7, 2006 regarding project traffic impacts to
the area (see Attachment 6). A traffic study was not required to be conducted for the project
according to standards and thresholds. Thus, the Environmental Review Coordinator determined
there were no significant traffic impacts according the required CEQA level of analysis (see
Attachment 5). Nonetheless, based upon concerns expressed by residents, staff consulted with
the City's Traffic Engineering Division who subsequently conducted some traffic counts in the
area and who provided the following summary analysis.
The proposed project is 10 single family homes with one existing single family home to be
demolished. Therefore. the traffic impacts are for the net additional 9 homes. Using a trip
generation rate of 10 vehicle trips per home assumes a total project traffic impact of
approximately 90 vehicles per day.
6
Page 7, Item:
Meeting Date: 1 0f1 R/Oli
Engineering staff completed traffic counts in the area of the subject project From March 22
through March 24, 2006 traffic counts were completed on North Second Avenue between
Bayview Way and Shirley Street Also, speed and volume counts were conducted on North Del
Mar Avenue between Vista Del Mar Court and Nixon Place. The results of the data are as
follows:
North Second Avenue
North Second Avenue has an average daily traffic count of approximately 7,287 vehicles per day.
Of this total 3491 (48%) were in the northbound direction and 3796 (52%) in the southbound
direction. The percentage split shows that it is approximately evenly distributed. Since North
Second Avenue is a collector street, it circulates localized traffic as well as distributes traffic to
and from arterials and other collectors to access residential areas. The roadway design capacity is
7,500 vehicles per day according to the City's Subdivision Manual. At 7,287 trips per day, the
roadway is under design capacity and within design limits. This means that the roadway has
moderate volumes but would have minimal delays throughout most of the day and minimal to
some minor delays during certain peak hours of the day. The delays during the peak periods
would primarily be traffic queued up at the all-way stop sign at the intersection of North Second
Avenue and C Street
North Del Mar Avenue
The residential street North Del Mar Avenue has an average daily traffic count of approximately
167 vehicles per day. Of this total 101 (60%) were in the northbound direction and 67 (40%) in
the southbound direction. The percentage split shows that it is almost a 2:1 ratio for northbound
versus southbound vehicles. Since North Del Mar Avenue is a residential street, which is meant
to be the roadway that generates local trips, the roadway design capacity is 1.200 vehicles per
day. The volume today is 14% of the design capacity and with the project, all of the traffic has to
utilize North Del Mar Avenue. The traffic volume with the project increases to 23% of the
design volume. This 23% figure represents a level of service "A" (less than 60% design
capacity) which means that the roadway would still not be expected to have any delays since the
low volumes would mean that conditions are generally free flow throughout the day. It would
take approximately 720 vehicles per day for the level of service on this street to decease to level
of service "B", which would still be acceptable.
The speed count data showed that on this 25 MPH roadway northbound speeds averaged 18
MPH and 85% of the vehicles were at 24 MPH or lower. For the southbound direction, the
average speed was 21 MPH and 85% of the vehicles were at 28 MPH or less. The southbound
direction has a downward grade as it approaches the stop sign at the T -intersection with C Street
7
Page 8, Item:
Meeting Date: 10,11 R/Oh
Bayview Way
Bayview Way is a residential street with no curb improvements and one-lane in each direction.
According to the City's Subdivision Manual, design capacity is 1200 Average Daily Trips
(ADT's). A recent traffic count conducted at the project frontage showed ADT's of 167 vehicles
per day. Therefore, with the project's anticipated 90 trips per day increase, expected volume of
traffic on Bayview Way will be less than 300 vehicles per day, which is still acceptable on this
local street. The proposed increase in project traffic impacts on the level of service of Bayview
Way would not change from level of service "A".
The City's Subdivision Manual design criteria for streets states that residential streets should
provide access to not more than 120 tributary dwelling units. This project area has
approximately 62 dwelling units and with the project, the total will increase to 73 dwelling units
served by the existing three access points; Bayview Way, Shirley Street and North Del Mar
A venue. Since the design criteria also states that single family residential development shall not
exceed 120 residential lots unless two points of access are provided and there are three points of
access, the project does not create any traffic impacts on the local roadway network. The three
access points serve to better distribute the local traffic in this area.
P"rking
A two car garage is required and proposed for each of the 10 units. No parking will be allowed
along the private drive. In addition. section 19.22.150 of the Municipal Code requires guest
parking be provided since access to the proposed lots will be off of a proposed private road. The
applicant is proposing 10 guest parking spaces on site, in two parking bays, four spaces at the
northwest edge of Lot 2 and six spaces at the cul-de-sac. In addition, there is room for
approximately 3 on-street parking spaces on street on N. Del Mar Avenue. Based upon concerns
by a few residents in the vicinity of the project, city staff conducted a parking analysis and finds
the project will have negligible impact. While no parking will be allowed along the traveled way
of the private drive, the driveways provided for on each of the lots will be able to provide
opportunities for guest parking for a minimum of two vehicles. Thus, the site will accommodate
the projected guest parking demand. In order to affinn guest parking availability, the following
restrictions have been placed in the proposed Conditions of Approval and required to be
included in the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R's )for the project:
. Garages must be free and clear to allow for parking of 2 vehicles at all times
. No on-street parking along private drive
. Driveways should be available to provide opportunities for parking of 2-4 guest vehicles.
Because the applicant is proposing a private drive which is not wide enough to accommodate
parking along the street, although not required by code, they have provided for additional guest
8
Page 9, Item:
Meeting Date: 1 0fI RfOIi
parking spaces at a 1: 1 ratio at two locations within the project site. Four spaces are proposed at the
upper portion to accommodate the 4 parcels at this level. Six spaces are proposed within the lower
portion of the development in order to accommodate the six lower parcels.
At the neighborhood meeting of September 7, 2006, the neighbors continued to express concern
about the lack of parking provided with this project. While it is true that the proposed private drive
is not wide enough to accommodate on-street parking, for the reasons mentioned above, staff finds
the issue of the proposed provision for guest parking more than adequate, and that. in this particular
instance, more guest parking will be accommodated than in a typical subdivision which does allow
for on-street parking. The combination of one marked guest space per lot with maintaining each
driveway to accommodate at least two additional guest spaces provides a total of at least 3 guest
parking spaces per unit. On-street parking for a subdivision providing public street access, usually
has room for only 1 to 2 parking spaces along the street for each lot. The CC&R provisions
mentioned above will be enforced via a Homeowners Association (HOA). In addition, the
applicant will require the new homeowner to sign an agreement at the time of purchase of the lot,
agreeing to the CC & R provisions noted above.
nr:lln:l!:~
Stonnwater will be collected within the roadway with curb inlets, and /Tom private property with
the use of catch basins and culverts, with provisions for easements where required. The
collectable stonn water will be directed to a proposed underground detention system and will be
discharged-controlled before exiting at the northwest corner of the property. From this point, the
stonnwater will flow over the surface on Third A venue as it had done in the past.
The development will be required to comply with City's NPDES requirements and all water
quality issues,
Sllhc11vlC:::l()n Oesien
The proposed project complies with the general design requirements contained in the City's
Subdivision Manual. The proposed private street is allowed per Section 3-404.1 of the
Subdivision Manual.
Public Facilities
Water
The Sweetwater Authority has indicated there is a 6-inch main located on the east side of North
Del Mar Avenue. The owner will need to install a water main to this project. To date. the owner
has signed and returned the Authority's design requirement letter and paid requested deposit for
. . .
engmeenng review.
9
Page 10, Item:
Meeting Date: 1 f1/1 R/O';
Sewer
There are currently no sewer mains abutting the property that would allow for gravity-type flow.
The applicant proposes an off-site sewer main extension through the Third Avenue right-of-way
to the northwest. They will connect to an existing manhole approximately 267 feet northwesterly
within the Third Avenue right-of-way, and install a public 8" PVC sewer main, with concrete
encasement for the shallow installation up to the southwest comer of the site, then easterly into
the proposed Villas Del Mar Court cul-de-sac, and thence traverse up Villas Del Mar Court until
terminating in front of proposed Lot 1. In addition, the developer will construct a 15 ft. wide
roadway surface along the length of the portion of Third Avenue that will be served by the
proposed line in that right-of-way. The developer must grant an easement to the City of Chula
Vista for maintenance of the proposed lines.
FmerEpnr.y Sf':rvlr.es
The terminus of the private street will be a cul-de-sac containing a 90 foot diameter turn-around
that has a concentric 30 foot diameter planter area. The cul-de-sac standards proposed are the
same as those required for public streets. The Fire Department has reviewed the proposal and
approved the proposed turn-around radius.
S~hool<
The project is within the boundaries of the Chula Vista Elementary School District, which serves
children Kindergarten through Grade 6. Applicant will be required to pay applicable developer
fees based upon assessable area.
Earks
Applicant will be required to pay in-lieu park fees
Project romplian~e with Growth Management
This project is below the threshold required to prepare a Water Conservation or Air Quality
Improvement Plan.
Conflict of Interest
Staff has reviewed the proposed holdings of the Planning Commission and has found no holdings
within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property which is the subject of this action.
]0
Page 11, Item:
Meeting Date: 10/1 R;O/1
CONCLUSION
For the reasons stated above. staffrecommends adoption of the Resolution to I) rescind previous
action taken by the Planning Commission on May 10. 2006 and 2) that the City Council approve
the revised tentative map based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein.
A tt"chments
I Locator Map
2 Draft Planning Commission Resolution
3 Planning Commission Resolution of May 10, 2006
4 Draft City Council Ordinance
5 Mitigated Negative Declaration
6 Letters trom residents
7 Project Plans
8 Ownership Disclosure Fonn
J: planning\casefiles\05\PCZ 05-03\... IVillas Del Mar PC Staff Report 18 oct 2006
II
ATTACHMENT 1
LOCATOR
LOCATOR
ATT ACHMENT 2
DRAFT PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION ON CURRENTLY
PROPOSED PROJECT
RESOLUTION NO. PCS-04-06A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING
COMMISSION I) RESCINDING PREVIOUS ACTION TAKEN
ON ORIGINAL PROJECT AT MEETING OF MAY 10,2006 AND
2) RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT THE
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION
MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM IS-04-022; AND
APPROVING AND ESTABLISHING CONDITIONS OF A
REVISED TENT A TIVE MAP TO DIVIDE 2.06 ACRES LOCATED
ON THE WEST SIDE OF N. DEL MAR A VENUE INTO 10
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS-VILLAS DEL MAR
DEVELOPMENT, LLC.
WHEREAS, on January 20,2004 a duly verified application for PCS 04-06 and on June 22,
2005 a duly verified application for PCZ 05-03 were filed with the City ofChula Vista Planning and
Building Department, requesting approval of a Tentative Subdivision Map to subdivide 2.06 acres
into 13 lots. and rezone application requesting a change from the RI to RIP6 zone with Precise
Plan ModifYing District Standards ("Previous Project"); and
WHEREAS, the project has subsequently been revised to eliminate the need for a rezone
with Precise Plan Modifying District Standards and to reduce the number of residential lots trom 12
to 10, with the elimination of the common lot. In addition, the revised project no longer requires a
rezone application with Precise Plan ModifYing District Standards ("Currently Proposed Project");
and
WHEREAS, the area of land commonly known as Villas Del Mar (PCS 04-06) Tentative
Subdivision Map (PCS-04-06), Chula Vista Tract No. 04-06, which is the subject matter of this
Resolution, is diagrammatically represented in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein
by this reference, and for the purpose of general description herein consists of2.06 acres located on
the west side ofN. Del Mar Avenue ("Project Site"); and
WHEREAS. the Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed Project for
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has conducted an Initial
Study, IS-04-22 in accordance with CEQA; and
WHEREAS, based on the results ofthe Initial Study. the Environmental Review Coordinator
has detennined that the proj ect could result in significant effects on the environment. However,
revisions to the project made by or agreed to by the Developer 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-04-22; and
WHERAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has detennined that the changes to the
Currently Proposed Project, which were predicated upon previous Planning Commission and Public
Review, are minor with no additional environmental impacts or issues identified that are not already
covered under the Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-04-022 addressed in the previous project.
Therefore, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15073.5( c) recirculation ofthe Mitigated Negative
Declaration is not required; and
WHEREAS, on May 10, 2006 the Planning Commission considered the Previous Project
and recommended denial of the rezone with precise plan and accompanying tentative subdivision
map for a 12 lot single family planned residential development; and
WHEREAS, following the Planning Commission meeting. the applicant has worked with staffin
an effort to develop a revised project which addresses the concerns of the Planning Commission as
well as the surrounding residents; and
WHEREAS. pursuant to Chula Vista Municipal Code Section 2.04.570(B), the Currently
Proposed Project was brought back to the Planning Commission with a two part request: I) that the
Planning Commission rescind their previous action of May 10. 2006 and 2) that the Planning
Commission consider the revised project proposed by the applicant; and
WHEREAS, on September 7. 2006, a neighborhood meeting was held at Rosebank Elementary
School in order to discuss the Currently Proposed Project with surrounding neighbors; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission does hereby find that in the exercise of their
independent review and judgement, as set forth in the records of its proceedings, the Mitigated
Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (IS-04-022) has been
prepared in accordance with the requirements ofthe California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
the State CEQA Guidelines and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City OfChula Vista,
and hereby recommends that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (IS-04-022); and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Building Director set the time and place for a hearing on the
Project, and notice of said hearing. together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a
newspaper of general circulation in the city and its mailing to property owners within 500 feet ofthe
exterior boundaries of the property, at least 10 days prior to the hearing; and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 6:00 p.m.,
October 18, 2006 in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission
and said hearing was thereafter closed.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION I)
rescinds previous action taken on May 10.2006 and 2) recommends that the City Council adopt the
attached Draft City Council Resolution approving the Project, and Mitigated Negative Declaration
IS-04-022 in accordance with the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the City
Council.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this 18th day of October, 2006, by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Byron Felber. Chairperson
ATTEST:
Diana Vargas, Secretary
J:\Planning\Case Files\-06 (FY 05-06)\GPA\ gpa-05-01_PCS-03-OI-PCRes
ATTACHMENT 3
PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION OF MAY 10, 2006
RESOLUTION NO. PCZ 05-03/ PCS-04-06
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING
COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
DENY THE REZONE WITH PRECISE PLAN STANDARDS; AND
DENY THE ACCOMPANYING TENTATNE MAP TO DNIDE
2.06 ACRES LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF N. DEL MAR
AVENUE INTO 12 RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND ONE COMMON
LOT IN ORDER TO ALLOW A PLANED RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT-VILLAS DEL MAR DEVELOPMENT, LLC.
WHEREAS, on January 20,2004 a duly verified application for PCS 04-06 and on June 22,
2005 a duly verified application for PCZ 05-03 were filed with the City ofChula Vista Planning and
Building Department, requesting approval of a Tentative Subdivision Map to subdivide 2.06 acres
into 13 10ts("Project"), and rezone application requesting a change from the RI to RIP6 zone with
Precise Plan Modifying District Standards ("Project"); and
WHEREAS. the area of land commonly known as Villas Del Mar (PCS 04-06) Tentative
Subdivision Map (PCS-04-06), Chula Vista Tract No. 04-06, which is the subject matter of this
Resolution, is diagrammatically represented in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein
by this reference, and for the purpose of general description herein consists of2.06 acres located on
the west side ofN. Del Mar Avenue ("Project Site"); and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed Project for
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has conducted an Initial
Study, IS-04-22 in accordance with CEQA; and
WHEREAS, based on the results ofthe Initial Study, the Environmental Review Coordinator
has detennined that the project could result in significant effects on the environment. However.
revisions to the project made by or agreed to by the Developer 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-04-22; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission does hereby find that the Mitigated Negative
Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (IS-04-022) has been prepared in
accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State
CEQA Guidelines and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City OfChula Vista; and
WHEREAS, The Planning Commission does hereby find that in the exercise of their
independent review and judgment, the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program (18-04-022) in the form presented has been prepared in accordance with
requirements ofthe California Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Review Procedures
of the City ofChula Vista; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission having received certain evidence on March 10,2006,
as set forth in the record of its proceedings herein by reference as is set forth in full, made certain
findings. as set forth in their recommending Resolution PCZ-05-03/PCS-04-06 herein, and
recommended that the City Council deny the Project based upon findings of Section 19.14.576 ofthe
Municipal Code and in accordance with Government Code Section 66474; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Building Director set the time and place for a hearing on the
Project, and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a
newspaper of general circulation in the city and its mailing to property owners within 500 feet of the
exterior boundaries of the property, at least 10 days prior to the hearing; and,
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 6:00 p.m., May
10, 2006 in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission and said
hearing was thereafter closed.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION
recommends that the City Council deny the Rezone with Precise Plan standards and accompanying
tentative map based upon the following findings:
I. That such use will 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 Commission finds that proposed precise plan development standards would
allow the applicant to develop the project site in a way which is not compatible with
the existing development of the surrounding neighborhood. The proposed lot sizes
closest to North Del Mar Avenue are well below the size of the adjacent lots to the
north and south, as well as 2,000 square feet below the minimum lot size required by
the existing RI zone established for parcels fronting on N. Del Mar Avenue and
surrounding residential streets. Traffic generated by allowing development under the
proposed precise plan could negatively impact the neighborhoods existing quality of
life.
2. That such plan does not satisfY the principles for application of the "P" modifYing
district as set forth in CVMC 19.56.041;
(a) The Commission finds that although the property is unique in terms of its
topographic constraints on the western portion of the project site, the eastern
portion could still be developed under the existing R-I zoning which would result
in lot sizes and overall density more compatible with the surrounding existing
neighborhood.
(b) The Commission finds that although the western portion of the property is
adjacent to and contiguous to a zone allowing different land uses, the eastern
portion which is currently zoned R-I is more consistent with the surrounding
residential development than would be the applicant proposal for the eastern
portion of the project site under a precise plan.
(c) The basic or underlying zone regulations for the eastern portion of the project site
currently zoned R-I do allow this part of the development to achieve an efficient
and proper relationship among the uses allowed in the adjacent zones as said
adjacent uses on the eastern portion of site are also single-family residential R-l
zoned properties.
(d) Although the project site consists of two slightly different zone classifications,
being a single parcel, is under one ownership. The Commission finds that it is
not necessary to place a P modifying district over the site in order to enhance
ability to coordinate development of the site.
3.That exceptions granted which may deviate from the underlying zoning
requirements are not warranted to meet the purpose and application of the P precise
plan modifying district;
While the allowance of a precise plan on the western portion of the site which already
contains aP precise plan modifier (R1P6) may allow for a better development pattern
on this portion of the site, given the topographic constraints, and variation in adjacent
land uses, the Commission finds it is not necessary to rezone or allow a precise plan
to extend to the eastern portion of the project site given the size of the existing
residential development to the north, east and south.
4. That approval of this plan will not conform to the general plan and the adopted
policies of the city and therefore meets the reasons for denial stated in Section 66474
of the State Government Code.
Although the project proposed under the precise plan meets the density allowed
under the existing Residential-Low-Medium 3-6 dulacre designation ofthe General
Plan the Commission finds that the lot layout on the eastern portion ofthe site is not
compatible with existing lot sizes to the north. south and east. In addition, it is
necessary to adopt both the rezone and precise plan in order to achieve the proposed
density of 12 dulac which is at the upper range of density allowed (6 dulac). The
Planning Commission finds a more appropriate density given the surrounding
neighborhood would be more in the mid range of allowable density. This would also
allow the project more consistent with City policies reflecting the importance of
neighborhood compatibility.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the
City Council.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this 10th day of May. 2006. by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Vicki Madrid, Chairperson
ATTEST:
Diana Vargas. Secretary
JWlanning\Case Files\'{)6 (FY 05-06)\GPA\ gpa-05-01]CS'{)]'{)I-PCRes
ATTACHMENT 4
DRAFT CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION
DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 2006-_(PCS-04-06)
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CITY
COUNCIL ADOPTING THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING
PROGRAM IS-04-022 AND APPROVING AND
ESTABLISHING CONDITIONS OF A TENTATIVE MAP TO
DIVIDE 2.06 ACRES LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF N.
DEL MAR AVENUE INTO 10 SINGLE-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL LOTS-VILLAS DEL MAR DEVELOPMENT,
LLC.
I. RECITALS
A. Project; Application for Discretionary Approval
WHEREAS, on January 20, 2004, a duly verified application was filed with the City of
Chula Vista Planning and Building Department, requesting approval of a Tentative
Subdivision Map to subdivide 2.06 acres into 12 residential lots and one common lot
("Previous Project") by Villas Del Mar Development, LLC ("Developer"); and
WHEREAS, on May 10, 2006 the Planning Commission discussed the previous project and
expressed concerns I) the number and size oflots and 2) the number ofrequested deviations
from development standards needed to develop the project; and
WHEREAS, following the Planning Commission meeting of May 10, 2006 the applicant has
revised the previous project and reduced the number of residential lots from 12 to 10 and
eliminated the common lot ("Currently Proposed Project"); and
B. Project Site
WHEREAS, the area ofland commonly known as Villas Del Mar Tentative Subdivision Map
(PCS-04-06), Chula Vista Tract No. 04-06, which is the subject matter of this Resolution.
and is diagrammatically represented in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein
by this reference. and for the purpose of general description herein consists of 2.06 acres
located on the west side ofN. Del Mar Avenue, north ofC Street, west ofN. Second Avenue
and south of Bay View Court. located within the Residential Low Medium Designation (3-6
dwelling units per acre) of the General Plan, and the Residential Single Family (R-I-P6) zone
(Single Family Residential Zone. Precise Plan Modifying District ), consisting of APN 563-
290-04 ("Project Site"); and
C. Environmental Determination
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the Previous Project for
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and conducted an Initial
Study, IS-04-22 in accordance with CEQA; and
Resolution No. 2006-
WHEREAS, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS-04-022) was prepared for the Previous
Project, which involved the residential development of the 2.06-acre parcel within the
western portion of the city; and
WHEREAS, based on the results of the Initial Study, the Environmenta] Review Coordinator
detennined that the Previous Project could result in significant effects on the environment.
However, revisions to the Previous Project made by or agreed to by the Developer would
avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would
occur; therefore, the Environmenta] Review Coordinator has prepared a Mitigated Negative
Declaration, IS-04-22; and
WHEREAS, on March 6. 2006, the Resource Conservation Commission detennined that
Initia] Study IS-04-22 for the Previous Project was adequate. and recommended adoption of
the Mitigated Negative Declaration, IS-04-22; and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has detennined that the changes to the
currently proposed project, which were predicated upon previous Planning Commission and
Public Review, are minor with no additional environmental impacts or issues identified that
are not already covered under the Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-04-022 addressed in the
previous project. Therefore. pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section ]5073.5(c) recirculation
of the Mitigated Negative Declaration is not required; and
WHEREAS. on October ] 8,2006, the Planning Commission recommended adoption of
Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-04-22 to the City CounciL
D. Planning Commission Record on Applications
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a noticed public hearing on the Project on May
10, 2006, and after hearing staff's presentation and public testimony voted (5-0) to
recommend that the City Council deny the Project, in accordance with applicable findings;
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a notice public hearing on the Currently
Proposed Project on October ]8, 2006, and after hearing staff's presentation and public
testimony voted xxx to 1) rescind previous action taken on the original project on May 10,
2006 and 2) recommend that the City Council approve the Currently Proposed Project. in
accordance with the findings and subject to the conditions listed below; and
E. City Council Record on Applications
WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for the public hearing on the Project's
tentative subdivision map application; and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose,
was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City, its mailing to
property owners within 500 feet of the exterior boundary of the Project, at least 10 days prior
to the hearing; and
WHEREAS, the duly called and noticed public hearing on the Project was held before the
City Council of the City of Chula Vista on November 14, 2006, in the Council Chambers,
2
Resolution No. 2006-
276 Fourth Avenue, at 4:00 p.m. to receive the recommendations 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, detennine
and resolve as follows:
II. PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD
The proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning Commission at its public
hearing on the Currently Proposed Project held on October I I, 2006 and the minutes and
Resolution resulting therefrom, are hereby incorporated into the record of this proceeding.
III.CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA AND INDEPENDENT
JUDGMENT OF CITY COUNCIL
The City Council has exercised their independent review and judgment and concurs with the
Planning Commission. Resource Conservation Commission, and Environmental Review
Coordinator's determination that Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program (IS-04-22), in the fonn presented, 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
adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program IS-04-022.
IV. TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FINDINGS
A. Pursuant to Government Code Sections 65300 et. seq. (Planning and Zoning Law), and
66473.5 (Subdivision Map Act), the City Council finds that the Project, as conditioned
herein, is in confonnance with the elements of the City's General Plan based on the
following:
I. Land Use
The project will be developed at a density of 5 dwelling units per acre, which is
within the allowable residential density range of 3-6 dwelling units per acre. The
project design is consistent with the clustering provision of the Land Use Element,
because the clustered design will preserve significant areas of steep slope. Also, the
project proposes a detached single family planned development which will be
consistent with the character intended for a Residential Low-Medium area, and will
be more compatible with the development of the surrounding area, which is primarily
single family residential. The proposed project provides housing opportunities in the
northwest portion of the City.
2. Circulation
The Developer wil1 construct the on-site private street. Off-site public streets
required to serve the subdivision already exist. Required public street improvements
will be provided by the Developer through the attached Conditions of Approval. The
private street within the Project will be designed in accordance with the City design
standards and/or requirements and provide for vehicular and pedestrian connections.
3
Resolution No. 2006-
This project area currently has 62 dwelling units. With this project. the total will
increase to 71 dwelling units served by the three existing streets: Bayview Way.
Shirley Street and North Del Mar Avenue. The existing City design criteria states
that single family residential development shall not exceed 120 residential lots unless
two points of access are provided. The project does not create any traffic impacts on
the local roadway network because there are three existing points of access. The
three access points serve to better distribute the local traffic in this area. All city
standards will be maintained on all city streets.
3. Public Facilities
The Project has been conditioned to ensure that all necessary public facilities and
services will be available to serve the Project concurrent with the demand for those
services. There are no public service, facility, or phasing needs created by the Project
that warrants the preparation of a Public Facilities Financing Plan.
4. Housing
The Project is consistent with the density prescribed within the Residential - Low
Medium General Plan designation, and the Project provides additional opportunities
for single family residential home ownership.
5. Growth Management
The Project is in compliance with applicable Growth Management Element
requirements because there are no public service, facility, or phasing needs that
warrant the preparation of a Public Facilities Financing Plan.
6. Open Space and Conservation
The project proposes clustering of the development of dwellings on the lower
elevations in order to minimize grading of steep slopes. The Environmental Review
Coordinator has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration, IS-02-045, which
addressed the goals and policies of the California Environmental Quality Act, and
found the development of the site to be consistent with the goals and policies of the
Conservation Element
7. Parks and Recreation
The Project has been conditioned to pay park acquisition and development fees prior
to recordation of the Final Map.
8. Safety
The City Engineer, Fire and Police Departments have reviewed the proposed
subdivision for conformance with City safety policies and have determined that the
proposal, as conditioned, meets those standards. A Fire Protection Plan has been
prepared and approved by the City Fire Marshal.
4
Resolution No. 2006-
9. Noise
The Project has been reviewed for compliance with the Noise Element and will
comply with applicable noise measures at the time of issuance of the building permit.
The Project has been conditioned to require that all dwelling units be designed to
preclude interior noise levels over 45 dBA and exterior noise exposure over 65 dBA
for all outside private yard areas.
10. Scenic Highwav
This Project Site IS not located adjacent to or visible from a designated scemc
highway.
II. Seismic Safetv
A preliminary geotechnical investigation has been prepared for the project, which
determined that a trace of the potentially active Nacion Fault is present on the
property. The report recommended that certain geotechnical mitigation measures be
required, which have been included in the Mitigated Negative Declaration as
conditions of approval. Also, another condition of approval has been included which
requires that a detailed soils report and geo-technical study be prepared in conjunction
with grading plans, and that the Developer follow the recommendations of the
geotechnical report and study prepared in conjunction with the grading plans.
B. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66473.1 of the Subdivision Map Act, the City
Council finds that the configuration. orientation, and topography of the site allows for the
optimum siting of lots for natural and passive heating and cooling opportunities and that
the development of the site will be subject to site plan and architectural review to insure
the maximum utilization of natural and passive heating and cooling opportunities.
C. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66412.3 of the Subdivision Map Act, the Council
certifies that it has considered the effect of this approval on the housing needs of the
region and has balanced those needs against the public service needs of the residents of
the City and the available fiscal and environmental resources.
D. The site is physically suited for residential development because the proposed site can
accomodate the density of residential development called for by the General Plan while at
the same time grading the site in such as way that is sensitive to the existing sloping
topography of the site.
E. The conditions herein imposed on the grant of permit or other entitlement herein
contained are approximately proportional both in nature and extend to the impact created
by the proposed development.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby approve the Project subject to
the general and special conditions set forth below.
5
Resolution No. 2006-
V. Government Code Section 66020 NOTICE
Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(d)(1), NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the 90
day period to protest the imposition of any impact fee, dedication, reservation, or other exaction
described in this resolution begins on the effective date of this resolution and any such protest
must be in a manner that complies with Section 66020(a) and failure to follow timely this
procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, set aside, void or annual imposition.
The right to protest the fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions does not apply to
planning, zoning, grading, or other similar application processing fees or service fees in
connection with the project; and it does not apply to any fees, dedication, reservations, or other
exactions which have been given notice similar to this, nor does it revive challenges to any fees
for which the Statute of Limitations has previously expired.
VI. GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
A. Project Site is Improved with Project
The Developer, or hislher successors in interest and assigns, shall improve the Project Site
with the Project as described in the Tentative Subdivision Map, Chula Vista Tract No. 04-06,
Villas Del Mar.
VII. SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
A. The conditions herein imposed on the tentative map approval herein contained is
approximately proportional both to nature and extent of impact created by the proposed
development. Unless otherwise specified, all conditions and code requirements listed below
shall be fully completed by the Developer or successor-in-interest to the City's satisfaction
prior to approval of the Final Map, unless otherwise specified:
GENERAL! PLANNING AND BUILDING
I. All of the tenns, covenants and conditions contained herein shall be binding upon and
inure to the benefit of the heirs, successors, assigns and representatives of the Developer
as to any or all of the property.
2. Developer and/or his/her successors in interest, shall comply, remain in compliance and
implement, the tenns, conditions and provisions, as are applicable to the property which
is the subject matter of the Tentative Subdivision Map, as recommended for approval by
the Planning Commission on October 18, 2006. Prior to approval of the Final Map for
the project, the Developer shall enter into an agreement with the City, providing the City
with such security and implementation procedures as the City may require compliance
with the above regulatory documents. The Agreement shall also ensure that, after
approval of the Final Map, the Developer and his/her successors in interest will continue
to comply, remain in compliance, and implement such Plans.
