HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Reports /2007/12/12
AGENDA
MEETING OF THE
THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
6:00 p.m.
Wednesday, December 12,2007
City Council Chambers
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA
CALL TO ORDER:
ROLL CALL/MOTIONS TO EXCUSE:
Planning Commission:
Tripp_Felber_Moctezuma_ Vinson
Bensoussan_ Clay ton_ Spethman_
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND MOMENT OF SILENCE:
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS:
Opportunity for members of the public to speak to the Planning Commission on any subject matter
within the Commission's jurisdiction, but not an item on today's agenda. Each speaker's
presentation may not exceed three minutes.
CONSENT ITEMS:
The Chair may entertain requests by Staff to continue or withdraw an agenda item. The Chair may
also entertain a recommendation by a Commissioner to approve certain non-controversial agenda
items as consent items. Items approved on consent are in accordance with Staff's proposed
findings and in accordance with the recommendation as stated in Staff's report to the Planning
Commission.
PUBLIC HEARINGS I ACTION ITEMS:
1. PUBLIC HEARING:
Consideration of the applications filed by
Brookfield-Shea Otay, LLC, to develop 3.9 acre
Concordia Lutheran Church site, located at 267 East
Oxford Street:
- PCZ 07-08; a rezone from the R-1-7 Single Family
Residential zone to the R-1-5-P Single Family
Residential zone, with a Precise Plan Modifying
District;
- PCM 08-02, a Precise Plan to establish Precise
Plan development standards, architectural and
landscape design guidelines;
Planning Commission
- 2 -
December 12, 2007
- PCS 07-07, a Tentative Subdivision Map to
subdivide 3.9 acres into 24 residential and 2 open
space lots, served by a new public residential
street.
Project Manager: Richard Zumwalt, Associate Planner
2. Discussion:
Role and responsibility of Design Review
Committee.
Jim Hare, Assistant Planning Director
DIRECTOR'S REPORT:
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
ADJOURNMENT:
To a Special Planning Commission meeting on
December 18,2007.
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 (TOO) at 585-
5647. California Relay Service is also available for the hearing impaired.
CHULA VISTA
PLANNING
COMMISSION
AGENDA STATEMENT
Item: 1
Meeting Date: 12/12/07
ITEM TITLE:
PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of the following applications filed by
Brookfield-Shea Otay, LLC, to develop 3,9 acre Concordia Lutheran Church
site, located at 267 East Oxford Street:
1. PCZ-07-08, a rezone from the R-I-7 - Single Family Residential
zone to the R-I-5-P Single Family Residential zone, with a Precise
Plan Modifying District;
2. PCM-08-02, a Precise Plan to establish Precise Plan development
standards, architectural and landscape design guidelines;
3, PCS-07-07, a Tentative Subdivision Map to subdivide 3,9 acres into
24 residential and 2 open space lots, served by a new public
residential street.
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning and Building
INTRODUCTION
This is a request for a Rezone, Precise Plan and Tentative Subdivision Map to develop 24 single-
family lots on a 3,9-acre site presently occupied by the Concordia Lutheran Church at 267 East
Oxford Street in southwestern Chula Vista (see Locator Map),
BACKGROUND
The applicant is acting on behalf of the property owner, Concordia Lutheran Church. The
church would sell the property and construct a new church facility in the Winding Walk
neighborhood of the Otay Ranch Planned Community.
Public Meeting
On November 7, 2007, City staff and the applicant hosted a publicly noticed neighborhood
meeting at the Kellogg Elementary School, to accept comments and questions on the project.
Prior to this meeting, the applicant conducted two public meetings to obtain public input and
provide updates on the progress of the project. There were six attendees from the public at the
city-initiated meeting. The concerns related to the project that were expressed at the meeting
included:
Oxford Street Project
Page 2
12/12/07
. Increased traffic on Melrose Ave, which is need of repair;
The City Engineer has reviewed the project and detennined that the traffic will decrease as a
result of the change from church to residential uses, from 304 to 240 average daily trips. The
project will not create traffic impacts. Melrose Street is on the list of streets requested by
citizens for re-surfacing, but a schedule has not been established at this time,
· Privacy concerns related to new two-story homes being placed adjacent to existing homes;
The City does not regulate privacy issues that could occur between adjacent properties.
· Potential affects of grading and construction of fences and retaining walls adjacent to the
existing homes;
During the construction phase of the project, the builder will design grading, walls and fences
that will not encroach onto the adjacent properties, and will be required to comply with the
grading ordinance, and detailed wall and fencing plans.
. Timing and Phasing of construction of the project;
The owner clarified that the property may be sold to a builder and anticipated that
construction would not commence until 2009.
. Project drainage after development;
The applicant's Engineer described the proposed site drainage and improvements, including
construction of a stonn drain system, a curb and gutter system, a cross-gutter, SwaleGard
curb inlet filters, and a grass-lined swale. Low flows from the site would be intercepted and
diverted by proposed cross-gutters to curb-inlet filters which will screen out larger materials
and discharge water directly into a proposed grass-lined swale located at the southwestern
comer of the project site. The grass-lined swale will convey flow in a westerly direction, and
will be graded at approximately 0.2% slope to pennit water to percolate prior discharge to the
public curb/gutter system on East Oxford Street at the southwestern comer ofthe site.
Peak flows from the east side of the site will be conveyed along the proposed public street
and bypass the cross gutter, flowing directly to East Oxford Street. A portion of the peak
flows from the west side of the site will enter the curb inlets filters and be diverted to the
grass-lined swale before discharge to the public curb/gutter system on East Oxford Street at
the southwestern comer of the site while the remaining will bypass the inlets and flow out to
East Oxford Street.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with
the California Environmental Quality Act and has conducted an Initial Study, IS-07 -031 in
Oxford Street Project
Page 3
12/12/07
accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Based upon the results of the Initial
Study, the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the project could result in
significant effects on the environment. However, revisions to the project made by or agreed to
by the Applicant would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no
significant effects would occur; therefore, the Environmental Review Coordinator has prepared a
Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, IS-07-031
(see Attachment 8, Final Mitigated Negative Declaration).
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the attached Planning Commission Resolution PCZ-07-08/PCM-08-02/PCS-07-07,
recommending that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program IS-07 -031; and adopt the attached Draft City Council
Resolution and Draft Ordinance, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained
therein.
BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
On November 19, 2007, the Resource Conservation Commission determined that Initial Study
IS-07-031 for the Project was adequate, and is recommending that the City Council adopt the
Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, IS-07-031.
DISCUSSION
Project Site Characteristics:
The 3.9 -acre project site is located within the urbanized area of Western Chula Vista, (see
Locator Map). The site is approximately 100 feet east of the intersection of Melrose Avenue and
East Oxford Street. Primary access to the site is currently provided directly from East Oxford
Street. The existing site slopes gently to the north from 260 feet to 270 feet. The site has been
partially disturbed with previous uses including a church, pre-school/daycare, and parking lot on
the south side of the lot and play fields on the north side of the lot (see Attachment 2, Aerial
Photo). The existing land uses on each side of the project are single-family residential.
Project Description:
The project proposes demolition of the eXIstmg church, daycare/community building, and
accessory buildings, and redevelopment of the 3.9 ac. site with 24 single-family detached
residential dwelling units (see Attachment 6, Precise Plan Map). The project includes the
following applications:
1. PCZ-07-08, a rezone from the R-1 Single Family Residential zone with minimum 7,000
square foot lots, to the R-1-5-P Single Family Residential zone, with minimum 5,000
square foot lots, including a "P"-Precise Plan Modifying District and Precise Plan
development standards;
Oxford Street Project
Page 4
12/12/07
2. PCM-08-02, a Precise Plan to establish a Precise Plan Map and Text, including
development standards, architectural, and landscape design guidelines;
3. PCS-07-07, a Tentative Subdivision Map to subdivide 3.9 acres into 24 residential lots
and 2 HOA-maintained open space lots, served by a new public residential street. The
residential lots will range in size from 5,006 sq. ft. to 6,249 sq. ft. in size.
