HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Rpts. /2005/03/30
AGENDA
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Chula Vista, California
6:00 p.m.
Wednesday, March 30, 2005
Public Services Building
Council Chambers
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA
CALL TO ORDER: Cortes_ Felber _ O'Neill_ Hom
Madrid /-IJII_
ROLL CALUMOTIONS TO EXCUSE
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE and MOMENT OF SILENCE
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Opportunity for members of the public to speak to the Planning Commission
on any subject matter within the Commission's jurisdiction but not an item on
today's agenda. Each speaker's presentation may not exceed three minutes.
1. PUBLIC HEARING:
ZAV 05-13; Consideration of a Zone Variance
application for a residence located at 163 G Street
requesting to waive the two-car garage requirement
for an addition greater than 50% of the existing
dwelling unit floor area.
Project Manager: Lynette Tessitore-Lopez, Associate
Planner
2. PUBLIC HEARING:
PCC 05-18; Consideration of a Conditional Use
Permit for a Circle K located at 98 Bonita Road,
which includes the demolition of the existing car
wash and two of the existing fueling dispensers and
the construction of a new 2,916 sf convenience
store, which along with gasoline sales, will operate
on a 24 hour basis and include the sale of beer and
wine. Fiedler Group.
Project Manager: Jeff Steichen, Associate Planner
Planning Commission
- 2 -
March 30, 2005
3. PUBLIC HEARING:
PCC 05-33; Consideration of a Conditional Use
Permit to allow the establishment of a weekly
Farmer's Market at 1360 Eastlake Parkway in the
Walmart parking lot.
Project Manager: Ann Pease, Associate Planner
4. PUBLIC HEARING:
PCS 04-09; Consideration of a Tentative
Subdivision Map known as Sycamore Estates,
Chula Vista Tract 04-09 located at 1655 Sycamore
Drive. - Norton Construction Company.
Project Manager: Rich Zumwalt, Associate Planner
DIRECTOR'S REPORT:
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
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.
.=#= L
~(f?
~~
~~
Memorandum
CIlY OF
CHUlA VISTA
Deparhn.en1: of Planning and Building
Date:
March 17, 2005
To:
Planning Commission
Via:
Nancy Lytle; Assistant Planning Director ...fA/.
Lynnette Tessitore-Lopez, Associate Planner i~7'~.
From:
Subject:
ZA V-05-13; 163 "G" Street
On Wednesday February 9, 2005 staff brought forth to Planning CommissionZA V-05-13, a request
for a variance to waive the two car garage requirement of the Single Family Residential Zone
associated with a proposed 644 square foot addition, to an existing 917 square foot residence, with a
recommendation of denial. In an effort to allow the applicant to assess other options, the Planning
Commission continued the item to the March 23rd, 2005 meeting. Since such time, staff has
discussed available options with the applicant. The applicant has informed staffthat she intends to
proceed with a pre-fabricated two-car garage manufactured by Tuff Shed. Since the tuff shed
(affixed to a permanent foundation) will meet the requirement of a two-car garage, a variance is no
longer necessary. Though staff has received written correspondence from the applicant that she
intends to proceed with the pre-fab garage, the applicant, despite staffs request to do so, has not
provided a written withdrawal of the variance. As it is necessary to proceed with an action on this
case and because the applicant has advised staff that she intends to proceed with an option that would
not require a variance, staff reiterates the previous recommendation for denial of this variance
request.
RESOLUTION NO. ZA V -05-13
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING
COMMISSION TO DENY A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE, ZA V-05-13,
TO WAIVE THE TWO-CAR GARAGE REQUIREMENT OF THE R-1,
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONE. APPLICANT: MARISA
RASCON, 163 "G" STREET.
WHEREAS, on January 12,2005 a duly verified application for a variance was
filed with the City of Chula Vista Planning Division by Marisa Rascon; and
WHEREAS, the lot currently consists of single-family residence without a
garage; and
WHEREAS, Chula Vista Municipal Code Section 19.24.190 and 19.22.170
states that additions to legal existing dwelling units that constitute an increase of fifty
percent or more of the floor area of the original building's square footage, the existing
building, including the addition, shall comply with the current zoning code standards; and
WHEREAS, Chula Vista Municipal Code Section 19.62.180 requires that all
dwelling units in the R-1 Zone shall have constructed on the same lot, a two-car enclosed
garage containing a minimum of 400 square feet and minimum dimension of 20 feet; and
WHEREAS, a legal non-conforming situation already exists due to the absence
of any garage on the site; and
WHEREAS, Chula Vista Municipal Code Section 19.64.050 a legal
nonconforming use shall not be enlarged, extended or reconstructed, substituted or
structurally altered, except in conformity with the order of a duly constituted authority,
unless the use is changed to a use permitted in the zone in which such building or
premises is located; and
WHEREAS, per Chula Vista Code Section 19.14.050 the Zoning Administrator
referred said matter to the Planning Commission for a decision; and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed
project for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and has
determined that the project qualifies for a Class 1 (existing facilities) categorical
exemption pursuant to Section 15301 of the State CEQA Guidelines. Thus, no further
environmental review is necessary; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Director set the time and place for a hearing on said
request for a variance 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 and residents 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
February 9, 2005 at 6:00 p.m. in Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the
Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, the hearing was opened and continued until March 30th, 2005; and
WHEREAS, after considering all reports, evidence, and testimony present at
said public hearing with respect to the variance application, the Planning Commission
voted to deny the variance application:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission does
hereby deny ZA V -05-13 in accordance with the findings set forth below
1. That a hardship particular to the property and not created by any act of the owner
exists. Said hardship may include practical difficulties in developing for the needs
of the owner consistent with the regulations of the zone; but in this context,
personal, family, or financial difficulties, loss of prospective profits, and neighboring
violations are not hardships justifying a variance. Further, a previous variance can
never have set a precedent, for each case must be considered only on its individual
merits.
There is no hardship or special circumstance associated with the applicant's property.
The parcel exceeds the minimum lot size and dimension requirements of the underlying
zone, and is similar in configuration to surrounding parcels. The 7,405 square foot parcel
provides ample access and room in an appropriate location for the required garage to be
provided. The applicant's preference not to provide the two-car garage does not alleviate
the owner from conforming to the regulations of the zone as the two-car garage can be
detached and can be oriented to allow for the proposed addition with little if any impact
to the existing single family residence.
2. That such a variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial
property rights possessed by other properties in the same zoning districts and in the
same vicinity, and that a variance, if granted would not constitute a special privilege
of the recipient not enjoyed by his neighbors.
The variance request is not necessary for the enjoyment of substantial property rights
enjoyed by surrounding properties. Surrounding parcels are very similar to the applicant's
in terms of lot size, dimension, and topography, and generally have two car garages.
There is no hardship associated with the applicant's property that necessitates the
granting of a variance from the two-car garage requirement. . Therefore, in this case,
granting a variance from the two-car garage requirement would result in the granting of a
special privilege to the applicant that is not enjoyed by surrounding property owners in a
similar situation and, would allow an expansion of a single family residence without a
garage in the R-l, Single-Family Residential Zone even though the property and zoning
laws would allow for the construction of one.
3. That the authorizing of such variance will not be of substantial detriment to the
adjacent property and will not materially impair the purposes of this chapter or
public interest.
The variance would have a detrimental impact upon surrounding parcels. Allowing non-
conforming uses within the City is detrimental to the orderly development of the city and
adverse to the general welfare of persons and property. The two-car garage requirement
is to provide adequate off-street parking so as to alleviate the congestion on residential
streets and space for the necessary storage of materials in an enclosure. An enclosed two-
car garage is necessary to protect the general welfare of surrounding parcels by
preventing the establishment of parking spaces in an open parking lot situation, which is
inappropriate for residential development, and would prevent the open and disorderly
display of materials and items that would be stored in enclosures to avoid an unsightly
appearance.
4. That the granting of such variance will not adversely affect the General Plan of the
City or the adopted plan of any government agency.
The granting of this variance would adversely affect the General Plan of the City of
Chula Vista. A variance from the two-car garage requirement would be incompatible
with Goal 3 Objective 11 of the General Plan which calls for development that".. .meets
or exceeds a standard of high quality planning and design." A two-car garage is
necessary and essential to the residential character of a neighborhood by ensuring that
open areas remain accessible and visual impacts are minimized.
DENIED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA,
CALIFORNIA, this 30th day of March, 2005, by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Marco P. Cortes, Chair
ATTEST:
Diana Vargas, Secretary
]:\Planning\case Files\-05 (FY 04-05)\zA V\public Hearing\zA V -05-13 163 G Street\Redlined Reso.doc
:tF<.
~ \ rt..
~-:
~~.~
ClIY Of
CHULA VISTA
DepartIn.en:t of Plan.n.in.a- an.d Bu.ildin.a-
Date:
March 30, 2005
Subject:
Chair Cortes and members of the Commission
Jeff Steichen, Associate Planner, Deparbnent of Planning & Bnildin#
Follow-up information regarding PCC 05-018, 98 Bonita Road
To:
From:
Background:
At the meeting of March 16, 2004, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the above referenced
project. Based upon public input and discussion by the Commission, the item was continued for 1 week
with the request that staff provide additional information regarding 1) adding additional specific conditions
of approval regarding the sale of beer and wine consistent with past approvals elsewhere in the City; 2)
surrounding businesses in the area which sell beer and wine and their hours of operation.
Staff response:
Staffhas confirmed that the Commission has included certain specific conditions for other CUP's. We have,
therefore, prepared a revised draft strike-out/underline Planning Commission Resolution containing
additional conditions regarding the operation ofthe convenience store, specifically regarding the sale of beer
and wine.
Staff has researched the surrounding businesses including the Chevron station located across the street from
the project site at 95 Bonita Road. Staffhas confirmed that this Chevron station does have a mini-mart and a
license for the off premise sale of beer and wine. This, along with the adjacent liquor store at 88 Bonita
Road constitute the two businesses in the vicinity selling beer and wine for off-premise consumption. Based
upon information obtained for the State's Alcoholic Beverage Control, there are no additional restrictions on
the hours for sale of beer and wine other than their standard prohibition on such sales between the hours of
2 am to 6 pm. There is no sale of beer and wine at the Shell gas station located at 100 Bonita Road.
RESOLUTION NO. PCC-05-018
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING
COMMISSION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR
THE DEMOLITION OF AN EXISTING CAR WASH AND
REPLACEMENT WITH A CONVENIENCE STORE WHICH WILL
INCLUDE A 24 HOUR OPERATION AND THE SALE OF BEER
AND WINE.
WHEREAS, on October 20, 2004, Fiedler Group ("Applicant"), filed a duly
verified Conditional Use Permit application to allow for the replacement of an existing car
wash with a convenience store which includes 24 hour operation and the sale of beer and
wine at 98 Bonita Road ("Project Site") in the CN (Neighborhood Commercial, Precise Plan)
zone; and
WHEREAS, The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed
project for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has
determined that the proposed project qualifies for a Class 1 categorical exemption pursuant to
Section 15301 ofthe State CEQA guidelines; and
WHEREAS, the Director of Planning and Building set the time and place for a
public hearing on said Conditional Use Permit application and notice of said hearing,
together with its purpose, was given by its mailing to property owners and residents within
500 feet of the exterior boundaries ofthe property at least 10 days prior to the hearing; and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely
March 16, 2005, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the
Planning Commission and said hearing was thereafter closed; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission does
hereby approve Conditional Use Permit PCC-05-18 in accordance with the findings and
subject to the conditions contained in this Resolution.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 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 proposed facility will provide the community a needed service by supplying daily
automotive needs, convenience needs, ford and beverages. The provision of these goods
and services in close proximity to home and work contributes to the general well being of
the neighborhood and community by allowing residents to complete necessary, routing
errands without the stress and traffic generation of driving longer distances.
Page 2
March 30, 2005
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.
Combining the back of the building for the convenience store with a masonry wall along
the south elevation will provide a physical barrier between the operation of the
convenience store at the apartments to the south. As a result, there will be no negative
impacts in terms of noise or loitering during the night-time hours when the store is still in
operation to the residents to the south. On site pedestrian safety will be enhanced by the
requirement of the applicant to provide a paved walkway between the gas pump islands
and the entrance to the convenience store. Replacement of the car wash facility with the
convenience store will provide for additional landscape planter areas to the east and west
of the store. In addition, the project has been conditioned to require that the existing
plantings located in three landscape planters along the frontage of Bonita Road and
Bonita Glen Drive be replaced with new plantings.
Allowing beer and wine sales is typical for a convenience store of this type and will not
negatively impact the surrounding neighborhood due to the restriction on hours of sales
of beer and wine mandated by the State.
3. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions specified in
the code for such use.
The proposed use is located in a Neighborhood Commercial Zone which allows the
operation of a gas station and convenience store selling alcoholic beverages after securing
a conditional use permit. The facility will comply with required development and
operating regulations including setbacks, height and parking requirements contained in
the Chula Vista Municipal Code.
4. That the granting of the Conditional Use Permit will not adversely affect the
General Plan of the City, the Montgomery Specific Plan or the adopted plan of any
government agency.
The use, as proposed, has been found to be consistent with the General Plan and other
applicable policies in that convenience stores are allowed by right within the
Neighborhood Commercial designation on the subject property. The project as
conditioned, which is to allow said store to operate on a 24 hour basis and include the
sale of beer and wine, is in compliance with the applicable codes and regulations.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CONDITIONS
I. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the Applicant shall:
Page 3
March 30, 2005
A. Satisfy all conditions of approval listed in Section I of the attached Design Review
Committee Notice of Decision (see Notice of Decision, Attachment 3).
B. Applicant shall provide proof of license from California Department of Alcoholic
Beverage Control (ABC) for the off premise sale of beer and wine.
II. Prior to occupancy, Applicant shall comply with the following conditions:
A. Satisfy all condition of approval listed in Section II of the attached Design Review
Committee Notice of Decision.
B. Contact Richard Preuss at Chula Vista Police Department (619/691-5127) to schedule a
security inspection and comply with all findings of said inspection. Employee training in
emergency procedures shall be conducted to the satisfaction of the Police Department
prior to occupancy.
C. Implement the security recommendation of the Crime Prevention Unit of the Police
Department, including access control, surveillance detection, and police response and
ongoing training of management and employees in security procedures and crime
prevention. Implementation of these recommendations shall coincide with the
commencement of operations.
III. Continuous Conditions:
A. Comply with all on-going conditions listed in Section III of the attached Design review
Committee Notice of Decision.
B. The applicant shall keep the entire site free from litter and other debris, and shall
maintain all landscaped areas on site in healthy and weed-free condition.
C. No outside sales (other than gasoline sales) or storage of any item and no outside work
of any nature shall be permitted on the premises at any time.
D. Applicant shall comply with all regulations of the California Department of Alcoholic
Beverage Control (ABC) regarding the sale of off premise beer and wine. Any violations
of such regulations, including restrictions on hours of sale, may result in review of this
Conditional Use Permit for modification or revocation.
E. The Applicant shall implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) to prevent the
pollution of storm water conveyance systems, both during and after construction.
Permanent storm water requirements shall be incorporated into the project design, and
shall be shown on the plans. Any construction and non-structural BMPs requirements
that cannot be shown graphically must be either noted or stapled on the plans.