3. Any and all agreements that the Developer is required to enter into hereunder shall be in a
fonn approved by the City Attorney.
6
Resolution No. 2006-
4. Design and construct all street improvements in accordance with Chula Vista Design
Standards, Chula Vista Street standards, and the Chula Vista Subdivision Manual unless
otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Obtain City Engineer approval of detailed
improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer licensed in the State of
California detailing horizontal and vertical alignment of public improvements.
Said improvements shall include, but not be limited to, asphalt concrete pavement, base,
concrete curb, gutter, sidewalk, pedestrian ramps, driveway, sewer and water utilities,
drainage facilities, street light, and fire hydrants.
5. Guarantee the construction of public street improvements deemed necessary to provide
service to the subject subdivision in accordance with City standards.
6. Detailed street tree Plans for the Project shall be submitted concurrent with grading plan
submittal and approved prior to approval of the Grading Penn it by the Director of
Building and Planning or designee. Plans shall be prepared by a registered Landscape
Architect pursuant to the City's Landscape Manual, City Grading Ordinance and
Subdivision Manual.
7. All retaining wall footings that occur within planter areas shall be of a deep-footed design
to accommodate shrub plantings and tree planting where occur. In some cases this may
be a specially designed footing to satisfy this condition. The tree and shrub plantings
shall confonn to the approved landscape concept plan.
8. Developer shall comply with all applicable sections of the Chula Vista Municipal Code,
the City Growth Management Ordinance, and the City's General Plan, as amended from
time to time. The Developer shall prepare any final maps and all plans in accordance
with the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act and the City ofChula Vista Subdivision
Ordinance, Grading Ordinance, the Landscape Manual, and Subdivision Manual.
9. If any of the tenns, covenants or conditions contained herein shall 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 including issuance of
building pennits, deny, or further condition the subsequent approvals that are derived
from the approvals herein granted, institute and prosecute litigation to compel their
compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their violation. The Developer shall
be notified in writing 10 days in advance prior to any of the above actions being taken by
the City and shall be given the opportunity to remedy any deficiencies identified by the
City.
10. Submit a "Recycling and Solid Waste Management Plan" which has been approved by
the City of Chula Vista Conservation Coordinator. The plan shall demonstrate those steps
the Developer will take to comply with Municipal Code, including but not limited to
Sections 8.24 and 8.25, and meet the State mandate to reduce or divert at least 50 percent
of the waste generated by all residential, commercial and industrial developments. The
7
Resolution No. 2006-
Developer shall contract with the City's franchise hauler throughout the construction and
occupancy phase of the project. The plan shall incorporate trash enclosures which are
designed to comply with the City's N.P.D.E.S. permit if applicable, to provide
compatibility with the architectural style of the development, and to enhance trash
enclosure doors where they are highly visible.
II. Developer shall diligently implement, or cause the implementation of all mitigation
measures pertaining to the Project identified in Mitigated Negative Declaration, IS-04-22.
Mitigation measures not satisfied by a specific condition of this Resolution or by Project
design shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning and Building.
Mitigation Measures shall be monitored via the Mitigation Monitoring Program approved
in conjunction with the above Mitigated Negative Declaration. Modification of the
sequence of mitigation shall be at the discretion of the Director of Planning and Building
should changes in the circumstances warrant such revision.
12. Developer and/or its successors-in-interest shall, to the satisfaction of the Environmental
Review Coordinator, deposit funds sufficient to pay the costs associated with the hiring
of a Mitigation Monitor (biological specialist) to oversee the implementation of the
biological mitigation measures identified in the IS-04-22 Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program.
13. Present written verification to the City Engineer from Sweetwater Authority that the
subdivision will be provided adequate water service and long-tenn water storage facilities
and comply with other requirements delineated in comment letter dated March 28, 2006.
14. Install fire hydrants as detennined by the City Fire Marshall. Said hydrant locations shall
be shown on the grading and/or improvement plans.
15. Provide evidence to the satisfaction of the City Engineer of ties to established survey
monwnents for the proposed street centerlines prior to issuance of any grading or
construction pennits, or approval of the final map.
GRADING/DRAINAGEINPDES
16. Submit and obtain approval by the City Engineer of grading plans prepared by a
registered civil engineer. All grading and pad elevations shall be within 2 feet of the
grades and elevations shown on the approved tentative map or as otherwise approved by
the City Engineer and Planning Director. Grading and improvement plans shall be based
on NA VD88 vertical datum. All offsite grading and construction shall require signed and
notarized letters of pennission trom the affected property owners.
17. Design all lot grading so that lot lines are located at the top of slopes. This may require
the use ofretaining walls along some lot lines. All retaining walls shall be noted on the
grading plans and include a detailed wall profile. The maximum height of all retaining
walls shall not exceed 6 feet per Section 19.58.150 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code.
8
Resolution No. 2006-
Structural wa]] calculations are required if wa]]s are not built per City Standards and/or if
fences are to be placed on top of retaining wa]]s.
18. Submit and obtain approval by the City Engineer for an erosIOn and sedimentation
control plan as part of grading plans.
19. Show the location ofcut/fi]] lines based on existing topography on grading plans.
20. Submit a list of proposed lots indicating whether the structure wi]] be located on fi]], cut,
or a transition between the two situations prior to approval of the final map.
21. Submit a detailed geotechnical report prepared, signed and stamped by both a registered
civil engineer and certified engineering geologist prior to approval of grading plans and
issuance of a grading pennit.
22. Submit a drainage study prepared by a registered civil engineer to be reviewed and
approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading pennit or other development
pennit. Design of the drainage facilities shaU consider existing onsite and offsite
drainage patterns. The drainage study sha]] calculate the pre-developed and the post-
developed flows and show how downstream properties and stonn drain facilities are
impacted. The study sha]] include calculations sizing the proposed underground
detention system. The extent of the study sha]] be as approved by the City Engineer. The
energy dissipaters sha]] be designed to accommodate the runoff velocities from a 100-
year stonn.
23. A]] onsite drainage facilities sha]] be private.
NPDES REQUIREMENTS
24. Comply with a]] provisions of the National Po]]utant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) and the Clean Water Program during and after a]] phases of the development
process, including but not limited to: rough grading, construction of street and
landscaping improvements, and construction of dwe]]ing units.
25. The IS-foot wide sewer access road (Third Avenue Extension) shaU be designed to
handle stonn water runoff fonn the site and from the adjacent properties to the north.
Provide erosion control measures at the northerly end of said sewer access road and a
PCC cross gutter at the stonn drain outlet structure from the development.
26. The proposed project is subject to NPDES General Construction Pennit requirements.
Obtain pennit coverage and develop a Stonn Water Po]]ution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
prior to the issuance of a Land Development (Grading) Pennit. Said SWPPP sha]]
include construction and post-construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) for stonn
water po]]ution prevention, as we]] as funding mechanisms for post-construction BMPs.
9
Resolution No. 2006-
27. The applicant is required to complete the applicable fonns upon submittal of the project
grading plans (see City of Chula Vista's Development and Redevelopment Storm Water
Management Requirements Manual) and comply with the Manual's requirements.
28. According to the NPDES Municipal Pennit, Order No. 2001-01, this project is
considered a Priority Development Project and, hence, subject to the requirements of the
Standard Urban Stonn Water Mitigation Plans (SUSMPs) and Numeric Sizing Criteria.
29. The developer shall enter into an agreement to fully implement NPDES best management
practices ("BMPs") to reduce the amount of pollutants entering the city's stonn water
conveyance system, including but not limited to:
a. Providing stonn drain system stenciling and sign age; more specifically:
i. Provide and maintain stenciling or labeling near all stonn 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 along channels
and creeks.
b. Installing and using efficient irrigation systems and landscape design; more
specificall y:
1. Employ rain shutoff devices to prevent irrigation after precipitation.
11. Adjust irrigation systems to each landscape area's specific water
requirements
111. Using flow reducers or shutoff valves triggered by a pressure drop to
control water loss in the event of broken sprinkler heads or lines.
IV. Employing other comparable, equally effective, methods to reduce
irrigation water runoff.
c. Employing integrated pest management principles. More specifically, eliminate
and/or reduce the need for pesticide use by implementing Integrated Pest
Management (IPM), including: (I) planting pest-resistant or well-adapted plant
varieties such as native plants; (2) discouraging pests in the landscaping design;
(3) distributing IPM educational materials to homeowners/residents. Minimally,
educational materials must address the following topics: keeping pests out of
buildings and landscaping using barriers, screens, and caulking; physical pest
elimination techniques, such as, weeding, squashing, trapping, washing, or
pruning out pests; relying on natural enemies to eat pests; and, proper use of
pesticides as a last line of defense.
d. Educate the Public. More specifically, the Homeowners Association, through
Property Management, etc., shall inform residents about the City's non-stonn
water and pollutant discharge prohibitions. This goal can be achieved by
distributing infonnative brochures (some available free from the City of Chula
Vista) to new home buyers and dedicating sections of newsletters to stonn water
quality issues, as applicable.
10
Resolution No. 2006-
SEWER / WATER
30. All proposed public sewer lines shall be located within the 24-foot public sewer and
access easement. Developer shall be responsible for obtaining any needed offsite sewer
easements.
31. Design and construct all the sewer mains and manholes within Villas Del Mar Court and
the Third Avenue Extension to public standards in accordance with Chula Vista Design
Standards and Chula Vista Subdivision Manual.
32. A Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) paved access is required through the development.
An asphalt concrete (AC) paved access is required through the Third Avenue Extension
to accommodate City sewer maintenance trucks and fire trucks. All paved access shall be
designed based upon a Traffic Index (TI) of 5.0.
33. If the flow line elevation at the end of the proposed gutter at the northerly end of the
sewer access road is higher than the rim elevation of the existing sewer manhole just to
the north of the property limits, the existing sewer manhole shall be upgraded to a water
tight sewer manhole.
34. An additional sewer manhole shall be required either upstream or downstream of MH 5,
to prevent a ninety (90) degree bend in the sewer main.
35. The paved sewer access on Third Avenue shall extend to the existing northerly sewer
manhole shown on the Tentative Map.
36. Removable bollards or an approved access gate shall be required at the entrance to the
sewer access road, just south of Lot 10.
STREETS
37. Provide a 100-watt street light on North Del Mar Avenue as approved by the City Traffic
Engineer.
38. Design and construct public street improvements fronting the properties located at 160
and 152 North Del Mar Avenue to connect to the existing improvements south of the
project and provide a transition north of the project. Installation of street improvements
shall include, but not be limited to curb, gutter, sidewalk, alley type apron, cross gutter,
approved pedestrian ramps, and street light on per City Standards. Street improvements
on North Del Mar require a centerline to curb width of 18 feet.
39. Driveway dimensions shall include the width of the driveway flares. Driveways shall
comply with the City of Chula Vista driveway standards per CVCS IA.
II
Resolution No. 2006-
40. Streets within the development shall be private.
41. The existing power pole shall be relocated as shown on the Tentative Map. All utilities
services for the subdivision shall be underground.
EASEMENTS
42. Grant to the City a 24-foot public sewer and access easement over the public sewer lines
on the Final Subdivision Map.
43. A private 10-foot storm drain easement on Lot 8 shall be granted on the Final
Subdivision Map to APN 563-290-05-00, 152 North Del Mar Avenue.
44. Grant to the City on the Final Subdivision Map a 5.5 foot wide street tree planting and
maintenance easement along North Del Mar Avenue as shown on the Tentative Map.
45. The private 5-foot landscape (Lots 1-10) and 25-foot general utility and drainage
easement (Lot A) within the subdivision boundary shall be conveyed to subsequent
purchasers of Lots 1-10 pursuant to the requirements of Section 18.20.150 of the
Municipal Code of the City ofChula Vista.
AGREEMENTS
46. Agree to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and its agents, officers and
employees, from any claim, action or proceeding against the City, or its agents, officers
or employees to attack, set aside, void or annul any approval by the City of Chula Vista,
including approval by its Planning Commission, City Councilor any approval by its
agents, officers, or employees with regard to this subdivision pursuant to Section
66499.37 of the Map Act provided the City promptly notifies the subdivider of any claim,
action or proceeding and on the further condition that the City fully cooperates in the
defense.
47. Agree to hold the City harmless from any liability for erosion, siltation or increase flow
of drainage resulting from this project.
48. Agree to ensure that all franchised cable television companies ("Cable Company") are
permitted equal opportunity to place conduit and provide cable television service to each
lot within the subdivision. Restrict access to the conduit to only those franchised cable
television companies who are, and remain in compliance with, all of the terms and
conditions of the franchise and which are in further compliance with all other rules,
regulations, ordinances and procedures regulating and affecting the operation of cable
television companies as same may have been, or may from time to time be issued by the
City ofChula Vista.
49. Agree to comply with all applicable sections of the Chula Vista Municipal Code and
prepare the Final Parcel Map and all plans in accordance with the provisions of the
Subdivision Map Act, Subdivision Ordinance and the Subdivision Manual of the City of
Chula Vista.
12
Resolution No. 2006-
50. Agree to include provisions in the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions
(CC&R's) assuring maintenance of all common landscaping, open space, streets,
driveways, sewer and drainage systems, which are private. The City of Chula Vista shall
be named as a party to said Declaration authorizing the City to enforce the tenns and
conditions of the Declaration in the same manner as any owner within the subdivision.
All the individual homeowners of the project shall own all private driveways jointly and
inseparably. Include provision that no private facilities shall be requested to become
public unless 100% of all homeowners have agreed in the fonn of a written petition.
51. Prior to the approval a Final Map, a Declaration or Supplementary Declaration of
Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be submitted and subject to the
approval of the City Engineer and City Attorney. The CC&R's shall include the
following obligations of the Homeowners Association (HOA):
1. A requirement that the HOA shall maintain comprehensive general liability
insurance against liability incident to ownership or use of the following areas:
-All open space lots that shall remain private,
-Other Master Association property.
11. Before any revisions to provisions of the CC&R's that may particularly affect the
City can become effective, said revisions shall be approved by the City. The
HOA shall not seek approval from the City of said revisions without the prior
consent of 100 percent of the holders of first mortgages or property owners within
the HOA.
Ill. The HOA shall defend, indemnify and hold the City harmless from any claims,
demands, causes of action liability or loss related to or arising from the
maintenance activities of the HOA.
IV. The HOA shall not seek to be released by the City from the maintenance
obligations described herein without the prior consent of the City and 100 percent
of the holders of first mortgages or property owners within the HOA.
v. The HOA is required to procure and maintain a policy of comprehensive general
liability insurance written on a per occurrence basis in an amount not less than
one million dollars combined single limit The policy shall be acceptable to the
City and name the City as additionally insured to the satisfaction of the City
Attorney.
VI. The CC&R's shall include provisions assuring maintenance of all open space lots,
streets, driveways, drainage and sewage systems which are private.
VII. The CC&R's shall include provisions assuring HOA membership in an advance
notice such as the USA Dig Alert Service in perpetuity.
Vlll. The CC&R's shall include provisions that provide the City has the right but not
the obligation to enforce the CC&R provisions the same as any owner in the
project
13
Resolution No. 2006-
IX. The CC&R provisions setting forth restrictions in these Tentative map conditions
may not be revised at any time without prior written peffi1ission of the City.
x. The HOA shall not dedicate or convey for public streets, land used for private
streets without approval of 100% of all the HOA members or holder of first
mortgages within the HOA.
XI. The HOA shall maintain all water quality facilities In confoffi1ance with the
NPDES Municipal Peffi1it, Order No. 2001-0 I
Xll. The CC&R's shall include provisions assuring compliance with the solid waste
and recycling program requirements, to the satisfaction of the City Conservation
Coordinator.
XllI. The HOA shall maintain all landscaping installed in common areas as defined by
the CC&R's.
XIV. CC&R's shall include restriction related to garages and parking as follows:
. Garages must be free and clear to allow for parking of 2 vehicles at all
times.
. No on-street parking along private drive (other than designated guest
parking spaces).
. Driveways shall be available for additional guest parking
52. Developer agrees to submit Homeowners Association budget for review and approval by
the City Engineer for the maintenance of private streets, water quality improvements,
stOffi1 drains, sewage systems, electrical system, plumbing and roof. More specifically,
said budget shall include the following provisions and maintenance activities:
a. Streets must be sealed every 7 years and overlaid every 20 years
b. Sewers must be cleaned once a year with the contingency for emergencies
c. Red curbs/striping must be painted once every three years.
d. The Homeowners Association shall be responsible for service utilities including
water and sewer, and the billing and payment of these utility costs.
e. StOffi1 Water quality facilities inspected prior to and after every rain event and
cleaned as necessary (twice a year minimum); media inserts replaced as
recommended by the manufacturer; with a contingency for emergencies. The
budget shall also include a monitoring program including sampling and
preparation of an annual report, when required by the City.
14
Resolution No. 2006-
MISCELLANEOUS
53. Tie the boundary of the subdivision to the California System-Zone VI (NAD '83).
54. Submit copies of the final map, grading plan, and improvement plan in a digital fonnat
such as (DXF) graphic file prior to approval of the Final Map. Provide computer aided
Design (CAD) copy of the Final Map based on accurate coordinate geometry calculations
and submit the infonnation in accordance with the City Guidelines for Digital Submittal
in duplicate on 3 Y, HD floppy disk prior to the approval of the Final Map.
55. Submit a confonned copy of a recorded tax certificate covering the property prior to
approval of the Final Map.
56. Comply with all applicable sections of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. Preparation of
the Final Map and all plans shall be in accordance with the provisions of the Subdivision
Map Act and the City of Chula Vista Subdivision Ordinance and Subdivision Manual.
57. Developer shall install and make operable the fire hydrants, emergency vehicu]ar access
and street signs prior to delivery of combustible building materials, to the satisfaction of
the City Fire Marshal. Said hydrant locations shall be shown on the improvement plans.
58. Provide precise underground fire service plans prior to locating Fire Department
connections and post indicator valves, with placements to be approved by CVFD. All
Fire Department connections must not be any closer than three feet to the face of curb.
59. Provide a water flow analysis for the underground fire service utility. Show all
calculations on a point-to-point system. Provide proof that the most remote fire hydrant
can produce a minimum flow of 1,500 gpm for 2 hours at 20 psi.
60. All underground fire service installation is to be inspected by CVFD. Call 72 hours in
advance to schedule an appointment.
61. Provide contractors material and test certificate for underground pipe.
62. Design all dwelling units to preclude interior noise levels over 45dBA and exterior noise
exposure over 65 dBA for all outside private yard areas.
64. Submit a phasing plan showing sequence of construction and occupancy of the project,
including installation of landscaping, recreation amenities, utilities, and fire protection
improvements.
65. Developer agrees to pay the all applicable fees in accordance with the City Code and
Council Policy including applicable Transportation Development Impact Fees (TDIF)
and Public Facilities Development Impact Fees ("PFDIF").
]5
Resolution No. 2006-
VIII. EXECUTION AND RECORDATION OF RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL
The property owner and the Developer shall execute this document by signing the hnes
provided below, said execution indicating that the property owner and Developer have each
read, understood, and agreed to the conditions contained herein. 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 the Developer, and a signed, stamped copy of this
recorded document shall be returned to the Planning and Building Department. Failure to
return a signed copy and a stamped copy of this recorded document within thirty days of
recordation to the City Clerk shall indicate the property owner and Developer's desire that
the Project, and the corresponding application for building pennits andlor 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 Developer or Property Owner
Signature of Developer
IX. 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 htigation to compel their compliance with
said conditions or seek damages for their violation. The Developer shall be notified ten (10)
days in advance prior to any of the above actions being taken by the City and shall be given
the opportunity to remedy any deficiencies identified by the City within a reasonable and
diligent time frame.
X. 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 tenn, provision and condition herein stated; and that in
the event that anyone or more tenns, provision, or conditions are detennined by a Court of
competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, this resolution shall be deemed
to be automatically revoked and of no further force and effect ab initio.
Presented by:
Approved as to fonn by:
Jim Sandoval
Director of Planning & Building
Ann Moore
City Attorney
16
ATTACHMENT 5
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Mitigated Negative Declaration
PROJECT NAME:
Villas Del Mar
PROJECT LOCATION:
160 N. Del Mar Avenue
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.:
APN #563-290-0400
PROJECT APPLICANT:
Villas Del Mar Development LLC
Frederico Escobedo
CASE NO.:
IS-04-022
DATE OF DRAFT DOCUMENT:
February 27, 2006
DATE OF RESOURCE CONSERV A TION COMMISSION MEETING: March 6, 2006
DATE OF FINAL DOCUMENT:
April 4, 2006 (Revised 9/2112006)
PREPARED BY:
Maria C. Muet!
Revisions made to this document ~mbsequent to the issuance afthe notice 0lavailability of the draft Mitigated
Negative Declaration are denoted by underline.
Background
A Mitigated Negative Declaration (!S-04-022) was prepared for the Villas Del Mar Proiect. which involved the
residential development of the 2.06-acre parcel within the western portion of the Citv. The Resource
Conservation Commission recommended adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration at their March 6,
2006 Meeting. On April 3. 2006 the Design Review Committee approved design of the proiect. The Planning
Commission recommended denial of the proiect on Mav 10. 2006. The project has since been redesigned
reducing the number of proposed lots from 12 to 10 lots. The proiect is scheduled for review bv the Planning
Commission on October 18, 2006. The changes to the proposed project are minor with no additional
environmental imoacts or issues identified that are not alreadv covered under the Mitigated Ne!2:ative
Declaration lS-04-022 addressed in the earlier proposaL Pursuant to CEOA Guidelines Section 15073.5(c)
recirculation of the Mitigated Negative Declaration is not required.
A. Proiect Setting
The 2.06-acre project site is located at 160 N. Del Mar, within the urbanized area of Western Chula
Vista, (Exhibit 1- Location Map). The site is adjacent to N. Del Mar Avenue and near Vista Del Mar
Court and N. Third Avenue. Primary access to the site is currently provided off of N. Del Mar
A venue through a private road easement shared by properties to the north. The rectangular-shaped
flag lot site is covered with naturally vegetated land, dry grasses and slopes from a gentle gradient to
steeper slopes towards the west. The entire project site has been partially disturbed with previous
uses including a single-family residence, garage and small accessory structures. The land uses
immediately surrounding the project site are as follows:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Single-Family Residential
Single-Family and Multi-Family Residential
Single-Family Residential
Mobile Home Park
B. Proiect Description
The proposal consists of subdividing the project site into H lQ single-family parcels. Access to the
site would be provided via a private road entrance off of N. Del Mar Avenue. The project includes
the demolition and replacement of an existing single-family residence. The remaining ++ 2. parcels are
designed for single-family residential development. Proposed on-site improvements include drainage
facilities, sewer system facilities, fire hydrants, retaining walls, fencing, improved paved areas, open
space and landscape treatments. The proposal includes a Design Review Pennit for a Precise Plan, a
Rezone to change a portion of the property zoned RI to RIP6, as well as a Tentative Map. The
project is subject to a Habitat Loss and Incidental Take (HUT) pennit in accordance with the City of
Chula Vista Multiple Species Conservation Program Subarea Plan.
C. Compliance with Zoning and Plans
The proposed project site is within the General Plan LM (Low-Medium Residential Density/3-6
dwelling units per acre) and RI and RIP6 (Single Family Residential/Precise Plan) Zone. The
proposal includes a rezone of the RI portion of the site to RIP6 area, thus creating an overall RlP6
zone. The proposed project has been found to be consistent with the applicable site development
regulations and the General Plan.
D. Public Comments
On December 22, 2005, a Notice of Initial Study was circulated to property owners within a 500-foot
radius of the proposed project site. The public review period ended January 4, 2006. Two verbal
comments were received during this period regarding traffic circulation, density and unidentified sand
fill materials on site. The issues regarding traffic and undocumented fill are addressed in the
Mitigated Negative Declaration sections below.
On March 1. 2006. the Notice of Availability of the Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration for the
proiect was posted in the County Clerk's Office and circulated to propertv owners within a 500-foot
radius of the proiect site. The 30-dav public comment period closed on March 30. 2006. A written
comment letter was received from the Sweetwater Authority. The issue included minor edits to the
Utilities/Service Svstems portion of the Initial Studv Checklist/Mitigated Negative Declaration. Other
comment letters were received bv the Planning Department but not addressing the adequacv of the
Mitigated Negative Declaration.
E. Identification of Environmental Effects
An Initial Study conducted by the City of Chula Vista (including an attached Environmental
Checklist fonn) detennined that the proposed project may have potential significant environmental
impacts however; mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project to reduce these impacts
to a less than significant level. This Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance
with Section 15070 of the State of Cali fomi a Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.
Air Ouality
Short- Term Construction Activities
The proposed project will result in a short-tenn air quality impact created ITom construction activities
associated with the proposed project. The grading of the site for future single family residential
development and worker and equipment vehicle trips will create temporary emissions of dust, fumes,
equipment exhaust, and other air pollutants associated with the construction activities. Air quality
impacts resulting from construction-related operations are considered short-tenn in duration.
2
In order to analyze potential project impacts/emissions, the emission factors and threshold criteria
contained in the 1993 South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Handbook for Air
Quality Analysis were used.
Table I below provides a comparison of daily construction emissions to the SCAQMD's emission
thresholds of significance for each criteria pollutant Emissions were calculated using the URBEMIS
2002 model. The addition of emissions to an air basin is considered under CEQA to be a significant
impact. Implementation of the Mitigation Measure I contained in Section F below would mitigate
short-term construction-related air quality impacts to below a level of significance. These measures
are included as a part of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Table 1.0
Project Estimated Construction Emissions 2006/2007*
Pollutant CO ROG NO, S02 PMIO
MitT.;;;ted (Ibs/dav) (lbs/day) (lbs/day) Ibs/dav (lbs/day/tota1)
Construction
equipment and 82.19 59.51 59.06 .31 7.39
grading
Significance
Threshold, 550 75 100 150 150
Exceed No No No No No
threshold
ROG is used in the Air Quality Model and VOC is used in the SCAQMD Threshold Criteria. For the purpose of
this analysis, ROG is used in this model.
Combined Short-Term and Long-Term Impacts
In order to assess whether the project's contribution to ambient air quality is cumulatively
considerable, the project's operational emissions were quantified. The proposed project once
developed will not result in significant long-term air quality impacts. The minimal project generated
traffic volume would not result in significant long-term local or regional air quality impacts. Through
project design, emission-controlled construction vehicles and efficiency building product, no area
source or operational vehicle emission estimates will exceed the Air Quality significance thresholds;
therefore, no mitigation measures are required. Refer to Table 2.0 below.
Table 2,0
Project Estimated Area and Operational Emissions 2006/2007*
Pollutant CO ROG NOx S02 PMIO
Mitigated (Ibs/day) (lbs/day) (Ibs/day) (lbs/day) (Ibs/day)
Vehicle 15.04 1.23 1.49 0.01 1.36
Emissions
Area Sources 0.52 1.08 0.15 0.01 0.00
Total 15.56 2.31 1.64 0.02 1.36
Significance 550 55 55 ISO 150
Threshold,
Exceed No No No No No
Threshold
'Source SCAQMD CEQA Handbook Air Quality Model 1993
1 South Coast Air Quality Management District/Air Quality Significance Thresholds
3
Biological Resources
A Biological Resource Analysis was prepared by Pacific Southwest Biological Services, Inc., dated
January 19, 2006, to assess the potential biological resource impacts of the project A biological
reconnaissance survey of the project site was conducted on May II and June 2, 2005 to identifY
existing vegetation on the site. On-site surveying included zoological assessment conducted by a
qualified zoologist on May 19,2005. The biological resource analysis is summarized below.
The 2.06-acre project site consists of 0.11 acres of developed land and approximately 1.844-acres of
disturbed habitat The site is located in an area designated as a urban/development area under the
City's Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP) Subarea Plan. The surrounding land to the
west, north, east and south are currently developed with residential uses. A portion of the northern
property is currently vacant and undeveloped. The already disturbed site contains Eucalyptus trees,
urban/developed land, non-native grassland vegetation and portions of earlier salt marsh vegetation,
specifica11y known as Cismontane Alakali Marsh community.
The project site is located within in the City of Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan boundary in an area
designated as a "Development Area." Under the Subarea Plan, the proposed project is subject to the
requirements under the Habitat Loss Incidental Take (HLIT) Ordinance. In accordance with the
HLIT Ordinance, those projects that are greater than one acre, contain sensitive biological resources,
and are located outside of the "Covered Projects," must demonstrate compliance with the Ordinance
and obtain Take Authority from the City of Chula Vista for impacts to Covered Species. The
fo11owing is a summary of the findings and impacts contained in the updated biological report as
required by the City's HLIT Ordinance, Section 17.35.
Vegetation Impacts
The biological report determined that the development of the project would result in impacts to 1.14
acres of Non-native Grassland (NNG) habitat. According to the MSCP Subarea Plan, NNG is
designated as Tier III (common uplands) habitat Impacts to this habitat must be mitigated in
accordance with the City's MSCP Subarea Plan. This can be accomplished by providing evidence
that the NNG or equivalent credits in a offsite mitigation preserve bank has been acquired to the
satisfaction of the City's Planning and Building Department Director. Implementation of the
mitigation measures identified in Section F of this Mitigated Negative Declaration wi1l reduce
identified indirect biological impacts to a level below significance.
Salt Marsh Vegetation Community
Along the northwestern portion of the project site, a tidal marsh that was once part of the Sweetwater
River Estuary was identified. Early history records indicated that the construction of the flood control
levees and SR 54, eliminated any tidal activity. This area is dominated by non-native grasses and
shaded by eucalyptus trees. According to the biological resource study and concurred by the City's
third-party Biological Resource consultant, there are no hydrologic conditions that support the
Cismontane Alkali marsh vegetation, and those that were discovered were likely leaching out of the
existing alkaline salt area. The federal and state agencies that have jurisdiction over wetlands and
associated areas are not likely to consider this Alkali marsh remnant to be significant under their
jurisdiction, and would not be considered a jurisdictional authority of the u.S. Army Corp of
Engineers subject to 404 Take Permit regulations. This area is being avoided through project design,
as it is located within the IS-foot setback along the north boundary of the project site. This feature
does not limction as a wetland nor as a salt marsh vegetation community.
In order to ensure avoidance of the habitat, prior to the issuance of any clearing, grading or
construction permits, orange biological fencing wi11 be insta11ed around the remnant marsh area
4
within the IS-foot property line setback, near Lot M ~, in accordance with the development plans and
to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator. The City's Mitigation Monitor will
conduct periodic site visits to verify the placement of the biological fencing and to ensure that all
construction activities remain within the approved limits of grading. Implementation of the mitigation
measures identified in Section F of this Mitigated Negative Declaration will reduce potentially
significant biological impacts to a level below significance.
Animal/Wildlife Species Impacts
The Non-native Grassland habitat, open space areas near the site, and the eucalyptus trees along the
northern boundary could be used as foraging habitat by common raptorial sensitive species of the
area. These species include Red-shouldered Hawks, Cooper's Hawks, and Red-tailed Hawks.