Compliance with Development Re2ulations:
Site
General Plan
Low-Medium
Residential (3-6
dwelling units/acre)
North
Low-Medium
Residential (3-6
dwelling units/acre)
Low-Medium
Residential (3-6
dwelling units/acre)
Low-Medium
Residential (3-6
dwelling units/acre)
Low-Medium
Residential (3-6
dwelling units/acre)
South
East
West
ANAL YSIS:
CV Municipal Code Zoning
R-l (Single-Family
Residential)
Existing Land Use
Concordia Lutheran Church and
Daycare
R-l (Single-Family
Residential)
Existing Single-Family Residential
R-l (Single-Family
Residential)
Existing Single-Family Residential
R-l (Single-Family
Residential)
Existing Single-Family Residential
R-l (Single-Family
Residential)
Existing Single-Family Residential
In recommending approval of the requested Rezone, Precise Plan, and Tentative Subdivision
Map, staff relies on the rationale discussed below:
Rezone
The site and surrounding neighborhood consists primarily of single-family residential
development that has been zoned R-1 (single-family residential) for more than 20 years. The
General Plan designation for the project site and surrounding area is Low-Medium Residential,
which permits single-family development at a range of 3-6 dwelling units per acre. The General
Plan includes policy LUT 4.2 that states that existing, stable single-family residential areas
should be protected through zoning or other regulations that discourage higher-density
residential uses or other incompatible activities. To maintain compliance with the General Plan,
the applicant has requested a rezone from the R-1-7 Single-Family Residential zone, to the R-1-
5-P (Single-Family Residential zone, 5,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size, with a Precise Plan
Modifying District). The project proposes 24 detached single-family homes on a 3.9-acre site,
which yields a gross density of 5.88 dwelling units per acre (including the site and adjacent land
area measured to centerline of East Oxford Street). Rezoning to a minimum 5,000 square foot lot
size is necessary to permit the project to achieve the density permitted by the General Plan.
Oxford Street Project
Page 5
12/12/07
Compliance with the General Plan is not considered solely on the basis of development of
individual lots, but from an overall "neighborhood density" perspective. To establish that the
project is within the range of anticipated densities that would comply with General Plan, a 302-
acre neighborhood planning area bounded by Hilltop Drive on the west, I-805 on the east, Naples
Street on the north, and Palomar Street on the south was analyzed. This area includes 1,179
existing dwelling units, non-residential and vacant lands, and 73.9 acres of land dedicated for
streets and public right-of way. The actual gross residential density of this area was determined
to be 3.9 dwelling units per acre. The maximum theoretical residential dwelling unit capacity, at
3-6 dwelling units per acre and 302 gross acres, is 1,809 dwelling units. When compared with
the existing 1,179 dwelling units, there is available residential capacity of 630 dwelling units at
the neighborhood level. Thus, approval of the 24 unit project wil1 not cause the density of the
neighborhood area to exceed the maximum gross density of 6 du/acre established by the Low-
Medium Residential General Plan designation.
Rezoning to a 5,000 square foot minimum lot size will benefit the neighborhood because it will
result in construction of new, entry-level single-family housing product type that will range in
size from 1,982 to 2, 676 square feet, that will be similar in size and scale as the existing older
homes in the neighborhood. In contrast, development of the project with homes on lot sizes of
7,000 square foot minimum in today's market could result in an increase in home sizes from 500
to 900 square feet, which in staffs opinion would not be as compatible with the size or value of
existing homes in the surrounding neighborhood. Also, it would result in a reduction of lot yield
of 6 lots, which would reduce the fiscal revenues to the City generated by the project, which are
needed to provide maintenance and services to the neighborhood. Construction of new, entry-
level single-family housing will enhance the property values of existing homes in the
neighborhood.
Development of the site in compliance with the R-1-5-P zone will be consistent with the Low-
Medium Residential designation and objectives of the General Plan. However, to enable the
project to be designed to be compatible with the surrounding development on larger lots, staff
has required a P-Modifying District with the rezone, which requires approval of a Precise Plan.
Precise Plan
The Precise Plan includes a Precise Plan Map and Text, including the Precise Plan development
standards, architectural, and landscape design guidelines (see Attachment 10). The Precise Plan
Text will serve as the land use plan for the project. The Precise Plan Map shows residential
building footprints and other site improvements. Minor amendments to the Precise Plan Map can
be approved by the Zoning Administrator, as long as those amendments are consistent with the
approved Precise Plan Development Standards.
Adoption of the Precise Plan will help ensure that the future design will be compatible with the
surrounding neighborhood. The proposed R-1-5-P zone requires a Precise Plan that enables the
modification of the development standards of the typical R-1-5 zone. The Precise Plan will
establish a 20 ft. rear yard building setbacks (see table below), which is more restrictive than the
15 ft. required by the R-1-5 zone, to encourage rear yards to be consistent with the R-1-7 zone
for the surrounding area, and to provide the residents with additional rear yard area for private
Oxford Street Project
Page 6
12/12/07
recreation. The Precise Plan will also establish architectural, landscaping and fencing guidelines.
The proposed precise plan guidelines will act as the modified R-1-5-P zoning standards for the
project area, and are listed in the following table:
PRECISE PLAN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Lot Size 5,000 sq. ft. minimum
Lot Width 50 ft. minimum, except 35 ft. for cul-de-sac lots
Building Coverage 40% maximum
Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 50% Maximum
(including garage)
Front Yard Building Setback:
(all setbacks measured from property line except
where noted)
. To Building (living area) 15 ft.
. To Porch 10 ft.
Width of porch shall not exceed 1/3 width of
house
. To Garage 22 ft. from closest edge of sidewalk to face of
garage
Rear Yard Building Setback: 20 ft, with the following exceptions:
Up to 1/3 of the width of the first story of any
house may encroach 5 ft. into the required 20 ft.
rear yard setback, as long as the second
story meets the main 20 ft. setback. The
exception shall not apply to more than two
adjacent houses.
Interior Side Yard Building Setback 5 ft.
Exterior Side Yard Building Setback 10ft.
Building Height: 28 ft. / 2 stories
(Measured to mean height level between eave
and ridge -per CVMC 19.04.038)
Fencing: Decorative stucco or wood fencing is required.
Maximum height is 6 feet from adjacent grade
level.
Garage Minimum 400 square foot, 2-car garage with
minimum dimension of 20 feet.
Oxford Street Project
Page 7
12/12/07
Notes:
a. Minor modifications to Precise Plan map are permitted pursuant to approval of a Site
Plan and Architectural Review by the Zoning Administrator, per CVMC 19.14.420.
Amendments to the Precise Plan Map shall comply with the Precise Plan Development
Standards. All other Precise Plan amendments shall comply with Precise Plan
Modification requirements per CVMC 19.14.577.
b. Uses and Development standards not addressed in this Precise Plan shall comply with
the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, CVMC Title 19.
c. Accessory Uses and Structures shall comply with requirements of CVMC 19.24.030,
with the following exceptions:
(1) The first 300 square feet of any attached or detached open structure, such as a
patio cover or gazebo, which are open on 2 or more sides, are exempt from the Floor
Area Ratio requirements.