F. All roof top equipment shall be screened.
Page 4
March 30, 2005
G. The City ofChula Vista requires that all new development and significant redevelopment
projects comply with the requirements of the NPDES Municipal Permit, Order No. 2001-
01. According to said Permit, all projects falling under the Priority Development Project
Categories are required to comply with the Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plans
(SUSMP) and Numeric Sizing Criteria.
H. Ensure that the storage, use and handling of flammable and combustible liquids are in
accordance with Article 79, 2901.3 and 2902.2 of the Fire Code.
1. Implement Source Control Best Management Practices (BMPs) during the post-
construction of the project. Such BPMs include, but are not limited to:
. Frequent sweeping of outdoor areas
. Providing spill response materials near all fueling stations
. Employee training on storm water regulations and procedures
. Prohibiting power washing or hosing of equipment or outdoor areas into storm
drain systems
. Providing cover and secondary containment for hazardous materials
J. Periodically clean and replace the filter inserts and oil-absorbing media.
K. Trash bins shall have watertight lids and the lids should be closed when not in use.
L. The Conditional Use Permit approval shall not waive compliance with all sections of
Title 19 of the Municipal Code, and all other applicable City Ordinances in effect at the
time of building permit issuance. In particular, all signs on-site shall comply with
Chapter 19.60 ofthe Chula Vista Municipal Code.
M. The restroom in the store shall be accessible to the public during hours of operation.
N. All temporary signs shall be in compliance with Chapter 19.60 ofCVMC.
O. The conditions of approval for this Conditional Use Permit approval shall be applied to
the subject property until such time approval is modified or revoked, and the existence of
this approval with conditions shall be recorded with the title of the property. Prior to the
issuance of the building permits for the proposed unit, the Applicant/property owner shall
provide the Planning Division with a recorded copy of said document.
P. Any deviation fromthe above noted conditions of approval shall require the approval of a
modified Special Use Permit approval by the Director of Planning and Building.
Q. The Applicant/owner shall and does hereby agree to indemnify, protect, defend and hold
harmless City, its City Council members, officers, employees and representatives, from
and against any and all liabilities, losses, damages, demands, claims and costs, including
court costs and attorney's fess (collectively, liabilities) incurred by the City arising,
Page 5
March 30, 2005
directly or indirectly, from (a) City's approval and issuance of this Special 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, 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 Special Use Permit where indicated below.
Applicant's/operator's compliance with this provision is an express condition of this
Special Use Permit and this provision shall be binding on any and all of
applicant's/operator's successors and assigns.
R. This Planning Commission approval shall become void and ineffective if not utilized
within one year from the effective date thereof, in accordance with Section 19.14.260 of
the Municipal Code. Failure to comply with any conditions of approval shall cause this
permit to be reviewed by the City for additional conditions or revocation.
S. This Conditional Use 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 Permittee and after the City has given to the Permittee the right to be
heard with regard thereto. However, the City, in exercising this reserved right/condition,
may not impose a substantial expense or deprive the Permittee of a substantial revenue
source which the Permittee cannot, in the normal operation of the use permitted, be
expected to economically recover.
T. There shall be no video games associated with or a part of the operation.
U. There shall be no advertising or promotional signs for beer and wine visible from the
exterior of the store.
V. Any outside pay phone shall be incapable of receiving incoming calls. Should such a pay
phone attract loitering or otherwise be overused by iuveniles, it shall be removed at the
sole discretion and direction of the Zoning Administrator in consultation with the Police
Department.
W. Hours of operation for the sale of beer and wine within the food mart shall be limited to
6:00 a.m. to 2 a.m.
X. No floor displays of beer or wine shall be allowed. Locks shall be installed and
maintained on cooler doors where alcohol will be displayed. Coolers and other display
areas holding alcohol shall be locked between the hours of2:00 a.m. to 6:00 a.m.
y. At the discretion of the Police Department, the applicant shall provide a video
surveillance security system for the food mart. The camera system, if required by the
Police Department, shall be monitored by the food mart staff, be recorded (with time and
date stamp). The recorded video shall be kept for a 120-day period should it be needed
Page 6
March 30, 2005
for an investigation or court hearing. In the event the City determines that security
problems exist on the site, the conditions of approval of this permit may be amended to
require the provision of additional security measures or other additional conditions to
mitigate security problems.
z. The conditional use permit shall be approved for a period of one year following the
issuance of a certificate of occupancy, At the end of that time, the permit shall be
reviewed to determine whether, in the opinion ofthe City, the sale of alcoholic beverages
has exacerbated the {>roblems with minors loitering or drinking in the area or has led to an
increase in the number of reported crimes, in which case the permit shall be reconsidered
by the Planning Commission for possible inclusion of additional conditions or for
revocation.
IV. EXECUTION AND RECORDATION OF RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL
The Property Owner and Applicant shall execute this document signing on the lines
provided below, said execution indicating that the property owner and applicant have
each read, understood and agreed to the conditions contained herein, and will implement
same. Upon execution, this document shall be recorded with the County Clerk of the
County of San Diego, at the sole expense of the property owner and/or applicant, and a
signed, stamped copy returned to the City's Planning and Building Department. Failure
to return the signed and stamped copy of this recorded document within 10 days of
recordation shall indicate the property owner/applicant's desire that the project, and the
corresponding application for building permits and/or a business license, be held in
abeyance without approval.
Signature of Property Owner
Date
Signature of Applicant
Date
Page 7
March 30, 2005
V. CONSEQUENCE OF FAILURE OF CONDITIONS
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
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 approvals herein granted, institute and prosecute litigation to
compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their violation. Failure
to satisfy the conditions of this permit may also result in the imposition of civil or
criminal 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 event that anyone or more terms, provisions or conditions are
determined by a Court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable,
this resolution and the permit shall be deemed to be automatically revoked and of no
further force and effect ab initio.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT a copy of this resolution shall be transmitted to
the City Clerk.
APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA,
CALIFORNIA, this 30th day of March, 2005, by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Marco Polo Cortes, Chair
ATTEST:
Diana Vargas, Secretary
] :\Planning\case files\PCC\PCC-05-O 18\Resolutions
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT
Item:
Meeting Date: 3/16/2005
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing: PCC-05-018 consideration ofa Conditional Use Permit for a
Circle K located at 98 Bonita Road, which includes the demolition of the
existing car wash and two of the existing fueling dispensers and the
construction of a new 2,916 s.f. convenience store which, along with gasoline
sales, will operate on a 24 hour basis and include the sale of beer and wine.
Fiedler Group.
The Applicant, The Fiedler Group, submitted a request for a conditional use permit in order to
demolish the existing car wash and two of the existing fueling dispensers and construct a new 2,916
square foot convenience store which, along with gasoline sales, will operate on a 24 hour basis and
include the sale of beer and wine.
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act and has determined that the proposed project qualifies for a
Class 1 categorical exemption pursuant to section 15301 of the State CEQA guidelines. Thus, no
further environmental review is necessary
RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution PCC-05-18 to allow
the 24 hour operation and beer and wine sales for a new 2,916 square foot convenience store, subject
to the conditions contained therein.
DISCUSSION:
1. Project Background
On December 13, 1995, the Planning Commission approved a conditional use permit (PCC 96-04)
for the demolition of an existing building containing automotive service bays, and the construction of
a new cashier booth, automated car wash, an additional gas island (two additional pumps), and 24-
hour operations for gasoline sales only for an existing service station located on the project site.
Hours of operation for the car wash were restricted to the hours of7:00 am to 8:00 p.m. In order to
mitigate against potential noise impacts from the car wash, a condition of approval required a
masonry wall be constructed at a height of between 7 and 9.5 feet and extend approximately 20 feet
in an easterly and westerly direction from the car wash building, along the south property line.
2. Project Setting
The proj ect site is a relatively level 20,606 s.f. parcel located at the southwest comer of Bonita Road
and Bonita Glen Drive, west ofI-805. The site currently contains 6 gas pumps, an existing cashiers
booth and food mart, and an automated car wash to the rear of the site.
Page 2 I Item:
Meeting Date: 3-16-2005
3. General Plan, Zoning and Land Use
The project is zoned CN (Neighborhood Commercial), and has a General Plan Land Use Designation
of Commercial. The following table specifies the existing land uses surrounding the parcel:
General Plan
Zoning
Current Land Use
Site:
Retail Commercial
CN, Neighborhood
Commercial Service Station with car wash
CVP (Visitor Commercial) Restaurant, Hotel
R3D (Multi-Family Residential) Apartments
CCP (Central Commercial) Service Station
CNP (Neighborhood
Commercial Commercial Center
North:
South:
East:
West:
Visitor Commercial
High Density Res.
Retail Commercial
Retail Commercial
4. Project Description
The project includes the demolition ofthe existing car wash and two ofthe existing fuel dispensers
and the construction of a new 2,916 s.f. convenience store which, along with gasoline sales, will
operate on a 24 hour basis and include the sale of beer and wine.
Design of the project was approved by the Design Review Committee on February 21, 2005.
5. Project Data Table
Assessor's Parcel Number: 570-131-05
Current Zoning: CNP (Neighborhood Commercial,
Precise Plan)
Land Use Designation: Commercial Retail
Lot Area: 20,606 sq. ft.
REQUIRED/ALLOWED: PROPOSED:
Parking: 15 spaces Standard Spaces: 14
(1 per each 200 square feet) Compact Spaces: 0
Disabled: 1
10% of the total is allowed for compact spaces. Total: 15
Lot Coverage: none 14.15%
Setback:
Front Yard: 15 feet (for building) 105 feet (to building)
Rear Yard: o feet 0
Side Yard: o feet 22 feet
Building Height: 2 Y2 stories; 35 feet maximum 18 feet (bldg); 24 feet (tower)
Page 3 I Item:
Meeting Date: 3-16-2005
6. Staff Analysis
The site is surrounded on three sides (north, east and west) by existing commercial
development. South of the site (across a 10 foot wide access easement to the commercial
site) is an existing apartment complex. The proposed convenience store will be located
along the southerly property line at the same location as the existing automated car wash.
Similarly to the car wash, the south elevation ofthe convenience store will be a continuation
of the masonry wall located along the south elevation and will reflect the height of the
building for that portion which serves as the back. The resultant wall will be similar to that
which currently exists on the site. In addition, unlike the car wash, the convenience store will
be fully enclosed. The fact that the back of the building will be at the rear of the property
line will also 1) limit the ability for deliveries via the back of the building and 2) limit the
ability of patrons or others to congregate behind the store. Thus, even though a 24 hour
operation is proposed as well as the sale of beer and wine, there will be less impact to the
residents to the south than from the existing car wash facility.
A condition of approval by the DRC on February 21, 2005 was that new plantings be
installed in the three existing landscape planters located along the frontage of Bonita Road
and Bonita Glen Drive. In addition, new landscape islands will be installed west and east of
the new convenience store, due to additional area provided by the removal of the driveway
entrance and exit for the car wash. This additional landscaping will bring the site up to
current code standards in terms oflandscaping requirements. This, in combination with the
requirement to install new plantings in the existing landscape planters will provide site
upgrades from what is currently existing.
On site activities currently accommodated by the existing cashier and food mart, which will
be removed to allow room for required additional parking, will be accommodated in the new
convenience store facility. Pedestrian access to the convenience store, which will replace the
need for a separate cashier booth, will be facilitated by a condition of approval to provide an
enhanced walkway design from the gas pump islands to the entrance to the convenience
store.
Conclusion
The project is generally consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan and associated
documents. Based on the preceding information in this report, staff recommends the Planning
Commission approve PCC 05-018 subject to the conditions listed in the attached Resolution.
Page 4 I Item:
Meeting Date: 3-16-2005
Attachments
1. Locator Map
2. Resolution PCC-05-0 18
3. DRC 05-25 Notice of Decision
4. Disclosure Statement
5. Project Plans
J :\Planning\Case Files\-05 (FY 04-05)\PCC\PCC-05-018\Public Hearing\Staff ReportslPC
ATTACH~IENT 1
~
..:---,
",
"
"
~~~",\ II / \ \ ---,
""", "\', I t-.,~\~
"',.")('i1Y~
\\ ~\ ~
'" '... " \ / / \
'...., \\.' "\>~ / / 1/' I'
' .\~~
/'80" \. \ ~
S~~ ~ ...
~~ ~ \
"!J.- '-- _.
..
PROJECT
LOCATION
\~,
- \
. \, -:... '
\ Ii
I ,\
.
/
.
~~-;
,~.
,,,,'>-:' '....:,,-
".-
(.~~~
cf(/:,( -
,,~ .'"
c;, ..~
7~"
'G~
LOCATOR
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT
Item: 3
Meeting Date: 3-30-2005
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing: Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit, PCC-05-033,
for Eastlake Educational Foundation to conduct a Certified Farmers'
Market in the parking lot of Walmart at 1360 Eastlake Parkway, Chula
Vista.
The Eastlake Educational Foundation is represented by Ms. Rhonda Valencie, who is requesting
permission to conduct a weekly Farmers' Market in the parking lot ofWal-Mart at 1360 Eastlake
Parkway (see Locator). The project will consist of the establishment of a certified market to be
held every Friday afternoon from 3:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. in the spring and summer, and 3:00
p.m. to 6:00 p.m. in the fall and winter, and involving at least twenty-one (21) certified farmers
as well as sixteen (16) food and miscellaneous craft vendors. Also proposed are the hosting of
seasonal activities, such as music, craft demonstrations and childrens' activities.
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the proposed project
qualifies for a Class 1 categorical exemption pursuant to Section 15301 (Existing Facilities) of
the State CEQA Guidelines. Thus no further environmental review is necessary.
BACKGROUND:
On April 20, 2004, Ordinance No. 2958 was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council.
This Ordinance amended Section 19.54.020 and added Section 19.58.148 to the Chula Vista
Municipal Code in order to allow "Certified farmers' market(s)". These are described in the
Municipal Code as retail sales operations, generally outdoors, selling predominantly fresh
produce and/or flowers which are subject to the certification regulations of the State of California
Department of Agriculture, Weights and Measures and the County of San Diego's Department of
Environmental Health.
Certified Farmers' Markets are required to operate no more than once a week, with the day and
hours of operation established by the Conditional Use Permit. The sales area must maintain a
25-foot setback from the street and must be located on a paved surface. The sales area is
required to be kept in a neat and well-kept manner, with restrooms, emergency access, waste
management provisions and on- and off-site security and traffic controls. Approval of a planned
sign program is required, complying with the provisions ofCVMC 19.60.050 and temporary
signs identifying the market and its hours may only be displayed for a maximum of four hours
Page 2 , Item:
Meeting Date: 3-30-2005
prior to the event and one hour following, in addition to during the event.
The initial term of a Certified Farmers' Market is specified to be for a period not to exceed one
year, with any extension or renewal of the Conditional Use Permit being heard and acted upon by
the City Council, unless the City Council expressly delegates such authority to the Planning
Commission.
Proceeds from this market will benefit the Eastlake Educational Foundation (EEF), whose
mission is to support the six schools in the Eastlake Community. It is anticipated that the funds
raised will support the highest quality public education in Eastlake community schools..
RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution PCC-05-033,
recommending that the City Council approve the proposed establishment of a once-weekly
Farmers' Market in the parking lot of the Wal-Mart on Eastlake Parkway for an initial one-year
period with authority for subsequent extensions delegated to the Planning Commission.