Impacts associated with clearing and grading activities upon raptor nesting are considered potentially
significant. Therefore, a pre-construction survey for nesting raptors will be required. A copy of the
preconstruction survey results and recommendations must be submitted to the City's Environmental
Review Coordinator for review and approval.
In addition, the applicant will be required to provide evidence that the impacted area of NNG has
been properly mitigated in an offsite mitigation bank to the satisfaction of the City's Planning and
Building Director. Implementation of the mitigation measures identified in Section F of this
Mitigated Negative Declaration will reduce potentially significant biological impacts to a level below
significance.
Habitat Loss Incidental Take (HUT) Permit
Due to the impacts to the Tier III habitat, Non-native Grasslands, the applicant will be required to
meet the Habitat Loss Incidental Take (HUT) findings and obtain a HUT Permit trom the City of
Chula Vista in accordance with the City's HLIT Ordinance (Section 17.35 of the CVMe).
Landscaoe Treatments
Based upon remnant Alkali Marsh vegetation identified on the project site, any proposed landscaping
must not contain invasive vegetation that has the potential to infiltrate this habitat. In order to ensure
that this existing area is protected from invasive vegetation, prior to the issuance of a grading permit
the applicant will be required to prepare and submit a final landscape plan/palette to the City's
Environmental Review Coordinator for review and approval. Implementation of the mitigation
measures identified in Section F of this Mitigated Negative Declaration will reduce potentially
significant biological impacts to a level below significance. This measure is included as part of the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (See Section F).
Geologv and Soils
To assess the potential geological/soils impacts of the project, a Geotechnical Investigation evaluation
was prepared by Geocon Incorporated/Geotechnical Consultants, dated November 18, 2003. The
study indicated that there are no known active faults existing on the project site or in the immediate
area. The closest known active fault is the Rose Canyon Fault located approximately 4.7 miles west
of the project site. The liquefaction potential on the site is considered to be low due remedial grading
recommendations, the presence of shallow and dense materials and the lack of shallow groundwater
over a majority of the project site. The groundwater level will fluctuate with seasonal rain and local
soil absorption. No significant geological or soil impacts would be created as a result of the proposed
project as conditioned.
5
The geotechnical study indicates that a small area in the mid/eastern section of the project site
contains undocumented fiU materials. The geotechnical study includes recommended measures for
the removal of unsuitable or recompaction of any suitable fill materials to mitigate significant
geological impacts. Prior to building permit issuance the applicant will be required to comply with
all the recommendations presented in the study. Details of the undocumented fiU are disclosed under
the Hazards/Hazardous Materials Section below.
Submittal of a final soils report wi1l be required prior to the issuance of grading permits to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer. The mitigation measures contained in Section F below would
mitigate potential geological/soils impacts to a less than significance leveL These measures are
included as a part of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Site History
Information provided by the current owner, historic aerial photographs, historic records/zoning/land
use records and surrounding property owners indicate that the site has been mostly used for
residential purposes. Information provided by a nearby resident indicated that a previous owner has
deposited undocumented fill on the project site. Since that time, much vegetation, dirt, and debris has
covered the remainder portion of the site.
Phase l/Phase II
A Phase I/Phase II Environmental Site Assessment was prepared by Geocon, Inc., dated February 3,
2006, in order to assess the potential recognized environmental conditions or likely presence of any
hazardous substances or petroleum products into building structures, ground soil, ground water, or
surface water of the project site.
On January 20, 2006, a total of 24 soil samples was co1lected from four borings within the middle and
eastern portion of the project site. In addition, a sample of sandy material was co1lected trom an area
that appeared to be the disposal location of the sandblasting waste. The fill included sandblasting
debris materials consisting of sticks, bricks, and plastic sheeting. Geocon Incorporated confirmed
that no groundwater was encountered in any of the trenches excavated during their investigation.
Concentrations of high PCBs or other potential contaminants were not detected in any of the
composite samples. Based upon the comparison of the various sampling concentrations and the
limitations encountered during the sample co1lection of the sandy material, Geocon recommended
further assessment, proper excavation and proper disposaL None of the CCR Title 22 Metals were
detected above respective limits.
On January 27'" and 30''', 2006 approximately 30 cubic yards of undocumented fiB/sandy material
was removed and taken to an authorized classified waste disposal facility. The material was
manifested as a non-hazardous waste solid due to its low concentrations as determined by the
analytical testing. After the removal of the sandy material additional confirmation soils samples were
collected trom the ground surface beneath the former pile. These additional soil samples were
analyzed and no PCBs or other contaminants were detected at or above the laboratory detection limit
in any of the additional soil samples.
According to the complete Phase II, the disposal of the undocumented f11l/sandy material and
underlying groundwater do not pose a threat to public health. No significant hazards/hazardous
materials impacts are anticipated as a result of the proposed project, therefore, no mitigation measures
are required.
6
In the event any additional areas of waste are encountered during the project development, those areas
should be assessed by a qualified environmental site assessor and handled accordingly. Evidence of
such analysis and necessary remediation or removal, will be submitted to the Environmental Review
Coordinator for review and determination.
Lead and Asbestos
The project proposal includes the demolition of the existing residence, garage and accessory
structures. The potential exists for impacts to result from the demolition of structures that may
contain lead and asbestos. Therefore, prior to any demolition activities, a licensed and registered
asbestos and lead abatement contractor will perfonn asbestos and lead-based paint abatement in
accordance to all applicable local, state and federal laws and regulations, including San Diego County
Air Pollution Control District Rule 361. 145 - Standard for Demolition and Renovation. The
mitigation measures contained in Section F below would mitigate potential hazards/hazardous
materials impacts to a less than significant level. These measures are included as a part of the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Septic Tanks
The project site is currently serviced by a septic tank system, below ground, located north of the
existing residence. Any equipment associated with the septic system should be removed and disposed
of in accordance with applicable standards and regulations. In the event any suspicious chemical
odors, or other potential environmental concerns are encountered, a qualified professional will be
required to assess the areas of concern. Including the preparation and submittal of a WTitten analysis,
identifying the areas of concern with appropriate measures, to the Environmental Review Coordinator
for review. The mitigation measures contained in Section F below would mitigate potential
hazards/hazardous materials impacts to a less than significant level. These measures are included as a
part of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Hvdrologv and Water Quality
The existing site drains from east to west, running from North Del Mar A venue to Third Avenue.
The drainage on North Del Mar Avenue remains in the right-of-way, peaking at the connection point
to the proposed Villas Del Mar Court. Drainage from the lots along the south property line is diverted
by existing ditches and discharged onto Third Avenue to the west. The drainage flows from the lots
to the north, in a northwesterly direction, away from the subject property. The drainage system for
the subject site is designed to handle flows generated from the site plus a portion of the existing
residence.
The proposed drainage improvements include an underground detention system within the park/open
space area of Lot A, detention discharge control structure, private drainage easements, rip rap and
filtration system at the western comer of the project site. No offsite grading or construction activities
for any infrastructure improvements is proposed within the northern IS foot property setback near the
alkali marsh vegetation area.
According to the Engineering Department, the proposed improvements are adequate to handle the
project stonn water runoff generated from the site. Additional Best Management Practices (BMPs)
included as part of the project design consist of a stonn drain inlet protection system, rip rap outlet
protection, protection of access and perimeter containment measures including open space and
landscaped treatments throughout the project site.
As a standard condition, a final drainage study will be required in conjunction with the preparation of
the project grading plans. Properly designed drainage facilities will be installed at the time of the site
7
development to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. In addition, compliance with required NPDES
regulations and BMPs wi]] reduce water quality impacts to a less than significant level. These
measures are included as a part of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (See Section F).
Wastewater Management Services/Sewer System
The project site is within the boundaries of the City of Chula Vista wastewater services area. The
existing area sewer facility system includes sewer lines along Bayview Way and along Vista Del Mar
Court. There are currently no sewer mains abutting the property that would allow for gravity-type
flow. Therefore an off-site main extension through the Third A venue right of way, and an 8" PVC
sewer main up to the southwest corner of the subject site and into the proposed project court cul-de-
sac are proposed to service the residential lots. The applicant will be required to submit a final sewer
plan to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The applicant is required to grant an easement to the
City of Chula Vista wastewater services for the purpose of maintenance of the proposed sewer lines.
No significant impacts to the City's sewer system are anticipated as a result of the proposed project.
F. Mitigation Necessarv to A void Significant Impacts
Air Quality
I. The following air quality mitigation requirements shaH be shown on all applicable grading, and
building plans as details, notes, or as otherwise appropriate, and shall not be deviated rrom unless
approved in advance in writing by the City's Environmental Review Coordinator:
. Minimize simultaneous operation of multiple construction equipment units.
. Use low pollutant-emitting construction equipment.
. Use electrical construction equipment as practical.
. Use catalytic reduction for gasoline-powered equipment.
. Use injection-timing retard for diesel-powered equipment.
. Water the construction area twice daily to minimize fugitive dust.
. Stabilize graded areas as quickly as possible to minimize fugitive dust.
. Pave pennanent roads as quickly as possible to minimize dust.
. Use electricity from power poles instead of temporary generators during building, if
available.
. Apply stabilizer or pave the last 100 feet of internal travel path within a construction site
prior to public road entry.
. Install wheel washers adjacent to a paved apron prior to vehicle entry on public roads.
. Remove any visible track-out into traveled public streets within 30 minutes of occurrence.
. Wet wash the construction access point at the end of each workday if any vehicle travel on
unpaved surfaces has occurred.
. Provide sufficient perimeter erosion control to prevent washout of silty material onto public
roads.
. Cover haul trucks or maintain at least 12 inches of freeboard to reduce blow-off during
hauling.
. Suspend all soil disturbance and travel on unpaved surfaces if winds exceed 25 miles per
hour.
8
Biological Resources
2. To avoid any impacts associated with construction noise, construction must occur outside of
the breeding season for nesting raptors (January 15 through July 31). If construction must
occur during the breeding season for these species, prior to initiating any construction-related
activities (including clearing of vegetation, grubbing, and grading), pre-construction surveys
must be performed by a City-approved biologist to determine the presence or absence of
nesting raptors within 500- feet of the construction area. The pre-construction survey must be
conducted within 10 calendar days prior to the start of construction, the results of which must
be submitted to the City's Environmental Review Coordinator for review and approval prior
to initiating any construction-related activities. If nesting raptors are detected, a nOIse
mitigation plan shall be submitted and approved by the City's Environmental Review
Coordinator prior to initiating any construction related activities.
3. Prior to the issuance of any land development permits including clearing, grading or
construction permits, temporary orange biological fencing shall be installed around the
existing remnant Cismontane Alkali Marsh plant area and reflected in the grading plans.
Fencing must be constructed in accordance with the development plans to the satisfaction of
the Environmental Review Coordinator. The City's Mitigation Monitor will conduct periodic
site visits to verify the placement of the biological fencing and to ensure that all construction
activities remain within the approved limits of grading.
4. Prior to the issuance of any land development permits including clearing, grading or
construction permits, the applicant obtain a Habitat Loss Incidental Take (HUT) Permit from
the City for impacts to Tier III habitat (Non-native Grasslands) in accordance with the City's
HUT Ordinance, Section 17.35.
5. Prior to the issuance of any land development permits including clearing, grading or
construction permits, the applicant shall submit evidence that 1.14 acres of Non-native
Grassland or equivalent credits have been permanently secured in a mitigation bank to the
satisfaction of the Planning and Building Director.
6. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall prepare and submit a final landscape
plan/palette to the City's Environmental Review Coordinator for review and approval to
ensure landscaping at the rear of Lot .w J)., within the property line setback, will be non-
invasive and compatible with the existing alkali marsh vegetation.
Geological
7. Prior to the issuance of construction permits, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City
Engineer that all the recommendations in the Geotechnical Investigation, dated November 18,
2003 have been satistied.
Hazards/Hazardous Materials
8. Prior to any demolition activities, a licensed and registered asbestos and lead abatement
contractor shall perform asbestos and lead-based paint abatement in accordance to all
applicable local, state and federal laws and regnlations, including San Diego County Air
Pollution Control District Rule 361.145 ~ Standard for Demolition and Renovation.
9. Prior to the issuance of any construction permits, any equipment associated with the septic
system shall be removed from the project site and disposed of in accordance with the
applicable County of San Diego Department of Environmental Health Services regulations. If
any chemical odors or potential environmental concerns are encountered, a qualified
9
profeSSIOnal shall assess the area and submIt a written report to the Environmental RevIew
Coordinator for review.
Hvdrology and Water Oualnv
10. Prior to the Issuance of a gradmg permit, the City Engineer shall verify that the final gradmg
plans comply with the provisIOns of CalifornIa Regional Water Quality Control Board, San
Diego RegIOn Order No. 2001-0 I with respect to construction-related water quality best
management practIces.
I L Prior to the Issuance of a grading permit, a final drainage study shall be requIred m
conjunction with the preparatron of the final gradmg plans. The City Engineer shall verify
that the final gradmg plans comply with the provIsions of California Regional Water Quality
Control Board, San Diego Region Order No. 2001-0 I with respect to permanent, post-
constructron water quality best management practIces (BMPs). If one or more of the
approved post constructIOn BMPs IS non-structural, then a post-construction BJ'vIP plan shall
be prepared to the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to the commencement of
construction. Compliance wIth sald plan shall become a permanent requirement of the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
12. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, temporary desilting and erosion control devices
shall be installed. ProtectIve devices shall be provided at every storm drain inlet to prevent
sediment from entering the storm drain system. These measures shall be reflected in the
grading and improvement plans to the satIsfaction of the City Engineer.
G. Agreement to Imnlement Mitigation Measures
By sigmng the line(s) provided below, the Applicant and Operator stipulate that they have each read,
understood and have their respective company's authority to and do agree to the mitrgatron measures
contained herein, and wil1 implement same to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review
Coordinator. Failure to sign the Ime(s) provided below prior to postrng of this Mitigated Negatrve
Declaration with the County Clerk shall indicate the Applicant's and Operator's desire that the
Project be held in aheyance without approval and that the Applicant and Operator shall apply for an
Environmental Impact Report.
~t(t'(~~v 1!.s {Ubnt
Printed Name and Title of Applicant
(or authorized repre ntative) /7
/} /
/ /
/ / I //\ /
Signatrire zVAp !cant./ c '
(or autholJlzed representative)
?lu (II " 4? r
o
~/27 /O~
Dafe /
z/z 7/0"
l){"te I
N/A
Printed Name and Title of Operator
(if different from Applicant)
Date
NIA
Signature of Operator
(if different from Applicant)
Date
10
H. ConsuHation
1. Individuals and Organizations
City of Chula Vista:
Marilyn Ponseggi, Planning and Building Department
Marisa Lundstedt, Planning and Building Department
Steve Power, Planning and Building Department
John Schmitz, Planning and Building Department
Maria Muett, Planning and Building Department
Glen Laube, Planning and Building Department
Josie Gabriel, Planning and Building Department
Jeff Steichen, Planning and Building Department
Richard ZumwaH, Planning and Building Department
Sohaib Al-Agha, Engineering Department
Frank Rivera, Engineering Department
Samir Nuhaily, Engineering Department
Alex AI-Agha, Engineering Department
Beth Chopp, Engineering Department
Silvester Evetovich, Engineering Department
Jim Newton, Engineering Department
Ben Herrera, Engineering Department
Gary Edmonds, Fire Department
Lynn France, Conservation Coordinator
Krista Rhinehardt, Building and Park Construction
Others:
Dee Peralta, Chula Vista Elementary School District
Sweetwater Authority
2. Documents
City ofChula Vista General Plan, 2005 (as amended).
Title 19, Chuta Vista Municipal Code.
Final Environmental Impact Report, City of Chula Vista Genera] Plan Update, EIR No. 05-01,
December 13,2005.
City of Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, February 2003.
Biological Resource Analysis for the Villas Del Mar, Pacific Southwest Biological Services, Inc.,
January 19,2006,
Preliminary Lotting and Grading Study/Earthwork and Drainage Statement for Villas Del Mar,
Chula Vista, Tri-Dimensional Engineering Incorporated, January 19,2004.
Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation for 160 North Del Mar A venue, Chuta Vista, Geocon,
Incorporated, November 18, 2003.
II
Phase I/LImlted Phase II Environmental Site Assessment, Villas Del Mar, 160 North Del Mar
Avenue, Chula Vista, Geocon Incorporated, February 3, 2006.
Hlstorical EvaluatlOn of 160 North Del Mar Avenue, Chula Vista, Scott A. MooffiJian, January
30,2004.
3. Initial Study
ThlS environmental determmation is based on the attached Initial Study, and any comments
received m response to the Notlee of Initial Study. The report reflects the independent judgment
of the City of Chula Vista. Further mfonmatlOn regarding the environmental review of thls
project is available from the Chula Vista Plannmg and Building Department, 276 Fourth Avenue,
Chula Vista, CA 91910.
~1~~~'
Environmental Review Coordinator
Date:
~"//t7?
( /
J:\Planning\MARlA\lnitial Study\Villas Del Mar\IS-04-022MND.doc
12
C HULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
LOCATOR PROJECT . PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
C9 APPLICANT: Villas Del Mar Development LLC. INITIAL STUDY
~~g~~~~ 160 N Del Mar Av Request: Proposing ORC for 12 single family dwelling's on individual lots.
SCALE: FILE NUMBER:
NORTH No Scale 18-04-022 Related cases: PCS-D4-<>6; PCZ -05-03, DRC-05-56
J: \planning\carlos\locators\is04022.cdr 02_28.06
EXf!18IT /
~I
I
~\
."._._._-_..,---~-
_______~____~~~"'I'( ~~I ,,':,;,,;] ~~~J~II:~~~ CeCg.gWe<;913NCmd
3nN3~;'Zy;;~~lt::;;~ -1 ~II]I ~ lr'l T~" "f~':i
If" I ", ,I
'.WI"a..llM II I,', : () _I
i' , - .' - - I! I
~~_~T~-',~~Pl~:1F:-r,:::~~:-:-?~~T-- - ~
.,- ,,' , ' ~ '. ~
."...."..."..-.".-"".-
~:j;;~~P;&~~~~:f~~:;:~~~id~;~i~" .~:
~!'I! ',I, bl'll i .oJi,!
1'1 I II Ii "ill
I
WiiHb ~;pt;' ,
,-,;CO'
0::;'
-<I
~ !'Bm~i"l,'m
~,I':I:I:I:I:;l:;I::'~
:J 11M!,
~
-
>
0...
<C
~
~--~~'b-
'-0'"
;>
r::
<C
t--<
7,
!.:.I
t--<
<C
t--<
[/]
i: j
['; ~
.... "';
,..."
> >-
b;
"
~ 'i
I: Iii!!! !
..
I!!i! I,:!
~ ':~_t." .
L,:;'I,~
, II!!! !!I
;>
<(
~ L
~~
~~
-
:::J
-
"'"
u
W-;
c'
iJc
~-=~--,~':- s:~,.
/ I
o
---......
:-,~
,
~-
~~
(<
u
';' ,
~" H
',~ ~ ,~,~,'
H~;
~
-~---~-- I
':"/:_-:.'=-:.~~~ 11
,
I
4
II
"
I
l
'I!;
0'-'"
'" [~
"I'" "
", ,+
"i' I' ;~!
~'__ 0,,'
~'m t~~~
Ii I d il II'!-
I [! I ;1-11
:...::
;.,i' ;.
-:i' !i'
~ ; f g 6 ~
~ ~~ : ~ ':
1'----", ' ~, 1---, ,t-! ~I
~ '~~~.! .~'i~ ~ E
f1 I~Ji~ II;...J ~I
. ~ ,~; ~I :11' ~
; -1'!'1.~) ,! : H- i
1\0 "<.>. I" -,I ."'.
, L-- 'I"~ I I,.., ",;",
__ ___ r -' ~. ,is -~. ~, '"
I ~ ',?:~ ! t!:J ;~~~i
..J"f"'C--~,' >~.I; 1; ~,!! r S~I"
, ~,,'-;11~" ~~;..J <:II~~
_~ ~~...,i: .J.__ _ "". ,-
"'~ ' ""'"
I,
, " J ~!"
',' ',~ ~,~ ~ ",;;,_~,,'~ ,i';,j,l ~ ';~~ ~ ',':, II ~,~~
, I . < I .'j J "', ,0, "~i ," ii,
:~ff-~~,*~H 1~~~\;~1;;-)~;:~~~1,:fl_,~iL
, r'~ 'I ' , ~,_I I}~><\O:~,' J,;,,~,J:;7-,,~,,\)i';S &>'"",,-- - - -- -.. - "':
I ;LL_ i'i - ;;~:!!ft~_~=_~~~~';:~:~-~1.~~_\~~:(;~:~';L;1C;:{~K_~~_'\'~~['i~~2
~~
I
I
~"I
z, r~!!I!,
,L,',)!( ~
~~~rl ~~ ~
I~! ;;~~I
, - ii;~!
,
,
, ,
\'
,
,
'~ If~j
;> -~:\ I
q~f
, ~~"
J,,~
II
-=--~--~:!_--
ii
!'
,.I
~
,-
-
G
~:
L:
~ <~ ( , "j
]
c
c
-,
.~
i
k
'-.
~
.::t::-
~
-1.4
I
~
~
\;
~
ATTACHMENT "A"
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM (MMRP)
VILLAS DEL MAR - IS-04-022
This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program has been prepared by the City of Chula Vista
in conjunction with the proposed Villas Del Mar project. The proposed project has been
evaluated in an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared in accordance with the
Cahfornia Enyironmental Quality Act (CEQA) and City/State CEQA Guidelines (IS-04-022)
The legislation requires public agencies to ensure that adequate mitigation measures are
implemented and monitored fOT 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):
], Air Quality
2, Biological Resources
3, Geological
4, Hazards/Hazardous Materials
5, Hydrology and Water Quality
MONITORING PROGRA1\1
Due to the nature of the environmental issues identified, the Mitigation Compliance Coordinators
shall be the Environmental Review Coordinator and City Engineer of the City of Chula Vista,
The applicant shall be responsible to ensure that the conditions of the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program are met to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator and
City Engineer. The applicant shall provide evidence in written fonn confinning compliance with
the mitigation measures specified in Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-04-022 to the
Environmental Review Coordinator and City Engineer. The Environmental Reyiew 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 Ayoid Significant Effects, of Mitigated Negative
Declaration IS-04-022, which will be implemented as part of the project. In order to detennine if
the applicant has implemented the measure, the method and timing of yerification 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:\P1anning\MARIAdnitial Study\Villas Del Mar\IS~04-022MMRPtexLdoc
E
i"
o
'0
~
o
o
:;;
o
o
:;
'"
i
~
'"
:c
'"
I-
00
c
w
E
E
o
(J
ID
~ ro
;; 0
c. 00
E ro
o :.;:::
t) S
~
<(
a::
~
o
a::
a.
~
z
~
o
a.
w
a::
c
z
<(
~
Z
c::
o
!::
z
o
~
z
o
~
~
E
~
w
:c
'iij >.
01:
o ~
0.0.
00
ID
'"
~
~
00
~
ID
:;;
c
,2
"iij
C>
f.:
:;;
>-
N f-
N :J
0 <<
.J- ::J
0 a
ch '"
;j'
rn o 0
:;; 02
a; ;: d,)
0 ~ ~
C>~
00 ,- 00
,g :::: It!
:;ID
'> :;
-..
. .
o 0
o.u ><
a..
0 -2 .
- 0 0
o ,_ , 0
a;; aU ><
o u
'E~ . .
i=~ 0: c
0
U ><
"
>-'
_ 0
o 0
"CI:;::;
o ~
=:E
w ~
:; ID
>
C>
o
~
:>,'S
E U::;
u OJ:;:' c......
:;:,.s:i3 ro a3
~ 0:5 -5 ~E
.~ ~ ro'c ~
2:'g>g-~aT
<(woo... 0
2'
~
~
u 0
ID 0
.c:.;:::
U u
ID
00.
moo
D:E
ID
.Q 00
ro m
.Q 00
00 0
00-"
]3~ !
E C :.;::;
.~~~ ~
~.c'~
w ~ 0
~ 0 ~
oroo.
o _0.
:.;::; CJ)m
.~~ 3;
~m~
E OJ ill
.2='~-'=
=.00
~ i.'5 CI)
0'"-- ('\J
o.~
're ~o_
C>_ 00
.S:m2
~ c 0
..Qo!::
ocui
';l52
.Q.QW
f-oo~
-
a
c
,2
'@ui
(1)=
o.C
o '
OOc
~ w
g E
c 0.
ro 'S
~o-
~ ID
,_ 0
00 0
~t5
,- ,
E'"
,_ 00
o 0
~ 8
'E ro
ID U
E t5
0. m ~
.~ 0. ~
~ ~ ~
,Q C 0...
t3 <l) dJ
2 ~ <;
00 'S (5
o 0- 00
8 Q) ~
'" 0 ~
~ 0 E
t) c
"E 2 0
q' ~ 1:5
C 0 -5
ro 0 ~
.2 ro
o .g
0. 13
~ w
.2 W
ID ID
00 00
::J ::J
.
. . .
U
~......;
- 0
ro ID
mE
U 0.
ID-
00 '
::Jg
~
w
W
~
o
9-
w
00
w
-0
-2
'2
m
25
0>
C
~
o
o '
:';:::"'E
~ ID
'c E
,- 0.
iJ)"S
000-
::JID
W
N
E
e
E
.9
-'"
'm
~
w
U
l
ID
:0
~
00
o
0.
00
ro
~
"
U
'0
0'
"
ID
:0
~
00
o
0.
00
m
~
'"
U
o
0'
00 00
m ro
00 ' 00
~ tJ ~
ro~ e
~ .~
-0 .-<:::
roO>
~ ~
0>-
"
ro
~
ro
o
o
jj
2
1;;
c
8qj
ID ~
~~ ~ ~
~:e -S"E
'v ,v'c
S.2 <i5"E
.
.
.
c
~(i
m ~
ED
1tB
wE
> e
~'E
.
C
m
:s
0.
E
2'
"6
D
i:3~
]!~
-~ "Cij
~?U
0_
0.'-
~Oi
We
~~
0..'5
ED
0'"
.;;: .~
>-0
"E-a
'C (f)
0(;
~ro
w ~
~ ~
::J1J,
rou
c:=
~.Q
-*i5.
:;:0
0-
- :s
~ "C
_ 0.
OW
0=
_ 00
- c
00 0
ro,-
a;t5
.c 2
~u;
> c
~8
~ ro
o c
....:..c
w_
~ .~
~:5 ~
_ m_
oo 0. c
>-_ ID
-ID~
~~gJ
<(z"-
.
.
.Q
6-
c
o
6-
m
D
ID
>
ro
0.
m
o
::: vi
c~
ID ro
u 0
m ~
'00
roL)
00 ~
wo.
.c c
00 0
3 c
-c
~ W
.Q W
~0
=i:
mID
" >
E.8
.
,~
:0
~
0.
~
ID
WW
> U
~ ~
o ~
.s 8
so
90
~2
~ a
; .~
:0 E
"ilia
"5 ("')
>-0
c:C
ro:!:::
ID ~
~2
~ ~
"'''
a
D
o
W
ID~
.Q W
- >
- ro
ro 0.
- 0
.!: :::I
o 0
0.0
00_
00 w
ID >
U ro
u ~
m-
ID
c-
o .~
:.=-<::
U W '
~>'O
~ ID
- ~ ~
00 0 ~
o ro ~
8 ~ 8
ID >- 0
.Q ro 00
_~ro
.c~.Q
I/J (; r.n
~ ;: B
ID-5~
>ro~
>IDOO
.
.
o
on
ro
0..
c
w
>
w
6-
.9
eui
-~
o ro
o 0
U ~
C U
.9 i'i
00 ~
00.
W 0
IDC
_0
w_
.~ .~
:V~
o.ro
c E
W ~
'u~
~~
~ 0
wS
'00
"::; ~
2 ro
Cl. ~
a a3
>
~ m
<D 0.
.c c
g OJ:::I ...:
.- c: c: ::J
N=OO
...--:::5_~
~ ('IJ W '-
<n..c: > (])
roOJ~a.
~C:--(f]
-,'C -0 Q)
(Ij::JC=
c"'D ro E
19:9~1{)
C I eN
"(5 ~ 2 a5
E - L.... Q)
o~~~
r.l)g'5~
is-O=-o
;:: ~ ~.!::O
......O=~
::;......<<1":;:
ro"E"'DU)
.J:: rn C q)
'- 0 ill U
Q)..Q Q.{1J
><:lJ(/)'t
o Q) ::J ::J
U.;::U)(/)
.
. .
I
E
.9
'c
o
~
c
g
ro
;5'
U)
W
0
a:
:0
0
U)
W
a:
-'
N <(
N 0
0 <3
-+ 0
0 -'
rh 0
aJ
m
~
a;
0
en
m
'>
~
..91
.c
'"
I-
0;
c
'0
c
rn
.E 0:
o 0"J:g ~c
~ -2 w'5 (j)
ro (I) E = E
g.~~~15
8:~g--g ~
<(WOroO
Uj,.J
o:g x
"-0
~"
o .
";:.C x
~o
co
. ;;
0': 0 x
0
0
'"
'"
2
~
~
u c
w 0
..r:::;::;
, 0 a5
c ~
ro _
D::E
(J)- c 1-"0""0..6' 3: ~
"g ~ ~~ ~_~ ~ ~oB'~2 f(~
c(j)~owaEu ~tiw~ ~~
o~ ~~.~~c ~m-'-ww~'~
~(J}~~6~~~~E~Eo7~-o-
~.~~~:;::;~WW-~WD-~~~~
'-"0 u'-a,--(I)5~o~co~
~w~~2(J}(l)~~~o~~uro~a
6~~'5~~~~%~~E.~~~a~
uw~lli6g~;~c.Q~~~2~~
5..r::~~u2Ecg.Q~~go~c~
~=ew~g0'~ID~0Eu~~roE
-oo55row~~c2~~~cD~g~
2~~(J}(J}~~~~~-o.2.~ro~E02
.~~~~~O~-o-~6~~>groE~~
o~~~.~(J}020~TI_~:;::;~DWU
m 0 roD ~.~ c _ '- '- corn 0 ~'> rn
m'-~'-~rnom2a~m~2amWD
ro3~a'o~~'~~w~=c.5roW~2
~u,u~u~Q~..r:: ~WO,-D_ro
UO-OO(J}~O(J}rOwE-~ro2m
~~S~'~5~~~~~~~.~~~~~
.~~a~~~8i~~~5'~~~cE.Q
>. ~ wu~>c .~ -c-Cro6U
C6QJ6"o.5a.2-a aw~~o...=2
ro._ ._ 11)- _0.0._""0._ 0 C >......