(2) The first 100 square feet of detached enclosed buildings such as a pool, storage, or
garden building is exempt for the floor are ratio requirement.
(3) A 5-foot rear and side yard setback is required for any accessory structure in the
required rear or side yard area.
The proposed preCIse plan standards will have a positive impact on the surrounding
neighborhood because the proposed standards allow the applicant to design a Project that is
compatible with the existing single-family residential development. The Project will include 15-
foot front yard and 10 foot exterior side yard building setback standards, which are the same as
the R-1-7 Zone. A minimum rear yard setback of 20 feet is required, which exceeds the R-1-5
requirement and matches the R -1-7 zone. Through the use of three different floor plans at
varying setbacks, the front and rear elevations of the homes will be staggered, which will vary
the alignment of homes to add visual interest. Front yards of some homes may include porches,
and rear yards of some homes may include a 5 ft. encroachment into the rear yard setback for a
one-story element, which will add interest and variety to the elevations. The applicant is
proposing single-story plans on 10 of the 24 lots, which will complement the surrounding area.
The surrounding neighborhood also contains a mixture of single-story and two-story
development. The Precise Plan will include architectural guidelines that will encourage variety in
architectural styles, colors, materials, rooflines, and window treatments. Such standards will
allow construction of a single-family development that is more compatible with the surrounding
R-1-7 zone type of development than the typical R-1-5 development.
Tentative Map
Subdivision Design/Lot Size
The narrow, rectangular shape of the property lends itself to a typical subdivision design with
lots fronting on a single, centrally located street, connecting to East Oxford Street on the south.
All lots meet the minimum 5,000 square foot lot size, 50-foot minimum lot width, and 35-foot
cul-de-sac lot width required by the Precise Plan development standards and R-l zomng
standards. The project will include an HOA open space lot at the end of the cul-de-sac, and
Oxford Street Project
Page 8
12/12/07
another landscaped HOA lot to support the grass-lined drainage swale at the southwestern corner
of the lot. The lots will be designed to comply with the Subdivision Manual lot design criteria.
The proposed density of the project is 6.15 dwelling units per acre, which is consistent with the
density requirements of the RLM General Plan and R-I-P-5 zoning.
The project proposes waiver of the Subdivision Manual standard that lot lines be located at the
top of the slope, so that the south lot line of Lot One can be located at the bottom of the slope.
This is necessary to meet minimum lot width and area requirements for the lot, and to minimize
the amount of grading and use of retaining walls. A freestanding decorative wall will be placed
within the HOA lot at the top of the slope. The area between the wall and the street right-of way
will be placed in an easement and the landscaping and wall will be maintained by the
Homeowner's Association. The City Engineer recommends approval of this waiver on the
grounds that it would be a superior design and that the public safety will not be adversely
impacted.
Grading
The site slopes uphill gently to the north, and is part of a gently sloping ridgeline that slopes
uphill to the east. This area has been completely developed with single-family homes. The
conceptual grading plan proposes a total of 2,370 cubic yards of grading, with balanced cut and
fill. Manufactured slopes are limited to a few portions of the site, such as Lots 1 and 2, and along
the westerly edge of the site. Slope heights will be minor with the maximum height of 5 ft. and
grade of 2: 1 between Lot 24 and the grass-lined swale. Because slope heights are minor, the
maximum retaining wall height will be 3 ft. Retaining walls will be limited to the rear of Lots 7-
12 and side lot lines of Lots 3, 4,21,22,23 and 24. 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. Any visible retaining walls, such as those along the rear of Lots 7-12, will be
required by conditions of approval to be constructed of decorative materials.
Project Access
Vehicular access to the site is provided by East Oxford Street, a public street with an existing
improved width of 40 feet with a 60 ft. right of way. The proposed on-site public street will be
improved to 36 feet with a right-of-way of 56 feet. The proposed public street will create a 4-way
intersection with East Oxford Street and Monterrey Street to the south. Conditions of approval
require that the proposed on-site public street will be improved to full residential street standards
with curb, gutter and sidewalk, and other public utilities in conjunction with Final Map approval.
Pedestrian access on-site will be provided by non-contiguous sidewalks along the street frontage,
connecting to existing sidewalks on East Oxford Street to the surrounding area. Transit service to
the site will be provided by Chula Vista Transit. There is an existing bus stop located 1 block
westerly of the site at the intersection of Melrose and East Oxford Street.
Oxford Street Project
Page 9
12/12/07
Public Utilities
In conjunction with the review of the Project, the applicant has prepared technical reports
analyzing the condition of public utilities such as sewer and water facilities, drainage, and water
quality/storm water runoff systems. Drainage and water quality is discussed in the Background
section above. The findings of these reports are summarized in the attached Mitigated Negative
Declaration (see Attachment 8).
The sewer technical report found that construction of additional public sewer improvements is
needed to serve the Project, and that the Project would not impact existing sewer facilities. The
existing sewer facility system includes 8-inch sewer lines along East Oxford Street and onc
sewer lateral to serve the existing church. There are currently no sewer mains serving the
northerly part of the site. Therefore a new 8-inch sewer lateral line within the proposed public
street, connecting the sewer main in East Oxford Street is proposed to service the lots. The
applicant will be required to submit a final sewer report and plan showing compliance with the
City's Sewer Design Criteria, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
The Sweetwater Authority Water District provides water service to the Project area. They will
provide service to the Project, contingent upon approval of internal improvement plans. The
proposed improvements will include a new water main extension within the proposed public
road that connects to the existing Authority water main in East Oxford Street, and terminates in
the proposed cul-de-sac. This would include new separate laterals and meters for each parcel.
Adequate storage facilities exist to serve the project.
Schools
The Project site is located in the attendance area of Palomar Elementary School at 300 East
Palomar Street, within the boundaries of the Chula Vista Elementary School District. The
Project is also within the attendance area of Castle Park Junior High School located at 160
Quintard Street, and Castle Park High School at 1395 Hilltop Drive, within the Sweetwater
Union High School District.
Staff contacted each school district, to determine if the additional dwelling units proposed by the
Project would cause these schools to be adversely impacted. Both School Districts provided
updated student generation rates for new development. Palomar Elementary is presently below
its capacity, and both Castle Park Junior High and Castle Park High Schools were both above
their capacity. Applying these rates resulted in generation of approximately 8 elementary school
students, 3 junior high school students, and 6 high school students, as described below:
Oxford Street Project
Page 10
12/12/07
School (Grade)
Dwelling
Units
24 X
Generation Rate
Students Generated
Palomar Elementary School
(K -6)
.35 =
8
Castle Park Jr. High School
(7-8)
Castle Park High School
(9-12)
TOTAL
24
X
.1216
-
3
-
24
X
.2291
=
6
17
Both school districts responded that they would be able to accommodate the additional students
generated by the Project, and that the schools would not be adversely impacted by the approval
of the Project.
CONCLUSION:
Based on the preceding information, staff finds that the project meets the General Plan, Zoning
and Subdivision Manual requirements, and recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the
attached Planning Commission Resolution recommending that the City Council approve the
Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, Rezone,
Precise Plan and Tentative Map for the project, subject to the conditions listed in the attached
Draft City Council Resolution and Draft Ordinance.
DECISION-MAKER CONFLICTS:
Staff has reviewed the property holdings of the Planning Commissioners and has found no
property holdings within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property, which is subject to this
action.
FISCAL IMPACT
A "Fiscal Impact Analysis of the Oxford Street Project" report dated November 12, 2007 was
prepared by CIC Research for the applicant. The report estimates the fiscal impact of the project
on the operation and maintenance budget of the City's General Fund. The report concluded that
there would be a positive surplus of $11 ,530 to the City General Fund, and no fiscal impacts as a
result of the development of the Project. Also, the cost of processing the applications will be
covered by the deposit accounts paid for by the applicant.