DISCUSSION:
1. Site Characteristics
The project site is located at 1360 Eastlake Parkway, currently the location of an existing
new shopping center. The proposed site of the activity is the southeastern section ofthe
parking lot which is closest to Eastlake Parkway. The area to be utilized will provide
space for the stalls to be set up, as well as the rides and parking for customers. Ample
parking is anticipated, since the site was intended for a much larger store footprint, and
the required number of spaces are designated for handicapped use.
2. General Plan. Zoning and Land Use
The project is located in the Planned Community (P-C) zone, and has a General Plan
Land Use Designation of Commercial. The following table specifies the types of land
uses surrounding the project site:
General Plan
Zoning
Current Land Use
Site:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Commercial P-C
Commercial P-C
Commercial P-C
Multi Family Residential P-C
Single Family Residential P-C
Shopping center
Shopping Center
Shopping Center
Townhomes
Single Family Residential
Page 3 , Item:
Meeting Date: 3-30-2005
3. Proposal
Ms. Rhonda Valencia proposes to operate a Farmers' Market every Friday afternoon from
3:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. during Spring and Summer, and 3:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. during fall
and winter, regardless of weather conditions, on the Wal-Mart site, occupying the parking
lot in the southeast area ofthe site. Her intent is to provide at least twenty-one vendors
who are Certified Agricultural Producers, and although she has firm commitments only
from the five she has worked with in the past, she expects to have at least sixteen more
confirmed by her opening day in late May. At least another sixteen vendors will
merchandise prepared foods and arts and crafts, live music will be performed
occasionally, and there will be children's activities. The applicant plans to begin
operations in May of2005, and it is understood that any extension or renewal of this use
permit must be heard and acted upon by the City Council. Complete plans of this
proposal have been submitted (see Site Plan of Attachment-.J.
Market setup will be temporary, and removal of stalls and other equipment will be
accomplished at the end ofthe day's events. The stalls and activities will be situated
entirely on paved surfaces, and all trash, including greenwaste and recycling, will be
removed from the site by each operator, although trash bins will be provided for
customers, to be emptied by Wal-Mart custodial staff at the close of the market.
The market operators will be required to maintain the sales area in as neat and clean a
manner as possible at all times. On the day of the event, eight small temporary signs are
proposed to be used. They will be put out prior to the event and retrieved in the evening.
ANALYSIS:
In accordance with Sections 19.58.148 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, the City Council,
subsequent to its receipt of recommendations thereon from the Planning Commission, has the
authority to approve a Conditional Use Permit in order for a Farmers' Market to operate.
This large shopping center is located on the western edge of the Eastlake Greens residential area.
The space proposed for this Farmers' Market is the southwest area of the site, closest to Eastlake
Parkway before it intersects with Olympic Parkway.
The site plan indicates that the market is a relatively small endeavor, when compared to the size
of the shopping center. Because the Wal-Mart site is slated for future expansion, there is more
parking available than is likely to be used, and the activity is reasonably-well removed from
neighboring businesses. Traffic associated with this Farmers' Market will probably not exceed
the amount usually associated with shopping activities for a commercial center of this size.
Page 4 I Item:
Meeting Date: 3-30-2005
The establishment of a farmers' market at this location will provide an increased amount of
necessary and desirable service to the residents and businesses of Chula Vista. There is another
farmers' market proposed for the campus of Southwestern College, but that one is on Saturday
morning rather than Friday afternoon and sufficient distance from this market that they should
not be considered competitive.
Farmers' markets are a proven "sustainable" agricultural and consumer practice. "Sustainability"
is an enormous public policy advantage to the community. Another advantage is that these
markets become a place to meet friends and neighbors, thereby building community. They have
been found to help local retailers thrive in locations where markets exist, since people will come
out to shop and combine trips.
It has been stated by the applicant that the majority of the produce is of a variety and freshness
not typically available in retail stores. Local growers tend to practice organic farming, resulting
in fewer pesticides and fertilizers that cause pollution. Local Farmers' Markets are a method of
reducing environmental costs by avoiding the price of transport of agricultural products from
further away, common when shopping at chain grocery stores. The structures will be entirely
temporary on this site and an adequate effort has been made to limit the potential effects on
passers-by and neighbors of the property.
The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan of the city. This proposed market will help
accommodate the needs of residents in this portion of the City, and it is a short term, interim use
which will therefore not adversely affect the policy and goals of the General Plan.
Issuance of a Conditional Use Permit., as conditioned, will be in substantial compliance with
Section 19.58.148 of the Municipal Code.
CONCLUSION:
Staff believes that this request meets the findings required for its granting and recommends
approval of the proposed conditional use permit in accordance with the attached Planning
Commission Resolution.
Attachments
1. Locator Map
2.. Planning Commission Resolution PCC-05-022
3. Project Site Plans
4. Disclosure Statement
J :\Planning\ANN\PCC\Staff Reports\PCC05033 .SttRpt.doc
RESOLUTION NO. PCC-05-033
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
PCC-05-033 TO CONDUCT A FARMERS' MARKET IN THE
PARKING LOT OF W ALMART AT 1360 EASTLAKE PARKWAY,
CHULA VISTA.- EASTLAKE EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION
I. RECITALS
WHEREAS, on January 10, 2005 a duly verified application for a Conditional Use
Permit (PCC-05-033) was filed with the City of Chula Vista Planning and Building
Department by Eastlake Educational Foundation ("Applicant") requesting permission to
conduct a Farmers' Market consisting of at least 37 vendors, 21 of which will be
Certified Agricultural Producers on the property ofWal-Mart on the Project Site
("Project"); and
A. Project Site
WHEREAS, the area ofland owned by Wal-Mart is the subject matter of this Resolution,
and is represented in Exhibit "A", copies of which are on file in the Office of the City
Clerk, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; and for the purpose of
general description is approximately two acres of property on the southeastern edge of
the overall Wal-Mart site at 1360 Eastlake Parkway, with a land use designation of
Freeway Commercial (FC) and a zone of Planned Community (P-C) ("Project Site");
and
B. Project; Application for Discretionary Approval
WHEREAS, on January 10,2005, the Applicant filed an application with the City of
Chula Vista Planning and Building Department requesting approval of a Conditional Use
Permit to allow the operation of a Certified Farmers' Market consisting of at least 37
vendors, or no more than 45 vendors without approval by the Planning Division of a site
plan, 21 of which will be Certified Agricultural Producers on the southeastern edge of the
overall Wal-Mart site at 1360 Eastlake Parkway; and
C. Prior Discretionary Approval and Recommendations
WHEREAS, the application for a Conditional Use Permit has received the following
discretionary approvals and recommendations: Planning Commission recommendation
of approval of Conditional Use Permit PCC-05-033 to operate a Certified Farmers'
Market at 1360 Eastlake Parkway on March 30, 2005; and
D. Planning Commission Record of Applications
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on the Project
on March 30,2005, and after hearing staffs presentation and public testimony voted
Resolution No. 2005-
Page 2 of
to recommend that the City Council approve the Project, in accordance with the
findings and subject to the conditions listed below; and
E. Council Record of Applications
WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for the public hearing on the Project's
Conditional Use Permit application; and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose,
was given by its publication in a newsaper of general circulation in the City, its mailing
to property owners and tenants residing within 1,000 feet of the exterior boundary ofthe
Project, at least ten 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 April 12, 2005, in the Council Chambers, 276
Fourth Avenue, at 6:00 p.m. to receive the recommendations ofthe Planning
Commission, and to hear public testimony with regard to the same.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City ofChula
Vista does hereby find, determine and resolve as follows:
II PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD
The proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning Commission at their
public hearing on the Project held on March 23, 2005, and the minutes and Resolution
resulting therefrom, are hereby incorporated into the record of this proceeding.
III. COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reveiwed the proposed project for
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and has determined that the
proposed project qualifies for a Class 1 (Existing Facilities) categorical exemption
pursuant to Section 15301 ofthe State CEQA Guidelines. Thus no further environmental
review or documentation is necessary.
IV. INDEPENDENT JUDGEMENT OF CITY COUNCIL
The City Council has exercised their independent review and judgement and concurs with
the Environmental Review Coordinator's determination that the Project qualifies for a
Class 1 (Existing Facilities) categorical exemption pursuant to Section 15301 ofthe State
CEQA Guidelines.
V. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS
The City Council of the City ofChula Vista does hereby make the findings required by
the City's rules and regulations for the issuance of Conditional Use Permits, as herein
below set forth, and sets forth, thereunder, the evidentiary basis that permits the stated
finding to be made.
Resolution No. 2005-
Page 3 of
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 at this location is necessary and desirable from the perspective that
providing for the sale of fresh produce and flowers to residents of Eastlake is a positive
feature which will contribute to the general well-being of both the neighborhood and the
community at large.
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 use will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare to the
general public, or be injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity. The market
will only operate on Friday afternoons, and will provide little impact on traffic or
parking. Provisions have been made in this application which will ameliorate traffic
concerns, provide for trash accumulation and restrooms and will be of a temporary
nature, with removal of stalls and equipment accomplished at the end of the day's events.
3. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions specified
in the code for such use.
The proposed use shall comply with the conditions of Conditional Use Permit, PCC-05-
033 as recommended by the Planning Commission, and shall be in accordance with all
applicable regulations and standards specified in the Municipal Code for such use. The
proposed use is also in accordance with Municipal Code Section 19.58.148, which now
allows Certified Farmers' Markets. Furthermore, the conditions ofthis permit are
approximately in proportion to the nature and extent of the impact created by the
proposed development 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 Permit will not adversely affect the Chula Vista
General Plan in that said Project is in the Commercial land use designation, which
anticipates the gathering of people for shopping and other activities such as this Certified
Farmers' Market. Thus the granting of this Conditional Use Permit is in keeping with the
intent of the General Plan of the City.
VI TERMS OF GRANT OF PERMIT
The City Council hereby grants Conditional Use Pennit PCC-05-033, subject to the
following conditions, whereby the Applicant and/or property owners shall:
Resolution No. 2005-
Page 4 of
PLANNING & BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS
1. The Project, as shown or described in the conceptual plans, applications and other
exhibits shall be established and maintained as those plans are approved by the Planning
Commission.
2. No more than forty-five (45) vendors may participate, with at least 55% of those vendors
being Certified Agricultural producers.
3. The Farmers' Market may operate only on Fridays from 3:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m.
4. The Farmers' Market shall be located on the southeastern edge ofthe Wal-Mart parking
lot, closest to Eastlake Parkway.
5. Approval of a Planned Sign Program shall be obtained for all signs to be used. The
development and approval ofthe Planned Sign Program shall comply with the provisions
ofCVMC 19.60.050.
6. Temporary signs identifying the Farmers' Market and hours thereof may be displayed
during the event, and not more than four (4) hours before and one (1) hour after said
event.
7. Pennants may be used only for safety and precautionary purposes.
8. Price signs may be used only when of a size and location so as to benefit the pedestrian
shopper and not passing vehicles.
9. Pursuant to Chula Vista Municipal Code 19.58.148 (c), (6) the market shall be kept in a
neat and well-kept manner at all times, maintaining a 25-foot setback from the street.
On- and off-site security and traffic controls shall be provided as necessary, along with
provisions for emergency access. Restroom facilities shall be furnished and adequate
waste management and recycling shall be accomplished.
10. If live animals are incorporated into the market, they shall be retained in pens or other
appropriate enclosures and shall be subject to any requirements placed upon their
inclusion by the City of Chula Vista Police Department, Animal Control Division.
11. Musical or other live entertainment must be conducted at a volume which causes no
disruption or interference to residents of the surrounding area.
12. This Certified Farmers' Market shall be subject to the certification regulations ofthe
State of California Department of Agriculture, Weights and Measures, and the County of
San Diego's Department of Environment Health.
13. This permit shall be subject to any and all new, modified or deleted conditions imposed
after approval ofthis permit to advance a legitimate governmental interest related to
Resolution No. 2005-
Page 5 of
health, safety or welfare which the City shall impose after advance written notice to the
Permittee and after the City has given to the Permittee the right to be heard with regard
thereto. However, the City, in exercising this reserved right/condition, may not impose a
substantial expense or deprive Permittee of a substantial revenue source which the
Permittee cannot, in the normal operation ofthe use permitted, be expected to
economically recover.
14. Applicant/operator shall and does hereby agree to indemnify, protect, defend and hold
harmless City, its Council members, officers, employees, agents and representatives,
from and against any and all liabilities, losses, damages, demands, claims and costs,
including court costs and attorneys' fees (collectively, "liabilities") incurred by the City
arising, directly or indirectly, from (a) City's approval and issuance of this conditional
use permit, (b) City's approval or issuance of any other permit or action, whether
discretionary or non-discretionary, in connection with the use contemplated herein, and
(c) Applicant's installation and operation ofthe 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 provision is
an express condition of this conditional use permit and this provision shall be binding on
any and all of Applicant's/operator's successors and assigns.
15. The applicant shall allow the Project Site, while it is in operation, to be inspected six
months subsequent to the issuance of a business license to check conformance with
Project plans and conditions of approval.
16. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of Title 19 (Zoning)
of the Municipal Code, and all other applicable City Ordinances in effect at the time of
building permit issuance.
17. Pursuant to Chula Vista Municipal Code 19.58.148 (c), (6) this permit shall expire one
(1) year after the date of its approval by the City Council. Any extension or renewal of
this use permit must be granted by the Planning Commission.
18. This Conditional Use Permit shall become void and ineffective if not utilized or extended
within the time allotted in Section 19.14.260 of the Municipal Code.
EXECUTION AND RECORDATION OF RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL
19. The property owner and the applicant shall execute this document by signing the lines
provided below; said execution indicating that the property owner and applicant have
each read, understood and agreed to the conditions contained herein. Upon execution,
this document shall be recorded with the County Recorder of the county of San Diego, at
the sole expense of the property owner and/or applicant, and a signed, stamped copy
returned to the City's Planning and Building Department. Failure to return a signed and
stamped copy ofthis recorded document within ten days of recordation to the City Clerk
shall indicate the property owner/applicant's desire that the project, and the
Resolution No. 2005-
Page 6 of
corresponding application for building permits and/or a business license, be held in
abeyance without approval. Said document will also be on file in the City Clerk's Office.
Signature of Property Owner
Date
Signature of Applicant
Date
CONSEQUENCE OF FAILURE OF CONDITIONS
20. If any of the foregoing conditions fails 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
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 approvals herein granted, institute and prosecute litigation to
compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their violation. Failure
to satisfy the conditions of this permit may also result in the imposition of civil or
criminal penalties. Developer or a successor in interest gains no vested rights by the
City's approval of this Resolution.
Resolution No. 2005-
Page 7 of
INVALIDITY; AUTOMATIC REVOCATION
21. It is the intention of the Planning Commission that its adoption of this Resolution is
dependent upon the enforceability of each and every term, provision and condition herein
stated; and that in the event that anyone or more terms, provisions or conditions are
determined by a Court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable,
this resolution and the permit shall be deemed to be automatically revoked and of no
further force and effect ab initio.
THIS RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL IS HEREBY PASSED AND APPROVED BY
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, THIS
DAY OF 2005.