Du_5ua.m_a.w~2u~'-~ocm
~2~2~.~~~U2U2b~.~~W~
~~~~w~.S~~~~~Grn~~~u
06~6~~~U~666WE~~~~
ruSuEro~rorouuu=roroEuro
N
--
0>
C
C
C
ro
i::' 0:::
U :?~_:?c
:;::.,.;:: W -0 W
CaJE=i=
~~~~~
0...010.-00.
o.cWcaJ
<(WOrnO
x
x
x
2
'"
"
u C
ID 0
..c:~
U u
ID
C ~
ro _
O:::~
C
ill _
2 -o..c:~E~g ~
.E UJ-J] ~T5 g.-~E~ 6-!:
Qi~~~a3C)ii;o=~-g
.::-E~=LLiDlY~o2cr
c aJ"- ~ ."D-ro=cU:;'>-+
aJa.aJ_(/Jw~~aJco
Ec=<(~..c:~oEo2
g.,g-ro ~o..:; E.~ aJ~-E
ill ~-t5f! O)-~ is 6 il5ro=
ii;~ (D6:6 w.=:2o..-ro-g
-oc.~E~UE:g~=>
E8c_~OJ2ijw:;:;....~~
ro .... ~ U w"E w ~~:J ~
-;,o_-roc=o-E~ill~ro
~ g.:d ~.!: 8 '0 ~ > Q) ~
_.- (DEl:) ro c (/).9.9-'
o -g -g m 2.!::.2 z-. (/) -o.!:
is 01:0 ~iiJa3~G:~ ffi:2
c cim_!:~o'>-+ (l) > OJ~
~.!: gu:;.... 2~~2.~.!:
~m~.x2CiJ~ .wgro
.- ~ 0 W ro c m ~ 0 w E
mu>.mroO..c:.8'6'.::~
:S OJ"":S m u....... ro 0 ro UJ
o.~ ~-o rn15.9-~'~.~_~
::~ a.5c~ ~~ o..~~
.guEoro:Jroo2o....
0.. c 2 ro 0.. E o..()"w:.o ~
~
0;
c
:Q
-
~ '"
III~
"'DO
Bc:g OJc
:;::., ro m.~ m
c OJ E Qi E
~.!: t m t
._ erne ro
~.ffi g-.~g.
<(QOWO
x X
X X
X X
2
US
"
U C
ill 0
..r::::;:::;
O~
c ~
ro _
O:~
w ro
-E m:E-~
2 (/)-"@~U
'E E ~= ID
........ ro......c:
IDaJ-'Q)-'
;:-o.a5f=~
[5.Q ~.9 3
Et5E2~
g- E 35 g ~
a> (J) 0 0.-0
~B-.J.!~~O .
l:):::ffioe~
EOi5;,~r--:
rn OJ ro -'.-.--
-;'.SIUU;-6
~~~~E'5
a ~i9E~cJi
is g.g e ~ ill
~.~ro:;Gg
~~-t5E~~
.~ g-c ~ ~ 'E
.9:oB----70
o ~ '6.~ ~t:
&.~g.E-Z~
"
0>
C
~
':s >.
III:::
~l:)~
~ ffi ~ gc
CO)E~E
r5.~t mt
._ c C1J c ro
8:.ffig..~g.
<(a..DWO
N
u
00
~
"-
2
US
"
U C
ill 0
..r::::;::;
o U
c ~
ro _
0: c
(/) ID C:
~..co
E ...._2
~~'O c c5
-,E(J)~2?t5
CID~.c-'Q)
m 0.. u Q) 0.=
Ecro>:;.o
~,g~~ffi:?
~~..-~.o:g
(l) ~ ~"D c.-
-o(/)~mo~
"0 B-' bfU
c (.) (l) ~ (J)1:J
~....gii5;e@
>.ow('ijEQ:I
~:?~.2: ro.S
'0'6 Q) &.!:: E
ID ~.~ Q) -0 ro
(.) OJ E .... Q} 0::
c _.c 0 '-
rn Q):J 1:J a <lJ
:J.!: (/) C (l):S
~m=C1J~-
.~ (l) ~ lfj >-.0
l?u~~~6
..... 0)-' .... (1)'-
oc~Gco
.....'6umro~
o ~ '6..2: E.~
& .g g. ~ ~ ~
~
rn
:2'
W
o
'"
,:g
:>
E
i"
c:
E
'c
o
:2'
c:
,Q
1ii
~
N
N
o
..;.
o
<h
....
~
..Q
ns
I-
C>
c:
!2
"3 >.
CJ~
~"D~
~ 1ij ~:?c
~g>E~E
,g'c~~@
:5:~ g-~g-
<:eQ..OWO
~'..
o;:g ><
a;,;'O
ai;.:.:i
c''''
'~:g ><
C:'<J
>w
Q),,'UJ
o:d'5 ><
o
.&
Uj
:;.,
u c:
ID 0
..c:.;::;
o ~
c: 0.
"''''
5:E
'@~-g ~-g
..c:..... rnCOjrn
~.83:~~C=
c: Q) a> .- 0
~t:"5o~~
=..Q,!~...J~ID
ft~oo',O)
ro(:'::~a~
v..!:!!oQ>c..c
::; c..7iI '- Q) ~
-Q) c: Q)..c ro
E ~:.e=;;;; E
....ooro3:=
(l) I/') 0 _ ra
O,-oU O)..:::.:~
en c: .!: ~ (ij
.!: .!2 ~ g..o 0)
"D(ij,-oQ).E
~.!: a1~ tIJ in
01_ a::: c III 'x
rom_coca>
o~~~~1?
Q)~Q):3t.....
g ~ ~ ~ ~~
~-co<De::
II) c:.= 0 a. (J,)
.~rnE~Q)::c:e
o~LU~:5~::J
.....ro!l)ot::a.E
o g-~ c..~ E E
it 0.<3 g.'3 8 8
<ri
C>
c:
}2
'S >-
t:C;~
.~~ gO).....
~ ro a5.5 a5
~:?EQ;E
u'- t::: Q) t
= c: ro.!: ttI
ft~ g.~g.
<(a..owo
ret;
:~Wg ><
C'O'
11)>111
"':..1::.><
c.;.o
o
'EID
~:5 c.:'
~rn:2
a...... ctI .
rn ~ .QI-c
Q).....1i5~
:5 Q; ~.!a
uiVc.:(ij'
.'~.5- (/)
E cntij c:
Q; tD.~ :R
a. >.~ ..c
.~ <3 ~ ~
g~g21
~.....(!}",
~.8 <1>g
Oa>=N
~ g .s cO
QQ)(/)..-
Q):Q c ....
(,) > 0 Q)
C!D:.;::;..c
en Q,) ro E
~:Q~ ~
.~ ~ Q) 0
o....EZ
:: ~ E-o
0- 0 Q)
.;::~ ~m
0..(/)....-0
rn
~ em........
....:::03:.<..8
.g~-gz."E
-g~E-S~
roc.s-goc
-cororoUJ:!
(\)u..cQ)ocn
:gc:~(ij' ar I
.~ E.~(j)o~
- Q) 0.-- C"-
ttlm"'C~m""':
(fJ-..c Q) 0 (/) <D
ID co f/)- rn'"
~""C2:~.5~
~~-orn-g~r::
~:;;~,gu....g
c; c;- ~.!:.g ~
.Q 1'0 -g 1'0 (/)-ii) 0
:!:: (/) ro= c;'- c
'0.8 (/) ro.Qo <1J
E1n.8-Ernea::
<1J..c (/).- -....-c
-c (/) <1J ~ ~ c; @
~~~~~8c;
ra <1J ra !:: -c !::.Q
.82E-E~g~
0.~.g8(/)~E
(t ~~~~o:~
C>
c:
:Q
.::; >.
CCI :~
.~-g ~ rn.....
~ ra ~.!: ~
~g'E(i)E
,g'E~~~
~~ a} g> a}
<(Q..OLlJO
"
"
"
M
"
~
on
'"
0..
.oJ
05
:;.,
u c:
ID 0
u15
ID
c:o.
'" w
0:::.=
c:
~~.~ ~.i 2
.~~.~O _~rao
E Eb ~ 1n.~ O":~rn
<1J <1J"'OCI).2c raE.~
a.ii)&--2:~-o::J"E
c;>>o 0<1J 0 CI>(/) 0
.Q(/)a.~CI)o.Qj:-cO
u.2.!!! C..c 0..... cU
::J i5.."'O ::J.:!::: 5 ra ~
'::'w"'OOra~Ora<1J
~ (/) c:: U Q) 0 u ~'>
owraQ)I-CC;ra<1J
u:52:Orn~Q)Q)a::
~.c'iii ijc ij ~:5cu
(O~u=w._ra(/)c
......~w~EE(/)(/)Q)
O"'C"Orog~E&E
8"* C.~'5 u 8 ~ 5
C::'13 <1J..... C ~5='=
~o:5-ELlJrouroE:
~ ~ E'3:b~Cii-5iw
';;:;~2wcu)crn~
.cc......uwc;wc;.....
....<1J-C~EoE.Qo
.8E~"Et~5~.....~
....0.0 oro-""<1J1::: w
.Q'::i E U a. ~'> '0 g..>
a:g~i:ij~~~Ci~~
oi
~
o
ii:
o
t
o
'"
0::
-0
o
'"
o
o
..g
0,
;!1'
o
o
~
"'
~
N
N
o
.J.
o
ch
'"
:2
OJ
o
if>
~
'>
~
o
jj
"::} >-
m~
q-05
U c c ~c
::::. ro <D;:: Q)
c:: CJ) E Q) E
~.~ t <D t
-== 2 (ILS ro
8:~ g.~g.
<(o...owo
--'
~~x
C,;."O
0".0.;
c.
';::.'C x
, 0
cu
~
oJ'"
D::5x
u
Q)
1i
ra
I-
~x
.2<
'25
~
,',;'; ~,g
'ou
ill
.'::-, iij iF
;: 0:: c
>-
r-
:J
<(
::J
a
0::
w
~
S
o
z
<(
>-
(!)
o
--'
o
0::
o
>-
I
E
>. >.-~
a..~
Eme;
o ~ ,
>.uOo......
'0;G 2?(; ~
mm .0
J!o..s oc
:;-:?ro;;:~
E'6 25 ~ 6-
~ ~.~o 2
0)- a:: c ro
c:: ~ ro-Q ~
'6 ~.- OJC)
ro il) E 0::'" 2
.....-CO ro
(J)......~o-
ro cu ro CJ)@
o:s:26~~
w >. 0 =.~
g~(/)~~U
ro ~ 6 (/).b ~
~ _"({j _ (/) a.
.~ m -;;12 6 c
ill..c 0 ro U <l)
-5 ~ o.as.9 E
.9:t~ou~
'- c --'.b ill ro
OOJ.J::cCLC
&tD'~8~E
ci
~
~
C
i2
'S >.
m.~
.2:'-oU
i, C:;::' 0)......
~('1j~Cc
c OJ E'~ E
~.~ 1::: (1)......
Ci2~'52i
a.~ (]) c 11)
<(o...owo
x
x
x
2
~
~
u 0
~.Q
o~
00.
m "'
0:0
Il) 6...... c
~~~o (1) TI
.sro~~iij 5:_5'~
~ o._.Q (f) ro 0 ..c Q)
"'0 1lJ-ro U') _ 'O.................c::
ro o..s::'~ E.8 U) <D.2"'O .~ :::0
C ill (/) ..... ro""" (1) '- U ~
<>=..cilla.O~..CI02ro B......E
ro.....<DwOJa.>.EU;O'Q)cc~
_..cc.c-U)~,-, ~E~Q)E~
~;t::'i5I""" g @ffiO 6 0...0"'0..(1) 0
E~cf;c..c::lQ)c(l)"""E'-O:
:v 6w'~8:=: ;:6.<fl..CI 0 0 S
a.:;:::;>.>, 5:w...... ='o.cu!if._~
0)0."";:::->> ......-(/)(\1 __
C C U 0..;<::: C; ~ . Q..c. ,-' '-
'6.~Q)Ero' >(i)L(/)Q)C-C0
ro C J:: 0 ::1"- C a... co C Q).Q Q) g-
'- 01- 008 o~ c.E:2.S U ~o::
Q) U U) '- N:;::: 0 Q. Q)::J E
~"!: ~ ~2 0 2~1Jo...&i~....--g
O~~o.~ZUi ~ 2~ca ~ro
Q) .... a... 0)> .... co...... CD._ U ro Q)
O"S Q)C(ij Q) 0:;::; ~ cU..... W"e
~ g.!:'g c"E5: ~ 8E~.:: E.9
:J...."'O.....20OOo.. O......cO'-
~ w ~ OIg>c 8........Ui 2'0 Ew U is
"a;:: O>rna:::.Q......-a; 8..Ui c Q)15:2:
..c:rom<.2 ro afc E-a 6.2 u= c
:;~<.2 w"ca::;g ~~ yo ~~,g
-:>.Q)-5oororooUi~EVJro
o-o:S......~O)Eco..o.~Ecg
";::.2_ ro ro_9,:I Q) ro a...o..rn o~=
o...VJozUOo..EroroVJOD..2
~
~
Q
C
:g
ciJ,q
,q-g 50)->-'
5 ro ~"s ~
COJEdJE
B-S t Q) t
"_ c ro c ro
~~ g.gg-
<.(o...owo
x
x
x
.ill
iJj
32
u C
ill 0
..c::;::;
o ~
Co.
m "'
ilE
~
c 0
. ro c-o
]1-0 -~ 2: .0
~2 E v ~u
o~.8E-5<D
0..- VJ 0 c-5
E w c....."-.....
<D..Q <D U} -00
:-'ro iii:S~ 6
-E -55""" OJ~t5
.... ro C <D cu
~~~"a3:U]?
0)"5:2 c.oro
c <D > <D ~ VJ
'6 -0 e E ro Q)
~ (5 a... 0 -5i:S
OJ-b (]).;; (/J 0
ro cD...... ill"""
o8ro~:J~
<D 5 -55 _~ i{J ~
g"_ (f) -a <D
ro ~ ill & E c
:J ...."~...... ill Q)
U} ill > c (f) E
"~v Q) <lJ ill <lJ
<lJ C -0 >..c: >
-5 ro g; ~ I- e ...:
01._ 0. " CL Q)
.:~~.8 ~"s_~
g-wo-aJUi-a 0)
ct~ ct:c ~~ JJ
N
~
"'
"
'"
"
P-
u
o
~
~
:2
:2
N
N
o
.,.
o
~
"
::
"
o
~
:g
>
So
~
o
.:f)
~
:;:
;;;
:;:
="
~
,
S;
~ \I f?-
--p-
:...~ --
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
OTYOF
CHUlA VISTA
I. Name of Proponent:
2, Lead Agency Name and Address:
3. Address and Phone Number of Proponent:
4, Name of Proposal:
5, Date of Checklist:
6. Case No.:
ENVIRO]';MENT AL Ai'!AL YSIS QUESTIONS:
Issues:
I. AESTHETICS, Would the project
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
b) Substantially damage scemc resources, including,
but not lirrrited to, tress, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or
quality of the site and its surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare,
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views
in the area?
1
Villas Del Mar Development, LLC
Federico Escobedo
City of Chula Vista
Plarming and Building Department
276 Fourth Ayenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
160 North Del Mar A venue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
(619) 420-4101
Villas Del Mar
February 20, 2006
18-04-022
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
No
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Comments:
a-b)The proposal includes the development of twelve single family residential units with site
improvements in accordance with the City of Chula Vista Municipal Code and Design Review
Guidelines, The proposed landscape improvements would enhance and improve the aesthetic
quality of the surrounding hillside and neighborhood street, Del Mar Avenue, The proposed
project would not damage any scenic resources, vegetation, or historic buildings within a state
scenic highway, The project site contains no scenic vistas or views open to the public, The
development layout is designed not to block any private vista views tram the existing and
proposed residential units,
c) The proposal is an in fill residential development project. The proposed project will not
substantially degrade the eXisting visual character or quality of the project site or its adjacent
residentia1 surroundings, The project site is pi armed for residential development according to the
General Plan Land Use regulations,
d) The proposal will be required to comply with the City's minimum standards for roadway
lighting, The project will be required to comply with the light and glare regulations (Section
19,66,100) of the Chula Vista Mumcipal Code (CVMC), Compliance with thesc regulations will
ensure that no significant glare, or light would affect daytime or nighttime views in the
surrounding residential neighborhood area.
Miti!!ation:
No mitigation measures are required,
II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the
pro j ec!:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Fannland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Fannland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the F annland
Mapping and Monitoring Program of the Califomia
Resources Agency, to non-agricu1tural use?
D
D
D
.
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or
a Williamson Act contract?
D
D
o
.
c) Involve other changes in the existing environment,
which, due to their location or nature, could result in
conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use?
D
D
o
.
2
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Commeuts:
a-e)The project site has been previously rough graded and surrounding properties have been partially
developed, These properties are consistent with the Chula Vista Genera] Plan and zoning
designation, and contain no agricultural resources or desih'Ilated fannland, The proposal would
not convert Prime Fannland, Unique Fannland or Fanmland of Statewide Importance to non-
agricultural use and no impacts to agricultural resources would be created as a result of the
proposed project,
Mitil!ation:
No mitigation measures are required.
III. AIR QUALITY. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
o
o
o
.
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute 0 0 0 .
substantially to an existing or projected air quality
violation?
c) Result in a cllillulatively considerable net increase 0 0 . 0
of any criteria pollutant for which the project
regIOn lS non-attainment under an applicable
federal or state ambient air quality standard
( including releasing emISSIons, which exceed
quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant 0 . 0 0
concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial
number of people?
D
D
.
D
3
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Comments:
(a-e) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E,
Mitigatiou:
The mitigation measures contained in Section F ofthe Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially signiiicant air quality impacts to a leve1 ofless than significance,
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the
project
a) Havc a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status
species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the Caliiomia Department of Fish
and Game or U.S, Fish and Wildlife Service?
o
.
o
o
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 V,S, Fish and Wi1dlife Service?
o
.
o
o
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally 0 0 . 0
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to,
marsh, vernal pool, coastal, ete,) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other
means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any 0 0 . 0
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species
or with established native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native
wildlife nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
o
o
o
.
4
Issues:
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 I'vl1tigated Negative Declaration, Section E,
Miti!!ation:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
o
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
.
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
No
Impact
o
The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant biological resource impacts to a level ofless than significance,
V, CULTURAL RESOURCES, Would the project
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defined in
State CEQA Guidelines 9 15064,5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant
to State CEQA Guidelines 9 15064,5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a umque
paleontological resource or site or unique geologic
teature?
o
o
o
5
o
o
o
o
o
o
.
.
.
Issues:
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Significant With Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
D D D .
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside offonmal cemeteries?
Comments:
a) In order to assess potential historic resources located on the project site or surrounding areas, a
historical evaluation study was prepared, dated January 30, 2004, The following details summarize the
results of the study, The existing residential structure was not associated with any important events or
individuals in tenms of local, state or national history, The residence or site does not qualifY as a
historic resource under national, state or local register cnteria, The proposed project will not constitute
a substantial, adverse change to the significance of an historical resource as the residence has been
detennined by the analysis not to be historically or architecturally significant within the project impact
area, Therefore, no substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in
Section 15064,5 is anticipated and no mitigation measures are required,
b) Based on the level ofprevlOus site disturbance, the potential for significant impacts or adverse changes
to archaeological resource as defined in Section 15064,5 is not anticipated,
c) Bascd on the level of previous disturbance to the site and the relatively limited amount of additional
grading for the proposed project, no impacts to unique paleontological resources or nnique geologic
features are anticipated,
d) No human remains are anticipated to be present within the impact area of the project site,
Mitigation:
No mitigation measures are req11Ired,
VI, GEOLOGY AND SOILS -- Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential
snbstantial adverse effects, inclnding the risk of
loss, injury or death involving:
l.
Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State
Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault?
o
o
o
.
ii,
Strong seismic ground shaking?
D
D
D
.
Ill.
Seismic-related
ground
failure,
including
D
D
D
.
(,
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Issues: Significant 'With Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation [mpact
Incorporated
liquefaction?
lV. Landslides? 0 0 0 .
b) Result in substantial soi1 erosion or the loss of 0 0 . 0
topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is 0 . 0 0
unstable, or that would become unstable as a
result of the project, and potentially result in on-
or oiT-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, creating substantial 0 0 . 0
risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the 0 0 0 .
use o f septic tanks or alternative wastewater
disposal systems where sewers are not available
for the disposal of wastewater?
Comments:
a-e) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E,
Miti~ation:
The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potential1y significant geological impacts to a leve1 ofless than significance,
VII. 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
o
.
o
b)
Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably ioreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the
o
o
.
o
7
Issues:
release of hazardous materials into the
environment?
c)
Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
d)
Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code section 65962,5 and, as a
result, would it create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment?
e)
For a project located within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the project result in a safety hazard
for people residing or working in the project area?
f)
For a project within the vicinity of a private
airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard
for people residing or working in the project area?
g)
Impair implementation of or physically interfere
with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
h)
Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
loss, injury or death involving wildland fires,
including where wildlands are adjacent to
urbanized areas or where residences are
intermixed with wildlands?
8
Potentially
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
D
D
D
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
D
D
D
D
D
D
Less Than
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
D
D
D
No
Impact
.
.
.
.
.
.
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Comments:
a and b) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E (Hazards/Hazardous Materials),
c) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E, The proposed project site is located within one-
quarter mile of an existing school located on Second Avenue, The proposed project will not emit
acutely hazardous emissions or materials, therefore, will not create a significant impact to the
schools within the surrounding area,
d) The proposed project is not located on a site included on the hazardous list pursuant to the
Govemment Code Section 65962,5, therefore, will not create a significant impact to the public or the
environment.
e) The project is not located within an airport land use plan nor within two miles of a public airport or public
use airport; therefore, the project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to adverse
safety hazards,
f) The proJect is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip; therefore, the project development would
not expose people working in the project area to adverse safety hazards,
g) The project is designed to mcet the City's emergency response plan, route access and emergency
evacuation requirements, The proposed fire improvements include an emergency turning radius and fire
hydrant. No impairment or physical interference with the City's emergency response plan is anticipated,
h) The project is designed to meet the City's Fire Prevention building and fire service requirements, No
exposure of people or structures to a significant risk ofJoss, injury or death due to wildfires is anticipated,
Miti!!ation:
The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potential1y significant Hazards/Hazardous Materials impacts to a level ofless than significance,
VIII, 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?
D
.
D
D
9
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supphes or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer
volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table
level (e,g" the production rate of pre-existing nearby
wells would drop to a level which would not support
existing land uses or planned uses for which permits
have been granted)? Result in a potentially
significant adverse impact on groundwater quality?
Less Than
Potentially Signific:lnt Less Than No
Significant With Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
0 0 . 0
Issues:
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern ofthe 0 0 . 0
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 ofthe 0 0 . 0
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
structures within a 100-year flood hazard area which
would impede or redirect flood flows?
e) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of 0 0 0 .
loss, injury or death involving flooding, including
flooding as a result of the failure ofa levee or dam?
f) Create or contribute runoff water, which would 0 0 0 .
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stonmwater drainage systems or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff'?
10
Issues:
Comments:
(a-I) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E,
Mitieation:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
The mitigatlOn measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant Hydrology/Water Quality impacts to a level ofless than significance,
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the
proj ect:
a) Physically divide an established community?
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the
pTOject (including, but not limited to the general
plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation
plan or natural community conservation plan?
11
o
o
o
o
D
.
o
D
o
.
.
o
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Signilicant
Impact
No
Impact
Comments:
a) The project site is surrounded with single and multi-family residential, including nearby industrial land
uses, The proposed residential infill project would be consistent with the character of the immediate
surrounding residential area and would not disrupt or divide an established community; therefore, no
significant land use impact would occur as a result of the project.
b) The project site is located within the Rl and R1P6 (Single-Family Residentia1lPrecise Plan) Zones and
RLM (Low-Medium Density) General Plan land use designation, The proJect is required to rezone the
existing R16 parcel section to Rl for comprehensive compatibility, Tne proJect has been found to be
consistent with the all-respective zoning regulations, General Plan guidelines and regulations,
therefore; no significant land use impacts are anticipated.
c) Refer to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E, Potential short-tenm construction noise/raptor
nesting and biologically sensltive impacts are addressed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration,
Section, under Biological Resources,
Miti!!ation:
The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant Land Use/Planning impacts to a level of less than significance,
X. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
o
o
o
.
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
.
12
Issues:
Comments:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
No
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact
a) The project site has been previously disturbed with the existing single-family residential land use, The
proposed project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource of value to the
region or the residents of the State of California,
b) The State of Califomia Department of Conservation has not designated the project slte for mineral
resource protection, Therefore, no impacts to mineral resources are anticipated as a result of the
proposed project.
1VIiti!!ation:
No mitigation measures are required,
XI. NOISE. Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels
in excess of standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies')
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
groundbome vibration or groundbome noise levels?
c) A substantial penmanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan
or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use airport,
would the project expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise levels?
1) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
13
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
would the project expose people residing or working
in the projcct area to excessive noise levels?
Comments:
a-d) It is anticipated that on-site workers and adjacent residential population may be exposed to
construction noise associated with short-term construction activities. However, the project will be
required to comply with the City's Noise Ordinance, In addition, due to the minimal construction
activities associated with the project, impacts to surrounding residential properties related to
construction noise levels are not expected to be significant. The proposed residential project is not
located within the Health Risk Assessment Area (HRAA), within 500 feet of any adjacent freeway or
highway, The project is not anticipated to potentially violate the noise limits of the City's noise
control ordinance,
The project site contains eucalyptus trees and according to the Biological Resource Study, there is
potential for raptor nesting in eucalyptus trees, Potential short-tenn construction noise/raptor nesting
impacts arc addressed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E, under Biological Resources,
e-f) The project is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport, nor is it
located within the vicinity of a private airstrip, Therefore, the project development would not expose
people rcsiding or working m the project area to excessive noise levels,
Mitigation:
No mitIgation measures are required,
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING, Would the
project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area,
either directly (for example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of road or other inrrastructure)?
o
o
o
.
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere"
o
o
o
.
c) Displace substantial numbers
necessitating the construction of
housing elsewhere?
of people,
replacement
o
o
o
.
14
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
[mpact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Signitican t
Impact
No
Impact
Comments:
a-c) The project is surrounded by existing residential development and involves the removal and
replacement of one single family residence, The proposed project does not involve the extension of
public facilities that would induce substantial growth, Future residential development of the site for
the proposed 12 single-family residential units is consistent with the General Plan and would not
exceed the regional or local population projections, The proposed project would involve the partial
rezoning of the RIP6 to Rl Zone to be consistent with the adjacent single-family residential
properties to the north, south and east. The proposed project would not involve displacement of
existing housing or individuals,
Miti!!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 times or
other perfonmance objectives for any public services:
a, Fire protection? 0 0 . 0
b, Police protection? 0 0 0 .
c, Schools? 0 0 0 .
d, Parks? 0 0 . 0
e, Other public facilities? 0 0 0 .
15
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Commeuts:
a) According to the Fire Department, adequate fIre protection services can continue to be provided to the
site, The applicant wilJ be required to comply with the Fire Department policies for fITe hydrant
placement, fIre truck tumaround and new building construction, The City's Fire performance
obJectives and thresholds wilJ continue to be met.
b) According to the Chula Vista Police Department, adequate police protection services can continue to be
provided upon completion of the proposed project. The proposed proJect would not have a signifIcant
effect upon or result in a need for substantial new or altered police protection services, The City's
Police perfonmance objectives and thresholds will continue to be met.
c) The proposed project would not induce substantial population growth; therefore, no significant adverse
impacts to public schools would result. According to the Chu1a Vista Elementary School District letter
dated January 5, 2006, the applicant would be required to pay the statutory building pennit school fees
for the proposed residential construction or an alternative financing mechanism such as participation in
or annexation to a CFD is recommended,
d) The proposed project would not induce significant population growth, as it is a smalJ residential infilJ
project. However, the applicant slialJ be required to pay Park Acquisition and Development Fees
(pAD) in accordance with Ordinance No, 2945 adopted by City Council on January 6, 2004,
e) The proposed project would not have a significant effect upon or result in a need for new or expanded
governmental services and would continue to be served by existing public infi-astructure,
'Vlitigation: No mitigation measures are required,
XIV. RECREATION. Would the project:
a)
Increase the use of existing neighborhood and
regional parks or other recreational facilities such
that substantia1 physical deterioration of the facility
would occur or be accelerated?
D
D
.
D
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?
D
D
D
.
16
Issues:
Comments:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
No
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact
a) The proposed project would not induce significant population b'fowfh, as it is a small residential infill
project and would not impact existing or proposed recreational facilities, However, the applicant will
be required to pay Park Acquisition and Development Fees (pAD) in accordance with Ordinance No,
2945 adopted by City Council on January 6, 2004,
b) The project does not include the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, The project site is
not planned for any future parks and recreation facilities or programs, Therefore, the proposed project
would not have an adverse physical effect on the recreational environment.
Miti!!atio n:
No mitigation measures are required.
XV. TRANSPORTATION / TRAFFIC. Would the
project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of
the street system (i,e" result in a substantial increase
in either the number of 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 in a change in air traffic patterns, including
either an increase in traffic levels or a change m
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" fann
equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
17
D
D
D
.
D
D
.
D
D
D
D
.
D
D
D
.
D
D
.
D
f) Result in inadcquate parking capacity?
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Significant With Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
D D D .
D D D .
Issues:
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
supporting alternative transportation (e,g" bus
turnouts, bicycle racks)?
Comments:
(a,b,d,e) According to the Traffic Engineering Department, the proposed residential infill project is not
antlcipated to result in any significant traffic, circulation or emergency access impacts, The project
generated traffic trips are minimal, approximately 120 Average Daily Trips (ADTs) that is not considered
to be a sugstantial increase ini either numbr of vehicle trips, volume or capacity, In addition, the project-
generated trips will not exceed the level of service standard established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or highways, Therefore, will not create significant traffic
operations impacts along North Del Mar Avenue and surrounding residential or collector streets,
c) The proposal would not have any significant effect upon any air traffic patterns, including either an
increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks,
f) The proposal includes garage space including pull out spaces and 10 parking spaces on Villas De!
Mar Court in accordance with the Chula Vista Zoning Code, The proposal meets ADA requirements
for accessibility and parking,
g) The proposal would not conflict with adopted transportation plans or alternative transportation
programs, There are no bus turnouts or public transportation systems along this portion of N, Del
Mar Avenue,
Mitil!ation:
No mitigation measures are required.
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS.
Would the project
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
applicabie 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
D
D
.
D
18
Issues:
existing facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of new stonm
water drainage facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the
project rrom existing entitlements 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 in addition to the provider's existing
commitments?
t) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted
capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste
disposal needs?
g) Comply wlth federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
19
Potentially
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
D
D
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
D
D
D
D
D
Less Than
Significant
Impact
.
D
.
D
D
No
Impact
D
.