Oxford Street Project
Page II
Attachments
1 Locator Map
2 Aerial Photo
3 Draft Planning Commission Resolution
4 Draft City Council Resolution
5 Draft City Council Ordinance
6 Precise Plan Map
7 Tentative Map
8 Final Mitigated Negative Declaration
9 Ownership Disclosure Fonns
10 Precise Plan Text
Prepared by: Richard Zumwalt, Associate Planner, Planning and Building Department
J: planning\casefiles\07 -08\PCZ\publichearing\PCZ 07 -08-PC-AS-11-8-07
12/12/07
KeUoog
=Iernenta:v
Sch:-ol
CHULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
LOCATOR PROJECT
C!) ;;:: Brookfield Shea Otay, LLC.
~ 267 E. Oxford Street.
SCALE: FILE NUMBER:
No Scale PCZ-07-08
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
ZONE CHANGE
Request 24 5FD development on a 3.9 acre lot Zone change
proposed from R-1 to R-1-5-P. Located at 267 E. Oxford 5t
NORTH
Related cases: IS-07-031, PCS-07"()7 & GPM>7.Q4
---....--......--.....-..,......
" ,...c............. ._"._~m_'" --...-
OXFORD STREET PRECISE PLAN
;4 rr A-cH /l/1 e:- NT ..:2-
Introduction
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Figure 2 - Aerial Photograph
Page.3 of 30
Oc,ober -:-. 2UlJ7
A7T4CHA1~JJ( 3
RESOLUTION NO. PCZ-07 -08/PCM -08-02/PCS-07 -07
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING
COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
ADOPT THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM IS-07-
031, REZONE PCZ-07-08 WITH PRECISE PLAN STANDARDS,
PRECISE PLAN PCM-08-02, AND TENT A TIVE SUBDIVISION MAP
PCS-07-07, FOR THE OXFORD STREET PROJECT LOCATED AT
267 EAST OXFORD STREET - CONCORDIA LUTHERAN
CHURCH.
WHEREAS, duly verified applications for a Rezone, Precise Plan And Tentative Subdivision
Map were filed with the City of Chula Vista Planning Department on April 10,2007, by Brookfield
Shea Otay, LLC ("Applicant") on behalf of Concordia Lutheran Church ("Owner"); and
WHEREAS, the Applicant requests approval of an amendment to the adopted zoning map or
maps established by Section 19.18.010 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code in order to rezone the
Project Site from the R-l (Residential Single Family) Zone to the R-1-5-P (Residential Single
Family, Precise Plan) zone with a "P" Precise Plan Modifying District, adopting Precise Plan
standards and establishing a Precise Plan for the Project Site, and approval of a Tentative
Subdivision Map to divide the Project Site into 24 single family residential lots ("Project"); and
WHEREAS, the area ofland commonly known as the Oxford Street Project (current site of
Concordia Lutheran Church), which is the subject matter of this Resolution, is depicted in Exhibit
"A", attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, and for the purpose of general
description herein consists of one site totaling 3 .90-acres located at 267 East Oxford Street ("Project
Site"); and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and has conducted an Initial Study, IS-07-
031 in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Based upon the results of the
Initial Study, the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the project could result in
significant effects on the environment. However, revisions to the project made by or agreed to by the
Applicant would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant
effects would occur; therefore, the Environmental Review Coordinator has prepared a Mitigated
Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, IS-07 -031.
WHEREAS, The Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program, IS-07 -031, was considered by the Resource Conservation Commission, who voted 5-0-0-1
on November 19, 2007, to recommend that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative
Declaration; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Building Director set the time and place for a hearing on the
Project, and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a
newspaper of general circulation in the city and its mailing to property owners within 500 feet ofthe
exterior boundaries of the property, at least 10 days prior to the hearing; and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 6:00 p.m.,
December 12,2007, in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission
and said hearing was thereafter closed; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission having received certain evidence on December 12,
2007, as set forth in the record of its proceedings, incorporated herein by this reference made certain
findings with respect to its recommendation of Resolution PCZ-07-08/PCM-08-02/PCS-07-07,
which are identified herein; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration and
Mitigation Monitoring Program (IS-07 -031), has been prepared in accordance with requirements of
CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines and the Environmental Review Procedures ofthe City ofChula
Vista; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission agrees with the findings included in the draft
Resolutions of Council, attached hereto, and adopts such findings as their own, including the
findings for approval of rezone and precise pan modifying district; consistency with the General
Plan, those of public convenience, necessity, general welfare, and good zoning practice; Precise Plan;
and Tentative Subdivision Map.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION, based
on the facts and circumstances presented at the hearing, the attached Agenda Statement and draft
resolutions and ordinance, and the ability to make the findings necessary for such action,
recommends that the City Council adopt the attached Draft City Council Ordinance adopting
Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, IS-07-031, and
Rezone PCZ -07-08, rezoning the Project Site from the R-l (Residential Single Family) Zone to the
R-1-5-P (Residential Single Family, Precise Plan) zone with "P" Modifying District, and adopting
Precise Plan standards; and Draft City Council Resolution for Precise Plan PCM-08-02, and
Tentative Subdivision Map PCS-07-07, approving a Precise Plan and establishing conditions of a
Tentative Map for the Project, to divide the Project Site into 24 single family residential lots.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT a copy ofthis resolution be transmitted to the City
Council.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this 12th day of December, 2007, by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
William C. Tripp,
Chairperson
ATTEST:
Diana Vargas, Secretary
J:\Planning\Case Files\-07 (FY 07-08)\PCZ\ PCZ-07-08\PCZ-07-08-PCM-08-02-PCS-07-07.PCRes
CHULA VISTA PLANNING AND
LC)OCATOR ~~~Fc';.k:
PROJECT
ADDRESS:
SCALE:
No Scale
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
Brookfield Shea Otay, LLC.
267 E. Oxford Street.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
ZONE CHANGE
Request 36 SFD development on a 3.9 acre lot. Zone change
proposed from R 1 to R2. Located at 267 E. Oxford St
NORTH
FILE NUMBER:
PCZ-07 -08
Related cases: 15-07-031, PCS-07-07 & GPA-07-04
J:\Planning\Public Notices\PCZ\PCZ0708.cdr 04.26.07
ATT-"i c I-t ~ E1vJI 1-
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ADOPTING MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND
REPORTING PROGRAM IS-07 -031, APPROVING A PRECISE
PLAN AND ESTABLISHING CONDITIONS OF A
TENTATIVE MAP FOR THE OXFORD STREET PROJECT, TO
DIVIDE 3.90 ACRES LOCATED AT 267 EAST OXFORD
STREET INTO 24 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS -
CONCORDIA LUTHERAN CHURCH.