Presented by:
Approved as to form by:
James Sandoval,
Director of Building and Planning
Ann Moore
City Attorney
J :\Planning\Ann\PCC\Resolutions\PCCOS033.reso
RESOLUTION NO. PCC-05-033
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL APPROVE AND IMPOSE CONDITIONS ON A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PCC-05-033 TO CONDUCT A
FARMERS' MARKET IN THE PARKING LOT OFWALMART
AT 1360 EASTLAKE PARKWAY, CHULA VISTA.- EASTLAKE
EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION
WHEREAS, on January 10,2005 a duly verified application for a Conditional Use
Permit (PCC-05-033) was filed with the City ofChula Vista Planning and Building Department
on behalf of Eastlake Educational Foundation ("Applicant"); and
WHEREAS, said application requests permission to conduct a Farmers' Market
consisting of at least 37 vendors, 21 of which will be Certified Agricultural Producers on the
property ofWal-Mart on the Project Site ("Project"); and
WHEREAS, the area ofland owned by Wal-Mart is the subject matter ofthis resolution,
and is represented in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; and for
the purpose of general description is approximately two acres of property on the southeastern
edge of the overall Wal-Mart site at 1360 Eastlake Parkway, with a land use designation of
Freeway Commercial (F-C) and a zone of Planned Community (P-C) ("Project Site"); and
WHEREAS, Certified Farmers' Markets require that a Conditional Use Permit (CUP)
shall be approved by the City Council subsequent to its receipt of recommendations thereon from
the Planning Commission, pursuant to Chula Vista Municipal Code Section 19.54.020 and
Section 19.58.148; and
WHEREAS, such markets require that a CUP shall require a public hearing before the
City of Chula Vista Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposal for
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the
Project qualifies for a Class 1 categorical exemption pursuant to Section 15301 of the State
CEQA Guidelines, thus no further environmental review is necessary; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission does hereby find that the environmental
determination of the Environmental Review Coordinator was reached in accordance with the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Review
Procedures of the City of Chula Vista.
WHEREAS, the Planning and Building Director set the time and place for a hearing on
said Conditional Use Permit 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
and residents within 500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the project site at least 10 days prior to
the hearing; and
Resolution PCC 05-033
Page 2
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely March 30,
2005 at 6:00 p.m. in Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission
and said hearing was thereafter closed; and
WHEREAS, after considering all reports, evidence, and testimony presented at said
public hearing with respect to the Project, the Planning Commission voted
recommending that the Conditional Use Permit be approved; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of
Chula Vista does hereby recommend to the City Council that they approve the proposed
Conditional Use Permit 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 and the Applicant.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this 30th day of March, 2005, by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Marco Polo Cortes, Chair
ATTEST:
Diana Vargas, Secretary
J: \Planning\ANN\PCC\Resolutions\PCC05033 .PCRESO.doc
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT
Item No.: J..f
Meeting Date: 3/30/05
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing: PCS 04-09; Consideration of a Tentative Subdivision
Map known as Sycamore Estates, Chula Vista Tract 04-09 located at 1655
Sycamore Drive. - Norton Construction Company.
The applicant, Norton Construction Company, has submitted an application requesting approval
of a Tentative Subdivision Map to subdivide 2.04 acres into 10 single-family residential lots
ranging in size from 7,010 to 10, 367 square feet. The proposed subdivision is located at 1655
Sycamore Drive, approximately 200 ft. south of the intersection of Sycamore Drive and Walnut
Drive (see Locator Map).
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-04-034
in accordance with CEQA. Based upon the results of the Initial Study, the Environmental Review
Coordinator has determined that there is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record
before the City of Chula Vista, that the project may have a significant effect on the environment;
therefore, the Environmental Review Coordinator has prepared a Negative Declaration, IS-04-
034.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION:
On February 21,2005, the Resource Conservation Commission determined that Initial Study IS-
04-034 for the Project was adequate and recommended its adoption.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission adopt attached Resolution PCS 04-09 recommending that the
City Council approve Tentative Subdivision Map Chula Vista Tract 04-09 in accordance with the
attached draft City Council Resolution.
DISCUSSION:
I. Existing Site Characteristics
The property is level and supports 2 existing single -family residences, one located on the north
side of the site and one on the south side. Except for the existing occupied single-family
residence on the southern portion of the site, the site supports non-native, disturbed vegetation,
and is fenced off by chain link fencing. The site is divided into two subareas, the northerly
portion which fronts on the existing Sycamore Drive cul-de-sac, and the southerly portion which
has frontage on the southerly portion of Sycamore Drive at the intersection of Spruce Road.
Page 2, Item:
Meeting Date: 03/30/05
2. Surrounding Land Uses
Surrounding the project site are single-family residential homes on lots of approximately 7,000
square feet, which are a mixture of newer and older well-maintained homes, with the exception
of the Church of God in Christ, which is west of the project site. To the north, approximately 1
.block away is the 5.07-acre Los Ninos Neighborhood Park. Main Street is located approximately
'14 mile to the south.
Table 1: General Plan, Zoning and Existing Land Use of Site and Surrounding Area
General Plan Designation Zoning Existing Land Use
Site Residential Low Medium R-I-P-7 (7,000 s.f. min. lot size) Single Family
(3-6 dwelling units per acre) Single Family Residential Residential
North Residential Low Medium R-I-P-7 (7,000 s.f. min. lot size) Single Family
(3-6 dwelling units per acre) Single Family Residential Residential
Residential Low Medium R-I-P-7 (7,000 s.f. min. lot size) Single Family
South (3-6 dwelling units per acre) Single Family Residential Residential
East Residential Low Medium R-I-P-7 (7,000 s.f. min. lot size) Single Family
(3-6 dwelling units per acre) Single Family Residential Residential
West Residential Low Medium R-I-P-7 (7,000 s.f. min. lot size) Church of God In
(3-6 dwelling units per acre) Single Family Residential Christ
3. Proposed Project
The Tentative Subdivision Map proposes subdivision of the 2.04 - acre lot into a total of 10
single-family residential lots, ranging in size from 7,010 to 10,367 square feet. The average lot
size is 7,736 square feet. The proposed density of the project is 4.9 dwelling units per acre, which
is consistent with the density requirements of the Residential Low-Medium General Plan
designation and Single Family Residential (R-I-P-7) zoning. Subsequent to recordation of the
Final Map, the proposed lots will be developed with single-family detached dwellings with three
plans ranging in size from 1,433 to 1,682 square feet in size. No common areas or improvements
are proposed or required, therefore no Homeowner's Association is proposed.
The northerly 7 lots have frontage on the Sycamore Drive cul-de-sac, which is proposed for re-
alignment, and the three southerly lots have frontage on the southerly portion of Sycamore Drive
at its intersection with Spruce Road. On the north side of the project, realignment of the cul-de-
sac and adjustment of its location to the north will require a road vacation that will cause portions
of the existing Sycamore Drive public R.O.W. to be vacated and returned to private homeowners
on the south side of Sycamore Drive. Conditions of approval have been included which require
that the vacation be approved prior to City acceptance of the re-aligned public street, and that
driveway improvements for these existing lots be extended to serve the homes.
The proj ect proposes waiver of Subdivision Manual standards for the alignment of the cul-de-sac
to allow the cul-de-sac to be adjusted to the north to provide better access and lot design for the
project. Also, a waiver of the subdivision manual drainage easement between lots 2 & 3, to
Page 3, Item:
Meeting Date: 03/30/05
reduce the easement to 12 feet is proposed. The City Engineer recommends approval of these
waivers on the grounds that the public safety will not be adversely impacted.
4. Analysis
Subdivision Design/Lot Size
The lots have been designed to comply with the Subdivision Manual lot design criteria.
The proposed density of the project is 4.9 dwelling units per acre, which is consistent with the
density requirements of the RLM General Plan and R-I-P-7 zoning. All lots meet the minimum
7,000 square foot lot size, 60-foot minimum lot width, and 35-foot cul-de-sac lot width required
by the zoning. In addition, the lots have been designed so that future homes can be designed to
meet the setback requirements of the R-I-P-7 zoning. The project has also been conditioned to
require that the existing houses be demolished prior to recordation of the Final Map.
Grading
The proposed grading will result in a total of 5,200 cubic yards of imported fill. Manufactured
slopes are limited to a few portions of the site, such as on the northerly edge of lot 10, which
requires a 5 ft maximum 2:1 slope and 4 ft retaining wall along the northern property line. The
retaining wall is needed to create a useable side yard, and is proposed to be a tan colored slump -
block decorative wall. Other slopes will be along the west sides of lots 5-7, which will be a
maximum 3.5 ft, 2:1-4:1 gradient fill slope, and a 6 ft. high, 2:1 gradient fill slope on the south
side of lots 4 and 5. Conditions of approval have been included requiring a wall and fencing plan
and conceptual landscape plan to address any aesthetic concerns that may arise regarding to the
design of walls and fencing and planting of the street trees and slopes.
Proj ect Access
Vehicular access to the site is provided by Sycamore Drive and Spruce Roads, classified as
residential streets. Conditions of approval require that the proposed streets will be improved to
full city standards, including 28 feet traveled width, curb, gutter and sidewalk, in conjunction
with Final Map approval.
Pedestrian access to the site and surrounding area will be provided by sidewalks along the project
frontage. Transit service to the site will be provided by Chula Vista Transit. The nearest bus stop
is located at the intersection of Main Street and Otay Valley Road.
Conclusion:
Based on the preceding information, staff is of the opinion that the project meets the General
Plan, Zoning and Subdivision Manual requirements for a Tentative Subdivision Map, and
recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the attached Planning Commission Resolution
PCS 04-09 recommending that the City Council can approve the Tentative Map PCS 04-09
subject to the conditions listed in the attached Draft City Council Resolution.
Page 4, Item:
Meeting Date: 03/30/05
Attachments:
1. Locator Map
2. Planning Commission Resolution
3. Draft City Council Resolution
4. Mitigated Negative Declaration
5. Ownership Disclosure Statement
J :\planning\casefiJes\fy04-05\pcs _ 04-09-PC Agenda Statement
~'\ // \~ \~~l 1:-
\ \ I '-1
I~----i---c ~
..._--+-~\O:~I I I ~~. ,
--- ;,(. Woodlark Ln' . ;,(. 1 !
I.Q,"-~I" Iii I I
~~~\ : ! p 'IU)U
\ '--1\1 I i~ I J~
~ p';;J~/n T71S~ II II
I LOCATION ".. ;# ~
I I /Il~
/~/
I / /
) / /
;~'I
I .
i
I "
r-----1 ~ !
!~x.
1 ,~!
~
! I
I
j
I
I
~
I
~--
I
i--
r-;-----.----..
, I
i I
I I
~
-----
,
/ l
Malta Av
r I I
I I :,'
i~
o
C;
/lOQ
/~ ~
i/ If--] tl
/ n :J
! ~ ~
ri-r---
( '- '
'-J~
~--,
v:zv
('.
,--,
'--J
I I
(-1
L.-F
~~
Q &
V
I \
i I I
i i '\ \
Ii ""/
L-
Main St
,
1 1
I '
~I
~
\ I:
, \ I
~~
ifil, ~ ~
tL uJ '~
( ---;
CHULA VISTA
LOCATOR
C) S~LE
No Scale
PLANNING AND
BUILDING
DEPARTMENT
PROJECT Norton Construction
APPLICANT: Sycamore Estates
PROJECT Sycamore Dr. & Spruce Rd.
ADDRESS:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
SUBDIVISION
Request: Proposal to develop 11 single family dwellings on 2.04
acres in the R1P7 zone.
NORTH
FILE NUMBER:
PCS-04-09
Related cases: 18-04-034
J:\planning\carlos\locators\pcs0409.cdr 07.13.04
~1tf<<;i/I ~Afr l
RESOLUTION NO. PCS-04-09
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING
COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL APPROVE A TENTATIVE MAP TO DIVIDE 2.04
ACRES LOCATED AT 1655 SYCAMORE DRNE INTO 10
SINGLE-F AMIL Y RESIDENTIAL LOTS NORTON
CONSTRUCTION COMPANY.
WHEREAS, on June 18, 2004, a duly verified application was filed with the City of
Chula Vista Planning and Building Department by the Norton Construction Co. ("Applicant"),
requesting approval of a Tentative Subdivision Map to subdivide 2.04 acres into 10 single family
residential lots ("Project"); and,
WHEREAS, the area of land which is the subject matter of this Resolution is
diagrammatically represented on Exhibit "A", and for the general description herein consists of a
of2.04 acres located at 1655 Sycamore Drive ("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-04-034 in accordance with CEQA; and
WHEREAS, Based on the results of the Initial Study, the Environmental Review
Coordinator has determined that there is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record
before the City of Chula Vista, that the proposed project may have a significant effect on the
environment; therefore, the Environmental Review Coordinator has prepared a Negative
Declaration, IS-04-034.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission having received certain evidence on March 30,
2005, 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 PCS-04-09 herein, and
recommended that the City Council approve the Project based on certain terms and conditions;
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.,
March 30, 2005, 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 adopt the attached Draft City Council Resolution approving
the Project 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 30th day of March, 2005, by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Marco Polo Cortes, Chairperson
ATTEST:
Diana Vargas, Secretary
DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 2005-_(PCS-04-09)
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING AND ESTABLISHING
CONDITIONS OF A TENTATIVE MAP TO DIVIDE 2.04
ACRES LOCATED AT 1655 SYCAMORE DRIVE INTO 10
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS NORTON
CONSTRUCTION COMPANY.
I. RECITALS
A. Project; Application for Discretionary Approval
WHEREAS, on June 18, 2004, a duly verified application was filed with the City of Chula
Vista Planning and Building Department by the Norton Construction Co. ("Applicant")
requesting approval of a Tentative Subdivision Map to subdivide 2.04 acres into 10 single
family residential lots ("Project"); and
B. Project Site
WHEREAS, the area of land commonly known as Sycamore Estates Tentative Subdivision
Map (PCS-04-09), Chula Vista Tract No. 04-09, 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 2.04 acres located at 1655 Sycamore Drive, located within the Residential Low
Medium Designation (3-6 dwelling units per acre) of the General Plan and Montgomery
Specific Plan, and the Residential Single Family (R-I-7) zone, consisting of APN 624-032-
14,47 and 48, ("Project Site"); and
C. Environmental Determination
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-04-034 in accordance with CEQA.
WHEREAS, Based on the results of the Initial Study, the Environmental Review Coordinator
has determined that there is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the
City of Chula Vista, that the proposed Project may have a significant effect on the
environment; therefore, the Environmental Review Coordinator has prepared a Negative
Declaration, IS-04-034.
WHEREAS, on February 21,2005, the Resource Conservation Commission determined that
Initial Study IS-04-034 for the Project was adequate, and recommended adoption of the
Negative Declaration, IS-04-034. Furthermore, on March 30, 2005, the Planning Commission
also recommended adoption of Negative Declaration.
D. Planning Commission Record on Applications
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on the Project on
March 30, 2005, and after hearing staffs presentation and public testimony voted _-_-_ to
Resolution No. 2005-
recommend that the City Council approve the 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 April 12, 2005, in the Council Chambers, 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, determine and
resolve as follows:
II. PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD
The proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning Commission at their public
hearing on the Project held on March 30, 2005, 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 Negative Declaration (IS-04-034), in the form 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 is hereby approved.
V. TENT A TIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FINDINGS
A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66473.5 of the Subdivision Map Act, the City
Council finds that the Tentative Subdivision Map, as conditioned herein for 1655
Sycamore Drive, is in conformance with the elements of the City's General Plan, based
on the following:
1. Land Use
The General Plan and Montgomery Specific Plan land use designation is Low
Medium Residential (3-6 dwelling units per acre). The proposed 10-10t subdivision
will be developed at a density of 5 dwelling units per acre, which is within the
allowable density and permitted number of dwelling units.