D
.
.
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
(mpact
Comments:
a) The project site is located within an urban area that is served by all necessary utilities and service systems.
According to the Engineering Department, no exceedance of wastewater requirements of the Regional
vVater Quality Control Board would result ITom the proposed proj eet.
b) According to Sweetwater Authority correspondence dated February 22, 2006 and March 28, 2006, an
existing 6-ioch water main is located on the east side of North Del Mar Avenue with Oile existing water
service to the site. The proposed improvements will include a new water main extension within the
R..!:-QPosed private road that connects to the existing Authoritv water m9-in in North Del Mar Avenue. and
terminates in the prouosed cul-de-sac. This would include new separate laterals and meters, as .....1311 as the
installatIOn of redueed pressure prineitJle backflom dz\ ices and --Ehecl~ " al','es on any indi'.'iooal--Hre
~fie.n systems. for each parceL Should any of the proposed residences be required to have a buildill!!
fire sprinkler system then each water service shall be euuipped with an approved backflow protection
deVlce that would be owned and maintained bv the property owner. As the water facility improvements
are designed in accordance with water authority standards, no significant impacts to existing facility
systems will occur as a result of the proposed project
See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E (Hazardsffiazardous Materials and HydrologylWater
Quality) for details regarding the existing septic tank and new wastewater service systems for the proposed
project
c) The proposed project will result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities and expansion of
existing facilities. The potential discharge of silt during construction activities could impact the storm
drain system. Appropriate erosion control measures will be identified in conjunction with the preparation
of final grading plans to be implemented during construction. The proposed project is subject to the
NPDES General Construction Permit requirements and shall obtam permit coverage and develop a Storm
Water Pollution PrevenhOn Plan (SWPPP) prior to issuance of gradmg permits, In addition, the project
shall be conditioned to implement construction and post-construction water quality Best Management
Practices (B:rv1Ps) for storm water pollution prevention in accordance with the Chula Vista Standard Urban
Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP). No significant impacts to the City's storm drainage facilities are
anticipated as a result of the proposed project.
d) The project site is within the potable water service area of the Sweetwater District. Pursuant to
correspondence from the Sweetwater Authority, the project may be serviced from the 6"-water main on N.
Del Mar A venue and the applicant will need to install a service main to service this site. The proposed
project will be required to construct expansions to existing water facilities as described in Section b above.
e) See XVLa, and b,
f) The City ofChula Vista is served by regional landfills with adequate capacity to meet the solid waste needs
of the region in accordance with State law.
g) The proposal would be conditioned to comply with federal, state and local regulations related to solid
waste.
Mitigation: See Section E of the NIitigated Negative Declaration; refer to the Hydrology and Water Quality and
HazardsfHazardous Materials Sections. The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative
Declaration would mitigate identified storm water/storm drainage and wastewater impacts to a level of less than
significant.
20
Issues:
XVII. THRESHOLDS
Will the proposal adversely impact the City's
Threshold Standards?
A) Libnuy
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 80S by
buildout. The construction of said facilities shall be
phased such that the City will not tall below the city-
wide ratio of SOO GSF per 1,000 population, Library
facilities are to be adequately equipped and staffed,
B) Police
a) Emergency Response: Properly equipped and staffed
police units shall respond to 81 percent of "Priority One"
emergency calls within seven (7) minutes and maintain
an average response time to all "Priority One"
emergency calls of S,S minutes or less,
b) Respond to S7 percent of "Priority Two" urgent calls
within seven (7) minutes and maintain an average
response time to all "Priority Two" calls of 7,S minutes
or less.
C) Fire and Emergency Medical
Emergency response: Properly equipped and staffed fire
and medical units shaH respond to calls throughout the City
wIthin 7 minutes in 80% ofthe cases (measured annually),
D) Trame
The Threshold Standards require that all intersections must
operate at a Leve! of Service (LOS) "C" or better, with the
exception that Level of Service (LOS) "0" may occur
during the peak two hours of the day at signalized
intersections, Signalized intersections west ofI-80S 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 tms Standard,
21
Potentially
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
No
Impact
.
.
.
.
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Issues: Significant With Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
E) Parks and Recreation Areas 0 0 0 .
Thc Threshold Standard for Parks and Recreation is 3
acres of neighborhood and community parkland with
appropriate facilities/l,OOO population east ofI-80S,
F) Drainage 0 0 . 0
The Threshold Standards require that storm water flows
and volwnes not exceed City Engineering Standards,
Indlvidual proJects will provide necessary improvements
consistent with the Drainage Master Planes) and City
Engmeering Standards,
G) Sewer 0 0 . 0
The Thresh01d Standards require that sewage flows and
volumes not exceed City Engineering Standards,
Individual projects win provide necessary improvements
consistent with Sewer Master Planes) and City Engineering
Standards,
H) Water 0 0 0 .
The Threshold Standards require that adequate storage,
treatment, and transmission facilities are constructed
concurrently wlth p1anned growth and that water quality
standards are not Jeopardized during growth and
construction.
Applicants may also be required to participate m whatever
water conservation or fee offset program the City of ChuJa
Vista has in effect at the time of building permit issuance,
22
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Comments:
a) The project would not induce substantial population growth; therefore, no impacts to library facilitIes would
resuit. No adverse impact to the City's Library Threshold standards would occur as a result of the proposed
proj ect.
b) According to the Police Department, adequate police protection services can continue to be provided upon
completion of the proposed project. The proposed project would not have a significant effect upon or result in a
need for substantial new or altered police protection services. No adverse impact to the City's Police Threshold
standards would occur as a result of the proposed project.
c) According to tile Fire Department, adequate fire protection and emergency medical services can continue to be
provided to the project site, Although the Fire Department Itas indicated they wiU provide service to the project,
the project will contribute to the incremental increase in fire service demand throughout the City. This increased
demand on fire services will not result in a significant cumulative impact. No adverse impact to the City's Fire
and Emergency Medical Threshold standards would occur as a result of the proposed project.
d) According to the Traffic Engineering Division, the slUTounding street segments and intersections including Third
Avenue and Del Mar Avenue will continue to operate in compliance with the City's traffic threshold standard
with the proposed project traffic. No adverse impact to the City's traffic threshold standards would occur as a
result of the proposed project.
e) The proposed project would not induce significant population growth, as it is a small residential infill project and
would not impact existing or proposed recreational facilities. However, the applicant shall be required to pay
Park Acquisition and Development Fees (PAD) in accordance with Ordinance No, 2945 adopted by City Council
on January 6, 2004,
f) Based upon the review of the project, the Engineering Department has determined that there are no significant
issues regarding the proposed drainage improvements of the project site. The proposed drain system includes
improvements to existing drainage culverts to handle 1 DO-year storm events, a series of inlets, private catch basins
and culverts, lUlderground detention systems, discharge controls, and filtering systems. No adverse impacts to the
City's drainage threshold standards will occur as a result of the proposed project.
g) The project site is within the bOlUldaries of the City of Chula Vista wastewater services area. The existing area
sewer facility system includes sewer lines along Bayview Way and along Vista Del Mar Court. There are
currently no sewer mains abutting the property that would allow for gravity-type flow. Therefore an off-site main
extension through the Third A venue right of way, and an 8" PVC sewer main up to the southwest comer of the
subject site and into the proposed project court cul-de-sac are proposed to service the various lots. The applicant
shaU be required to submit a fmal sewer plan to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The apphcaot is required to
grant an easement to the City of Chula Vista wastewater services for the purpose of maintenance of the proposed
sewer lines, No adverse impacts to the City's sewer system or City's sewer threshold standards will occur as a
resnlt of the proposed project.
h) The project site is within the potable water service area of the Sweetwater District. Pursuant to correspondence
trom the Sweetwater Authority, the project may be serviced trom the 6"-water main on N, Del Mar Avenue and
the applicant will need to install a service main to service this site. No significant impacts to existing facility
systems or the City's water threshold standards will occur as a result of the proposed project.
LVIitigation: No mitigation meaSill'es are required.
23
Issues:
XVIII, MANDATORY FINDINGS OF
SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the range
of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current project, and the
effects of probable future projects,)
c) Does the project have environmental effects, which
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
Comments:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
No
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
.
D
D
D
.
D
D
.
D
a) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E, Potential short-tenm construction noise/raptor nesting
and biologically sensitive impacts are addressed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E, under
Biological Resources.
b) Thc project site has been previously disturbed with a similar resIdential land use and site improvements,
No cumulative considerable impacts associated with the proJect when viewed in cormection with the
effects of past projects, other current projects and probable future projects have been identified,
c) The proJect will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly, as the
proposed project has been mitigated to lessen any potential significant impacts to a level of less than
significance.
Mitigation: The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitlgate
potentially significant impacts to a level ofless than significance,
24
XIX, PROJECT REVISIONS OR MITIGATION MEASURES:
Project mitigation measures are contained in Section F, Mitigation Necessary to Avoid Significant
Impacts, and Table I, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, of Mitigated Negative Declaration
IS-04-022,
XX. AGREEMENT TO IMPLEMENT MITIGATION MEASURES
By signing the line(s) provided below, the Applicant and/or Operator stipulate that they have each read,
understood and have their respective company's authority to and do agree to the mitigation measures
contained herein, and will implement same to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator.
Failure to sign below prior to posting of this Mitigated Negative Declaration with the County Clerk shall
indicate the Applicant and/or Operator's desire that the Project be held in abeyance without approval
and that the Applicant and/or Operator shall apply for an Environmental Impact Report,
<t' ' 0;9 ,
.>t' eYe (eJ ~')t.~bai"
Printed Name and Title of Applicant
(or authorized representative)
/ti/14
Sighat~te M Applicant
(or authorized representative)
z/2;ft ?
Dat
N/A
Printed Name and Title of Operator
(if different from Applicant)
N/A
Signature of Operator
(if different from Applicant)
Date
25
XXI. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potential1y affected by this project, involving at
least one impact that is a "Potential1y Significant Impact" or "Potential1y Significant Unless Mitigated,"
as indicated by the checklist on the previous pages,
D Land Use and Planning DTransportation/Traffic
D Population and Housing . Biological Resources
. Geophysical D Energy and Mineral
Resources
D Public Services
D Utilities and Service Systems
D Aesthetics
D Agricultural Resources
. Hydrology/Water
.Hazards and Hazardous
Materials
D Cultural Resources
. Air Quality
D Paleontological
Resources
D Noise
D Recreation
D Mandatoty Findings of Significance
26
XXII, DETERMINATION:
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project could uot have a significant effect on the D
environment, and a Negative Declaration will be prepared,
I tind that although the proposed project could haye a significant effect on the
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in
the projcct have been made or agreed to by the project proponent. A Mitigated
Negatiye Declaration will be prepared,
I find that the proposed project may have a significant effect on the enviromnent,
and an Environmental Impact Report is required,
I find that the proposed project may have a "potentially significant impact" or
"potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one
effect: 1) has been adequately analyzed in an 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 Report IS
required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed,
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, because aU potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed
adequately in an earlier ElR or Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable standards
and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier ElR or Negative
Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the
proposed project, nothing further is required
~:f~~'
Environmental Review Coordinator
City ofChula Vista
'7/"I/~k
r I
Date
J:\Planning\1vlARIA\lnitia! Study\Vi11as De! Mar\IS-04-022draftChecklist.doc
27
.
D
D
D
ATTACHMENT 6
LETTERS FROM RESIDENTS
March 17. 2C06
Case Number: DRC-05-56
Project Description: Design Review for 12 unit planned residential development
known as "Villas De! Mar"
Site Address: 160 North Del Mar Avenue
Project Planner
Planning Dept.
Bldg. 300
Chula Vista Civic Center
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Attn: Jeff Steichen
! am a property owner in the surrounding area of this proposed development.
I am concerned about the environmental impact that this project will have mainly
with traffic.
I am suggesting that me existing road, North Third Avenue, west of this project, be
used as the main access road for the residents of the new homes in this development.
North Third Avenue is already designated for utility use for trash and sewer for this
development.
Please have whatever issues for using North Third Avenue road be addressed and
resolved now. l11e map shows that there are undeveloped areas around this site.
These areas will probably be developed in the near future, and, they would also
benefit with the use this road.
Thanks for your consideration in this matter.
Sincerely,
~~;!- ~. 25o.rJ@
Terrie A. Sapp
Ir;:::\? ,~ ~ 1 ~:: ~, rr01
IL,/l; ,- ~ - -, Iii ill
~~! M~,R 1 7 ZG06 Jil0
I
.'.
PL,t\Ni"11NG
255 Shirley St
Chula Vista, CA. 91910
280 Shirley St
Chula Vista, CA 91910
2-90
(]ll:1.la Vista City Council and Pla:nning
April 3, 2006
Subj: ~\TeT\J\l houses 'Jvest DfDell\;Iar::;etvleen I"Ti\Con Place .wa Bay-yie'Vv
= strongly object tache plac~ment.of 12 ne"01 houses and a park -en the 2 Y4 acres of land
proposed. for 'the following r-easons;
With aCC"S3 stre,,!s and sidewalJcs there are no yards for the houses. Chula Vista should
maintaill. i-[s bedrDom ,CDm"i]1uruty 'With pice nouses and yards and nor jam houses so clos~
together that neighbors can wash each others windows, Our neighborhood is zoned to
anow single faJJ1ily houses on a lot big enough to have a yard for I:lInilies, It ';\liD ruin it
TO jam houses on to little lots so small a park for all the houses must be built. A builder
-will make his money an,d leave bm we choose to live in our great neighborhood for many
years, Please do TIot destroy OTJR NEIGHBOOR..LJ:OOD OliR HOi'vIES OUR LIFE
STYLE just because someone wants to make a few extra dollars at our expense,
Proposed park wil! have problems ,MiTh who does up keep, it will be used by
neighborhood kids even though it is private, who will be liable for any accidents.
The aooiiion .or 12 families v.,rith 2 cars or more vI/ill tremendously L~pact the traffic in
thi8cae~Dmood_
"j / /'.//2, /'/ i
}A,,-'/lJ.-~t d //4'/IJ...~_.
Rlchard L BatteitiSi1" /'~
209 Nixon PI
Chula Vista, CA 91910
2-91
~-
Ie::
"
'~
.t::i."'?-;;--
<= -~
}.!..
-
f 1 !
:;,:\v~/~-:e""..j_4~.'jC.4
"d "'Vy!l
"';";;'.;:".;/
.0
., .""
.:J f,V?
1 :t::
j',,.,,....
" ,
f~)~,;;;i
'1'-'.'
j0',)'"
J'1V'~J.'f,
.
/ :~
, ~='
i' .".~ ~P..f
,)v,li'! ,
.r:; ...
'--='
At;;;'
",-," ."c_
J-Jj~-.
jh'J:,
.l'_ /~.Y;/ ,;Ii.';)
.v.';':..~,""I-i'q~'''\
;.(
-~
j~ .
/:} ll/~,!!:-
'::/~
;jj~';:/.., ';;y/-l')Ai/'~
}'~ ;A,l:/ "_f't/Y':ft.,C
-' ".>~.
,77(J:J] ; /l,""J,;::,;j
;..........;" /r...",;;
7z5:?f.
':;v
,>'
,::} l~1 i:
,~"'"''''
__0'7,/\"
':;1 ~ 6 ,~v";~/
! ~
IA!
-- ,
)'itorIT
j",~./i!jiF
:J",i!j'
/?'~'1./
yfi-'"!$
t
I }'
3 7:"i!E',6: r
;:J)~
.-r--:'
//Ji!"
(?,4 /,,/
//ilf,.;)
, ?
01E
/.,"1 J::
fif.~
j?;:;~q~
, .
:;: ;:;;t';--)~:~/
t(
'~,d
~ -?
;.:.;;
-}",,/ ..,i";'
~,nJ!t:.:,'
J.'
r/j i~
,
tv/.,g!
ti/~J u/
" ,
;;)'''''/ d'~~//
/\1:...,,'7 J.J- .'=.,J
/~' if! if /q
.'1/~ /...:.::t:;.,,'.,,,
/ ..f"..... .~~.- . ,,~
.~ "'."'" .c"" """
, ,
..:<"'}/_~~
1'1'1'&,,/1
/ ..,f' ;..,/. -"
~./Jr;f "':;,~ ~~,I i
si
k-.-:>
,OG
,.~
i'V
_I . ~r;;> ~
'1"'"v'4""')-t~?">
.1 ,j~~"1 'i- .j..'-
/;!l/c/
Al-tt' .7
$e/11/;
ct~\/
f
L1t.""
,:1 ~~;~:;"'Y~ii}j;~:
8""", .,-
~c;:: ~,:
/~?;:)};f
.?
~/~
4..?i!
;"",V
/
i~/id' tlJ.€
,
f:/:r!E:,d'f5
=--"
f),.i'J~
""--><1'1/
,
bit:
rf~?>.~ ? ,..... /_",,-,~ ~-""'/ J
~'''-'J.r- "",;.,/,';,.,.ri~~C>
......_~" !- "'""-
J'I,[
~;;J
~ 0 ,'~-4," .' .~~
;#/~~ r."
;C ",--J"I )~,O ,r4. j?flj'..">
,~j?if_=-d11;, -~cp.",__
J
'" .. c./...,f,.,;....
.;:"'Ji!l .' "",f-C:
L/'i.'~;..v'
"
-j"2 cP""
,/1,_
~ ,..,.... ..>
"?"""
/""" ,I -.),>
.,r<>c)..cJ _...-r
.::o/A:;,..::-c;.i ]
,
,''.rJ;...-'!",;;-ji~i''''
J",-,,"iT"_.,J
T.h,~
" f
S-;< -,- ~.
'. '" . ,-j'" ;".
j" --.--...-
, /.?
V'..?!~t j '/,;4/"
,I,,) J'cIV'!.oo-_J ""
J
I~'-?"
,J-'<1;;
, 7 M::/ J4) ',C
7'1. l' v~
,)~Aould/ ,lYE /'f~{:j 1A/"l:d/
" r'r
T-eA~'!..f/<('
Jj?"
<-#1'-
,,)...
,'::v,. "'!.it
'-"-";.'-CrJ
, /J, '_;(,-
;-"'.-~j'..":'" J ,_
.I 7"" ""_ '''_
.....-, / ./ f". '
)' ""}J // """,,'/"
l..--./"~ .".. - ,;0;.;;.. ~
,,+;1~
,
/==,,~,(,~ i~ ~,;.~
.:J'c-";:_.......f_ .
!
.-i-
; / ! . '-
l1/d'u/d /7R7~
,
td
.,.". /l'
,),jd/6'74/A1j
~ J i } r
.j~.fJ(;,~v!- ~ "'"
)'Y;/d f'f/5' Y
JI"
.~
,
.~/r"7J1.j~o
'...- - -
Q . /
VnY ViEt",'
,
J ""I 1/ /'"
;/'1 Ti1;...)
Iv:.,
,... ....l_
.)l.~c..
.,-..,- .:;.,...
"./~;;-
f'
';;;Oi'Y'Jc
'>/-",tr
..?JAy,,--
,+-, . / -i-/ ,.,....
CJ(;l/, /I f"t(JI j y) ~
"
c"?/d
,
bc.Lit'
,
/
,I . ./
00/1(/ r~ /1
- l/ ....-'
:C,/~{..;i
"
y.?
?-,,{I'
v"..",
,
/; "('"-,-:;>
..")~../ce.,,,
/:$
~.~l(
#
~
11,.-
L,JAy
(~.6"", / .~i./,.':...j
w#"".""'" ~ _
/1.'/V
!~.;d J.......~__ ""V
,1/./7,,/,;-_..7""'/""
y / .- /'
c/-l/V4
,
., -=---
j""" -r/'f,': is;,
~,~ /-
-
i' .....,,,,,d r ,,'" <//
~(f~"<l~-;/;;'''"
,
pry 0:5 /Y}~J!tj
,
, ~.
.4-r ",~,/",,-
f ~ d ,/7 ,j I",-'j~
)4/1/.<'6
. ~ ,..-
,
l1--if? ~~ Il;:'
S'OP/~O~'l,jC
1>,~ ,€:,e, ..;::>'
, /:-,~ ":"$1 /
""'&::01'4 I ,~.,...;...
.4....., /..,./
"-vw,~d .i'1itJ!
.J,.
" /-1"
.,'--, .... "-A of
/..: f/.t:;.l
, A
;;"-""
~
jo..,
c;/Vl v-
i/
li A-l("'f C)!>y.<~
. ,
/,
I;1~
,
r:<6E J'
/-1KE:
CJ ,(../:e;-,e
frY/';rl,.,-
,,1jdj"_"'-
i J....,
n,v O-',,)///lj:v~
,...... r J:..-il.. _--.;...0.7' ./
; .I
/ j t
jtV tEA'. ;;~d3
/".:;,.,-
'- lip.,. ~
-A ..-:}_ t;,'
/7 ;:<.t; /7/te.(;E:f
i
./ ..-:j_ .,-w
),A.,-"Q" ~ i:: .
.' ~.
P~/ i ;CJ.,/~
....j.- --
~v' &'
t.. ""c;."r
ve ;..)Ke-
/JiorP. if:
/1:0~E:
/
t1,:;,'Y! r<'"
~ ~ -,.;) "
(S
"., ,~
/(,r.4L '/
i\ I
j!/If.(;(!I w.;'~
/1,,fE/t
,
/74// it:
, I I
,./ A /?!;<fr;- '1'-", {;7 A v
:f1J'J jo' .c: !i/' .,/ ;>, j7" >'
, . I '
/0 '
0'<:: jfv'Erl c'~/<.b;.
;tltl- /1f;;; fA y.
i -- ~... .I
r
.' i.AE'o
::--
/f'.(A/
I _
/?-J.....,:....,J ~
;;,./J: I (,.i~ <C
I
/t jtkJG~
;0d,)'
) I
).,,/~/k\
",..,.-r-r..... .....
/ ,
/<'u/
..t-
1"'1"';:.
r/ .-
/ l
1.;,..""--0"<:
c f,/g" ~
~.-t.- f ~
;;J/it:.l.47iJi'/
;;4,...r",f ~j,,',~
~; J /" <Co
j ,X~"/
V.t-;";:..,,.y
A~
..- ......
i> p.4 C<" ~ ,-J '" '-
~-;r,.'J'!_:'A -f"f. v.
,~i;;h~~//&E?"'" '" f/j
,/ c?P;;;" ') - ,," if
" ., . '':''--.-' :-,,,,,-: /
/ ,/. ' """.
. ,..-:;y.?").':Y" /1/>. :,..13;A-t ,y,,//
- - -. ""~~---~--
--- , '~i
rA,t,R I 7 ,:: --: J
'--~'--.-~ ..----->.-'
,
, ~ _ L
"'""--~-~-~._.~~---=-.--.'-"-~_.--------~~~~~._~--,
7U Whom /-f!!laC; Cof7Ct2I!J1)
C3 - /7- DI.o
COIx:ernt''j +h-e rrojpcd. cc+
/ Ie 0 jJ /Je I mar Hv'€.
C{iS-f:' =# iJ!<.c -OS--C{p
.L - arzd~l -ami /; des /d-e cc+ 230
S~I'{le'f 5f,-J-- C2St- you Iv 11~5-e
Ccr75f{/er u5/ ()9 fJ" 3rJ ME: _ as qcc-eS5
--{;v --r; fv r ere 5 /c/errk -/0 -lire q !Jove- ,
Sa.. (~I ,d-eve Iof/l7en-j. tJ)-€ Q t~ . _ C-D.116€rn.TEI
ak:vut ,-fk- fro5fa~'vt -fra:ff7c --IA.cvr 1>>/1/
J:x: , CGtf\tYl ,"lYJ cf~ 511F/'10; pi, u-Je faye
TArN: Sma I; cl'/I IIren, CU7C! no :SIck v.Jct!1:5
TLufce A 4av; OUr tAlrdrefJ; crS wt'~/ as I
several DAtI' --h:r.ml!10, 0JCllkjv 4tvi
frOiY\ fAt" :9:}J:::D! bus 5fop ctf, +A-e..
sa.rrrf ,--h >'(1 e pc Of /-Q C{f --e Ira (Ie II r;3 1u
Cf'Jlc;! -&EJ{Yl _iA)o32~, Hcldf~ f'(U)re fraffic
P_ our ~fr~+ wU!, hOS--e.- ,q --/ern), (-e .
(1St:- ~ +~ eh, /dY(:(\ In CUY (Jer1A};orka::/
[~ welwh1f:' fJ-tw niftr'q/j::;8d's!
~+ please.. / r /-eas-e CDtJS/C!er' U5 ( 0-0}
W 3(') I1ve ex-nd II C 'I 5/;eef a5 7A ~ ,
Mo. in . c/t C C:.e-s s JD 1& /7 e IV de (.Ir:: Ir /0)61-.:/
project .7+ ~vul4 be more C{c~~j;k
~)o f;L~.~ +v r. lA, -t , f}C'Iz) r L SJ J,'ffLfS /
Ccrrlr1 un l-f:t h .-JA--e 51 5. c{nd _ ~O?-
--/rE€~! rjUlvl Lug V (ef. a (lev('cv--J.L ,'-I/J-42.
Qmf:u~f- ,0.1 +rctfh93 [o(nm /niJ - do--u;n , ^
_ ' ~ /, _ _ I I . _ //!.'~' / -L.L' _ ,----.!.. _....L
lXp-fJ l-
(tns/oen ry
c() IE r hearv)f c[/i /'
(. {)Ur rD/(l...-1-- Dr Vi'CLu,
)i:e!j; ,
7k liltU~~ ~[ty
a f ,~3D 51; l'r/-ey !/
CAu/aV;5k. ci1!
9/9/0
----- - -
2-94
~ .~ ~jj
l6 {j 11
May 04,2006
250 Vista De! Mar Court
r.h..'a V''''+a ra <\1 "~,0
_,.",,~i \!J....,<l..~ v ..w .;;) 'V
1-1"-'''''
Ir"'~_ t~ i0
, '-'<I
I f'lli
U ill
'j)
RE: Villas Dei Mar Deveiopment,LLC
Case # PCl-05-03/PCS-04-06
Location: 160 North Dei Mar Avenue
PLXiNiNG
Attn; Jeff Steichen, Project Planner
City Of Chula Vista
Building 300, Chula Vista Civic Center
276 Fourth Avenue, Chu!a Vista, Ca. 91910
To \Nhom Jt May Concern,
The proposed development located at 160 North Del Mar has
sparked some concern amongst neighbors in this somewhat tight-knit and
diverse community. Excess traffic, speeding and parking are the greatest
complaints from the surrounding impacted area, Therefore, ! am writing
this letter in an effort to make the city aware of Ihese concerns.
The number one complaint seems to be directed toward excess of
traffic in the immediate area. Our community is made up many senior
citizens that have been in this neighborhood since its development in the
1940's. These senior citizens have since, raised their children, lost loved
ones in service to our country and have witnessed first hand the many
many changes that have taken place over the past 60 years within the city
limits. Since the early 1990's, the makeup of the neighborhood has
reverted back to young families raising multiple children, In the past
fifteen years more than t\venty (20) two storey homes have been errected
within this same city blocl<: adding more than eighty people to this once,
quiet community, inevitably, with more residents comes more visitors,
vehides and traffic. Since the addition of 20 homes in the area, the City of
Chula Vista has done little if anything to improve the streets, sidewalks or
address the traffic problems associated with the newly added residences
to this smail neighborhood. What are the plans that the City intends to
implement with the addition of another 12 homes in an already congested
neighborhood?
Secondly, speeding cars are a growing concern for us residents. !t
is not uncommon for vehicles to be traveling on North Dei Mar avenue in
the 50 mile per hour range at any hour of the day or night_ There are many
young children in the neighborhood playing in the streets and riding bikes
,scooter and roUer skates. !, personally have witnessed on severa!
occassions near misses between speeding vehicles and children on bikes,
if.:' '......"""1
,-~ ; ,-. 1.
G 1) \j
'"Iii li1
Ii j O!
ii L./!i
it,~_/ j
i 1
1 ,
-4 j
I
I
Also, the comer of C street and North Dei Mar Ave is a pick-up and drop-off
point for the Hosebank EJementary schooi vvhich brings even more
vehides to the neighborhood to retrieve or deliver their children to I from
the school bus. Vehicles from Second ave, routinely use North Dei Mar
avenue as an alternate route to access their point of destination, Usually,
people are racinq in their vehicles in an attempt to make it to the
Department of Motor Vehicles before it closes. What does the City intend
to do in regard to the speeding vehicles on this very small stretch of North
Del Mar Avenue? I have noticed in other areas of San Diego County that
problems are not addressed until ,AFTER someone is seriously hurt or
worse. I hope this is not the City Of Chula Vista's standard practice.
Lastly, the lack of parking in the area is a growing problem. On Bay
View Way, vehicles park on both sides of the street ,leaving room for only
one vehicle to pass at a time. The problem will definitely impact the
surrounding area with the addition of the 12 proposed homes since
undoubtedly the new residents will use the street closes to their home.
Apartments in the immediate area already use North Del Mar, Del Mar Court
and Shirley street as an overflow parking lot. Does the proposed homes
have plans to provide extra parking for visitors and residents with more
than two (2) vehicles? How does the City plan to rectify this problem?
Please fee! free to contact me in regards to this letter or any of the issues
mentioned above. Also keep in mind that I am not speaking for just myself,
but for others in the neighborhood who have confided in me to share their
voices. ! can provide names and addresses if it would be helpful to the
community.
Thank you for your time in this matter and hope to hear from you soon.
/\ ..// /
,"' j"L ( " 1,/--::;{~:W"7,-r;'t"'"~"
C{llc{..Lj~/ ,-, -/ ./
Mr. Lancelot C, Longaker
(619)P254-2191
ATTACHMENT 7
PROJECT PLANS
(ATTACHED)
ATTACHMENT 8
OWNERSHIP DISCLOSURE
)f?
-~-
- -
P I ann
n cr
o
& Building
Planning 05v-i-sion
Department
Develooment ProcessinO"
, 0
CITY OF
,HUlA VISfA
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, contractDr, subcontractor, material supplier,
vi II \ ~ .\Dt \ /,t,:( Vr-Ji \0,,",-'''-'"+, LLc.. (7,...-c-( t\
/ ' ,
,-u\\c:~(V"\..:.... 1)-"I!~\':;>,/.J~e...,\-) LLC 0e.OLOvA
i /
T \.A.~
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 (cDrporation/partnership) entity,
n . ' ,
(c....., ().....AJ. l ru A ,. c ....~T c::..-
Ru b 1:" l.-1 ,1. ,,- c;. _"..:, G>--
,/ .... L. r1 0"...::....i.a
-,.0 ,~ = .:.('"G ,<,--\ f .;;:> _<.. ~ .::....... i.J-~ i...J,-"
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.
Tn &Ne' ",,\
- '
:C\Ao;.',I'\C~'- \~
J :,.J
~ . ,- i ,1
-+ tZcX e.,;-lL....:- -t- 5 (~uc..J-' c.