I. RECITALS
A. Project Site
WHEREAS, the area of land commonly known as the Oxford Street Precise Plan (PCM-
08-02) and Tentative Subdivision Map (PCS-07-07), Chula Vista Tract No. 07-07, which is
the subject matter of this Resolution, and is depicted in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference, and for the purpose of general description consists of
3.90 acres located at 267 East Oxford Street, located within the Residential Low Medium
Designation (3-6 dwelling units per acre) of the General Plan, and the Residential Single
Family, Precise Plan (R-1-5-P) zone, consisting of APN 639-392-14-00, ("Project Site"); and
B. Project; Application for Discretionary Approval
WHEREAS, on April 10, 2007, a duly verified application was filed with the City of
Chula Vista Planning and Building Department by Brookfield Shea Otay, LLC ("Applicant")
on behalf of Concordia Lutheran Church ("Owner") requesting approval of a Precise Plan
and Tentative Subdivision Map to subdivide 3.90 acres into 24 single family residential lots
("Project"); and
c. Prior Discretionary Approvals
WHEREAS, on January 8, 2008, the City Council of the City ofChula Vista voted _-_-_-
_ to adopt an ordinance adopting Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program, IS-07-031, and amending the City Of Chula Vista Zoning Map
established by Section 19.18.010 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code to rezone the Project
Site as depicted in Exhibit "A" from the R-l (Single-Family Residence) Zone, to the R-1-5-P
(Single-Family Residence, Precise Plan Modifying District) Zone, and adopting a Precise
Plan Modifying District with Property Development Standards for the project; and,
WHEREAS, on November 19,2007, the Resource Conservation Commission voted 5-0-
0-1 to find that Initial Study IS-07-031 for the Project was adequately prepared, and
recommended that the City Council adopt the Negative Declaration, IS-07-031 and
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, IS-07 -031, and
D. Planning Commission Record on Applications
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on the Project
on December 12,2007, and after hearing staffs presentation and public testimony voted _-_-
Resolution No. 2007-
_ to recommend that the City Council approve the Project, in accordance with the findings
and subject to the conditions listed below; and
WHEREAS, the proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning
Commission at their public hearing on the Project held on December 12, 2007, and the
minutes and Resolution resulting therefrom, are hereby incorporated into the record of this
proceeding; 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
F. City Council Hearing
WHEREAS, the duly called and noticed public hearing on the Project was held before the
City Council of the City of Chula Vista on January 8, 2008, in the Council Chambers, 276
Fourth Avenue, at 6:00 p.m. to receive the recommendations of the Planning Commission,
and to hear public testimony with regard to the same.
WHEREAS, the meeting was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 6:00 pm,
January 8, 2007, in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the City Council and
said hearing was thereafter closed.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby find, determine and
resolve as follows:
II. COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed Project for compliance
with the California Environmental Quality Act and has conducted an Initial Study, IS-07-031
in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Based upon the
results of the Initial Study, the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the
Project could result in significant effects on the environment. However, revisions to the
Project made by or agreed to by the Applicant would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects
to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur; therefore, the Environmental
Review Coordinator has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration, IS-07-031.
III. INDEPENDENT JUDGEMENT OF THE CITY COUNCIL
The City Council finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program (IS-07-031) have been prepared in accordance with the requirements
of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines and the
Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Chula Vista;
2
Resolution No. 2007-
The City Council considered Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Mon\toring and
Reporting Program (IS-07-031) together with any comments received during the public
reVIew process;
The City Council further finds that on the basis of the whole record before it, including the
initial study and any comments received, that the Project could result in significant effects on
the environment. However, revisions to the Project made by or agreed to by the Applicant
would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects
would occur;
The Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (IS-
07 -031) and other related materials are located in the Planning and Building Department and
maintained by the custodian of said documents who is the Director of Planning and Building.
This constitutes the record of proceedings upon which this adoption of the Mitigated
Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program is based;
The City Council further finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program (IS-07 -031) reflects the independent judgment of the
City Council of the City of Chula Vista and adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration and
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (IS-07 -031) for the Project.
IV. PRECISE PLAN FINDINGS/APPROVAL
1. That such plan will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to
the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity or
injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity.
The City Council finds that the proposed precise plan and development standards
contained in attached Exhibit C will not have a negative impact on the surrounding
neighborhood because the proposed standards allow the applicant to design a Project that
is more compatible with the type and intensity of existing residential development in the
area. The surrounding area includes single-family homes to the north, south, east and
west. These homes were developed pursuant to the R-1-7 zone with predominantly 7,000
square foot lots. To provide a subdivision design that is more compatible with the R-1-7
zone, the Project will include a minimum rear yard setback requirement of 20 feet, which
exceeds the R-1-5 requirement, and matches that of the R-1-7 zone. Through the use of
three different floor plans at varying setbacks, the front and rear yards of the Project will
be staggered, which will vary the alignment of homes to add visual interest. The applicant
is proposing single-story plans on 10 of the lots, which will complement the surrounding
area, which also contains a mixture of single-story and two-story development. Such
standards will allow construction of a single-family development that is more
aesthetically attractive and compatible with the surrounding R-1-7 zone type of
development than the typical R-1-5 development. The project meets the density
requirements of the General Plan, and therefore the intensity of development is consistent
with that of the surrounding single-family area and will not adversely impact public
facilities such as parks and schools.
2. That such plan satisfies the following principles for amendment of the "P" modifying
district as set forth in CVM C 19.56.041:
3
Resolution No. 2007-
(a) The basic or underlying zone regulations do not allow the property owner
or the City the appropriate control or flexibility needed to achieve an efficient and
proper relationship among the uses allowed in the adjacent zone
The City Council finds that application of the "P" modifying district is
appropriate because the underlying R-1-5 zone regulation does not allow
development standards needed to achieve a project design that is compatible with
the adjacent residential area, and therefore a precise plan modifying district is
needed to allow a more compatible design. Development of the site under the
standard R-1-5 zoning would potentially result in massing issues created by rows
of rear elevations of homes developed with a 15 ft. rear yard setbacks. The
Precise Plan standards will allow the Project to be designed with development
standards which will make a more appropriate transition between adjacent single
family development on 7,000 square foot lots, and will also be designed to
include walls, fencing and landscaped open space lots that will help buffer the
units adjacent from the adjacent uses, in a manner that the development of the site
will better coexist with adjacent uses.
3. That any exceptions granted which may deviate from the underlying zoning requirements
shall be warranted only when necessary to meet the purpose and application of the "P"
Precise Plan Modifying District.
With the exception of the rear yard setback of 20 feet and the front yard setback to the
porch of 10 feet, the development standards are the same as the R-1-5 zone. Minor
encroachment into the front and rear yard setbacks would add interest and articulation to
the street scene and rear elevations.
Development of the lot using the development standards of the R-1-5 zone would limit
the ability of the applicant to propose a design that meets the goal of achieving an
efficient and proper relationship among the uses allowed in the adjacent zone. The
Precise Plan will provide special development standards that will make the project more
compatible with adjacent single-family housing, which was developed under the R-1-7
development standards.
The City Council finds that these requested deviations under the Precise Plan are
warranted in order to achieve the purpose of the Precise Plan Modifying District.
4. That the approval of this plan will conform to the General Plan and the adopted policies
of the City OfChula Vista.
The Project has been designed and evaluated in accordance with the goals and objectives
of the General Plan. The Precise Plan, as described above, will allow the Project to be
consistent with the goals and objectives of the General Plan, and the Chula Vista
Municipal Code.
4
Resolution No. 2007-
The Precise Plan and Precise Standards as depicted in Exhibits B are adopted and are
supported by the required findings (CVMC Section 19.56.041, as outlined in Section II (E)
above. '
V. WAIVER OF PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCING PLAN
Pursuant to CVMC 19.09.050, the City Council hereby finds that the requirement for a
Public Facilities Financing Plan is hereby waived because the project is infill development
located in a developed portion of the City where adequate public facilities exist or will be
provided concurrent with development of the project site, therefore there are no public
service, facility or phasing needs that warrant the preparation of a Public Facilities Financing
Plan.
VI. TENTATIVE 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 267 East
Oxford Street, is in conformance with the elements of the City's General Plan, based on
the following:
1. Land Use
The General Plan land use designation is Low Medium Residential (3-6 dwelling
units per acre). The proposed 24-lot subdivision will be developed at a density of 6
dwelling units per acre, which is within the allowable density and permitted number
of dwelling units.