2. Circulation
2
Resolution No. 2005-
All of the on-site and off-site public streets required to serve the subdivision already
exist or will be constructed or paid for by the Applicant in accordance with the
Conditions of Approval. The public streets within the Project will be designed in
accordance with the City design standards and/or requirements and provide for
vehicular and pedestrian connections
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, therefore this
requirement is waived.
4. Housing
The Project is consistent with the density prescribed within the Residential Low-
Medium General Plan designation, and provides additional opportunities for single-
family residential home ownership.
5. Growth Management
The Project proposes 10 lots, which is less than the 50 unit minimum requirement
necessary to require compliance with applicable Growth Management Element
requirements.
6. Open Space and Conservation
The Environmental Review Coordinator has prepared a Negative Declaration, IS-04-
034, which addressed the goals and policies of the Conservation Element 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 includes adequate areas for on-site, privately-maintained open space to
serve each dwelling unit, and 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 meets those standards.
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.
3
Resolution No. 2005-
10. Scenic Highway
This Project Site IS not located adjacent to or visible from a designated scemc
highway.
11. Seismic Safety
The Project site is not within a mapped earthquake fault zone, and there are no known
or suspected seismic hazards associated with the Project. Conditions of approval
have been included which require that a soils report and geo-technical study be
prepared in conjunction with grading plans.
B. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66473.1 of the Subdivision Map Act, 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 it is graded, level and is
presently utilized for residential development. The Project conforms to all standards
established by the City for a residential development.
E. The conditions herein imposed on the grant of permit or other entitlement herein
contained is 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.
VI. GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
A. Project Site is Improved with Project
The Applicant, or his/her successors in interest, shall improve the Project Site with the
Project as described in the Tentative Subdivision Map, Chula Vista Tract No. 04-09, 1655
Sycamore Drive.
VII. SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
A. The conditions herein imposed on the tentative map approval or other entitlement 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 Applicant or successor-in-interest to the City's
satisfaction prior to approval of the Final Map, unless otherwise specified:
4
Resolution No. 2005-
GENERAL! PLANNING AND BUILDING
1. All of the terms, covenants and conditions contained herein shall be binding upon and
inure to the benefit of the heirs, successors, assigns and representatives of the Applicant
as to any or all of the property.
2. Applicant and his/her successors in interest shall, comply, remain in compliance and
implement, the terms, conditions and provisions, as are applicable to the property which
is the subject matter of this Tentative Subdivision Map and as recommended for approval
by the Planning Commission on March 23, 2005. The Applicant shall enter into an
agreement with the City, providing the City with such security (including recordation of
covenants running with the land) and implementation procedures as the City may require
compliance with the above regulatory documents. Said Agreement shall also ensure that,
after approval of the Final Map, the Applicant and his/her successors in interest will
continue to comply, remain in compliance, and implement such Plans.
3. Any and all agreements that the Applicant is required to enter into hereunder shall be in a
form approved by the City Attorney.
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. Where proposed street improvements do not
meet City standards, the Project engineer shall submit a written signed and stamped
request to deviate from City standards and that the deviation shall not reduce public
safety and the deviation conforms to common engineering practices and standards.
5. 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 said streets. Transitions shall be designed to meet existing improvements in
Sycamore Drive and Spruce Road to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Said
improvements shall include, but not be limited to, asphalt concrete pavement and base,
concrete curb, gutter, sidewalk, driveways, street name signs, sewer and water utilities,
drainage facilities, streetlights, and fire hydrants. Existing sewer lines to be abandoned
shall be removed from the ground and disposed. Realignment design of the existing
sewer system shall be to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
6. All improvements set forth in Conditions A.4 and A.5 shall extend to the limits of
Sycamore Drive realignment work as determined by the City Engineer and include
driveways and associated grading and landscaping work to the adjacent residents affected
by the realignment.
7. Guarantee prior to approval of the Final Map the construction of public street
improvements deemed necessary to provide service to the subject subdivision in
accordance with City standards.
8. Present written verification to the City Engineer from the California-American Water
Company that the subdivision will be provided adequate water service and long-term
water storage facilities.
5
Resolution No. 2005-
9. Provide evidence to the satisfaction of the City Engineer of ties to established survey
monuments to the proposed street centerlines prior to issuance of any grading or
construction permits or approval of the Final Map.
10. A conceptual landscape plan for the landscape parkway street planting and all slopes
shall be prepared by a registered Landscape Architect per the City's Landscape Manual,
City Grading Ordinance and Subdivision Manual. This conceptual plan shall be provided
prior to the grading permit submittal and approved by the Director of Building and
Planning or his/her designee.
11. Detailed street tree and Landscape Erosion Control Plans for the Project shall be
submitted concurrent with grading plan submittal and approved prior to approval of the
Grading Permit 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.
12. Submit a revised Tentative Map showing all existing structures, improvements and
grading for adjacent properties within 100 feet of the subdivision boundary, location of
one fire hydrant in the vicinity of the Spruce Road and Sycamore Drive intersection,
estimated quantities of cut and fill, and updated legal description, to the satisfaction of the
Director of Planning and Building and the City Engineer.
13. Obtain a demolition permit from the Building Division and remove all existing structures
prior to approval of the Final Map.
14. Prior to recordation of the Final Map, obtain consent of property owner to remove
building, and obtain approval of a demolition permit from the Building Division for the
structure located at 1610 Sycamore Drive.
GRADING/DRAINAGE/NPDES
15. 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 permission from the affected property owners.
16. Design all lot grading so that lot lines are located at the top of slopes. This may require
the use of retaining walls along some lot lines, subject to height limitations of the zoning
ordinance. Deviation from this standard may be approved by the City Engineer upon
submittal of grading plans together with an explanation by the Project engineer why the
standard cannot be met.
6
Resolution No. 2005-
17. Submit and obtain approval by the City Engineer for an erosIOn and sedimentation
control plan as part of grading plans.
18. Show the location of cut/fill lines based on existing topography on grading plans.
19. Submit a list of proposed lots indicating whether the structure will be located on fill, cut,
or a transition between the two situations prior to approval of the Final Map.
20. Submit a detailed geotechnical report prepared and signed and stamped by both a
registered civil engineer and certified engineering geologist prior to approval of grading
plans and issuance of a grading permit.
21. Submit a precise drainage study prepared by a registered civil engineer and approved by
the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit or other development permit.
Design of the drainage facilities shall consider existing onsite and offsite drainage
patterns. The drainage study shall show how downstream properties and existing storm
drain facilities are impacted. The drainage study shall address pre-developed versus post-
developed flows, address downstream drainage facilities. The extent of the study shall be
as the need for detention of increased flows and shall demonstrate that any increased
flows due to the development shall not cause offsite erosion nor negatively impact
existing approved by the City Engineer.
22. All public storm drain facilities (storm drains collecting runoff from public streets) shall
be located within public drainage easements. The City Engineer upon submittal of the
grading plans shall determine minimum width of said easements. Drainage easements
shall not split lot lines. Onsite public drainage easements shall be shown on the final map
and any needed offsite public drainage easements shall be obtained by separate
instrument prior to approval of grading plans. Stabilized vehicle and equipment access
shall be provided to said storm drain easements and facilities.
23. The Applicant's project engineer shall demonstrate that the proposed curb outlet on
Spruce Road shall not negatively impact the existing drainage pattern or cause hazardous
driving conditions due to increased storm flows in the street to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer.
24. The proposed Project is subject to NPDES General Construction Permit requirements.
Applicant shall any obtain permits and develop a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP) prior to the issuance of a Land Development (Grading) Permit. The SWPPP
shall include construction and post-construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) for
storm water pollution prevention, as well as funding mechanisms for post-construction
BMPs.
25. Upon submittal of the Project grading plans, the Applicant is required to complete the
applicable forms required by the City of Chula Vista's Development and Redevelopment
Storm Water Management Requirements Manual, and comply with the Manual's
requirements.
7
Resolution No. 2005-
26. According to the NPDES Municipal Permit, Order No. 2001-01, this Project is
considered a Priority Development Project, and therefore is subject to the requirements of
the Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plans (SUSMPs) and Numeric Sizing
Criteria.
27. All unpaved construction areas shall be sprinkled with water or other acceptable dust
control agents during dust - generating activities to reduce dust emissions. Additional
watering or dust control agents shall be applied during dry weather or windy days until
dust emissions are not visible.
28. Trucks hauling dirt and debris shall be properly covered to reduce windblown dust and
spills.
29. A twenty miles per hour (20 mph) speed limit on unpaved surfaces in connection with the
Project shall be enforced.
30. On dry days, dirt and debris spilled onto paved surfaces shall be swept up immediately to
reduce re-suspension of particulate matter caused by vehicle movement. Approach routes
to construction sites shall be cleaned daily of construction-related dirt in dry weather.
31. On-site stockpiles of excavated materials shall be covered or watered.
32. Disturbed areas shall be hydroseeded, landscaped, or developed as directed by the City,
to reduce dust generation.
33. Heavy-duty construction equipment with modified combustion/fuel injection systems for
emissions control shall be utilized during grading and construction activities. Catalytic
reduction for gasoline-powered equipment shall be used. Also, construction equipment
shall be equipped with pre-chamber diesel engines (or equivalent) together with proper
maintenance and operation to reduce emissions of nitrogen oxide, to the extent available
and feasible.
34. Remit to City Parkland Acquisition and Development (PAD) fees of $87,710.00 for 10
single-family residential lots, pursuant to Chapter 17.10 of the Municipal Code. This fee
shall be re-ca1culated prior to approval of the Final Map and may be subject to change.
SEWER
35. All proposed public sewer lines shall be located within a 15-foot wide public sewer
easement. Developer shall be responsible for obtaining any needed offsite sewer
easements. Onsite public sewer easements shall be shown on the Final Map and any
needed offsite public sewer easements shall be obtained by separate instrument prior to
approval of the improvement plans.
8
Resolution No. 2005-
36. Provide paved access to all proposed sewer manholes and existing sewer manholes
within the subdivision. Sewer access roads shall be a minimum width of 12 feet within
the IS-foot wide sewer easements. All paved access shall be designed based upon a
Traffic Index (TI) of 5.0.
STREETS
37. Provide a total of three 100-watt street lights on concrete standards. Two shall be located
on Sycamore Drive and one on Spruce Road. Street light locations shall be approved by
the City Traffic Engineer.
38. Transitions to existing street improvements along Sycamore Drive and Spruce Road shall
include but not be limited to, asphalt berms, asphalt sidewalk ramps and asphalt
pavement needed to feather into existing pavement as required by the City Engineer.
Street cross sections at 50-foot intervals shall be submitted with the improvement plans
for all widened street segments.
EASEMENTS
39. Dedicate additional right-of-way for all public streets adjacent to the development to
residential street standards, including any right-of-way required for offsite transitions to
existing improvements.
40. Grant to the City a 5.5-foot wide street tree planting and maintenance easement along all
public streets within the subdivision as shown on the Tentative Map.
AGREEMENTS
41. Applicant and his/her successors in interest 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, including approval by its Planning Commission, City Councilor
any approval by its agents, officers, or employees wit regard to this subdivision pursuant
to Section 66499.37 of the State 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.
42. Applicant and his/her successors in interest agree to hold the City harmless from any
liability for erosion, siltation, increase flow of drainage, or spillage of sewage resulting
from this Project, now and in the future.
43. Applicant and his/her successors in interest 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
9
Resolution No. 2005-
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 of Chula Vista.
44. Pay in full any unpaid balance for the Tentative Map Deposit Account No. DQ-I076 and
Project Account No. CA296.
45. Applicant shall enter into separate agreements with the Sweetwater Union High School
District and Chula Vista Elementary School District regarding annexation into
Community Facilities District No. 10, or pay school fees as required by State Law, to the
satisfaction of the above school districts prior to issuance of the first building permit for
the Project.
Signature of Property Owner
Date
Signature of Representative
Date
MISCELLANEOUS
46. Tie the boundary of the subdivision to the California System-Zone VI (NAD '83).
47. Submit copies of the Final Map and improvement plan in a digital format 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
information in accordance with the City Guidelines for Digital Submittal in duplicate on
3 Y2 HD floppy disk prior to the approval of the Final Map.
48. Driveway dimensions shall include the width of the driveway flares. Driveways shall
comply with the City of Chula Vista driveway standards per CVCS 1.
49. 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.
B. The following Conditions of Approval shall be satisfied prior to issuance of the first building
permit for the Project, unless otherwise noted:
1 Install fire hydrants as determined by the City Fire Marshall. Said hydrant locations shall
be shown on the improvement plans.
2 Submit plans and information to the satisfaction of the Chula Vista Fire Department that
the Project meets the Chula Vista Fire and California Fire Code requirements, including
but not limited to fire access, water supply, sprinkler systems, and fire alarms.
10
Resolution No. 2005-
3 Obtain approval of street addresses to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning and
Building.
4 Design all dwelling units to preclude interior noise levels over 45dBA and exterior noise
exposure over 65 dBA for all outside private yard areas.
5 Prior to installation of any water system improvements, submit one hundred percent
(100%) design plans to the California American Water District for review and approval.
6 Dedicate at no cost to the California American Water District the water main, fire
hydrants and water services for lots 4-10 after the Applicant has installed these facilities
to the District's satisfaction.
7 Have the California American Water District install the water service for Lots 1, 2 and 3
by connecting to the existing water main (at Applicant expense).
8 Pay all costs to abandon the existing unused utilities and to relocate existing utilities in
conflict with this Project. The Applicant shall also reconnect the plumbing of these
existing customers to the relocated services. The Applicant shall be responsible to survey,
describe and record any easements needed for private consumer lines associated with
utilities.
9 Submit a detailed wall/fencing plan indicating color, materials, height and location of
freestanding walls, retaining walls, and fences to the Director of Planning and Building
for approval prior to issuance of the first building permit. The wall plan shall also
include details such as accurate dimensions, complete cross-sections showing required
walls, adjacent grading, landscaping, road/trail/sidewalk improvements, and the location
of typical residential structures. Materials and color used shall be compatible and all
walls located in comer side-yards or rear yards facing public or private streets or
pedestrian connections shall be constructed of a decorative masonry and/or wrought iron
material. Any combination free standing/retaining walls shall not exceed nine (9) feet in
height. The Applicant shall submit a detail and/or cross-section of the
maximum/minimum conditions for all "combination walls," which include retaining and
free standing walls, as part of said wall plan.
10 Process the vacation of the excess right-of-way on Sycamore Drive due to the
realignment of the cul-de-sac. The excess right-of-way vacation shall include preparation
of legal descriptions and grant deeds reflecting the revised property boundaries to the
offsite parcels affected by the vacation deemed necessary by the City. Said vacation
process shall require a separate approval by City Council Resolution and shall be
accomplished within 60 days of City's acceptance of public street improvements.
11 Prepare and obtain approval from the City's Conservation Coordinator a "Recycling and
Solid Waste Management Plan". The plan shall demonstrate those steps the Applicant
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
11
Resolution No. 2005-
generated by all residential, commercial and industrial developments. The Applicant
shall contract with the City's franchise hauler throughout the construction and occupancy
phase of the Project. The plan shall incorporate any trash enclosure re-design required for
compliance with the City's NPDES permit.
x. EXECUTION AND RECORDATION OF RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL
The property owner and the Applicant shall execute this document by signing the lines
provided below, said execution indicating that the property owner and Applicant have each
read, understood, and agreed to the conditions contained herein. Upon execution, this
document shall be recorded with the County Recorder of the County of San Diego, at the sole
expense of the property owner and the Applicant, and a signed, stamped copy of this
recorded document within ten days of recordation to the City Clerk shall indicate the
property owner and Applicant's desire that the Project, and the corresponding application for
building permits and/or a business license, be held in abeyance without approval. Said
document will also be on file in the City Clerk's Office and known as Document No.