4, Please identify every person, including any agents, employees, consultants, or independent contractcrs ycu have
assigned to represent you before the City in this matter,
'-;::- eJi e r\ c- 0 :t ,s [~beje
JiJi..-t K L.o f':::~v
(lA.{!..\ T""'-c\"l';'" /
5. Has any person' associated with this contract had any financial dealings with an official" of the City Df Chula
Vista as it relates to this contract within the past 12 months, Yes_ No~
If Yes, briefiy describe the nature of the financial interest the official- may have in this contract.
6. Have you made a contributicn of more than $250 within the past twelve (12) months to a current member of the
Chuia Vista City Councii? No / Yes _If yes, which Council member?
2-96
;:,\!!?
~~-
.
p I ann
n g
& B u i I ct.; n g
Planning Division
Department
Oeve]oofilent ?rocessina
, 0
cm Of
.-:HUIA 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 Cr,ula Vista in the
past twelve (12) months? (This includes being a source of income, money to retire a legal cebt, gift, loan, etc,)
Yes No~
if Yes, which official" and what was the nature of item provided?
Date:
1/IC,Jc~
Sig~1dctor/APPlicant
\J : \ \ r., 1 Y{ \ M c.v Vue (D:Q ':"c( "1 +- LLCprint or
type name of Contractor/Applicarlt
Person is defined as: any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint venture, association, social club, frateCOla!
organization, corporation. estate, t"1Jst, receiver, syndicate, any other county, city, municlpaJity, cistrict, or other
po!itical 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 <= board,
commission, or committee or the City, employee, or staff members.
2-97
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT
Item No.: 2
Meeting Date: 10/18/06
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing; consideration of a proposed Genera Plan amendment to
establish a Mobilehome Overlay District
Resolution Recommending City Council Approval of a Proposed
General Plan Amendment to Establish a Mobilehome Overlay District
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning and BUildin~
One of the major focuses of the comprehensive General Plan Update adopted in December 2005
was the need for urban revitalization and redevelopment, particularly in western Chula Vista,
During those deliberations, one of the questions raised by the community was concern over the
possible displacement of existing residents when redeyelopment of some existing housing areas
takes place, such as within portions of the City's Urban Core area, This was of particular interest to
mobilehome residents as their housing costs are often lower than market rates for other comparable
sized housing units such as rental apartments,
In order to ensure that the often special circumstances of mobilehome residents are addressed
whenever a change of use and/or rezoning is contemplated for any existing mobilehome area, the
proposed General Plan amendment would create an Overlay District encompassing all existing
mobilehome developments within the City, and effectively require preparation of a plan of actions
to address any adverse effects of conversion, prior to City consideration of any change of use and/or
rezomng,
RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission approve the Resolution
recommending City Council approval ofthe proposed General Plan amendment.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable,
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: The City's Enyironmental Reyiew Coordinator has reyiewed
the proposed General Plan amendment for compliance with the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA), and has deteIDIined that that there is no possibility that the project will
have a significant effect on the environment and therefore is not subject to CEQA pursuant to
California Code of Regulations Title 14, Chapter 3 Article 20, Section 15061 (b )(3),
He m NO.-=----2
Pa!!.e No.: 2
Meeting Date: 10/18/06
DISCUSSION:
Back!!.round-
The General Plan serves as the long-range vision for orderly growth and deyelopment within the
City, Among its many goals and objectives is the need to maintain an adequate supply of land
designated and zoned at appropriate densities to support a variety of residential housing types,
This is in recognition of the need for the housing to respond to the varying income levels and
lifestyles of existing and future residents, In Chula Vista, mobilehome developments have
historically been a part of that supply, and haye effectively provided a unique and affordable
housing source, Housing costs for mobilehome living are often lower than market rates for other
types of housing such as comparable sized rental apartments, As such, it is not uncommon to find
that many of the households residing in mobilehome developments are liying on fixed incomes,
or are otherwise in need of lower-income affordable housing, Additionally, many residents own
their own coach, but rent or lease the land space, leaving them vulnerable to changes in land use,
These circumstances can present added challenges in finding suitable replacement housing
options for mobilehome residents in the event of potential closure of one or more of these
developments,
There are currently 32 mobilehome developments within the City in a variety of settings ranging
from well organized and maintained parks with exclusive Mobile Home Park (MHP) zoning, to
less fonnal and often smaller trailer parks in areas zoned for commercial or other development.
While many of the existing parks are not within areas enyisioned for change by the updated
General Plan, there are, for example, seyeral within the Urban Core Subarea where higher
density housing and transit-focused mixed uses are enyisioned to occur. Giyen growing housing
demands and rising land costs throughout the region, there will likely be increasing market
pressure over time for some mobilehome parks to convert to higher density housing and other
urban uses,
With the onset of implementation efforts under the updated General Plan, such as the Urban Core
Specific Plan, the possibility for urban redevelopment activities draws closer, including the
possibility of potential closure and redevelopment of mobilehome park sites, In order to be
better ready to handle such a circumstance, and be best equipped to balance the often unique
needs of mobile home residents with the challenges in locating suitable replacement housing,
staff is proposing to establish a General Plan-level Mobilehome Qyerlay District. As outlined
below, the Mobilehome Overlay District would establish the requirement for due evaluation of
the affects of a proposed closure on existing mobilehome residents, along with assurances that
the property owner and/or project proponent carries out a plan to address those affects prior to
closure,
Including an Oyerlay District in the General Plan provides a high-leyei, citywide policy
statement to affinn the importance and need to eyaluate and consider the affects of potential
changes in use and/or urban redeyelopment on this unique fonn of housing from the standpoints
of housing opportunity, affordability, displacement, replacement and/or relocation assistance
Item No.: 5
Pal!e No.: 3
Meeting Date: 10/18/06
Content of the Proposed General Plan Amendment -
As presented in Attachment 1, the proposed General Plan amendment consists of two main
components as summarized below:
1) A proposed new Section 7,17 in the Land Use and Transportation Element entitled
"Evaluations for Mobilehome Developments - Mobilehome Overlay District"-
This Section presents a background discussion and purpose for the District, along with a
new Objective and two related Policy statements, The text of the Section contains much
of the same infonnation and context presented in the above Background section of this
staff report, The first of the two policies (LUT 34.A,l) establishes that the property
owner and/or project proponent must prepare a plan in confonnance with applicable State
and local regulations prior to the City's consideration of any change of use and/or
rezoning inyolving the subject mobilehome property, that provides steps and provisions
to identify and address any adverse impacts of the conversion on the affected residents,
The second of the two policies (LUT 34,A,2) establishes that the City Council must
review the plan and make certain findings prior to taking action on the proposed change
of use and/or rezoning, Among those six findings are that the plan does ensure sufficient
evaluation and response to the effects of the resulting closure on the mobilehome park
residents, and that an adequate, detailed closure and relocation plan will be finalized and
carried out prior to the closure of the affected mobilehome deyelopment. Both the
Planning and Building Director and the Community Development Director are given
discretion in ensuring sufficient plan content.
2) A new Figure 5-l8(A) also in the LUT Element entitled "Mobilehome Overlay District"
The Figure presents a map and list of all 32 existing mobilehome deyelopments within
the City that are included in the proposed Overlay District. Staff acknowledges that due
to varying ownership situations and other factors, including planned land use, that a
number of developments may not be subj ect to conversion, Including all the
deyelopments at the General Plan level, however, ensures that the same considerations
would be giyen to any mobilehome development in the event that it is proposed for a
change of use and/or rezoning, regardless oflikelihood,
Conclusions and Next Steps-
Adoption of the Mobilehome Overlay District would provide one of the essentially three
mechanisms to address the needs of mobilehome residents in the event of a proposed closure, In
addition to the Overlay District in the Land Use and Transportation Element, the General Plan
Housing Element contains proyisions and policies regarding mobilehomes, and the City also has
a mobilehome deyelopment closure ordinance (CVMC Chapter 9.40),
Item No.~
Pal!e No.: 4
Meeting Date: 10/18/06
Staff from the Community Development Department's Housing Division will be moving
forward with an update to the closure ordinance that will, among other revisions, make reference
to the provisions of the Overlay District and establish the detailed content requirements for the
closure plans called for by the Oyerlay District.
DECISION MAKER CONFLICTS:
No Property within 500 feet
Staff has reviewed the property holdings of all Planning Commissioners and has found no
property holdings within 500 feet of the boundaries of the properties which are the subject of this
action,
FISCAL IMPACT: None at this time, The eventual cost of preparing the analysis and plan
required under the proposed policies would be born by the property owner and/or project
proponent.
Attachments
), Staff proposed General Plan Amendment Text and Exhibit.
~1:\PLANNING\General_Plan\GPU_Implementation\MH OPA PC Staff Report V2 final.doc
A TT ACHMENT 1 - PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT LANGUANGE AND
FIGURE TO ESTABLISH THE MOBILEHOME OVERLAY DISTRICT-
The following new text and Figure are proposed for addition to Section 7 of the General Plan
Land Use and Transportation Element:
. Addition of new LUT Section 7,17 after page LUT-130 to describe the background and
purpose for the Mobilehome Overlay District, and to establish an Objective and related
Polices regarding any proposed change of use and/or rezoning of any existing mobilehome
park.
7.17 - Evaluations for Mobilehome Developments; Mobilehome Overlay District
As noted in LUT Section 7,1 and in Housing Element Part L Section 3,0. maintaining an
adequate supply of land designated and zoned at appropriate densities to support a yariety of
residential housing types is an important component of ensuring sufficient diversity and
balance to meet the needs of existing and future residents,
In Chula Vista. mobilehome developments have historically been a part of that supply. and
have effectively provided a unique and affordable housing source, Housing costs for
mobilehome living are often lower than market rates for other types of housing such as
comparable sized rental apartments, As such. it is not uncommon to find that many of the
households residing in mobilehome developments are living on fixed incomes. or are
otherwise in need onower-income affordable housing, Additionally. many residents own
their own coach. but rent or lease the land space. leaving them vulnerable to changes in land
use, These circumstances can present added challenges in finding suitable replacement
housing options for mobilehome residents in the eyent of potential closure of one or more of
these developments,
As shown on Figure 5-18(A). there are currently 32 mobilehome developments within the
City in a yariety of settings ranging /Tom well organized and maintained parks with exclusiye
Mobile Home Park (MHP) zoning. to less fonnal and often smaller trailer parks in areas
zoned for commercial or other development. Within the Urban Core Subarea. several
mobilehome developments fall within the Interstate 5 Corridor District where higher density
housing and transit-focused mixed uses are envisioned to occur, With increasing housing
demands and rising land costs throughout the region. the likelihood for potential closure of
some mobilehome developments over time is real.
In recognition of these circumstances. and in order to better balance the often unique needs
of mobile home residents with the challenges in locating suitable replacement housing. it is
important that further analysis and planning be undertaken prior to the City's consideration
of any requested change in use and/or rezoning affecting any of the existing mobilehome
sites, In order to accomplish this. the Mobilehome Oyerlay District is established ensure
appropriate eyaluation and consideration of the affects of potential changes in use and/or
urban redevelopment on this unique fonn of housing from the standpoints of housing
opportunity. affordability. and displacement. replacement and/or relocation assistance,
Mobilehome Overlay District
Attachment I
Page 1 of3
As stated in the following Obiective and Policies, the Mobilehome Oyerlay District
establishes the requirement for such further analysis and planning to ensure due evaluation of
the affects of closure on existing mobilehome residents, and that the property owner and/or
proiect proponent has prepared and carried out a plan to address those affects,
Obiectiye - LUT 34.A
Ensure sufficient evaluation and response to the effects of any change of use or urban
redevelopment of existing mobilehome developments,
Policies
LUT 34,A.l Prior to the City's consideration of any proposed change of use and/or
rezoning of any mobilehome deyelopment properties within the City as identified on Figure
5-18(A), the property owner and/or proiect proponent shall prepare a plan in confonnance
with applicable State and City regulations, and to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning
and Building and the Director of Community Development, that provides steps and
provisions to address any adverse impacts ofthe conversion on the affected residents,
LUT 34,A.2 Prior to the consideration ofanv change of use and/or rezoning of any of
the mobilehome properties noted above, the City Council shall review the plan prepared
under Policy 34,A,l, and prior to taking action on said change of use and/or rezoning shall
make the following findings:
. That the proposed change of use and/or rezoning will not adversely affect attainment
of the City's goal to provide a variety of housing options within the City,
. That the proposed change of use and/or rezoning is supported by sound planning
principles, and will further opportunities to provide higher density, affordable
replacement housing within the City,
. That the property owner and/or proiect proponent plan does ensure sufficient
evaluation and response to the effects of the change of use and/or rezoning of the
existing mobilehome development.
. That the proposed change of use and/or rezoning will not result in seyere or undue
hardship on affected mobilehome residents,
. That the property owner and/or proiect proponent plan complies with applicable City
and State mobilehome conyersion and relocation regulations,
. That prior to the commencement of any closure of the mobilehome development, that
the property owner(s) will prepare and ensure perfonnance of a detailed closure and
relocation plan consistent with the requirements ofCVMC Section 9.40 and
applicable State regulations, and to the satisfaction of Directors of Planning and
Building and Community Development.
Mobilehome Overlay District
Attachment 1
Page 2 of3
1$
.-
..
.,
en
.-
Q
~
ca
-
..
Q)
>
o
Q)
E
o
::c
Q)
-
.-
.c2
o
:E
~
~ .::.rt:. &. ~
ro rn rn
a... ~ a.. ..::.:: IV 0...
~ ~ ~ ro ~E IV
ro ~~ ~rn roll) Il) a.. IV roo E
a... rom roD.. a..C) E Q) E CLI 0
IV D..a.. ~ (Lw .::.rt:. Il)~ 0 E~~~ WIl) I
Eww~ ro ~E ro E~~ ItO~$ ~~EB IV
ornE: CL =oW.::.rt:.CL o~ro ~~IO~~ro-~o =
I~~~~ WE~~I~rn~~IDCL~B8w~~~a..~w~~~
~~ ~ro rn~~oCLECLwo~roo~~_w~~w=$-~ IV
DW~~CL oCL~~~~o~D~~CL~wo5w ~ ~cSoooorn
O=DW~ I~~ow~I~o~~~~=~o~=~~owOOc$~
~~o== 2~~~Drow~~w~~~~wUO~~D~~WWSS
s~~e~~~~~o~~D~u5~~~t~g~~~~~8~~~ID
oo~Wm =~ ~€~OO~8Cc o~crou~ €oo ~
5ro~~c5~.::.rt:.m<oC)~~~~rowouwwu80~w~~ .~~
romot~~oo~~ =.~CO~CC)~~~C)CC ~rouo~~3~
~~~w~~~~~~0~~grn~~oo~g~~~~~~~5~~$c~
~rorogroro~o~ ro~~~~ Wroro ~oro~ro~~rororoo5
o~m~u~~~~~o~moom~0oo~wOOI~~0~~CLCLOO
~NM~~~~oomO~NMv~~~ro~o~NM~~w~romo~N
~~~~~~~~~~NNNNNNNNNNMMM
"'
~
ro
D-
O>
E
0_
IU
(l)E
=U)
-go
:;;>-
'"
0><=
~O>
~>
.~o
UjE
"'
"'
"
.."
U
'~
-
"'
>. C5
"' >-
~ "'
c: ~
5 >
"' >- 0
~ .fj E
c:: 5 ~
~~$
I::~:g
~(3~
CI
ffi ')\1
c:I < .I
~ \ \
I-I
~~
L_~
'/"1
.......,...f "
\
T"'"----
\. I
\, L-,
\. I
\. I
,
,
\.
\.
~.~~
L.._.!
!
!
;
!_.
"
..i
/
i
HeritaeRd
r n_"_ '.
\ \.
\ \.
\. )
i....,
!
!
i j
L.._.._..i
-'I
,"-'-1
\. ,
\ ~
81 \ /
~!I!i \ /
\\ Y
\\ _---- '1
--- -.,-.,-.
b:::.~.~=-"-"-"-"-"-"-"-"
,
r--J
i I
i I
! I
! I
L.'l I
<~~
Oz
z
~
~~!:I~>'
'ii, IIg=>
(( 11::1
/j
o
o
(YO
.--.
c-'-
~
----1
OJ
01
rv
Q...
I
\. r--J
\ I
\1
'\
\-
\-I
CI:
CO
....
,
It)
2!
:I
aI
ii:
I , ~ i I-I
L_ _....
,---
I
I
,--, LIl
/ I____....--,J
I i
(___ I
., ,
I
(.I
-.
I
...
-,
,
,
,
II '\
I ,"
(-
I
ATfAC.tfHFAJT :1- p3-.3e-F3
RESOLUTION GPA-07-01
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING CITY
COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT TO ESTABLISH A MOBILEHOME OVERLAY
DISTRICT
WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista's current General Plan was last
comprehensiyely updated on December 13, 2005; and,
WHEREAS, identified among the many goals and objectives of the General Plan
is the need to maintain an adequate supply ofland designated and zoned at appropriate
densities to support a variety ofresidential housing types in order to ensure sufficient
diyersity and balance to meet the needs of existing and future residents; and,
WHEREAS, mobilehome developments have historically been a part of that
supply in Chula Vista, and have effectively provided an affordable housing source; and,
WHEREAS, many of the households residing in mobilehome deyelopments are in
need of lower-income affordable housing, and housing costs for mobilehome living are
often lower than market rates for similar sized rental or other housing units in the local
market; and,
WHEREAS, these circumstances can present added challenges in finding suitable
replacement housing options for mobilehome residents in the event of potential closure of
one or more of these developments; and,
WHEREAS, increasing housing demands and rising land costs throughout
the region are creating increasing market pressures on the potential closure of
some mobilehome deyelopments oyer time; and,
WHEREAS, in order to address the often unique needs of mobilehome
residents and the challenges and potential hardships in locating suitable
replacement housing in the instance of a proposed mobilehome park closure,
further analysis and plans regarding relocation are needed prior to the City's
consideration of any requested change in use and/or rezoning affecting existing
mobilehome park properties; and,
WHEREAS, the City is proposing the subject General Plan Amendment to
establish a Mobilehome Overlay District to require such further analysis and planning to
ensure due evaluation of the affects of closure on existing mobilehome residents, and that
the property owner and/or project proponent has prepared and carried out a plan to
address those affects; and,
Planning Commission Resolution GPA-07-01
Page I of3
Planning Commission Resolution GPA-07-0l
Page 2 of3
WHEREAS, the areas of land for inclusion in the subject Mobilehome Overlay
District contain all land parcels within the boundaries of the existing 32 mobilehome
parks citywide as presented on proposed new General Plan Figure 5-18(A) of the Land
Use and Transportation Element included as Attachment I to the October 18, 2006, staff
report; and,
WHEREAS, the General Plan amendment also includes a new Section 7,17 -
Eyaluation of Mobilehome Developments - Mobilehome Oyerlay District, within the
Land Use and Transportation Element to establish the basis and intent for the District
along with an Objective and Policies stating the requirements established for properties
within the District, also as presented in Attachment I to the October 18, 2006, staff
report; and,
WHEREAS, the City's Environmental Review Coordinator has reyiewed the
proposed General Plan amendment for compliance with the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA), and has detennined that that there is no possibility that the project
will have a significant effect on the environment and therefore is not subject to CEQA
pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines,
WHEREAS, the Planning Director set the time and place for a hearing on the
proposed General Plan Amendment and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose,
was giyen by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city, at least 10
days prior to the hearing; and,
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely
6:00 p,m" October 18, 2006, in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the
Planning Commission and said hearing was thereafter closed,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT, ftom the facts presented to the
Planning Commission, the Planning Commission has detennined that approval of the
proposed General Plan amendment will result in an internally consistent General Plan,
and that the public necessity, convenience, general welfare and good planning practice
support the approval.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION
recommends that the City Council adopt the attached draft City Council Resolution
approving the General Plan amendment in accordance with the findings contained in that
draft City Council Resolution, and that a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the City
Council.
Planning Commission Resolution GP A-07-01
Page 3 of3
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this ISth day of October, 2006, by the following vote,
to-wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
Brian Felber, Chair
ATTEST:
Diana Vargas, Secretary
H:\PLANNfNG\General_Plan\GPU_Implementation\MH GPA Draft PC Reso.doc
J:\Attomey\MichaelSh\UCSP\.\1HP Overlay District-PC Reso-DCA Final.doc
DRAFT
RESOLUTION NO, 2006-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE
CITY'S GENERAL PLAN TO ESTABLISH A MOBILEHOME
OVERLAY DISTRICT
WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista's current General Plan was last comprehensiyely
updated on December 13, 2005; and,
WHEREAS, identified among the many goals and objectiyes of the General Plan is the
need to maintain an adequate supply of land designated and zoned at appropriate densities to
support a variety of residential housing types in order to ensure sufficient diversity and balance to
meet the needs of existing and future residents; and,
WHEREAS, mobilehome developments have historically been a part of that supply in
Chula Vista, and haye effectiyely proyided an affordable housing source; and,
WHEREAS, many of the households residing in mobilehome developments are in need of
lower-income affordable housing, and housing costs for mobilehome living are often lower than
market rates for similar sized rental or other housing units in the local market; and,
WHEREAS, these circumstances can present added challenges in finding suitable
replacement housing options for mobilehome residents in the eyent of potential closure of one or
more ofthese developments; and,
WHEREAS, increasing housing demands and rising land costs throughout the region are
creating increasing market pressures on the potential closure of some mobilehome developments
over time; and,
WHEREAS, in order to address the often unique needs of mobile home residents and the
challenges and potential hardships in locating suitable replacement housing in the instance of a
proposed mobilehome park closure, further analysis and plans regarding relocation are needed prior
to the City's consideration of any requested change in use and/or rezoning affecting existing
mobilehome park properties; and,
WHEREAS, the City is proposing the subject General Plan Amendment to establish a
Mobilehome Overlay District to require such further analysis and planning to ensure due evaluation
of the affects of closure on existing mobilehome residents, and that the property owner and/or
project proponent has prepared and carried out a plan to address those affects; and,
Resolution 2005 -
Page 2 of3
DRAFT
WHEREAS, the areas of land for inclusion in the subject Mobilehome Overlay District
contain all land parcels within the boundaries of the existing 32 mobilehome parks citywide as
presented on proposed new General Plan Figure 5-18(A) of the Land Use and Transportation
Element attached hereto as Exhibit 1; and,
WHEREAS, in addition to the aboye noted Figure, the General Plan amendment includes a
new Section 7,17 - Evaluation of Mobilehome Deyelopments - Mobilehome Oyerlay District,
within the Land Use and Transportation Element to establish the basis and intent for the District
along with an Objective and Policies stating the requirements established for properties within the
District, as presented in Exhibit 2 attached hereto; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to California Government Code section 65090, the Planning
Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on October 18, 2006, and recommended that the
City Council adopt the Resolution approving the proposed General Plan amendment; and,
WHEREAS, the proceedings and all eyidence introduce before the Planning Commission at
the public hearing on this proposal held on October 18, 2006, and the minutes and resolution
resulting there trom, are hereby incorporated into the record of these proceedings; and,
WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for the hearing on the General Plan
amendment and notice of said hearing, together with its purposes given by its publication in a
newspaper of general circulation in the City, at least ten days prior to the hearing pursuant to
California Government Code section 65090, and the City Council held a duly noticed public
hearing on October 24, 2006, on the subject General Plan Amendment; and,
WHEREAS, the City's Environmental Reyiew Coordinator has reyiewed the proposed
General Plan amendment for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),
and has detennined that that there is no possibility that the project will have a significant effect on
the environment and therefore is not subject to CEQA pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State
CEQA Guidelines,
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council hereby finds, detennines and
resolves as follows:
1. PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD
The proceedings and all eyidence introduced before the Planning Commission at their
public hearing held on October 18, 2006, and the minutes and resolution resulting there from are
hereby incorporated into the record of this proceeding,
DRAFT
Page 3 oD
Resolution 2005 -
II, GENERAL PLAN INTERNAL CONSISTENCY
The City Council hereby finds that the General Plan is internally consistent and shall remain
internally consistent following the adoption of amendments by this Resolution,
III. SEVERABILITY
The City Council declares that, should any provision, section, paragraph, sentence
or word of this resolution be rendered or declared invalid by any final court action in a court of
competent jurisdiction or by reason of any preemptive legislation, the remaining provisions,
sections, paragraphs, sentences or words of this ordinance as hereby adopted shall remain in
full force and effect. The City Council further declares that should any proyision, section,
paragraph, sentence or word of this resolution be found by a court of competent jurisdiction to
conflict with the City's General Plan the City's General Plan as adopted on December 13,2005
shall control and remain in full force and effect.
IV , APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
The City Council hereby approves and adopts the subject General Plan amendment
which consists of the documents presented in Exhibits 1 and 2 attached hereto, and on file
in the City Clerk's Office:
Presented by
Approved as to form by
James D, Sandoval
Planning and Building Director
Ann Moore
City Attorney
H:\PLANNING\Gcncm1 Plan\GPU Implcmcntation\MH Draft CC Reso.doc
J:\Attorney\MichaeIShIUCSPI}.1HP Overlay Dlstrict-CC Reso-DCA Final.doc
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT
Item: -3
Meeting Date: 10/18/06
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing: Consideration of a Miscellaneous Application,
PCM-06-10, to rename the northern 2,000 feet of Hunte Parkway to Salt
Creek Drive, Applicant: Salt Creek Golf, LLC,
The applicant, Salt Creek GolfLLC, submitted a miscellaneous application to rename the northern
2,000 feet of Hunte Parkway from the Salt Creek Golf Club entrance to Proctor Valley Road
(Locator Map), Pursuant to Chula Vista Municipal Code (CVMC) Section 12.44,010, street name
changes are considered by the Planning Commission and approved by the City Council.
The Environmental Review Coordinator, in compliance with the California Enyironmental Quality
Act (CEQA) has concluded that there is no possibility that the activity may have a significant effect
on the environment; therefore, pursuant to Section 15061 (b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the
actiyity is not subject to CEQA. Thus, no enyironmental review is necessary,
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt attached Planning Commission Resolution No, PCM-06-10, recommending that the City
Council approve attached draft City Council Resolution approying the street name change subject to
the conditions contained therein,
DISCUSSION:
Background:
The Auld Golf Course, located directly to the north (Locator Map), has been renamed and re-branded
to Salt Creek Golf Club and has also changed its marketing campaign, including publications,
advertisements, signage and internet website, The street name change is requested to reflect the
renaming of the golf course to create a more significant sense of place and arriyal for business
clients,
Project Site Characteristics:
The segment of Hunte Parkway is a Class III Collector street that is intended to distribute traffic to
and from arterials and other collectors to access residential areas, The requested street name change
will affect the segment of Hunte Parkway from the Salt Creek Golf Club entrance to Proctor Valley
Road, which is approximately 2,000 feet in length, There are three-collector streets within this
stretch of Hunte Parkway that include: Montecito Road, Duncan Ranch Road and El Granada Road,
The three roads lead to single family dwelling neighborhoods within the Rolling Hills Ranch Master
Planned Community,
Page 2, Item:
Meeting Date: 10-18-2006
Analysis:
Although the Fire and Police Departments generally discourage changing street names at
intersections, the proposed street name is clearly different from other street names in the vicinity and
will not create confusion or uncertainty for emergency vehicles and area residents, Because open
space lots run along both sides of this segment of Hunte Parkway, this proposal will only affect the
northern stretch of Hunte Parkway and the applicant's business establishment. Additionally, the
proposed street name change will not directly affect emergency response times because the only
addresses that will be affected are Salt Creek Golf Club and equipment from utility companies, The
GIS nayigation systems used by both the Police and Fire Departments to navigate within the City
will be updated accordingly to reflect the street name change,
The applicant will be responsible for all City costs associated with the street name change, including
costs to replace street name signs at all intersections along the street and any and all costs to modify
traffic signal equipment at the intersection of Proctor Valley Road and Hunte Parkway, Ifthe street
name change is approved, a total of 5 new street signs will be replaced, Three blade signs will be
replaced for the following intersections off Salt Creek Drive: (I) Montecito Road; (2) Duncan
Ranch Road; and (3) El Granada Road, The two remaining signs are dual signs that will be replaced
at the intersection of Proctor Valley Road and Salt Creek Drive, All new signage will be subject to
review and approyal by the City's Traffic Engineering Department.
DECISION-MAKER CONFLICTS:
Staff has reviewed the property holdings ofthe Planning Commissioners and has found no property
holdings within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property which is subject to this action,
CONCLUSION:
For the reasons mentioned above, staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the
attached Planning Commission Resolution recommending City Council approval of the proposed
street name change,
Attachments
1, Locator map
2. Draft Planning Commission resolution
3, CVMC Section 12.44,010
4, Disclosure Statement
5, Draft City Council Resolution
J:\Planning\Case ~i!es\-06 (FY 05-06)\PCM\PCM-06-1 0\5talr Reports\PC\PCM-06-1 () _Agenda Statement_llI.doc
1..1 {
I,,!...J I I "-,/~U
-DJi1 )!2ant?Maria Ct
/~~
q ....-
q'~
~ h I\J
II
~.......'----
-
~
1- '--
I~ I
I~^'
'-
~
ATTACHMENT 1
Auld Goff
Golf Course
'-
'MJ3
/
A(( ES!,
iJlWt:-w A I
~t >>
\1
/
I
(J)= ~!----- II I
~- ~ - A
~.lli L- .---~ ) I
~ ~ ~ ..- \.------1-- L 7
!=i d c: t:~ CZ:
~ !\ \<.0~\J
) Rd Duncan RanG '&-
C\\.o ~
",\,e
:10 "~ (1)
o"'<?- ~'~. f--2;1--
~ ~ ~. ~~
------'; ~ , f- l-)/
= ~:1: PROJECT ~
- >- % LOCATION
03 B,O -D \ \ I
,3(\'0: ~ '
-( ~C\ '~v of---,
V / / \ G '-' -.g
f~ > (1)
or{:;-N > '& - ~
" -~)-
..... '--"1 , '--
"" Santa Anoela Ct c----
rlf
I--
1--- Ct I _
\ V Barbara r--
~
(\\J.-
\~
-
~.<)
o
~
----.j
>--
Proctor Valley Rd
;:\--
~
,J/
r::ruc J --- ~~r--r--------
/,arstaICt \ \ \ \y,~ !~ ~
CHULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
LOCATOR PROJECT PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
C9 APPLICANT: Salt Creek Golf, LLC, MISCELLANEOUS
PROJECT Hunte Pkwy (From Auld Golf Request: Proposing a street name change of the segment of
ADDRESS: Course to Proctor Valley Rd) Hunte Pkwy from Auld Golf course to Proctor Valley Rd,
SCALE: FILE NUMBER: The new road will be called .Salt Creek Dr"
NORTH No Scale PCM-06-10 Related cases:
j:\planning\carlos\locators\pcm061 Q. cdr 05.16.06
Attachment 2
RESOLUTION NO. PCM-06-10
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING
COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
RENAME THE NORTHERN 2,000 FEET OF HUNTE PARKWAY TO
SALT CREEK DRIVE. APPLICANT: SALT CREEK GOLF, LLC.