2. Circulation
All 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 on - site public street is 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 in the southwestern portion of the City.
5
Resolution No. 2007-
5. Growth Management
The surrounding street segments and intersections including East Oxford Street and
Melrose Avenue will continue to operate at the same Level of Service in compliance
with the City's traffic threshold standard with the proposed project traffic. No
adverse impact to the City's traffic threshold standards would occur as a result of the
proposed project.
The Project site is located in the attendance area of Palomar Elementary School,
within the boundaries of the Chula Vista Elementary School District. The Project is
also within the attendance area of Castle Park Junior High School and Castle Park
High School, within the Sweetwater Union High School District. Palomar Elementary
is presently below its capacity, and both Castle Park Junior High and Castle Park
High Schools were both above their capacity. Both school districts responded that
they would be able to accommodate the additional students generated by the Project,
and that the schools would not be adversely impacted by the approval of the Project.
The project site is within the potable water service area of the Sweetwater District.
The project may be serviced from the 8"-water main on East Oxford Street and the
applicant will need to install a service main to service this site. No significant
impacts to existing facility systems or the City's water threshold standards will occur
as a result of the proposed project.
The project site is within the boundaries of the City of Chula Vista wastewater
services area. The existing sewer facility system includes 8-inch sewer lines along
East Oxford Street and one lateral to serve the existing church. Therefore a new 8-
inch sewer lateral line within the proposed public street, connecting the sewer main in
East Oxford Street is proposed to service the lots. No adverse impacts to the City's
sewer system or City's sewer threshold standards will occur as a result of the
proposed proj ect.
6. Open Space and Conservation
The project proposes individual single-family homes that meet the minimum open
space requirement per the Chula Vista Municipal Code. The Environmental Review
Coordinator has prepared a Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program, IS-07 -031, in compliance with the California Environmental
Quality Act, and finds that the development of the site to be consistent with the goals
and policies of the Conservation Element.
7. Parks and Recreation
The proposed project would not induce significant population growth, as it is a small
residential infill project and would not impact existing or proposed recreational
facilities. The Project has been conditioned to pay park acquisition and development
fees prior to recordation of the Final Map.
8. Safety
The City Engineer, Fire and Police Departments have reviewed the proposed
subdivision for conformance with City safety policies and have determined that the
proposal meets those standards.
6
Resolution No. 2007-
9. Noise
The Project has been reviewed for compliance with the Noise Element, a I10ise study
has been prepared by the applicant, which has determined that the project as
conditioned will comply with applicable noise measures at the time of issuance of the
building permit. The Project has been conditioned to require that all dwelling units be
designed to preclude interior noise levels over 45 dBA and exterior noise exposure
over 65 dBA for all outside private yard areas.
10. Scenic Highway
This Project Site IS not located adjacent to or visible from a designated scemc
highway.
11. Seismic Safety
A Geotechnical report has been prepared for the Project, which has determined that
the site is not within or near a mapped earthquake fault zone, and there are no known
or suspected seismic hazards associated with the Project site. Conditions of approval
have been included which require that a detailed soils report and geo-technical study
be prepared prior to approval of grading plans, and that foundation plans be reviewed
in conjunction with building permits. Therefore, project compliance with applicable
Uniform Building Code standards would adequately address any. building
safety/seismic concerns.
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, is
presently developed as a church, and is located adjacent to existing 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.
7
Resolution No. 2007-
VII. GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 66020 NOTICE
Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(d)(1), NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the
90 day period to protest the imposition of any impact fee, dedication, reservation, or other
exaction described in this resolution begins on the effective date of this resolution and any
such protest must be in a manner that complies with Section 66020(a) and failure to follow
timely this procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, set aside, void or annual
imposition. The right to protest the fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions does
not apply to planning, zoning, grading, or other similar application processing fees or service
fees in connection with the project; and it does not apply to any fees, dedication, reservations,
or other exactions which have been given notice similar to this, nor does it revive challenges
to any fees for which the Statute of Limitations has previously expired.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby approve the Project subject to
the general and special conditions set forth below.
VIII. TENTATIVE MAP 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. 07-07, located
at 267 East Oxford Street.
IX. 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, Owner or Successor-in-Interest to the
City's satisfaction prior to approval ofthe Final Map, unless otherwise specified:
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 shall pay in full any unpaid balance for the Project, including Deposit Account
No. DQ1439 and related Engineering Department accounts.
3. 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 November 28, 2007. 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.
8
Resolution No. 2007-
4. Any and all agreements that the Applicant is required to enter into hereunder shall be in a
form approved by the City Attorney.
5. If any of the terms, covenants or conditions contained herein shall 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 including issuance of
building permits, deny, or further condition the subsequent approvals that are derived
from the approvals herein granted, institute and prosecute litigation to compel their
compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their violation. The Applicant shall
be notified in writing 10 days in advance prior to any of the above actions being taken by
the City and shall be given the opportunity to remedy any deficiencies identified by the
City.
6. The Applicant shall implement to the satisfaction of the City Environmental Review
Coordinator and the City Engineer the mitigation measures identified in the Mitigated
Negative Declaration (IS-07-031) and associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program for the Project.
7. The Applicant shall comply with the "Recycling and Solid Waste Management Plan"
which has been approved by the City of Chula Vista Conservation Coordinator. The plan
demonstrates 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 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 trash enclosures which are designed to comply with the City's N.P.D.E.S.
permit if applicable, to provide compatibility with the architectural style of the
development, and to enhance trash enclosure doors where they are highly visible.
8. Applicant shall obtain a demolition permit from the Building Division and remove all
existing structures prior to issuance of the Grading Permit or Final Map, whichever
occurs first.
9. Applicant shall present written verification to the City Engineer from the Sweetwater
Authority that the subdivision will be provided adequate water service and long-term
water storage facilities.
10. Applicant shall obtain approval of a street name and street addresses to the satisfaction of
the Director of Planning and Building and City Engineer.
11. Applicant shall pay all applicable parkland acquisition and development (PAD) fees,
including in-lieu fees, to the City in accordance with Chapter 17.10 of the .Municipal
Code.
9
Resolution No. 2007-
12. Applicant shall submit detailed street tree and landscape erosion control plans for the
Project 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. Plans shall be consistent with the
Concept Landscape Plan approved in conjunction with the Precise Plan and Tentative
Map.
13. Applicant shall install landscaping as depicted on the approved landscape plans and shall
provide root barriers and deep watering irrigation systems for trees, as approved by the
Director of Planning & Building.
14. Applicant shall enter into an assignable "Grant of Easements and Encroachment permit"
to ensure the perpetual maintenance of landscaping within the right-of-way by the Home
Owner's Association. Street parkways shall be designated as recycled water use areas, if
approved by the local water purveyor and the San Diego County Health Department.
15. Prior to the installation of any dry utilities, including but not limited to cable, telephone,
gas or electric lines, Applicant shall complete street improvement Landscape
Improvement Plan showing above ground utilities. Prior to any utility installation, wood
stakes shall be placed by the Applicant "on-site" according to the approved street
improvement Landscape Improvement Plan, and shall be painted a bright color and
labeled as "future street tree location". Applicant agrees to provide to the City adequate
documentation that all utility companies have been given notice that no dry utility line
shall be located within five feet of the wood stake in any direction. Applicant will
maintain street tree identification stakes in the locations as shown on the approved street
improvement Landscape Improvement Plan until all dry utilities are in place.