Signature of Property Owner
Signature of Applicant
XI. CONSEQUENCE OF FAILURE OF CONDITIONS
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 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
approvals herein granted, institute and prosecute litigation to compel their compliance with
said conditions or seek damages for their violation. The Applicant 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.
XII. INVALIDITY; AUTOMATIC REVOCATION
It is the intention of the City Council that its adoption of this Resolution is dependent upon
the enforceability of each and every term, provision and condition herein stated; and that in
the event that anyone or more terms, provision, or conditions are determined 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 form by:
Ann Moore
City Attorney
Jim Sandoval
Director of Planning & Building
12
Resolution No. 2005-
J: \Planning\casefiles\fy04-05\PCS-04-09\pcs04-09 .cc. reso.doc
13
I / \/~ \ \ r---1,
..~, \ '~I '
'~'i-~ 'i r!
-~~;-'- \ U \_~I I :I ~
~~! I ~ .. Woodlark Ln " 1----1 i 5 '
i '81 I, ! ~I '
:0'\, ! ,I 'I<f)h'
\ /3\ J I I '
\ ";-----/ i' I I
, i , ') , i \.. ' /"----i
~ ~~//OllSi J
IlOCA11OM ~~ I
i I / ! \
r7-~7 . ( I
/ ! I
, I
I 'i I
!-----, ---~
1-- I i i (-c-----..."
, I I i-----------
: I:>' Ii"
I <( , 1--------..: I
L----: ~i ' I ~
, I ~I I
L-l1
I 'I I
/:~
Malta Av
I I
I
!
\i
'-\ 'j'
r~
'J.L;
'-
1'-""'"
-,F
(;;
/ Ii 'J~ '--J
k ~
d 0
CJ:J:L)
I
I
I
,
I /"-.
I~
, r-..;
.' I,
i Ie?
I
,Fe
'---'
L-.:
I
,--.
"-..:
I
!(/L~
,I ~J!
, I ! I \, I "I' i
'II'I/'~
,
'i I
i I
Main St
!
I
o II
~Qn'IQ//e, I
, Rei
~"i
c-
:-r\ ~I 11'1
r-" 'e--;.....j :-r-
II 'I ; i, 'I, 1'1 I, 'I
I-.---L--'~~
-;
/
I!l:' "~;'
~i', ----;- /
~ I ';!~ /
I ,!,=~' /('0
ill '\ c"
H:,FPI \ \/ ^ '( /.
(
CHULA VISTA
LOCATOR
C) S~lE
No Scale
PLANNING AND
BUILDING
DEPARTMENT
PROJECT Norton Construction
APPLICANT: Sycamore Estates
PROJECT Sycamore Dr. & Spruce Rd.
ADDRESS:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
SUBDIVISION
Request: Proposal to develop 11 single family dwellings on 2.04
acres in the R1 P7 zone.
NORTH
FILE NUMBER:
PCS-04-09
Related cases: 15-04-034
J:\planning\carlos\locators\pcs0409.cdr 07.13.04
e'll--ttglT A
Negative Declaration
PROJECT NAME: Sycamore Estates
PROJECT LOCATION: 1655 Sycamore Drive
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.: 624-032-47,624-032-14,624-032-48
PROJECT APPLICANT: Norton Construction
CASE NO.: IS-04-034
DATE OF DRAFT DOCUMENT: January 31,2005
DATE OF RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION MEETING: February 21,2005
DATE OF FINAL DOCUMENT:
March 8, 2005
PREPARED BY:
Mary Venables, Associate Planner
A. Proi ect Setting
The approximately 2.1-acre project site consists of three parcels located within the urbanized
area ofChula Vista at 1655 Sycamore Drive (See Exhibit A-Location Map). The project site
is relatively flat and contains two existing single-family residential structures. The land uses
that surround the project site consist of the following:
North: Single-Family residences, church, and Los Ninos Park across Walnut Drive.
South: Single-Family residences.
East: Single-Family residences.
West: Church and Single-Family residences.
B. Proiect Description
The proposed residential infill project consists of a ten-lot subdivision to accommodate the
construction of ten single-family residences ranging from 1,811 sq.ft. to 2,217sq.ft in area.
(See Exhibit B-Site Plan). The proposed lot sizes average over 7,000 sq. ft. each and the
proposed density of 4.9 dwelling units per gross acre is consistent with the low-medium
residential General Plan designation of the property. The proposal requires the demolition of
two existing single-family structures.
C. Compliance with Zoning and Plans
The project site is located in the R-I-P7 (Single-Family Residence 7,000 square foot
minimum lot size) Zone and RLM (Low-Mediurn/8-12 dwelling units per acre) General Plan
designations. The project is consistent with the applicable zoning regulations and the Chula
Vista General Plan.
A1"11\CH v"\' tA/T L.(
D. Public Comments
On January 19, 2005, a Notice of Initial Study was circulated to property owners within a
500-foot radius of the project site. The public comment period closed on January 28, 2005.
There was one inquiry from the public to view the proposed map however there were no
environmental issues of concern voiced.
On February 4.2005. the Notice of Availability of the Proposed Negative Declaration for the
proiect was circulated to property owners within a 500-[00t radius of the proiect site. The
public comment period closed on March 7. 2005. No verbal or written comments were
received on the proposed proiect.
E. Identification of Environmental Effects
An Initial Study conducted by the City of Chula Vista (including an attached Environmental
Checklist form) determined that the proposed project will not have a significant
environmental effect, and the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report will not be
required. This Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with Section 15070 of
the State CEQA Guidelines.
Air Quality
The proposed residential infill project will result in a minor increase in air pollutants during
the construction phase of the project. Air quality impacts resulting from construction related
operations are short-term in duration. Dust control measures are required during grading
operations and will be implemented in accordance with the rules and regulations of the
County of San Diego Air Pollution Control District (APCD) and the California Air
Resources Board.
The project site is located within the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB). The project would not
generate any substantial additional traffic and is consistent with the residential designation of
the project site under the adopted Chula Vista General Plan and Zoning regulations. The
residential land use designation has been included in regional air quality projects and plans
and will not conflict with or violate any applicable air quality plans or standards. For these
reasons, the proposed project would not result in any significant long-term local or regional
air quality impacts.
Biological Resources
Dudek & Associates prepared a biological resource survey and a Biological Constraints
Letter dated June 3, 2004, for the project site. No vegetation communities, plant, or wildlife
species considered sensitive by the City, California Department of Fish and Game, or U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service were observed on site or anticipated to occur. Therefore, no
sensitive biological resources present onsite are expected that would constrain development
of the site. -
2
Hydrology and Water Ouality
Based upon review of the project, the Engineering Department has determined that there are
no significant issues regarding the drainage of the project site. As a standard condition, a
final drainage study will be required in conjunction with the preparation of the project
grading plans. and appropriate erosion control measures will be identified and implemented.
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 NPDES General Construction Permit requirements and shall obtain
permit coverage and develop a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) prior to
issuance of grading permits. In addition, the project shall implement construction and post-
construction water quality Best Management Practices (BMPs) for storm water pollution
prevention in accordance with the Chula Vista Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan
(SUSMP).
F. Mitigation Necessary to Avoid Significant Impacts
No Mitigation Measures are required.
G. Consultation
1. Individuals and Organizations
City of Chula Vista:
Steve Power, Planning and Building Department
Josie Gabriel, Planning and Building Department
Marisa Lundstedt, Planning and Building Department
Maria Muett, Planning and Building Department
Sohaib AI-Agha, Engineering Dept.
Samir Nuhaily, Engineering Dept.
Beth Chopp, Engineering Dept.
Sandra Hernandez, Engineering Dept.
Silvester Evetovich, Engineering Dept.
Patricia Ferman, General Services Landscape Architecture
Lynn France, Administration Special Operations
John Schmitz, Planning and Building Department
Richard Zumwalt, Planning and Building Department
Frank Herrera-A, Planning and Building Department
Carolyn Dakan, Planning and Building Department
Others:
Dee Peralta, Chula Vista Elementary School District
Mark Dodero, RECON
3
2. Documents
City of Chula Vista General Plan, 1989
Final Environmental Impact Report, City of Chula Vista General Plan Update, EJR No.
88-2, May 1989
City of Chula Vista Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP) Subarea Plan,
February 2003.
Biological Constraints Letter for Sycamore Estates, Chula Vista, California, Dudek &
Associates, June 3, 2004.
Drainage Study, Sycamore Estates, Chula Vista, California, May Group, Inc., November
4, 2004.
Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) for Sycamore Estates, Chula
Vista, California, October 28, 2004.
3. Initial Study
This environmental determination is based on the attached Initial Study, any comments
received on the Initial Study and any comments received during the public review period
for this Negative Declaration. The report reflects the independent judgment of the City
of Chula Vista. Further information regarding the environmental review of this project is
available from the Chula Vista Planning and Building Department, 276 Fourth Avenue,
Chula Vista, CA 91910.
~~/2~?)'
Marilyn R. F. Ponseggi
Environmental Review Coordinator
Date:
3/&/os-
. (
J :\PJanning\MaryV\S ycamore Estates\IS-04-034ND.doc
4
,///'" Nj--1..v/ \// \ \---r--! i i Et= J t I I
: 1 \ . \ tj>-----t I- : '--'----
, ..----------~ - -i;: -1 j .,....--1-...,...--
: \ (J i. ~: ~m______~ <-: : --j I ' I
=b 11 _\VC><O~"'" en. f---1----1 ic- : ~: - -l i I !
~\ i~ l i --1 LJH' V): 2: L-.---,~ ri-r
\ \ : \ i ~m"'I: ; ; : : l I
~ ~~'~"ji~~-~i1 ~ TI~ l,-trrITI
\-m-~~j-----L--r~\--mn--. // L : i _...1-m- .___..--J: i ~ ~ (j,J-
/' II' ..,_.../"..:m--lm--1n.-.I....j--r--I-~/?-,,/r---l)r; .. 75: IJ:{
/ /. i . _m _"____...., ~;;I).A.-....... ! ; l~J CJ "'"
; . .", :: / )~ ...,.......... ' I !--}.,.._ -...
i ,mmT---m.----mnm-/ / i: 67/ /"'j!a 8 '-1-l.J.)
:---r-- \. L--.---_...../;' r' ---.: : rJZ '.......~ / / 8 b
I / ----'r- __ ", ~ "/' '-/ I
,I 'r....... ---.........: .... ..... J I
I /1 ! ,.. " / ---,_.... ", " '''-. I........... i!
/ j',',....- I ......... '-... .......... ....; ....'...../ I'
/.................. , I ......., 1 ",\" ........ ~ : ,r~ ..}
/1 '~J.J',...... .)(. ;' '" I ',....;~....... \ I'P ,qQ &d./
A "-./' / /' ' '" /~.... I 1--..1.. J ~
L ~ '........ I ........ ../' I .......... ..........._ " "(.v I ...........
/.................... fir" "'1 /":-/' ",/ ~>---~.... ......... ~.... /....~.......-~ \ !\ '1....... 0{~
A9' ( - ~" ......... ....../ /~ a ,-').:9"
!! / '........... /cJ,//<, ///) :r---......./._ " /.... \. 0 v. ~~
I ,...., / y 0 ,. /'< /.r :....... " '.... \. .-/'
: i...........J / ,p;/'-..../ .~ /.r __......... ~ : '<.~ ..)0. f...j,'~ /;
/ I I. C/o '<.. /~ /<": -n,--m-r-' 'Z... f / 1(' ~9pg "- / \
! , 10'" ./' ,.,.~ \ I . .....::::. '\ ...... / .><< L" "\ \
./ ! /'/ '.....,../~-}e --(' \ \ I:: '- ~." ~/' /' )!.... .....
"..' /r---_______--;i I...... //~fg<;~/~ \, \: I I j r~Co'......j/..........'y..... .../ ,/ \ ') /.--
(----7//(;:>// TII 11Ill-TT-JTli-l ~r '''fZI~''''<</'X''''/!)~) n
r--__ " 1--, _ / I, :" :: ,i ,,/,/ ":i ir---..--.j // i
f ,--_, -" _m_...m... .-m.........__h'_ -L:: :. U ,,\' . ." ! J' ,
-__ / r! j---rOJTm~l"''''_h--' LOTIJS 61--m---L..-....L- : ---- \( ~./-----j II L
__I---i V ': i . ' 1 r---...., m_____ ~: r' ,'...../>..~--..,--//1' 1--
-.__ \ I , i ! : i : i. (' 1,/ l-
I -" " :: '----- ~ . /\\r..... -"-'--- /1,
f \\ \ ~: J J. : : i : : : J -L · \\'\ -- ",..--- '-':I J
jh-rl \~~\ :: 1---- __....1______ i. i -1 '-_ ~~e~4 .f~:-\\ \_~7 "-...) ,/
/. /' I \ '\ \ i : : ' \. ~,J\ \ \ !
, . j \ . \. ; i : '. .', \ ! ;
---1_! i L,". . ---<: - .--....... ~ -m...m~h--U__________....! :-..-..--
r,,1ain St
-..-"",--... !
-- Of- '
-=rQY v- --'- ~
-<l-QjJ~'R-----
.-- 1 --~
I I "'-~_ --.....,
\---Tl
m"
, ,
I !
n-, Pl ~:!l
m ttJ LTI
:~-==----=::_)
----..'j.----:---.i--h--..--E~.-) (-.-
L_..m_...\ \ EE ~l'J:NO
mm \ \ D. . I
m r-t\ \ V. PrOject Lecatlon i
I
J
I
_.~----_.---
EXHIBIT A - LOCATION MAP
:;END;
STANDARD
OI\IISI(JoI BOUNDARY...__...._._..._._._
E:)It)tr LK ._...__...___...._...__.____
SYMBOL
---r..,--
--l\-h--r
I -~r
H~ >1
Ij lOT NO. 1 I
~' ,~~, J
~J\ /1
~ I \~
......,\1[ PlUG. caMCT I
TO EX. 8- (;11_
'"'-- DC. 0- <;V n
. .
.'
,
. -
9:'
{yQ
~
~':9' --.........
r;J' ~qj
r;J- ,g --.........
,
----------
PRELIMINARY TENTATIVE MAP for:
SYCAMORE ESTATES
CHULA VISTA TRACT NO.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
PO'SiED fU. SLOP( (2: 1 UHl..ESS 01MER'MSE ~). :.vm.IN,nr - 7/_J'/m:,
________<.5-
---4~
~
;'fWoeG OOHn:aAl_.__.______..__
POSIIED COfTCUR...._.___._..____
IT EUYATIOH.....__._...__._...__.._
i'nHC; sPOT E1.[VA1'oClol.___.__..._._
't.J(Jo4T I.J"(.__._____._-.-__
)'ftNC !I..CfIt-....__..__.__
,. DI~_._.__._._.__
17fJ..l
--------
:::X:::'l::
c:::)
'QI INLET - TYPI: or: ._S>RSD 0-&....-._
~ DRAI't (so: ~ 1 .t: 8).-SDRSD D-&a._. ---~---
-
-==:1!1====
SlOE.....