WHEREAS, a duly yerified application (PCM-06-l0) was filed with the City of
Chula Vista Planning and Building Department on May 3, 2006 by Salt Creek Golf, LLC
("Applicant"); and
WHEREAS, the Aplicant requests to rename the northern 2,000 feet of Hunte
Parkway to Salt Creek Drive ("Project"); and
WHEREAS, the segment of Hunte Parkway which is the subject of this
resolution is between the Salt Creek Golf Club and Proctor Valley Road in the Rolling Hill
Ranch Planned Community ("Project Site"); and
WHEREAS, a street name change may be allowed subject to recommendation
of the Planning Commission to the City Council pursuant to Chula Vista Municipal Code
Section 12.44; and
WHEREAS, the street name change affects only the northern 2,000 feet of
Hunte Parkway where the only assigned address is the subject project applicant; and
WHEREAS, the street name change has been reyiewed and endorsed by the
Police and Fire Departments as a clearly different street name in the general yicinity, The
City's GIS and existing street name signs will be updated to reflect the change and ayoid
confusion and uncertainty for emergency vehicles; and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Reyiew Coordinator, in compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) has concluded that there is no possibility
that the activity may have a significant effect on the environment; therefore, pursuant to
Section 15061 (b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines the activity is not subject to CEQA.
Thus, no environmental review is necessary; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Building Department Director set the time and
place for a hearing on said Project, and notice of the hearing, together with its purpose, was
given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and its mailing to
property owners and residents within 500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the Project Site
at least 10 days prior to the hearing; and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as adyertised on
October 18, 2006, at 6:00 p,m, in the City Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Ayenue, before
the Planning Commission of the City of Chula Vista to receive the recommendation of city
staff and to hear public testimony with regard to the Project, and the hearing was thereafter
closed; and
1
Attachment 2
WHEREAS, after considering all reports, eyidence and testimony presented at
the public hearing with respect to the Project, the Planning Commission voted (X-X) to
recommend approval of the Project as requested by the applicant to the City Council; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING
COMMISSION recommends that the City Council adopt the attached draft City Council
resolution approYing the street name change therein,
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA,
CALIFORNIA, this 18th Day of October, 2006 by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Bryan Felber, Chair
ATTEST:
Diana Vargas, Secretary
J:IPlanninglCase Filesl-06 (FY 05-06)IPCMIPCM,06-1 0IResoiutionsIPCM-06-1 0_ Reso _lIl.doc
2
Chula Vista Municipal Code
ATTACHMENT 3
12.44,020
be waived in those cases where said dedicated
street or portion thereof has previously been
acquired by the city and it has been determined that
the street is not needed by virtue of a change in
plans by the city, or the property invoived consti-
tutes an unnecessary surplus after construction of
the public improvement. Fees shall be waived in
such cases only if the application for vacation is
submitted within three years of the dedication of
the public right-of-way, (Ord, 1205 9 2, 1969; prior
code 9 27 ,1402(B)),
12.40.040 Permits - Grounds for denial.
The director of public works shall not grant the
pennits required by this title under any circum-
stances or upon any condition when he finds that
the granting of such permit will adversely interfere
with or affect the necessary visibility from the
street, necessary drainage in the immediate vicinity
of the encroachment, present or contemplated
vehicular and pedestrian traffic upon the street, or
the maintenance of streets, (Ord, 1205 92, 1969;
prior code 9 27,1501),
12.40,050 Appeal- Procedure generally,
Any person who applies for a permit under the
provisions of this title may appeal to the city coun-
cil from a decision of the director of public works
denying such application, The director of public
works shall give written notice to such applicant of
his failure to grant such application and stating the
reason therefor.
Such appeal must be in writing and contain a
copy ofthe written statement ofthe director of pub-
lic works denying the application, and snch appeal
shall specity the reasons wherein and whereby it is
alleged that the decision of the director of public
works is in error and shall be filed with the city
clerk within 15 days after receipt of the written
denial of the proposed penmit by the director of
public works, (Ord, 1205 92, 1969; prior code
9 27,1502),
12.40,060 Appeal - Decision authority.
Upon receipt of such appeal by the city clerk, the
matter shall be placed upon the agenda of the next
meeting of the city council, which shall, by formal
resolution, render its decision thereon within 40
days from the date of receipt by the city clerk, The
failure of the city council to act upon such appeal
within the 40-day period shall be deemed a denial
of such appeaL The decision of the city council
shall be final and conclusive, (Ord, 120592, 1969;
prior code 9 27.1502),
Chapter 12.44
STREET NAMES
Sections:
12.44,010 Regulations for adoption or change,
12.44,020 Fees for name and regulatory signs,
12.44.010 Regulations for adoption or change.
A, Official street names for all streets and high-
ways within the city shall be those recommended
by the planning commission, and approved and
adopted by the city counciL All names presently
assigned to streets prior to July 18, 1969 are
accepted as the official names of said streets.
B, In the event that street names are changed in
the future, said name changes shall be undertaken
upon the recommendation ofthe planning commis-
sion to the city counciL There shall be no require-
ment that a public hearing be held by either the
planning commission or the city council in consid-
ering the proposed name changes; provided, how-
ever, that either of said bodies may conduct a
public hearing, giving a written notice by mail to
all parties to be affected by said name change, i,e"
the residents of the subject street, or in the event
that a iarge number of residents are affected, by
posting of notices along the street and by subject
publication of said notice at least 10 days prior to
the date of the hearing,
C. It shall be the duty of the city council, in des-
ignating street names and in accepting recommen-
dations for changes of street names, to provide
names which do not cause confusion and uncer-
tainty to police, fire or other emergency vehicles by
virtue of similarity of spelling or sound of said
street names, and to act in changing such names so
as to eliminate such confusion and uncertainty.
(Ord,1205 92, 1969; prior code 927,103),
12.44,020 Fees for name and regulatory signs,
Required fee(s) are hereby established for street
signs and regulatory signs to be erected in subdivi-
sions and certain street openings, (Ord, 2506 9 I,
1992; Ord, 181191,1978; Ord, 173991,1977;
Ord, 1205 9 2,1969; prior code 9 27,1101),
12-31
ATTACHMENT 4
P I ann
ng & Building
Planning Division
Department
Development Processing
cnv Of
CHUlA VISTA
APPLICATION APPENDIX B
Disclosure Statement
Pursuant to Council Policy 101-01, prior to any action upon matters 'that will require dlscretionqry 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 Vlst;1 election must be flied. 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,9.. oWner, applicant, contractor, subcontractor, material supplier.
Lu{\\\:l.\"""" C:.ut.~u(r.CI....
To-....r. ~.-'ros+
(3y1'O~ ,So bl"".oY"3'oU
2. If any person' identified pursuant to (1) above is a cOfTJoration or partnership, list the names of all I ndividuals with
a $2DDO Investment In the business (cofTJoratlon/partnership) entity,
W \\\;'c..."" 6u':'\-".(;6o~
3, If any person' Identified pUffiuant 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 beneficiarytJr trustor of the trust.
4, Please identity every perscm, Including any agents, employees, consultants, or Independent contractors you have
assigned to represent you before the City in this metter.
5, Has any perSon' associated with this contr;.ct 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-X...
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 X Yes _'ryes, which Council member?
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vls!o
Colifoml.
91910
(619) 69t-5101
,OCT-2.2006 14:28 FROM:
TO: 916194095B61
P.3
~I~
-1d-
~~~~
01Y OF
CHUIA VISTA
P I ann
n, g
&
Building
Planning Division I
Department
Development Processing
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, ete,)
Yes_ ND-X-
If Yes, which official.' and what was the nature of item provided?
~ffit'
Signature of Contract pilcant
TJ/lJrn~s h01J-
type name of Contractor/Applicant
Print or
Date: I()~:.J-Ok
.
Person is defined as: any Individusl, firm, c:o.partnershlp, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal
organizatlDn, corpDratlon, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, any other cDunty, city, municipality, disttict, or other
political subdivisiDn, -or any other group Dr combination acting as a unit.
Official includes, but is not limited to: Mayor, Council member, Planning Commissioner, Member Df a board,
commission, Dr committee Dfthe City, employee, or staff members,
..
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista
California
91910
(619) 691-5101
ATTACHMENT 5
DRAFT RESOLUTION NO, 2006-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CITY
COUNCIL APPROVING THE STREET NAME CHANGE FOR
THE NORTHERN 2,000 FEET OF HUNTE PARKWAY TO
SALT CREEK DRIVE,
I. RECITALS
Project Site
WHEREAS, the subject site, which is the subject of this Resolution is represented in
Exhibit A and for the purpose of general description, herein consists of the northern
2,000 feet of Hunte Parkway between Salt Creek Golf Club main entrance and Proctor
Valley Road in the Rolling Hills Ranch Planned Community ("Project Site"); and
Project, Application for Discretionary Approyals
WHEREAS, on May 3, 2006, a duly verified application was filed with the City of Chula
Vista Planning and Building Department, by Salt Creek Golf, LLC ("Applicant"),
requesting to rename the northern 2000 feet of Hunte Parkway Salt Creek Driye
("Project"); and
WHEREAS, a street name change may be allowed subject to recommendation of the
Planning Commission to the City Council pursuant to Chula Vista Municipal Code
Section 12.44; and
WHEREAS, the street name change affects only the northern 2,000 feet of Hunte
Parkway where the only assigned address is the subject Project Site; and
WHEREAS, the street name change has been reyiewed and endorsed by the Police and
Fire Departments and they have deteffi1ined that the proposed street name is clearly
different in the general vicinity, The City's GIS and existing street name signs will be
updated to reflect the change and ayoid confusion and uncertainty for emergency
vehicles; and
Prior Discretionary Approyals,
WHEREAS, the Project Site has been the subject matter of a Tentatiye Subdiyision Map
commonly known as Rolling Hills Ranch, Chula Vista Tract PCS-92-02 preyiously
adopted by City Council Resolution No, 16834 on October 6, 1992; and amended by City
Council Resolution No, 2000-190 on June 13,2000 and Resolution 2003-199 on May 13,
2003; and
Planning Commission Record on Applications
Resolution No, 2006-
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a noticed public hearing on the Project on
October 18, 2006, and after hearing staffs presentation and public testimony voted (X-X)
to recommend that the City Council approve the Project; and
City Council Record on Applications
WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for the public hearing on the Project,
and notice of the hearing, together with its purpose, was giyen by its publication in a
newspaper of general circulation in the City, its mailing to property owners within 500
feet ofthe exterior boundary of the Project, at least 10 days prior to the hearing; and
WHEREAS, the duly called and noticed public hearing on the Project was held before the
City Council of the City ofChula Vista on November 14 2006, in the Council Chambers,
276 Fourth Ayenue, at 6:00 p,m, to receive the recommendations of the Planning
Commission, and to hear public testimony with regard to the same; and
WHEREAS, after considering all reports, evidence and testimony presented at the public
hearing with respect to the Project, the City Council yoted (X-X) approving the Project as
requested by the Applicant to the City Council.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby find, determine and
resolve as follows:
II. PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD
The proceedings and all eyidence introduced before the Planning Commission at its
public hearing on the Project held on October 18, 2006 and the minutes and Resolution
resulting therefrom, are hereby incorporated into the record of this proceeding,
III, CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA AND INDEPENDENT
JUDGMENT OF CITY COUNCIL
The City Council has exercised their independent review and judgment and concurs with
the Planning Commission and the Enyironmental Reyiew Coordinator's determination
that there is no possibility that the actiyity may have a significant effect on the
enyironment; therefore, pursuant to Section 15061 (b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines
the activity is not subject to CEQA, Thus, no environmental review is necessary,
IV. INDEPENDENT JUDGEMENT OF CITY COUNCIL
The City Council finds that the proposed Project has been reyiewed in accordance with
the California Environmental Quality Act, and Environmental Reyiew Procedures of the
City of Chula Vista, and has determined that there is no possibility that the actiyity may
haye significant effect on the enyironment; therefore, pursuant to Section 15061 (b) (3) of
the State CEQA Guidelines the actiyity is not subject to CEQA,
V, NOW BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL hereby grants approval of
the Project subject to the following conditions:
2
Resolution No, 2006-
I, Applicant shall pay all cost associated with the fabrication and installation of all
street signs, including, but not limited to the following Hunte Parkway
intersections: I) Duncan Ranch Road; 2) EI Granada Road; 3) Proctor Valley
Road,
2, Ten days after the adoption of this Resolution approying the street name change,
the Applicant shall request a cost estimate to the City for the fabrication and
installation of the aboye-mentioned street name signs,
3, Thirty days after the adoption of this Resolution approying the street name
change, the Applicant shall pay in full to the City the cost of fabricating and
installing the signs at the above mentioned intersections and any other location
deemed necessary by the City Traffic Engineer.
4, This approyal shall be subject to any and all new, modified or deleted conditions
imposed after approyal of this permit to advance a legitimate goyernmental
interest related to health, safety or welfare which the City shall impose after
advance written notice to the Applicant and after the City has giyen to the
Applicant the right to be heard with regard thereto, Howeyer, 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 cannot,
in the normal operation of the use permitted, be expected to economically recover.
5, The Applicant shall defend, indemnify and hold hannless the City and its agents,
officers and employees, from any claim, action or proceedings against the City or
its agents, officers or employees, to attack, set aside, void or annul any approyal
by the City, including approval by its Planning Commission, City Councilor any
approval by its agents, officers or employees with regard to this street name
change, provided the City promptly notifies the Applicant of any claim, action or
proceeding and on the further conditions that the city fully cooperates in the
defense,
6, The Applicant shall execute this document by making a true copy of this Notice
of Decision and signing both this original notice and the copy on the lines
provided below, said execution indicating that the Applicant have each read,
understood and agreed to the conditions contained herein, and will implement
same. Upon execution, the true copy with original signatures shall be returned to
the Planning and Building Department. Failure to return the signed true copy of
this document within 30 days from the adoption of this Resolution shall indicate
the Applicant's desire that the Project be held in abeyance without approval.
Signature of property owner
Date
3
Resolution No, 2006-
Signature of Applicant or Authorized Representatiye
Date
VI. CONSEQUENSE OF FAILURE OF CONDITIONS
If any of the forgoing conditions fail to occur, or if they are, by their tenns, to be
implemented and maintained oyer 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 approyals herein granted, deny, or further condition all certificates
of occupancy issued under the authority of approvals herein granted, institute and
prosecute litigation to compel their compliance with the conditions or seek damages for
their violation, No yested right are gained by Applicant or successor in interest by the
City approval of this Resolution,
VII, 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 tenn, provision and condition herein stated; and
that in the event that anyone or more tenns, proyision, or conditions are detennined by a
Court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, this resolution
shall be deemed to be automatically revoked and of no further force and effect ab initio,
Presented by:
Approved as to fonn by:
Jim Sandoyal
Director of Planning & Building
Ann Moore
City Attorney
J:\Planning\Case Fiiesl-06 (FY OS-06)\PCMIPCM-06,1 O\ResoiutionslReso _ CC _I lI,doc
4
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT
/.1
Item: I
Meeting Date: 10/18/2006
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing: PCC-06-070 consideration of a Conditional Use Pennit to
construct and operate an unmanned wireless telecommunications facility at
4340 Main Street. The applicant is T-Mobile,
The applicant, T-mobile, submitted a Conditional Use Pennit (CUP) application to construct and
operate an unmanned wireless telecommunications facility (WTF) at 4340 Main Street (see Locator
Map, Attachment I), The project includes a 65-foot-high monopine supporting 12 panel antennas,
and a 336-square-foot CMU enclosure behind an existing building for four equipment cabinets, The
City ofChula Yista Municipal Code (CYMC) requires a CUP for WTFs that exceed the maximum
allowable height in a particular zone, The proposed 65-foot-high monopine is in the Neighborhood
Commercial (CNP) Zone, where the maximum allowable height is 35 height; therefore, a CUP is
required,
The Enyironmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has detennined that the proposed project
qualifies for a Class 3 (new construction or conversion of minor structures) categorical exemption
pursuant to Section 15303 ofthe State CEQA Guidelines, Thus, no further enyironmental review is
necessary,
RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution PCC-06-070
approving the proposed wireless telecommunications facility, subject to conditions contained therein,
DISCUSSION:
Project Background
T-Mobile is expanding its existing wireless network throughout San Diego County, The network
consists of transmission and receiving stations, also known as wireless telecommunications facilities
(WTFs) or cell sites, to provide wireless telecommunication services for residences and businesses,
as well as to provide wireless connections for emergency services, In an effort to provide adequate
wireless services to its customers in the vicinity of Interstate 805 and Main Street, T-Mobile is
proposing a WTF at 4340 Main Street.
Project Setting
The 2,5l-acre project site is called Fiesta Plaza, located south of Main Ayenue, east of Melrose
Avenue, It is a strip mall with a variety of small businesses, from a dry cleaner to a barber shop to a
99 Cents store, There is an Italian restaurant in a separate building, West ofthe site is a 7-11 store;
east of the site is a gas station, Multi-family residential is located to the south and to the north,
Page 2, Item:
Meeting Date: 10/18/2006
across Main Street. The WTF is proposed at the west end of the Fiesta Plaza parking lot where there
are several mature trees in the vicinity (see Attachment 5, Sheet T-I),
General Plan, Zoning and Land Use
The project site is zoned Neighborhood Commercial, Precise Plan (a Precise Plan was approyed for
the project site in 1978 -- see Attachment 8, City Council Resolution No, 9354 and Planning
Commission Resolution No, PCM-79-12) and has a General Plan Land Use Designation ofCR
(Commercial/Retail), The following table specifies the existing land uses surrounding the parcel:
General Plan
Zoning
Current Land Use
Site:
CR
Commercial Retail
CNP
Neighborhood Commercial
Precise Plan Modifier
Fiesta Plaza
Neighborhood Shopping
Center
North:
RMH
Residential
Medium-High
R3Pl2
Apartment ResidentiaVPrecise Plan
12 units/acre
Melrose Villas Condos
South:
RMH
Residential
Medium-High
R3G
Apartment Residential
Low Rise
Woodside Village Condos
East:
CV
Visitor Commercial
CVP
Visitor Commercial
Precise Plan
Gas Station
West:
CR
Commercial Retail
CNP
Neighborhood Commercial
Precise Plan Modifier
7-11
RMH
Residential
Medium-High
R3G
Apartment Residential
Low Rise
Vista de Otay
Apartments
Project Description
T -Mobile proposes to construct a WTF consisting of a 65-foot-high artificial tree, commonly known
as a monopine, designed to resemble a pine tree, The monopine would support 12 panel antennas,
and would be located at the west end of the parcel. The facility also includes a 6-foot-high, 336-
square-foot equipment enclosure, to be located behind an existing building, The CMU enclosure is
designed to emulate the architectural features ofthe existing building including color, material and
design (see Attachment 5),
On January 12, 2005, the Planning Commission approved a nearly identical proposal for Cingular
Wireless on this site (see Attachment 7, Planning Commission Resolution No, PCC-04-072),
Howeyer, Cingular chose not to construct the WTF, and their vested rights expired one year after the
Page 3, Item:
Meeting Date: 10/18/2006
project was approyed because it was not commenced during that time,
Public Input
Staff also receiyed a letter of opposition from the president of the Melrose Homeowners' Association
(see Attachment 6) "on behalf of 92 families liying in the Melrose Villas Condominiums," north of
Main Street. The concerns she cited were noise, congestion, fwnes ("There are too many issues on
our corner now") and health ("the verdict is still out on the physical effects of having electrical wires
overhead for hwnan beings"),
Staff also receiyed a phone call from a person who resides south of the project site, He said he is
opposed to the project because he belieyes the project would present health risks and reduce property
values in the area,
Staff Analysis
In accordance with CVMC 19,89, Wireless Telecommunications Facilities, wireless
telecommunications facilities are allowed in any zone; however, proposed WTF structures exceeding
the height limit within the particular zone require approyal of a Conditional Use Pennit by the
Planning Commission, The project site is zoned CNP, which has a maximum height limit of 35
feet. The 65-foot tall monopine exceeds the maximum height limit by 30 feet.
The monopine will be designed with a dense branch count with the branches extending a minimum
of24 feet from the face ofthe antennas, The antennas will be arranged at 60 feet and approximately
47 feet. (See photo simulations, Attachment 3,)
The proposed monopine and associated equipment will be built to comply with Section 19,89 ofthe
Chula Vista Municipal Code and all other City zoning and building regulations, The equipment
enclosure will match the colors and material of the existing building, and will be placed behind an
existing building,
Access to the site shall be kept at a minimum and conducted in a manner that does not negatively
impact nonnal business operations,
Pursuant to the Telecommunications Act of 1996, local government does not have the authority to
regulate the placement, construction and modification of wire less services facilities on the basis of
environmental effects or radio frequency emissions, provided such facilities comply with the state's
regulations concerning such emissions,
The proposed WTC was reyiewed by Jerrold T, Bushberg, Ph,D" DABMP, DABSNM of Health and
Medical Physics Consulting, who found it to be in full compliance with FCC RF public safety
standards, In addition, the FCC Wireless Telecommunications Bureau has issued Radio Station
Authorization,
Page 4, Item:
Meeting Date: 10/18/2006
Issues
Why is the proposed height the only technologically feasible option for providing service to the
area?
The proposed WTF is designed to provide wireless telephone coverage for customers in the vicinity
ofInterstate 805, Main Street and the surrounding neighborhood, The goal of it is to provide a signal
that would reach signals generated by other existing T-Mobile wireless facilities in the area (see
Radio Signal Coyerage Maps, Attachment 4), T-Mobile radio engineers have detennined that in
order to meet the goal, the proposed 65- foot tall monopine with 12 antennas are necessary to ensure
that the radio signals reach the other signals in the area to provide uninterrupted coverage, Also, this
taller facility with multiple antennas means fewer cellular facilities in the area,
Does the facility use the smallest practical devices and most efficient technology needed to achieve
the needs of the network?
The WTF will use a total of 12 panel antennas mounted on a 65- foot high monopine that will proyide
the necessary connections to operate the facility, This facility has been designed and located to meet
the current and anticipated needs of the T-Mobile network in the area, According to T-Mobile
engineers, this facility uses the smallest practical devices, and the most efficient technology
available, Additionally, a 336-square-foot equipment cabinet enclosure is proposed that will house
radio cabinets, electrical connections, telephone connections and battery back-up, The size is typical
and is average for projects of this magnitude,
Has the facility been designed utilizing stealth technology to be visually unobtrusive and to blend
with the surrounding environment?
The WTF includes an artificial pine tree, or monopine, to partially conceal the antennas, This stealth
design will be located near existing trees of similar height. The equipment enclosure is designed to
match the existing building and will be painted in a gold tone color to match the existing building,
This stealth design facility provides visual compatibility within the context ofthe existing buildings;
therefore, the project design complies with the City's design standards for facility stealthing,
Was there a good faith effort to co-locate the T-Mobile facility? Why not to co-locate? Were
additional co-location sites considered?
There is not an existing WTF co-location site in the vicinity that meets the applicant's coyerage
criteria, Therefore, the applicant inyestigated the possibility of locating the WTF in a residential
back yard on Orange Avenue, However, since the City's WTF ordinance discourages WTFs in
residential areas and the site did not meet T -Mobile's coverage criteria, the site was not pursued,
The proposed site meets the necessary criteria and will be built so that another carrier could co-locate
there in the future,
Page 5, Item:
Meeting Date: 10/18/2006
Is there an opportunity for co-location at the proposed facility?
T-Mobile has designed the monopine to accommodate co-location in the event that another carrier
needs to establish a WTF in the vicinity and at the height proyided by the structure,
Decision Maker Conflicts
Staff has reviewed the property holdings of the Planning Commissioners and has found no such
holdings within 500 feet of the property that is the subject of this action,
Conclusion
The T -Mobile WTF at the proposed location will provide a necessary service by improving wireless
telecommunication service to customers, including residents, businesses and emergency service
proyiders, It is a passive use and, therefore, will not adversely affect the policy and goals of the
General Plan, Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approye the project subject to the
conditions in the attached Planning Commission Resolution No, PCC-06-070 (Attachment 7),
Attachments
I, Locator Map
2, Planning Commission Resolution No, PCC-06-070
3, Photo Simulations
4, Radio Signal Coverage
5, Site Plan
6, Letter rrom Cheryl Witt, President of Melrose Viilas Homeowners' Association
7, Planning Commission Resolution No, PCC-04-0n
8, City Council Resolution No, 9354 and Planning Commission Resolution No, PCM-79-12
9. Disclosure Statement
J:IPianning\KIM\StafTReports\Planning CommissionIPCC-06,070, T-Mobiie WTF, 4340 Main SLdoc
c::5 []
~
cJID
'b~
CJ:r1)
GID
0
CITD 0
R3PI2
San
Diego
County
Public
RIP7 Housing
Melrose Villas Condominums
Main St
Fiesta Plaza
Shopping Center
CNP
Gas
Station
Holiday
Inn
R3G
~ IIIIUl1*11*1 rn~
~ II rlllllUJ1D1lrn~
Woodside Villa e Condomlnums
PROJECT
lOCATION
:3
)
j
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
"
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
C HULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
LOCATOR PROJECT ' PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
C9 APPLlCAN'P. T-Mobrle CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
PROJECT 4340 M ' St Proposing: Wireless facility consisting of a 65 foot monopine
ADDRESS: aln, and 336 Sq, Ft. equipment shelter,
SCALE: FILE NUMBER:
NORTH No Scale PCC-06-070 Related cases: None
J:\planning\carlos\rocators\pcc06070.cdr 09.27.06
ATTACHMENT 1
47f4CH/!.1t=4-IT L
RESOLUTION PCC-06-070
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING
COMMISSION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PCC-06-070,
A REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE AN UNMANNED
WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY AT 4340 MAIN
STREET. - T -MOBILE
WHEREAS, a duly yerified application for a Conditional Use Pennit (PCC-06-070) was
filed with the City of Chula Vista Planning and Building Department on March 17, 2006 by
PlanCom for T-Mobile Wireless ("Applicant/Permittee"); and
WHEREAS, Applicant/Pennittee requests permission to construct and operate an
unmanned wireless telecommunications facility (WTF) at 4340 Main Street in the Neighborhood
Commercial, Precise Plan (CNP) Zone ("Project Site"), The facility consists of one 65-foot-tall
monopine supporting a total of 12 panel antennas attached to three 9-foot-wide sectors, and four
equipment cabinets enclosed within a 336-square-foot CMU wall.
WHEREAS, the Environmental Reyiew Coordinator, in compliance with the
California Enyironmental Quality Act (CEQA) has concluded that this project is a Class 3
categorical exemption from environmental review (CEQA Section 15303, new construction or
conversion of minor structures); and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Building Department Director set the time and place for a
hearing on the Conditional Use Permit and notice of the hearing, together with its purpose, was
given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and its mailing to
property owners and residents within 500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the project site at
least 10 days prior to the hearing; and
WHEREAS, a duly called and noticed public hearing was held at the time and place as
advertised on October 18,2006, at 6:00 p,m, in the City Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue,
before the Planning Commission of the City of Chula Vista to receive the recommendation of
city staff and to hear public testimony with regard to the Project, and the hearing was thereafter
closed,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission approves
Conditional Use Pennit PCC-06-070 in accordance with the findings and subject to the
conditions contained in this Resolution,
FINDINGS:
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 WTF will proyide and improve wireless telecommunication services for customers in
the yicinity of Main Ayenue and Interstate 805, It will also improve coverage and
I
capacity for the residences, businesses and emergency service providers including sheriff,
police, fire and paramedics in this area of the city,
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,
The WTF is required to comply with ANSI standards for EMF emissions, If maintained
properly, it will comply with all FCC standards for radio frequency emissions and operate
quietly, emitting no fumes, smoke, dust, or objectionable odors, It has been designed and
located to minimize impacts to surrounding uses, The antennas will be mounted and
concealed within a 65-foot high artificial pine tree (monopine) and yisually screened
from view, The height of the antennas are justified at 60 feet because the monopine is
proposed on a depressed area on the site and must meet coyerage objectives,
3, That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions specified in
the Chula Vista Municipal Code for such use.
Granting of this Conditional Use Permit is conditioned to require the Applicant/Permittee
and Property Owner to fulfill conditions and to comply with all applicable regulations
and standards specified in the Chula Vista Municipal Code for such use, It generally
allows WTFs in all zoning districts with a Conditional Use Permit. The proposed use
will be built in such a way that complies with the Municipal Code's development criteria
and all other City zoning and building regulations,
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 governmental agency.
The granting of this Conditional Use Permit will not adversely affect the Chula Vista
General Plan in that the project is a passiye use and, therefore, will not adyersely affect
the policy and goals of the General Plan, The project will be built in a location with
minimal impact on the existing land use, and relatiyely minimal yisual impact to the area
because the antennas are largely concealed within a monopine, Monthly maintenance
yisits that the project may generate will not result in the intensification of the use of the
site and is an insignificant increase in the traffic for the neighborhood,
5, That T -Mobile has been legally approved by all applicable state and federal
authorities to provide wireless telecommunications in the City.
The proposed WTC will be in full compliance with FCC RF public safety standards,
according to Jerrold T, Bushberg, Ph,D" DABMP, DABSNM of Health and Medical
Physics Consulting, In addition, the FCC Wireless Telecommunications Bureau has
issued Radio Station Authorization,
6, That the proposed height of 65 feet is the only technologically feasible option for
providing service to this area.
2
T Mobile engineers have determined that in order to meet the goals of proyiding a signal
that would reach signals generated by other existing T-Mobile WTF's in the area, the
proposed 65-foot tall monopine with 12 antennas is necessary to ensure that the radio
signals reach the other signals in the area to proyide uninterrupted coverage,
Additionally, according to T-Mobile engineers, this facility uses the smallest practical
deyices, and the most efficient technology available,
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the Planning Commission of the City of Chula
Vista grants the Conditional Use Permit PCC-06-070 subject to the following conditions that
shall be satisfied by the ApplicantlPermittee and Property Owner.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
I, Prior to the issuance of any permits required by the City of Chula Vista for the use
of the Project Site in reliance upon this approval, the Applicant/Permittee shall
satisfy the following requirements:
A. Any disruption to existing irrigation and planting program shall be repaired and
replaced equally or better,
B. Prior to, or in conjunction with the issuance of each building permit, the
Applicant/Permittee shall pay all applicable fees, including permit processing,
deyelopment impact fees and any and all outstanding fees due to the City Of Chula
Vista,
C, The T-Mobile pedestal shall not be placed within the City's right-of-way, which
extends 2,5 feet from the back of sidewalk or 27,5 feet from the street centerline on
Melrose A venue,
D, Repair or replace two driyeway aprons on Main Street, and a section of driveway
apron on Melrose Avenue, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
E, Repair or replace sidewalk sections on Main Street and on Melrose Avenue that are
cracked, lifted or may cause a trip hazard, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
F, Repair or replace two sections of curb and gutter on Melrose Avenue, to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer.