16. Applicant shall provide a minimum of 3 feet of flat ground access from the face of any
HOA maintained wall, fence, or landscaped area, to the beginning of the slope rounding
for maintenance, unless otherwise approved by the Director of Planning & Building.
17. Applicant shall install fire hydrants as determined by the City Fire Marshall. Said
hydrant locations shall be shown on the improvement plans.
18. Applicant shall 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.
GRADING/DRAINAGE/NPDES
19. The Applicant shall submit and obtain the City Engineer's approval of a detailed grading
plan in accordance with the Chula Vista Grading Ordinance.
10
Resolution No. 2007-
20. The Applicant shall submit improvement plans prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer
and obtain a construction permit to perform any work in the City's right of way or future
right of way.
21. The Applicant shall provide a conceptual Dry Utility Plan, Geological Investigation,
Water and Sewer Availability Studies, Drainage Study, Water Quality Technical Reports
(WQTR) with the Improvement and Grading Plan submittals.
22. The Applicant shall obtain approval of water improvements by the Sweetwater Authority
in conjunction with Improvement plans.
23. The Applicant shall comply with all provisions of the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) and the Clean Water Program during and after all phases
of the development process, including but not limited to: rough grading, construction of
street and landscaping improvements, and construction of dwelling units.
24. The Applicant shall incorporate site design BMP features and permanent BMP's
described in the final approved water quality and drainage report into the design and
construction of the project and shown on the grading plans.
25. The Applicant shall replace all existing sidewalks, curbs, and gutters on East Oxford
Street from property line to property line with curb, gutter and sidewalk to match existing
improvements to satisfaction of City Engineer.
26. The Applicant shall install curb, gutter and sidewalk paving on the proposed on,site public
street to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
27. The Applicant shall install ADA Pedestrian Ramps on both sides of proposed onsite
public street to the satisfaction ofthe City Engineer.
28. The Applicant shall repair East Oxford Street along the property line to the centerline
with an asphalt treatment approved by the City Engineer.
29. The applicant is required to comply with the City's SUSMP as amended from time to
time.
30. Applicant shall establish a homeowners association to fund and oversee a contract for the
maintenance of the onsite storm water BMP's. The frequency of maintenance of the
storm water BMP's shall be contained in the provisions of the Codes, Covenants &
Restrictions (CC&Rs). The City Engineer and Director of Public Works shall approve
the provisions of the CC&Rs regarding the onsite storm water BMP's prior to approval of
the final map.
11
Resolution No. 2007-
IMPROVEMENTS
31. All sewer laterals shall be privately maintained by the homeowner or HOA from each
building to the City maintained public sewer main.
32. Applicant shall 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.
33. Applicant shall guarantee, subject to Municipal Code Section 18.44 relating to the
construction of public street improvements for the project.
34. Applicant shall 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.
CC&R's
35. The Applicant shall submit a Declaration or Supplementary Declaration of Covenants,
Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) for approval by the City Engineer and Director of
Planning and Building prior to approval of the final map. The CC&Rs shall include the
following obligations of the Homeowners Association (HOA):
a. Listing of maintained private facilities.
b. Tbe City's right but not the obligation to enforce CC&R's.
c. Provision that no private facilities shall be requested to become public unless all
homeowners and 100% of the first mortgage oblique have signed a written
petition.
d. Maintenance of all private walls, fences, lighting structures, paths, recreational
amenities and structures, drainage structures and landscaping.
e. Implement education and enforcement program to prevent the discharge of
pollutants from all on-site sources to the storm water conveyance system.
f. Before any revisions to provisions of the CC&R's that may particularly affect the
City can become effective, said revisions shall be subject to approval of the City.
The HOA shall not seek approval from the City of said revisions without the prior
consent of 100% of the holders of first mortgages or property owners 'within the
HOA.
g. The HOA shall not seek to be released by the City from the maintenance
obligations described herein without the prior consent of 100% of the holders of
first mortgages or property owners within the HOA.
36. The CC&Rs referenced in condition 35 shall be consistent with Chapter 18.44 of the
Subdivision Ordinance.
37. The Applicant shall submit homeowners assocIatIOn (HOA) budget for review and
approval prior to final map approval by the City Engineer for the maintenance of private
12
Resolution No. 2007-
facilities, including but not limited to streets, storm drains and sewage systems. Said
budget shall include the BMP's and landscaping within the public street right-of-way.
EASEMENTS
38. All existing easements shall be shown and tied at lot lines on the final map. A title report
dated within 60 days of submittal of the final map shall be submitted together with
backing documents for all existing public utility easements and offers of dedication.
Developer shall submit evidence of noticing to all existing public utility easement holders
within the project boundaries as required by the Section 66436 of the Subdivision Map
Act.
39. Applicant shall 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.
40. Applicant shall process a "Grant of Easements, License and Maintenance Agreement" to
allow the HOA to maintain the landscaping within the proposed public right of way.
AGREEMENTS
41. Applicant and hislher 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 66499.3 7 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 hislher 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.
44. Applicant and his/her successors in interest agree to comply with all applicable sections
of the Chula Vista Municipal Code and prepare the Final Map and all plans in accordance
with the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act, Subdivision Ordinance and the
Subdivision Manual of the City of Chula Vista.
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
13
Resolution No. 2007-
satisfaction of the above school districts prior to issuance of the first building permit for
the Proj ect.
MISCELLANEOUS
46. On the Final Map, the Applicant shall tie the boundary of the subdivision to the
California Coordinate System (CCS83), Zone VI based on the North American Datum of
1983 (NAD 83).
47. Applicant shall pay following fees based on the final building permit issuance:
a) Sewer Connection and Capacities fees
b) Development Impact Fees
c) Traffic Signal Fees
48. Improvement Plans shall show that driveways shall comply with the City of Chula Vista
driveway standards per CVCS 1-B to the satisfaction ofthe City Engineer. .
49. The Applicant shall submit copies of the Final Map, grading plans, and improvement
plans in a digital format such as (DXF) graphic file prior to approval of the Final Map in
a form acceptable to the City Engineer.
50. Applicant shall submit a conformed copy of a recorded tax certificate covering the
property prior to approval ofthe Final Map.
51. Applicant shall 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.
B. The following Conditions of Approval shall be satisfied prior to issuance of the first building
permit for the Project, unless otherwise noted:
1 Applicant shall design all dwelling units to preclude interior noise levels over 45dBA and
exterior noise exposure over 65 dBA for all outside private yard areas.
2 Plans for new construction shall comply with 2001 Ca. Building Code, Electrical code,
Plumbing Code, Mechanical Code, Fire Code, 2004 Energy Code, 1997 Uniform Code
for Abatement of Dangerous Buildings, Seismic Zone 4, Wind speed - 70 MPH, and
Exposure-c. Plans submitted on or after January 1, 2008 shall comply with 2005 Energy
Code, and new 2007 Ca. Building Code, Electrical Code Plumbing Code, Fire Code and
Mechanical Code.
3 Applicant shall submit a detailed wa11/fencing plan showing that all project walls and
fences comply with the Oxford Street Precise Plan dated 11/20/07 and applicable City of
Chula Vista Municipal Code requirements. Plan shall indicate color, materials, height and
location of freestanding walls, retaining walls, and fences to the Director of Planning and
14
Resolution No. 2007-
Bqilding 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 corner 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.
IX. 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 Applicant
Date
Signature of Property Owner
Date
X. 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
15
Resolution No. 2007-
the opportunity to remedy any deficiencies identified by the City within a reasonable and
diligent time frame.