WALNUT DR.
\ .....oJat FIJ::L J
CER UNE-__._____
o UNE.________.__._.__.
<<Y DItADt Q..(..ItHOJT - nPE A...SORSD D-L...___===:{):::===
$II"
TYP1CA/., LOT GRADING
q.,. I
a':",,~~
"',.--.(./> -
~"!J,,".J ''>-s s
= '~''i I .0...+
s...._. F h <<. ,,?,-y
'~ I =
I I (EJasr.... 21) ~
_",,\4) ~I I ~f~~'E::'':f::f1 EJeOST. WAID! -..a:. '-'T. lil
h"1P:.\1.) DCrST. fO' TO BE RI1.OCATtJ)'~, L_..,.,
~~ !)').~ cg,r L I ~-;tOC4:*t
~' _ '-:-tT. O'~ - - -1 _""2'-': ,...... .. 25. __ z
"----s- s' S:=:i -
-- (.;;fi'M.-riJf.so,-- - I 1; .~:\~016> --- ;: (
E>>Sl ft:HC(' IfUII-C ,. ~\
TO 11[...."." ',.1 fv-l ~ / ~~ 'I
~~"Y0<\ 1 ~~~(\~T ~l
.('"\"'v~(). I _ '\ ~ A, \.~
() V ';"" l 0> "..A... '" & - ...;-;
~() 9, ~~ '\ / ;a-;r--...& ~;,
- ,"?'- ,.~~ ~ . . -,fS1\ It 'Y
~'39 ~ F€T~~" i ~~\ ~
REf WAlI.----4 \ ,.
!JQS1. .A1tR ~ ;;...... . \...r
(TO BE: Rn.OCATED) ~ ~ ~ ~;.
I I ,~, "'. ~.
1~!1t:
'-"'o~
=
~ (1fT swr E91r..>fl7 t;.'
~~~~ I ~
a>>KCT ""''''ST. ... /
CM-'''7.5;t. 1f';'5@:12K ,1/,,1!.
. '" \ i 1" I ~I .
.;;:.,~ ~ ~ln f ~ ~ ~'; D tj:1 ~.MU7
s . S L ~ {i I "1 SD tsoIT. j IPLAZ1I~ _ L ~:........ UIST. ..."" SOMCt '-'T.
"" . _~. 0 J } 103 1"- I' ~ to.. RW>CAmI
~ I ~~ l.--,cI ~,.+ &'f
\ .\",. \ .r:~1 ~.~.. ~1 n- - - --
_.{J ~ P_.72JI tB7U oJ:. b.J ~~,:~ - ,J
fir ~.- 7'-~,. '. '" "II ''{:''1
40 ~ .. - <i '2" J. .-C $ \ i 70
catH'CT to DOST lei ~, ,....-, s' """""" .... f!>-" R.'2&OcI
~ .. ",-N ''10 -I"". ~ .--
~ ..' ...... ..G , '-". . _'_'
~~~~%_~ ~~ ~ ....vD-.t:<--~-.&.7-~~.E ~ J
~~~;G~~~ '~~'~ J\_~~&f!Z~j.Y~~,\\S>,()-9(J_... :
~s ----1 ':.W.' - __~L" NI'.t:J:::.;r-j'J?f.. "t:'~ 1
. - · ~7 ~---4,\~<% ~ '-DR~ I~~ 51 ',,-90
~ \ \\\ 48 ""1'. . \. .~
E H'Wt)RANT___.________.
:tfI:T UQft__._____..__...
34
"
~
N
~
~
~
,~
I
I
OSST. ~ VCP 1'0 BE
REI....OCAltD. A8N4DCIH
EX. P\OIUC ....-,
(EJaST. ... ..'/
(RIm_f57.b)
(I.c.-IIS2.f7)
~
~
'"
~ ......-..--
s. w
-
I
I
I
~
!\
36
~
.
35
~I
= f[NC< !
ro.. RI:N<>'<€D~
(jOIST. .ATOt stIt'OCE "'T.
'" II[ ....OCATU> ~ - l
/ "..T_~~ V'?o ~D ~
/ (sa DET..... """"""
I NtS9"3I'.n-t: 17 13"
J~. ~
. .~
'7' ~ ~."//.
y I..LOT'O IL>X;. '. Ul
~ / P_ta4JI Jr::i.1 -, J /
/137 'DT /~ ~..~
~ ; /Hif>rt/l~
..~ ~ 1J:Li(/- ry .
....... r ~~.~ yr _ .........sa.r.....""
',=... .... . ,,/.)~ 4'-t
1 ';0 ~"~ /
1~ ~ ~~
... ~,. ./ ~ 7""1t ::-73"
,~.:5 L..!.22"~, ,.'. r~ :-':::'1
:,.......~.;;jji ,/
- /
73
(MH "~e)
(Rim-tao.I:)
--.........(1.&..,7:<..)
--.........
-.........
-........
J'I
72
..
. ,
= 30'
".
~
"( R-1.'6'"
_~~J6'
OCIST. ~ FDIC[,
'" II[ IIIIOO\ED
o JO 00
I---.J ....J
SCALE: ,-
"
,.
u::~./ ~ "-....
~~~.....,~. "-....
. "'_ ;;--:....T_ It va- to _ ...........
ESUt . ~T~ ~ IEMCMD.
'~'.,I..!lJ 1 - 10M" ........
T.~!f;' LOT4 I . 1_,1: _'-1
~_ ~ ,.JY- ~.&X ~ LE.>-la40
& ~ ~~~ ~ ....... DIS11ftG C1.I..-DE-SAC
. ~(~ 4~';~:1. "~~~.7:;SF-~ ~,J L;,l~ ~::~~~U) TOIEREWO'O
1~ PUaJC"'- tQ (U:_1,7CI)
~~ ~~~r-";;:;'''-.: -J,'r'i-. J--...___..-
61.&I);.~_ ,nos' 1 I ---
71
'-.
'. ""
a.724!F
P....,78.D
-
EJl EX.
Rrw R/W
Itl 1!1(EX.' 'lJfrEJC./ "
~1 I~ ~ (EJC.':~T) . lEX.~i-L1
"'- Z,,* ~ (~~ _(~ I ~
~' 1"\-- ~T1tR---~~
\EJC....wto -....
.. ...."."
U.$.
""",""COO'
LOT TASULATION TABLE
\DT lDT LOT PUll ~
NO.. =- :f 1"IfI€ fDft IWX SI)ES
, 7 IS 14.
"9. ~ 4,5' 1 I
72'Q8 7 oil II. t 45"4 I
7010 97'3.1 I 20" 1
an.. .. 370.1 ... ;,e' 2.. T,
"81 487.1 I
o 4.108.1 8 U.
701 814." 1 1 2O.J~ 7.'.
'I 138 130.:1 II. S" 16'
1 1 9- 8 r r
c:ROSS AJ.:JfE,N;E - 2.04 A4.
IIOTIS
~
,.
......"""'..
S<JLS .........
RECOYNENGIoJl)
A
~
WA TER RE
RETA/J
I
EXHIBIT B - SITE PLAN
~!~
~
~
01Y OF
ENVIRONl\1ENTAL CHECKLIST FORM CHULA VISTA
1. Name of Proponent:
Norton Construction
2. Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of Chula Vista
Planning and Building Department
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vist.a, CA 91910
3. Addresses and Phone Number of Proponent:
9340 Hazard Way, Suite A-I
San Diego, CA 92123
(858) 277-5322
4. Name of Proposal:
5. Date of Checklist:
6. Case No.
Sycamore Estates
January 25,2005
IS-04-034.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS QUESTIONS:
Less Tban
Potentially Significant Less Tban
Witb
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
I. AESTHETICS. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic 0 0 0 .
vista?
b) Substantially damage scemc resources, 0 0 0 .
including, but not limited to, tress, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a
state scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual 0 0 0 .
character or quality of the site and its
surroundings?
1
______.._____.___..___.__.__...__....__.._ m_
....~._____...__. ______.__...~.. _________ __un _m_." ...._,_. _
Issues:
d) Create a new source of substantial light or
glare, which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?
Comments:
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
With
Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
0 0 . 0
a-c) The proposal is a residential infill project that involves the demolition of two eXIstIng
structures and the construction of 10 new single-family homes: The subject site contains no
scenic resources, vistas or views open to the public, and is not in proximity to a state scenic
highway. The project is compatible with the existing land uses and would not degrade the visual
character of the site or its surroundings.
d) The project will result in a new source of light or glare through the construction of 10 new
residences and placement of streetlights. However, the construction of residences on the site will
not result in an adverse effect on day or nighttime views in the area and the project will comply
with the City's minimum standards for roadway lighting.
Miti2:ation: No mitigation measures are required.
II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. Would
the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland),
as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of
the California Resources Agency, to non-
agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural
use, or a Williamson Act contract?
c) Involve other changes in the eXIstIng
environment, which, due to their location or
nature, could result in conversion of
Farmland, to non-agricultural use?
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
0"
.
o
2
._---_.~._.._--_._---
Issues:
Comments:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a-c) The project site is neither in current agricultural production nor adjacent to property in
agricultural production and contains no agricultural resources or designated farmland.
Miti2:ation: No mitigation measures are required.
III. AIR QUALITY. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of
the applicable air quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or
contribute substantially to an existing or
projected air quality violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which
the project region is non-attainment under
an applicable federal or state ambient air
quality standard (including releasing
emissions, which exceed quantitative
thresholds for ozone precursors)?
d) Expose sensItIve receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a
substantial number of people?
o
o
o
o
o
3
o
o
o
o
o
o
.
.
.
o
.
o
o
o
.
Issues:
Comments:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
No Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact
a-e) The project site is located within the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB). The proposed residential
infill project would not generate any substantial additional traffic and is consistent with the
residential designation of the project site under the adopted Chula Vista General Plan and
Zoning regulations. The proposed residential land use has been included in regional air quality
projects and plans and will not conflict with or violate any applicable air quality plans or
standards. For these reasons, the proposed project would not result in any significant long-term
local or regional air quality impacts. See Negative Declaration, Section E.
Miti2ation: No mitigation measures are required.
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the
project:
a) Have 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 California Department of Fish and Game
or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional
plans, policies, regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404
of the Clean Water Act (including, but not
limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)
through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
___0.
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
4
---------
Issues:
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of
any native resident or migratory fish or
wildlife species or with established native
resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife nursery
sites
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provIsIOns of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan, or other
approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
Comments:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
No Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
o
.
o
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
a-f) The project site is located within a designated development area under the Chula Vista
MSCP Subarea Plan. To assess the potential biological resource impacts of the project, a
biological survey was conducted and a letter report prepared by Dudek & Associates, INe., dated
June 3, 2004. Based on the results of the report, no sensitive biological resources are present or
expected on-site that would constrain development. The biological report is available for review
at the City ofChula Vista, 276 Fourth Avenue. See Negative Declaration, Section E.
Miti2ation: No mitigation measures are required.
v. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the
project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as
defined in 9 15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to 9 15064.5?
o
.
o
o
o
o
.
o
5
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a umque
paleontological resource or site or umque
geologic feature?
o
o
.
o
d) Disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of formal cemeteries?
o
o
o
.
Comments:
a) The project proposal requires the demolition of two existing residential structures. It has
been determined that the buildings are not historically significant and do not meet any
criteria for consideration for listing on the City of Chula Vista Historic List. Therefore, no
impacts to historic resources are known or are expected to be present within the project
impact area and no substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as
defined in Section 15064.5 is anticipated.
b) Based on the level of previous disturbance to the site associated with the development of
residences and the relatively minor grading necessary to construct the proposed project, the
potential for impacts to archaeological resources is considered to be less than significant.
c) The project site is identified as an area of moderate potential for paleontological resources in
the City's General Plan EIR. Based on the minor level of disturbance to the project site and
adjacent site improvements including grading and fill level for the proposed project,
potential impacts to paleontological resources are considered to be less than significant. In
addition, no unique geologic features are present on the site.
d) No human remains are anticipated to be present within the project site.
Miti2:ation: No mitigation measures are required.
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Would the
project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects, including the
risk of loss, injury-or death involving:
6
--------
Issues:
1. 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? Refer to Division of Mines
and Geology Special Publication 42.
11. Strong seismic ground shaking?
lll. Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
IV. Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss
oftopsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as
a result of the project, and potentially result
In on- or off-site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or
collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in
Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building
Code (1994), creating substantial risks to
life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative wastewater disposal systems
where sewers ar~ not available for the
disposal of wastewater?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
7
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
.
o
.
.
No Impact
.
.
.
.
o
.
o
o
Issues:
Comments:
Potentially
Significan t
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
No Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact
a-e) The project site is not within a mapped Earthquake Fault Zone and there area no known or
suspected seismic hazards associated with the site. Due to the previous development of the site
and minor grading required for the proposed project, no significant geological impacts are
anticipated. The proposed earthwork quantity includes 5,200 cubic yards of imported fill. The
submittal of a soils report is required prior to issuance of grading and construction permits to
determine existing soil conditions and provide foundation and pavement recommendations.
Mitie:ation: No mitigation measures are required.
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?
b)
Create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident conditions
involving the release of hazardous
materials into the 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?
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
8
-.-----
Issues:
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?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
No Impact
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?
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
o
.
g)
Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
o
o
o
.
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?
o
o
o
.
Comments:
o
o
o
o
.
a-h) The project proposal involves the division of land and eventual development of ten single-
family residences. Except for the two existing structures on the southeast portion of the site, the
project site has been historically vacant with no potential for toxics. Project implementation
would not pose a health hazard to humans. The project site is designated for residential
development according to the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance and adopted MSCP Subarea Plan.
No significant hazards to human health safety would be created as a result of the proposed
proj ect.
Miti2ation: No mitigation measures are required.
------
9
Issues:
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 m significant
alteration of receiving water quality during or
following construction, or violate any water
quality standards or waste discharge
requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge such that there would be a net deficit
in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local
groundwater table level (e.g., the production
rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop
to a level which would not support existing
land uses or planned uses for which permits
have been granted)? Result in a potentially
significant adverse impact on groundwater
quality?
c) Substantially alter the eXIstmg drainage
pattern of the site or area, including through
the alteration of the course of a stream or
river, in a manner, which would result in
substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
d) Substantially alter the eXIstIng drainage
pattern of the site or area, including through
the alteration of the course of a stream or
nver, substantially mcrease 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?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
10
,.---------
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
Impact
.
o
.
.
No Impact
o
.
o
o
.---
Issues:
e) Expose people or structures to a significant
risk of loss, injury or death involving
flooding, including flooding as a result of the
failure of a levee or dam?
f) Create or contribute runoff water, which
would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater drainage systems or
provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
Comments:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
No Impact
Less Than
Significan t
Impact
D
D
.
D
D
D
.
D
a-f) The proposed infill project will not violate any water quality standards, waste discharge
requirements or adversely impact groundwater quality. 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 NPDES General
Construction Permit requirements and shall obtain permit coverage and develop a Storm Water
Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) prior to issuance of grading permits. In addition, the project
shall implement construction and post-construction water quality Best Management Practices
(BMPs) for storm water pollution prevention in accordance with the Chula Vista Standard Urban
Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP). See Negative Declaration, Section E.
Mitie:ation: No mitigation measures are required.