G, Call Dig Alert (800-277-2600) 48 hours prior to any construction to locate and mark
out all water lines,
II. Prior to Final Inspections:
A, A final inspection of the Project Site shall be conducted by the Department of
Planning and Building to ensure that all conditions of approval haye been met and all
necessary permits have been obtained, Electrical power to the facility shall not be
3
enabled prior to the issuance of final, unless such power is needed to test the facility's
operation during construction and installation, If enabled for testing purposes,
electrical power shall be disabled once testing is complete,
III, The following on-going conditions shall apply to the Project Site as long as it relies
upon this approval:
A, Applicant/Permittee shall maintain the Project Site in accordance with the approved
plans dated July 26, 2006, which includes site plans, architectural elevations, and
photo simulations on file in the Planning Diyision, and the conditions contained in
this PCC-06-070,
B. Applicant/Pennittee shall comply with all sections of Title 19 (Zoning) of the Chula
Vista Municipal Code, and all other applicable City ordinances in effect at the time
of building permit issuance,
C. This Conditional Use Pennit is for an unmanned telecommunications facility,
Access to the Project Site shall be kept at a minimum and conducted in a manner
that does not negatiyely impact nonnal business operations,
D, This Conditional Use Permit authorizes only the use specified, Any new use or
modification/expansion of uses shall be subject to the reyiew and approyal of the
Zoning Administrator.
E, Applicant/Pennittee shall cooperate with telecommunications companies in co-
locating additional antennas on Project Site proyided any co-locators haye been
granted a Conditional Use Permit by the City for such use at the Project Site,
Pennittee shall exercise good faith in co-locating with other communications
companies and sharing the Project Site, provided such shared use does not give rise
to a substantial technicalleyel-or quality-of-service impairment of the permitted use
(as opposed to a competitiye conflict or financial burden), In the eyent a dispute
arises as to whether Permittee has exercised good faith in accommodating other
users, the City may require a third party technical study at the expense of either or
both the Pennittee and Applicant/Permittee for co-location,
F, Applicant/Permittee shall comply with ANSI standards for EMF emissions, Within
six (6) months of the Building Division final inspection of the project, the
Applicant/Permittee shall submit a project implementation report to the Director of
Planning and Building, which proYides cumulatiye field measurements of radio
frequency (EMF) power densities of all antennas installed at Project Site, The report
shall quantify the EMF emissions and compare the results with currently accepted
ANSI standards, The report shall be subject to review and approval by the Director
of Planning and Building for consistency with the project proposal report and the
accepted ANSI standards, If on reyiew the City in its discretion finds that the
Project does not meet ANSI standards, the City may revoke or modify this
Conditional Use Permit.
4
G, Applicant/Permittee shall ensure that the project does not cause localized
interference with reception of area teleyision or radio broadcasts, If on reyiew the
City, in its discretion, finds that the project interferes with such reception, the City
may reyoke or modify the Conditional Use Permit.
H. Applicant/Permittee shall comply with the Chula Vista Municipal Code (CVMC)
noise standards, Within three (3) months of the Building Diyision's final inspection,
the Permittee shall submit a report to the Director of Planning and Building that
proyides cumulative field measurements of facility noises, The report shall quantify
the levels and compare the results with current standards specified in the CVMC for
industrial uses, The report shall be subject to reyiew and approyal by the Director of
Planning and Building for consistency with the project proposal approved on
October 18, 2006 and CVMC noise standards, If, on reyiew, the City finds that the
project does not meet the CVMC noise standards, the City may revoke or modifY
the Conditional Use Permit.
I. Applicant/Permittee shall regularly maintain the antenna site and associated
equipment and remove all graffiti within 48 hours of being notified by the City or
others of its existence,
1. Applicant/Permittee shall allow the City to inspect the Project Site six months after
the issuance of building permits to check conformance with project plans and
conditions of approyal.
K, 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
related to health, safety or welfare which the City shall impose after advance
written notice to the Applicant/Permittee and after the City has giyen to the
Applicant/Permittee the right to be heard with regard thereto, Howeyer, the City, in
exercising this reserved right/condition, may not impose a substantial expense or
depriye Applicant/Permittee of a substantial revenue source, which the
Applicant/Permittee cannot, in the normal operation of the use permitted, be
expected to economically recover.
L. Applicant/Permittee shall indemnify, protect, defend and hold hannless City, its
Council members, officers, employees, agents and representatiyes, from and against
any and all liabilities, losses, damages, demands, claims and costs, including court
costs and attorneys' fees (collectiyely, "liabilities") incurred by the City arising,
directly or indirectly, from (a) City's approval and issuance of this Conditional Use
Permit, (b) City's approval or issuance of any other permit or action, whether
discretionary or non-discretionary, in connection with the use contemplated herein,
Applicant/Permittee shall acknowledge their agreement to this provision by
executing a copy of this Conditional Use Permit where indicated, below,
Applicant's/Permittee's compliance with this proyision is an express condition of
5
this Conditional Use Permit and this proyision shall be binding on any and all of
Applicant's/Permittee's successors and assigns,
M, This Permit shall expire fiye (5) years after the date of its approval. After five (5)
years, the Applicant/Permittee may request an extension of this Conditional Use
Permit by the Zoning Administrator. The Zoning Administrator shall review this
Conditional Use Permit for compliance with the conditions of approyal and shall
determine, in consultation with the Applicant/Permittee, whether the project needs
to be modified from its original approval as part of the extension approyal.
N, This Conditional Use Permit shall become void and ineffective if not utilized or
extended within one year from the date of its approval in accordance with Section
19,14,260 of the Municipal Code, Failure to comply with any conditions of
approval shall cause this Permit to be reviewed by the City for additional conditions
or revocation,
0, Any yiolations of the terms and conditions of this Permit may result in the
imposition of ciyil or criminal penalties and/or the reyocation or modification of
this Permit,
p, If any of the foregoing conditions fail to occur, or if they are, by their terms, to be
implemented and maintained oyer time, if any of such conditions fail to be so
implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have the right
to revoke or modify all approvals granted, deny, or further condition issuance of all
future building permits, deny, revoke, or further condition all finals issued under the
authority of approvals granted in the resolution, institute and prosecute litigation to
compel their compliance with the conditions or seek damages for their yiolation,
Applicant/Permittee or a successor in interest gains no vested rights by the City's
approyal of this Conditional Use Permit.
Q, Upon cessation of the business operations and use of the antennas by the
Applicant/Permittee, the Applicant/Permittee has 90 days to submit a substitute user
to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning and Building Department and/or
remoye the antermas and accessory structure/equipment and return the project site
back to its original condition,
IV, EXECUTION AND RECORDATION OF RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL
A, Prior to the issuance of any permits required by the City of Chula Vista for the use
of the project site in reliance on this approval, the Applicant/Permittee and Property
Owner shall execute this document in duplicate by signing this original and all
duplicate originals on the lines proyided below, said execution indicating that the
Applicant/Permittee and Property Owner have each read, understand and agree to
the conditions contained herein, and will implement the same, Upon execution, one
original document shall be recorded with the County Recorder's Office of the
County of San Diego, at the sole expense of the Applicant/Permittee, and an
6
original duplicate, signed by the Applicant/Permittee and Property Owner and
stamped by County Recorder's Office, shall be returned to the Project Planner in
the Planning and Building Department. Failure to return the signed and stamped
duplicate original of this document within thirty days of the date of its approval
shall indicate the Applicant's/Permittee's or Property Owner's desire that the
project be held in abeyance without approval.
Signature of Property Owner
Date
Signature of Applicant/Permittee
Date
V. CONSEQUENCE OF FAILURE OF CONDITIONS
A. If any of the foregoing conditions fail to occur, or if they are, by their terms, to be
implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail to be so
implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have the right
to reyoke or modify all approyals herein granted, deny, or further condition
issuance of all future building permits, deny, revoke, or further condition all finals
issued under the authority of approyals 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 permit may also result in the
imposition of ciyil or criminal penalties,
VI. INVALIDITY; AUTOMATIC REVOCATION
A. It is the intention of the Planning Commission that its adoption of this Resolution is
dependent upon the enforceability of each and every term, proyision 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 inyalid, illegal
or unenforceable, this Resolution and the Permit shall be deemed to be
automatically revoked and of no further force and effect.
7
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA,
CALIFORNIA, this 18th day of October, 2006 by the following Yote, to-wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Bryan Felber, Chair
ATTEST:
Diana Vargas, Secretary
J:\Planning\KIM\Resolutions\Planning Commission\PCC-06-070, T-Mobile, 4340 Main St..doc
8
.
.
RESOLUTION NO. PCC-04-072
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT, PCC-04-0n, TO CONSTRUCT AN UNMANNED
WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY FOR
CINGULAR WIRELESS AT 4340 MAIN STREET,
WHEREAS, the area of land owned by the Gueyal Investments, L.P" more commonly
known as Fiesta Plaza, is the subject matter of this resolution, and is represented in Exhibit "A"
attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; and for the purpose of general description
is 2,51 acres of property located at 4340 Main Street ("Project Site"); and,
WHEREAS, on June 14,2004, a duly verified application for a Conditional Use Pennit
(PCC-04-072) was filed with the City of Chula Vista Planning Division by Cingular Wireless
("Applicant"); and,
WHEREAS, Applicant requests penmSSlOn to construct an unmanned wireless
telecommunications facility consisting of one 60-foot-high monopine to support 12 antenna arrays
and place a 336 square foot equipment shelter behind an existing building on-site ("Project"); and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and has detern1ined that the project
qualifies for a Class 3 categorical exemption pursuant to Section 15303 of the State CEQA
Guidelines and, thus, no further environmental reyiew is necessary; and,
WHEREAS, a duly called and noticed public hearing was held at the time and place as
advertised on January 12, 2005, at 6:00 pm in the City Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue,
before the Plalming Commission of the City ofChula Vista to receive the recommendation of City
staff and to hear public testimony with regard to the Project, and said hearing was thereafter closed,
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission does hereby find,
detem1ine and resolve as follows:
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 proposed use wi]] proyide and improve wireless telecommunication services in the yicinity of
Main Street and the 805 Freeway, The project wi]] also improve coyerage and capacity for
business users and personal use, and emergency service providers including sheriff, police, fire, and
paramedics,
2-8
ATTACHMENT 7
.
.
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.
The proposed telecommunications facility has been designed and located to minimize impacts to
surrounding uses, The proposed 60-foot high monopine will be situated at the west end of the
property near Melrose A yenue, The equipment shelter will be located behind the existing building
near the south property line, The Project, if maintaincd properly, will comply with all FCC
standards for radio rrequency emissions and operate quietly, emitting no fumes, smoke, dust, or
objectionab1e odors,
3, That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions specified in the code
for such use.
Granting of this conditional use pennit is conditioned to require the pennittee and property owner
to fulfill conditions and to comply with all applicable regulations and standards specified in the
Municipal Code for such use, including the City's Wireless Ordinance, That the Ordinance
generally allows wireless facilities in all zoning districts with a conditional use pern1it. The
proposed use will be built in such a way that complies with the Wireless Ordinance's deyelopment
criteria and all other City zoning and building regulations, Furthennore, the conditions of this
pern1it are approximately in proportion to the nature and extent of the impact created by the project
in that the conditions imposed are directly related to, and of a nature and scope related to the size
and impact of the project.
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,
The granting of this conditional use pennit will not adversely affect the Chula Vista General Plan in
that said Project is a passive usc and, therefore will not adversely affect the policy and goals of the
General Plan, The proposed use will be built in a location with minimal impact on the existing
land use, and relatiyely no visual impact to the area due to the stealth design of the monopine and
its inclusion among the existing yegetation, Monthly maintenance visits that the project may
generate will not result in the intensification of the use of the site and is an insignificant increase in
the traffic for the neighborhood,
BE IT FUTHER RESOLVED THAT the Planning Commission oCthe City ofChu1a Vista
hereby grants Conditional Use Pennit PCC-04-072 subject to the following conditions, whereby the
applicant and/property owner, prior to issuance of building pennits shall:
A, Obtain a pern1it to install a back-up generator for emergency power. The generator specifications
and location shall be reviewed and approved by the Fire Marshall.
B, Limits of trenching shall stay outside of existing planter area as shown along the narrow most-
southern planter area of the site plan, Provide a separate landscape plan that shows existing
landscaping and proposed restoration of planter areas, A note shall be placed on the landscape plan
2-9
Page 2
stating that any landscape planter area being displaced by this work shall be restored in equal or
better manner. All landscape plan submittals shall satisfy the requirements ofthe City Landscape
Manual.
C, The project shall comply with the following codes: 2001 CalifomiaBuilding Code; 2001 California
Electrical Code; and provide a one-hour rated wall for the equipment shelter. The project shall
meet Seismic zone 4; wind speed 70 mph exposure C requirements, Also submit a soils report and
structural calculations.
D, A graffiti resistant treatment shall be specified for the monopine trunk and equipment shelter
surfaces, This shall be noted on any building and wall plans and shall be reviewed and approved by
the Director of Planning and Building prior to issuance of building permits, Additionally, the
project shall conform to Sections 9,20,055 and 9,20,035 of the CVMC regarding graffiti control.
II. Prior to Final Inspections:
A, A final inspection of the facility shall be conducted by the Department of Planning and Building to
ensure that all conditions of approval have been met and all necessary permits haye been obtained,
Electrical power to the facility shall not be enabled prior to issuance of a final occupancy permit,
unless such power is needed to test the facility's operation during construction and installation, If
enabled for testing purposes, electrical power shall be disabled once testing is complete,
B, Construct and maintain the project as shown on the plans dated December 23, 2004,
C. Provide a minimum of one 2A I OBC fire extinguisher on the equipment shelter.
D, Electrical service connections and the locations of related components such as meters and
transformers shall be coordinated with the sites electrical utility provider and a City ofChula Vista
Electrician prior to issuance of building permit. Disruption of existing site improvements and
facilities, including site landscaping improvements, resuJting ITom the installation of said electrical
services shall be replaced/repaired in kind subject to the appropriate City approval(s),
E, Remove and replace broken sidewalk/driveway along roadway ITontages, Remove existing
driveways and replace with ChuJa Vista Construction Standard CVCS-l driveways in order to
provide pedestrian access route in compliance with ADA standards (i,e" maximum 2% sidewalk
cross-slope and 4 feet-wide sidewalk through driveway area),
F, Implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) to prevent pollution of storm drainage systems
during and after construction,
Ill. Continuous Conditions:
A, Remain in compliance with ANSI standards for EMF emissions, Within six (6) months of the
Building Division final inspection of the project, the Applicant shall submit a project
implementation report to the Director of Planning and Building which provides cumulative field
Page 3
2-10
.
.
measurements of radio frequency (EMF) power densities of all antelmas installed at subject site,
The report shall quantify the EMF emissions and compare the results with currently accepted ANSI
standards, Said report shall be subject to reyiew and approval by the Director of Planning and
Building for consistency with the project proposal report and the accepted ANSI standards, If on
review the City in its discretion finds that the Project does not meet ANSI standards, the City may
revoke or modify this conditional use pel1T1it.
B, Agree to cooperate with other telecommunication companies in co-locating additional antelmas on
subject property, provided said co-locaters have received a conditional use pel1T1it for such use at
said site trom the City, The Applicant shall exercise good faith in co-locating with other
communications companies and sharing the subject property, provided such shared use does not
give rise to a substantial technical level or quality of service impail1T1ent of the pel1T1itted use (as
opposed to a competitive conflict or financial burden), In the event a dispute arises as to whether
the Applicant has exercised good faith in accommodating other users, the City may require a third
party technical study at the expense of either or both the Applicant and the potential user.
C, Ensure that the project does not cause localized interference with reception of area television or
radio broadcasts, including local radio frequencies used by local school districts and water districts,
If on review the City, in its discretion, finds that the project interferes with such reception, the City
may revoke or modify the conditional use pel1T1it.
D, Comply with the City's Municipal Code noise standards, Within three (3) months of the Building
Division's final inspection, the applicant shall submit a report to the Director of Planning and
Building that provides cumulative field measurements of facility noises, The report shall quantify
the levels and compare the results with current standards specified in the Municipal Code for
industrial uses, Said report shall be subject to review and approval by the Director of Planning and
Building for consistency with the project proposal dated July 30,2003, and Municipal Code noise
standards, If on review the City finds that the project does not meet the Municipal Code noise
standards, the City may revoke or modify the pel1T1it.
E, Allow the site to be inspected six months subsequent to the issuance of building pemlits to check
confol1T1ance with project plans and conditions of approval.
F, This conditional use pennit shall be subject to any and all new, modified or deleted conditions
imposed after approval of this pem1it to adyance a legitimate goyemmental interest related to
health, safety or welfare which the City shall impose after advance written notice to the Pel1T1ittee
and after the City has given to the Pel1T1ittee 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
Pem1ittee of a substantial revenue source which the Pennittee cannot, in the nom1al operation of
the use pem1itted, be expected to economically recoyer.
G, This pemlit shall expire five (5) years after the date of its approval by the Planning Commission,
After this period, the Zoning Administrator shall review this conditional use pemlit for compliance
with the conditions of approval, and shal] detennine, in consultation with the applicant, whether the
project shall be modified from its original approval.
2-11
Page 4
H, This conditional use permit shall become yoid and ineffective ifnot utilized or extended within the
time allotted in Section 19,14,260 of the Municipal Code,
1. If the telecommunications facility is no longer needed at the approved location, the Applicant shall
remove the facility from the site and restore the site to its pre-exiting condition,
J, 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 (collectiyely, "liabilities") incurred by the City arising, directly or indirectly, from (a) City's
approyal and issuance of this conditional use permit, (b) City's approyal or issuance of any other
permit or action, whether discretionary or non-discretionary, in connection with the use
contemplated herein, and (c) applicant's installation and operation of the facility permitted hereby,
including, without limitation, any and all liabilities arising from the emission by the facility of
electromagnetic fields or other energy waves or emissions, 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 proyision 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,
IV, EXECUTION AND RECORDATION OF RESOLUTION OF APPRO V AL
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 wil1 implement same, Upon execution, this
document shall be recorded with the County Clerk ofthe 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 ofrecordation 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
of 4340 Main Street
Date
--
Signature of Applicant
Date
V. CONSEQUENCE OF FAILURE OF CONDITIONS
If any ofthe foregoing conditions fail to occur, or if they are, by their tenl1s, to be implemented and
maintained over time, ifany of such conditions fail to be so implemented and maintained according
2-12
Page 5
.
.
to their terms, the City shall have the right to revoke or modifY all approvals herein granted, deny,
or further condition issuance of all future building permits, deny, revoke, or further condition all
certificates of occupancy issued under the authority of approyals 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 permit may also result in the imposition of civil
or crimina] penalties,
VI. 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 eyent that anyone or more temls, proyisions or conditions are determined by a Court of
competent jurisdiction to be inyalid, illegal or unenforceable, this resolution and the permit shall be
deemed to be automatical1y revoked and of no further force and effect ab initio,
APPROVED BY THE PLANNJNG COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this 12th
day of January 2005, by the fol1owing vote, to-wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Marco p, Cortez, Chair
A TrEST:
Diana Vargas, Secretary
J\Planning\Michael\PCC.04-072 Rcso
2-13
Page 6
~
'.
..
( \
/\ ~q,
11rlvised 11-15-7/f
RESOLUTION NO. 9354
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CIIULA
VISTA APPROVING PRECISE PLAN FOR SHOPPING CENTER AND
FAST FOOD RESTAURANT AT SOUTHEAST CORNER OF OTAY
VALLEY ROAD AND HELROSE AVENUE
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby
resolve as follows:
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista has
heretofore received the recommendation of the Planning Commission,
as contained in Resolution No. P~I-79-l2, Rdopted on the 11th day
of October, 1978, setting forth the precise plan for the develop-
ment of a shopping center and fast food restaurant at the southeast
corner of Otay Valley Road and ~!elrose Avenue, and
--
mIEREAS, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista has
heretofore held a pUblic hearing to consider said precise plan on
November 7, 1978 and has taken testimony and heard evidence thereon,
and
WHEREAS, the environmental concerns of the proposed pro-
ject were previously considered as part of the rezoning request.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula Vista does hereby approve the precise plan for
a shopping center and fast food restaurant at the southeast corner
of Otay Valley Road and Helrose, Avenue in accordance with Planning
Commission Resolution No. PCM-79-12; provided, further, that the
site location of the fast food'restaurant shall be subject to
staff approval.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
(~ k;'l
~.&:7 7
George D. Lindberg, City
Isl D. J. Peterson
D. J. Peterson, Director of
Planning
ADOPTED AND APPROVED by
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA; this 7th
by the following vote, to-wit:
the CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF
day of Nrn,pmhpr , 1978._,
AYES: Councilmen Cox, Hyde. Gillow
NAYES: Councilmen Eqdahl. Scott
ABSENT: Councilmen None
ATTESThl.Jennie M. Fulasz
/"'/ will 'T' fu!dp
, l~ayor of the C:i ty of Chula Vista
ATTACHMENT 8
, ,
~ -. i
RESOLUTION NO. PCM-79-12
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNING COMmSSION RECOMr'1ENDING TlJ THE
CITY COUNCIL THE APPROVAL OF A PRECISE PLAN FOR DEVELOPMENT OF
A 2.26 ACRE SHOPPING CENTER AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF OTAY
VALLEY ROAD AND MELROSE AVENUE
WHEREAS, in conjunction with an application for change of zone from
C-V-P to C-N-P, Dawat Corporation submitted a precise plan on September 15,
1978 for the development of a 2.26 acre shopping center at the southeast
corner of Otay Valley Road and Melrose Avenue, and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission, at a duly advertised pUblic hearing
held at 7:00 p.m., October 11, 1978 in the Council Chamber, City Hall, 276 Fourth
Avenue, considered the precise plan as submitted, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission found that in accordance with the Negative
Declaration on IS-79-16 and the findings stated therein, this development will have
n~ significant adverse environmental impact, and adopted the Negative Declaration.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Planning Commission finds as
fo 11 ows :
a. That such plan 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.
The adjoining residential uses to the south will be separated from the
commercial use by carports, driveway and landscaping and should not be
affected.
b. That such plan satisfies the principles of the application of the "P" MDdifying
District as set forth in Section 19.46.041.
A grove of eucalyptus trees has been retained in the design and a planned
signing program will be required.
c. That any exceptions granted which deviate from the underlying zoning require-
ments shall be warranted only when necessary to meet the purpose and application
of the P Precise Plan Modifying District.
With the conditions applied the proposed use meets the requirements of the
Code.
.
. .."
"
, .
'.
.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Planning Commission recommends that
the City Council approve the precise plan for a shopping center and fast food
restaurant at the southeast corner of Otay Valley Road and Melrose Avenue,
, subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall prepare and submit a planned signing program upon
application for a bUilding permit.
2. Architectural plans for the proposed fast food building shall be submitted
in a later phase and be architecturally coordinated with the shopping
center buildings.
3. The roof line of building #1 shall be carried out on all elevations. The
building shall be offset frDm the. east property line to allow for the
roof extension.
4. Building #1 shall be set back from Otay Valley Road to coincide with the
setback established for the adjacent restaurant planned ,to the east
(approximately 31 feet from the ft'ont property 1 ine).
5. The driveway approaches on Melrose Avenue shall be perpendicular to the
street.
6. The driveways on 11e1rose Avenue serving the residential and commercial
uses which are adjacent to each other shall have a common driveway
approach by having a rounded nose Qf the median within the property
1 ine.
PASSED AND APPROVED by the City Planning Commission of Chula Vista, California
this 11th day of October, 1978 by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES:
R. Johnson, O'Neill, G. Johnson;, Pressutti and Williams
None
NOES:
ABSENT: Commissioner Smith
~7~ C>
A ting Chairman
ATTEST:
~\(&-
-.-
~-.............-...-;:
---
-----
f' I .1 n n in\!,
!(
! ,; , ~
my (n
CHUIA VI~TA
Disclosure Statement
Pursu;,ml l'; i.:(J~w_.il f-:\"di,;y -11)-;-(11. prl{jr ~o :~,')}' .JU ()I"' !..-;J "Ji;(l,:,['
Piann,(q CLJ'-n!1,IS~;In!" f-Jn{~ ali ,~:tll~! offiu:ii bcc;:n<> nj ~nl:" Cltv ;'1 :::,I~7.l,c 1(;:11
nterests oayrYlents u; Gl'"',pCl.CJi' ;::onlr!buhJf':i (!~~r .;; C:!y ;-:t :::r~
rT',ust hCe dISf;.:o';ecl
List Up:: THli
Cr), "r\r;:,r::l c:~J
(;1 'jlll)I'<~<;I'I':> 'J:-::lvln~ d !1:'I;;";~l<ji ,1"1('1-"--
D\\" 'f.:'r, dppll(;(1n! cn-11rat::L:1 $.JbCO'llr;;cI
;,1
~--~
---.-
I: ~"1'': ~)~I':>U'1 idE'~11:flC'(j i~',JrSLant L {'J dD,Y'Je ~; ;;:;\-'T,.",r,-1i
a $200;] il1'''f:S!"~'fWt in thE! ~)L,sil'ess {curp()r;itIO'l"I;~Jrh!<;,I-lq I ::I':.il\
-----~-
---~._~-~-
:1
If a'l~ ;_WISO:;' InC:iUBd purSui.::ulID '1:1 i:t)O\lC 1<:. ,~; -1'-1-,_1"1'[
::;er\,ii~q as .Ji~ector :)f Inc~ rH1n-proflt :)rq;:niLaLc (Y ,J~', Ir:j~';\,--'
--~-
"
PI{~asc< ',1f:ntify eVt;ry :)ei",OI1_ InCLJfPng ;li"iy' ;:j~~e'-\lS ~"~::I"):~",:l"
;jss;gn(~rl to ~('!Dre~;t:'~! 'i:)~ befty:;; t~H; (::1'1' in H1i~~ nlsl1p-
-------
----
.------
5,
his iH'Y person' a$Soc:i;Jll~d w,tn this r;Tlh:tct !1(:3J dny r; ,'H
\/ sla dS II ~c~;::1e-s Ie tiJi::., C~'lt:',jcl 'u;hir 1'1(: P,~$[ 12 rr.JIIHy:; '.-'f'
--~----
-,--------~..-
If Y8S ;j:iefjy ue::;uJbc' thc' :.;)L.Jr~ :if t:-e f'i:kt'j;.:;a:'ilt:'r::,';I!
----------
n _~
I) l' par I m l~ n t
[ 'H ",'1' j)!I:'wr,1 1": 1.\\ """i 11:.:
APPLICATION APPENDIX B
-;l:_~)j!~ rJl",uclcnary ~-j::t:CJ;1 ~)).. tile COLICI!
:1~';:>OS"j(8 of cerla'1 nwr:msrdp or financi8;
"11';:! 1)<2 fiied. iI'-!;; fo :CJwing 1'lformatiori
,-,~JI. .'-, j"H':.....ujecl '_Jr L'1I: :l:)P~IGlh'"lr'"~ or 1he
.'!:i:-c'
-~~--
0-- 1";1 Ini~ : ,'Hnp~; of aH ir',divluu,:hs wlfh
---~
-------.-
,'--;1;
L_ii' if,L'-;( :st ti-~e nar'-',es of any perSOr
'}, 1'"L";t";,r of tile ('uS!,
._,-----
~,. II dependent corlrFlclors you :i8ve
:C~j! 1-'fF; ,....iH' ;j,-j official~' of !'"'Ie City 01 C-ILtl3.
"'JI-"1_
--------
c," ; U".JC I~', now; C0'1f~8Ct
----~-
---~---
G, rJ;1VF:' you --''j8ue a (;:)nlrl!;Lllon 01 m(Ji'~ Ulan S25U 'Nltcu- th~, :-L~ ':.f :,~'-' '.''c: I'!XI 1l1"Ylths to a c,.Jrrent nH':!mber uf I'll"
CrL a \/stf.'J City Cr.)Lr-,C ,') Nu L Yes f 'y'es v",'f<d' -. ;'.:I'f ;1" ...(,~ .)~::
---------------
, t, ',..I"
I.
---------------
'I ),'.'1
ATTACHMENT 9
~\f?-
-.-
"""""'.....:;;.........~
----
----
PI" n n i 11 g
&
H t~
dill g
I) C' P ii r I rn (' n t
[I, I! :1:'1('1'1 [' -n, (H,...i 11h
un 01
CHULA VI~TA
APPliCATION APPENDIX B
Disclosure Statement - Page 2
Have- you ~r()vl(h:~d '''ncrf'~ t'1a[' SJ40 (U' ;:Jr' ili::!llI ,-j1 H-II,',,!if II
past tw!':!I'v'08 (U) r.,:,nH's') ,'T'lI-S Inc!ude5 :)f~l'lg ,} sour:_;t~
Ye:;;. No)(.
~f: : (-\1 ,';t 11"-,(: (:'::11)' Df Ct':'...dd Vista ,f) t'le
~f-nv 'c rc'tire (i le~jal debt. gift, loan. elc.}
;f Yn:-" '....l1i~'l ~;ff:ciai~- 3'lC .....'1at W-;,c.. rlll-: 'l<JIIJ;,_,:A t!:.'.~ ~::I'I':,I,'"i"
i}Jij}D&_
c_
--~-_.-
D;':It~
"
P'"Int or
------_._~--
typo. IL"
,r -:.)-ltfc;cl-:;r':Appll:;,~nt
Pers{y IS 'CHA;[-i'd dc, .:.'in,;, ir-,jlv'c11..;';Ii t 'rn .:,'~ I-dl1;;o:;:
orqc],"'lzation,o; :)or;:~t;on 8state, trus!, rel,;elver, S'r"-'(jl\"':;:':dr,. '"'
fJollliC"''11 ;;umj:\.'isiol' -Or" any othf'~r S-1rouP Of '~;onlb '\3ti,Yi ;--,::11
",:1;":: is::'> )(;1.81,(;[', 50C18: C:L:), fratf~rnaJ
.':" - >:;v1ll Lily '1lU'^ilcipality dlstncl or nthw
()ffi~;,31 ""ICIW;es :ul l<i'ml L::,i1bU !~I Ma~'C:I' (~, ~J')LiI '1 .'--''''!'-'
C0IT1!lliS3'0n or ;;o:nmilteto Or ii-ii':' Cit'", pnl;-"Jloyce, ::.1 sti::H:' ~,;- '."1
'CI '>:''''J01IS:.,,~,,:'!:-;r. f..,tpm1)I"~r 0' a ~)Oard
! '-Id:
.,.",.
" ;,'
" I