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the
project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan,
policy, or regulation of an agency with
jurisdiction over the project (including, but
not limited to the general plan, specific plan,
local coastal program, or zoning ordinance)
o
.
o
o
o
D
.
o
11
-----
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat 0
conservation plan or natural community
conservation plan?
o
o
.
Comments:
a) The proposed project is consistent with the residential character of the surrounding area and will
not disrupt or divide an established community.
b) The project site is within the R-I-P7 (Single-Family Residence 7,000 square foot minimum lot
size) Zone and RLM (Low-Mediurn/8-12 dwelling units per acre) General Plan designations.
The project is consistent with the applicable zoning regulations and the Chula Vista General
Plan.
c) The project will not conflict with any applicable adopted environmental plans or policies and
will not conflict with the adopted Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan.
Mitieation: No mitigation measures are required.
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 proposed project will 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) Pursuant to the Environmental Impact Report for the City of Chula Vista General Plan, the State
of California Department of Conservation has not designated the project site for mineral
resource protection.
Miti2: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
excessive groundbome
groundbome noise levels?
or generation of
vibration or
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase
in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity
above levels existing without the project?
e) For a 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?
13
o
o
.
o
D
.
D
D
D
D
.
o
D
o
.
o
D
o
.
D
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private
airstrip, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
With
Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
0 0 0 .
Issues:
Comments:
a, c, d) Due to the residential character of the existing surroundings, the proposed small residential
infill project is not anticipated to result in any significant noise impacts to noise-sensitive land
uses in the immediate vicinity. Compliance with the noise control ordinance of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code that regulates the maximum one-hour average sound level generated at the
property line is mandatory for any activities occurring on-site.
b) It is not anticipated that persons will be exposed to excessive groundbome vibration or noise
levels, as there will not be any heavy industrial equipment or machinery operated on-site beyond
short-term construction activities.
e) The project is not located within an airport land use plan or 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 excessive noise levels.
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 excessive noise levels.
Mitil!ation: 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 infrastructure)?
o
o
o
.
b) Displace substantial numbers of eXIstIng
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
o
o
o
.
14
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significan t
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
c) Displace substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
o
o
o
.
Comments:
a-c) The project site is surrounded by existing residential development and is zoned R-I-P7
Single-Family Residence Zone. The proposed project would be consistent with the zoning
designation. The proposal requires the demolition of two existing residential structures and the
extension of public facilities to serve the proposed housing units. However, the proposed project
improvements would not induce substantial growth and is consistent with the General Plan. The
project does not exceed regional or local population projections and does not displace substantial
numbers of people or housing necessitating the construction of replacement housing.
Miti2ation: No mitigation measures are required.
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project:
a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or
physically altered goverru;nental facilities,
need for new or physically altered
governmental facilities, the construction of
which could cause significant environmental
impacts, in order to maintain acceptable
service ratios, response times or other
performance objectives for any public
servIces:
Fire protection?
o
o
o
.
Police protection?
o
o
o
.
Schools?
o
o
.
o
Parks?
o
o
o
.
Other public facilitieS?
o
o
o
.
15
._.. __._n _._..__ _._.__...___.___._._....__.__...._. ...___n__. ____.____. _._ n.uu_.._.__ ___...____....._,______._~._ -
_... '..n__.. ....._....... _
___ .____._ .__u_ .. ___,___.____
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Comments:
a) According to the Fire Department, the proposal would not have a significant effect upon or
result in a need for new or altered fire protection services.
b) According to the Police Department, the proposal would not have a significant effect upon or
result in a need for new or altered police protection services.
c) The proposed infill project is located in the Rohr Elementary School attendance area that is
currently operating at or near capacity. While the project will not induce substantial population
growth, it is recommended that the project be annexed to Community Facilities District (CFD)
No.10 in lieu of developer fees to help fund any shortfall generated by new construction.
d) Because the proposed project would not induce significant population growth, it would not
create a demand for additional neighborhood or regional parks or facilities or have a significant
impact on existing park facilities.
e) The proposed project would not have a significant effect upon or result in a need for new or
expanded governmental services and could continue to be served by existing public
infrastructure.
Miti2:ation: 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 substantial physical deterioration of
the facility would occur or be accelerated?
o
o
.
o
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?
o
o
o
.
16
------
Issues:
Comments:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
No Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact
a) The proposed project will not induce population growth; therefore a substantial increase in the
use of neighborhood or regional parks or facilities will not occur or have an adverse impact on
existing recreational facilities.
b) The project does not include or require construction or expansion of recreational facilities thus
no adverse physical effect on the environment will occur.
Mith:?:ation: No mitigation measures are required.
xv. TRANSPORTATION / TRAFFIC.
Would the proj ect:
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 in location that results in substantial
safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design
feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
17
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
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
o
o
o
.
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity?
o
o
o
.
g) Conflict with
programs
transportation
racks) ?
adopted policies, plans, or
supporting alternative
(e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle
o
o
o
.
Comments:
a-g) No significant increases in traffic trips are anticipated to be generated as a result of the
proposed project. The Engineering Division has determined that the proposal does not have the
potential to result in any significant traffic impacts; therefore, the preparation of a traffic study
was not required.
Miti2ation: No mitigation measures are required.
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE
SYSTEMS. Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of
the applicable Regional Water Quality
Control Board?
o
o
o
.
b) Require or result in the construction of new
water or wastewater treatment facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
o
o
.
o
18
---------------
Issues:
c) Require or result in the construction of new
storm 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 from 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?
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient
permitted capacity to accommodate the
project's solid waste disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes
and regulations related to solid waste?
Comments:
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
o
.
o
o
a) The project site is located within an urban area that is served by all necessary utilities and
service systems. No exceedance of wastewater requirements of the Regional Water Quality
Board would result from the proposed project.
19
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
b) The existing water service to the project site will be relocated to accommodate the proposed
residences. An 8-inch water main will be constructed in the proposed reconfiguration of
Sycamore Drive and will be connected to the existing 8-inch water main located in Walnut
Drive. As part of the development process, the applicant shall coordinate with the California-
American Water District for proper design standards and guidance as required.
c) 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 NPDES General Construction Permit requirements and shall obtain permit coverage
and develop a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) prior to issuance of grading
permits. In addition, the project shall implement construction and post-construction water
quality Best Management Practices (BMPs) for storm water pollution prevention in accordance
with the Chula Vista Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP).
d) The project site is within the potable water service area of the California-American Water
Company. Pursuant to correspondence from the California-American Water Company dated
January 4,2005, the project may be serviced upon extension of an existing potable water main, a
new fire hydrant and new domestic water service installations. All water facilities shall be
installed in accordance with California-American Water standards and specifications. In
addition, the applicant shall pay all costs to abandon existing unused services and to relocate and
reconnect any existing customer services in conflict with this project.
e) The capacity of the existing sewer system within the project area is adequate to accommodate
the proposed project. The project will include the removal of an existing 8-inch VCP and
construction of a new 8-inch PVC sewer line connection in the proposed Sycamore Drive right-
of-way.
f) The City of Chula Vista is served by regional landfills with adequate capacity to meet the solid
waste needs of the region in accordance with State law.
g) The proposal would be conditioned to comply with federal, state and local regulations related to
solid waste.
Miti2ation: No mitigation measures are required.
20
lssues:
XVII. THRESHOLDS
Will the proposal adversely impact the City's
Threshold Standards?
A. Library
The City shall construct 60,000 gross square
feet (GSF) of additional library space, over
the June 30, 2000 GSF total, in the area east
of Interstate 805 by buildout. The
construction of said facilities shall be phased
such that the City will not fall below the city-
wide ratio of 500 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
5.5 minutes or less.
b) Respond to 57 percent of "Priority Two"
urgent calls within seven (7) minutes and
maintain an average response time to all
"Priority Two" calls of 7.5 minutes or less.
C) Fire and Emergency Medical
Emergency response: Properly equipped and
staffed fire and medical units shall respond to
calls throughout the City within 7 minutes in 80%
ofthe cases (measured annually).
D) Traffic
The Threshold Standards reqUIre that all
intersections must operg.te at a Level of Service
(LOS) "C" or better, with the exception that
Level of Service (LOS) "D" may occur during the
Potentially
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
21
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
No Impact
.
.
.
.
-----------
Issues:
peak two hours of the day at signalized
intersections. Signalized intersections west of
I -805 are not to operate at a LOS below their
1991 LOS. No intersection may reach LOS "E"
or "F" during the average weekday peak hour.
Intersections of arterials with freeway ramps are
exempted from this Standard.
E) Parks and Recreation Areas
The Threshold Standard for Parks and
Recreation IS 3 acres of neighborhood and
community parkland with appropriate facilities
/1,000 population east ofl-805.
F) Drainage
The Threshold Standards require that storm water
flows and volumes not exceed City Engineering
Standards. Individual projects will provide
necessary improvements consistent with the
Drainage Master Plane s) and City Engineering
Standards.
G) Sewer
The Threshold Standards require that sewage
flows and volumes not exceed City Engineering
Standards. Individual projects will provide
necessary improvements consistent with Sewer
Master Planes) and City Engineering Standards.
H) Water
The Threshold Standards require that adequate
storage, treatment, and transmission facilities are
constructed concurrently with planned growth
and that water quality standards are not
jeopardized during growth and construction.
Applicants may also be required to participate in
whatever water cons~rvation or fee off-set
program the City of Chula Vista has in effect at
22
Potentially
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
o
o
o
o
-.-.-.-.---......-.-..-.-.-----..-- --.--.--.
..____ .__._ ..__n.__ .__..._____________..._ ._.._._____.______________.
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
.
.
.
No Impact
.
o
o
o
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
the time of building permit issuance.
Comments:
a) The project would not induce substantial population growth; therefore, no impacts to library
facilities would result. No adverse impact to the City's Library Threshold standards would
occur as a result of the proposed project.
b) According to the Police Department, adequate police protection services can continue to be
provided upon completion of the proposed project. The proposed tentative parcel map for future
development of ten single-family residential units 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 the Fire Department, adequate fire protection and emergency medical services
shall be provided to the project site. Although the Fire Department has indicated they will
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.
d) The surrounding street segments will continue to operate in compliance with the City's Traffic
Threshold Standard LOS "C" (or better) with the projected project traffic. No adverse impact to
the City's traffic threshold standards would occur as a result ofthe proposed project.
e) Park pad obligation will be required per City Ordinance (refer to Municipal Code Chapter
17.10).
f) Based upon preliminary review of the project, the Engineering Department has determined that
there are no significant issues regarding the drainage of the project site. As a standard
condition, a final drainage study will be required in conjunction with the preparation of final
grading and improvement plans. In accordance with City standards, post-developed flows shall
not exceed pre-developed flows. Properly designed drainage facilities will be installed at the
time of site development to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. No adverse impacts to the
city's storm drainage system or City's Drainage Threshold standards will occur as a result of the
proposed project.
g) The capacity of the existing sewer system within the project area is adequate to accommodate
the proposed project. The project will include the construction of an 8-inch sewer line
connecting to the existing sewer system to serve the proposed residential units. No adverse
impacts to the City's Sewer Threshold standards will occur as a result of the proposed project.
23
Issues:
Potentially
Significan t
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
No Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact
h) Pursuant to correspondence receive from the California-American Water Company, dated
January 4, 2005, the project may be serviced upon extension of an existing potable water main, a
new fire hydrant and new domestic water service installations. In addition, the applicant shall
pay all costs to abandon existing unused services and to relocate and reconnect any existing
customer services in conflict with this project. As part of the development process the applicant
shall coordinate with the California-American Water Company for proper design guidance as
required.
Miti2ation: No mitigation measures are required.
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 proj ect 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?
24
o
o
.
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
--------
Comments:
a) The project site is currently developed and located within an established urbanized area, and is
within the designated development area of the adopted Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan. There
are no known sensitive plant or animal species or cultural resources on the site.
b) No cumulatively considerable impacts associated with the project when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, other current projects and probable future projects have been
identified.
c) The project will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly, as it is a site planned for future residential development.
Miti2ation: No mitigation measures are required.
XIX. PROJECT REVISIONS OR MITIGATION MEASURES:
There are no project revisions or mitigation measures necessary to avoid significant impacts.
xx. ENVIRONMENT AL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at
least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Unless
Mitigated," as indicated by the checklist on the previous pages.
0 Land Use and Planning
0 Population and
Housing
0 Geophysical
0 Agricultural Resources
0 HydrologylWater
o Air Quality
o Threshold Standards
---..----
o Transportation/Traffic
o Biological Resources
o Public Services
o Utilities and Service
Systems
o Aesthetics
o Energy and Mineral
Resources
o Hazards and Hazardous
Materials
o Noise
o Cultural Resources
o Recreation
o Mandatory Findings of Significance
25
----------
X.<"XI. DETERMINATION:
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the .
environment, and aN egative Declaration will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the 0
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the
mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the
project. A Mitigated Negative Declaration will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project may have a significant ~ffect on the 0
environment, and an Environmental Impact Report is required.
I find that the proposed project may have a significant effect(s) on the 0
environment, but at least one effect: 1) has been adequately analyzed in an
earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been
addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on
attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impacts" or "potentially
significant unless mitigated." An Environmental Impact Report is required,
but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
o
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because all
potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier
EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated
pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are
imposed upon the proposed project. An addendum has been prepared to provide
a record of this determination.
?1~tf~~'
Environmental Review Coordinator
City of Chula Vista
JhltJS-
, I
Date
J: \PlanninglM ary V\S ycamore Estates\IS-04-034S ycamore Estates.doc
26
~~~
iJ~-;
CIlY OF
CHUIA VISTA
P I ann
n g
& Building
Planning Division
Department
Development Processing
APPLICATION APPENDIX B
Disclosure Statement
Pursuant to Council Policy 101-01, prior to any action upon matters that will require discretionary action by the Council,
Planning Commission and all other official bodies of the City, a statement of disclosure of certain ownership or financial
interests, payments, or campaign contributions for a City of Chula Vista election must be filed. The following information
must be disclosed:
1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the property that is the subject of the application or the
contract, e.g., owner, applicant, contractor, subcontractor, material supplier.
N ~ ~~~L11nJJ~b.
2. If any person* identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals with
a $2000 investment in the business (corporation/partnership) entity.
r.Cu Nt11'-7~
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.
4. Please identify every person, including any agents, employees, consultants, or independent contractors you have
assigned to represent you before the City in this matter.
~oJ NW1i7J
~~o/i ~
5. Has any person* associated with this contract had any financial dealings with an official** of the City of Chula
Vista as it relates to this contract within the past 12 months. Yes_ No~
If Yes, briefly describe the nature of the financial interest the official** may have in this contract.
6.
Have you made a contribution .if more than $250 within the past twelve (12) months to a current member of the
Chula Vista City Council? No,," Yes _If yes, which Council member?
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista
California
Y1Y10
(61Y) 6Yl-5101
NTTft-G~4 r\A ~~II '-or:;
~~/~
-.-
r~= :;;.._~
cm OF
CHUlA 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, etc.)
Yes_ NOL-
If Yes, which official** and what was the nature of item provided?
Date:
(~ -11-0 4
\
tJJ.vil 'Inl W$7ft~eN J:~ {; .
type me of Contractor/Applicant
Print or
*
Person is defined as: any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal
organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, any other county, city, municipality, district, or other
political subdivision, -or any other group or combination acting as a unit.
**
Official includes, but is not limited to: Mayor, Council member, Planning Commissioner, Member of a board,
commission, or committee of the City, employee, or staff members.
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista
California
91910
(619) 691-5101