XI. 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:
Jim Sandoval
Director of Planning & Building
Ann Moore
City Attorney
J: \Planning\casefi les\fy07 -08\PCS-07 -07\pcs07 -07 .cc.reso.doc
16
CHULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING
Loe A TOR PROJECT PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
ru APPLICANT: Brookfield Shea Otay, LLC. ZONE CHANGE
ff\ ~~g~~~1: 267 E. Oxford Street.
"---J SCAlE: FILE NUMBER:
No Scale PCZ-07-08
DEPARTMENT
Request: 36 5FD development on a 3.9 acre lot. Zone change
proposed from R1 to R2. Located at 267 E. Oxford 5t
NORTH
Related cases: 1~7-O31, PCS-07-07 & GPA-07-04
J:\Planning\Public Notices\PCZ\PCZ0708.cdr 04.26.07
,
t:
ii.
~.::
I
.~
.s.
o..
....
t
~
..
....
'"
.~
~
~
:s
~
~
e
~
~
fo..
~
~
~
~
Q::;
~
~
..
....
'i'
....
o
t/)
U
Q.
--
OJ. miffl ~-.eMJ9 'Nd~
----'"aN-;~J~~~}"~Mbsor,r---------
I
I
I
I
I
I
---------------~----------------
I
I
I
i
---------------------
---------------------
~ \'!!
r
I
: 8~
L_
8~ '. @i
----- ----- ,
8~ @i
"'.
8- @:
..2
. .
8i @i
e~ @~
. _2
.
8i ... @i
. l- .
8i ('\~
8~
e~ e::
_2
~ .
@i @i
--- ---- - -/7------ ----
:
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
I
1\
\ i
\ \ ~
\~
,1:1:;
\::J
\g
\~
\
I
...=
".
,
,
..=
."
,
~a
,
~~
,
Q;
",
I
I
,
I
I
1 It); .....;
; ~i t") Z
I I
9J fiJ:iHJ. ;.j.-OLgt6C9 Ntf~
: ~~9.;ZN1Z'
: YtlNttW b'37~S3W
. ._.::'_~_'",;:7""_~~_.~_- :::."'7_-:::~__:__;:.;"':"':=_::::__~_~...7:
"
\'!
---------------
.. :
\'! .
,
---------------
'" '
~ ~
; ~
t
II
:~---------------
I ,n ~..
... .
~ ~l ~
'I! ~~~
I .,--------~~~--
ItI....-
: I ; ~~?
" ~~~
Uj~~
I --------~-~--
: ~I ~ ~ ~
..
~---------------
::' g
",.
1
,
---------------
Q.
~~
,
---------------
..
~i
,
~~
p"
:1
I
E)(h;bl.'r~
i...n It)
o~
Q,a:~
0( ~
~ 0 ~ i
!;( LL f
!z><ol
~ 0& I
I
I
fl; i
i; ~~~ ~!I
c ~.a:.f
111111
~
::J
~
~
;:.
...:
L_m__
Q.,
..
~
..
.~
..
;;
...
....
I
....
...
...
=
..
1>:
t-
o
o
'"
,,;
"
'"
"
8
fl) ~
-~---~-------
~~~~
;~~ ~
Ill}..<=: ~
(:~:!:---;;~
\ ~!
---
----
~t
,
~
(J)
o
1:1:;
...
~
::>!
~
'"
~
Q
I~
,0..
A7TACt-fMgAJ; 5-~
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ADOPTING MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND
REPORTING PROGRAM IS-07-031, AMENDING THE
ZONING MAPS ESTABLISHED BY MUNICIP AL CODE
SECTION 19.18.010 BY REZONING ONE PARCEL LOCATED
AT 267 EAST OXFORD STREET FROM R-1 (RESIDENTIAL
SINGLE FAMILY) TO R-1-5-P (SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL, PRECISE PLAN), AND ADOPTING PRECISE
PLAN STANDARDS.
1. RECITALS
A. Project Site
WHEREAS, the area of land, which is the subject of this ordinance is depicted in Exhibit
"A" which is incorporated into the ordinance by this reference, and for the purpose of general
description consists of one parcel totaling 3.90 acres, located at 267 East Oxford Street,
commonly know as the Concordia Lutheran Church ("Project Site or Site"); and
B. Project; Application for Discretionary Approval
WHEREAS, on April 10,2007, a Rezone application was filed by Brookfield Shea Otay,
LLC ("Applicant") on behalf of the Concordia Lutheran Church ("Owner") with the Planning
and Building Department of the City of Chula Vista requesting an amendment to the adopted
zoning map or maps established by Section 19.18.010 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code in
order to rezone the Project Site from the R-l (Residential Single Family) Zone to the R-1-5-P
(Residential Single Family, Precise Plan) zone, establishing a Precise Plan Modifying District,
and adopting Precise Plan standards for the Project Site ("Project"); and
C. Planning Commission Record on Application
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on the Project
on December 12, 2007, at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at 276 Fourth Avenue and,
after hearing staff presentation and public testimony, voted _-_-_-_ to recommend that the City
Council adopt the Project, in accordance with the findings listed below; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Building Department set the time and place for the hearing
on the Project applications and notices of the hearing, together with its purposes given by its
publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City, and its mailing to property owners
within 500 ft. of the exterior boundaries of the Project Site at least ten (10) days prior to the
hearing; and
WHEREAS, the proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning
Commission at the public hearing on the Project held on December 12, 2007, and the minutes
and resolution resulting there from, are incorporated into the record of these proceedings; and
E. City Council Record on Application
Ordinance
Page 2
WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for the hearing on the Project
applications and notices of the hearing, together with its purposes given by its publication in a
newspaper of general circulation in the City, and its mailing to property owners within 500 ft. of
the exterior boundaries of the Project Site at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held an advertised public hearing on the Project on_
_,2008, at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at 276 Fourth Avenue; and
WHEREAS, after hearing staffs presentation and public testimony, and receiving the
recommendation of the Planning Commission, the City Council voted _-_-_-_ to adopt the
Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS-07-031) and approve the project, in accordance with the
findings listed below; and
F. Discretionary Approvals Resolution
WHEREAS, at the same City Council hearing at which the ordinance was introduced for
first reading ( _, 2008), the City Council approved Resolution 2008-_ by which it
approved a Precise Plan and Tentative Map for the Project site.
NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby find, determine
and ordain as follows:
A Certification of Compliance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed Project for
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and has conducted an Initial Study,
IS-07-031 in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Based upon
the results of the Initial Study, the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the
Project could result in significant effects on the environment. However, revisions to the Project
made by or agreed to by the Applicant would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point
where clearly no significant effects would occur; therefore, the Environmental Review
Coordinator has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration, IS-07 -031.
B. Independent Judgment Of The City Council
WHEREAS, the City Council considered Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program (IS-07 -031) together with any comments received during the
public review process;
WHEREAS, the City Council further finds that on the basis of the whole record before it,
including the initial study and any comments received, that the Project could result in significant
effects on the environment. However, revisions to the Project made by or agreed to by the
Applicant would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant
effects would occur;
WHEREAS, the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program (IS-07 -031) and other related materials are located in the Planning and Building
Department and maintained by the custodian of said documents who is the Director of Planning
Ordinance
Page 3
and Building. This constitutes the record of proceedings upon which this adoption of the
Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program is based;
WHEREAS, the City Council has exercised their independent review and judgment and
concurs with the Planning Commission, and Environmental Review Coordinator's determination
that Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (IS-07-
031) in the form presented, has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines and the
Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Chula Vista, and adopts the Mitigated Negative
Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (IS-07 -031).
C. The rezoning of the Project Site is consistent with the City of Chula Vista General
Plan, as approved on 12/13/05, and public necessity, convenience, the general welfare and good
zoning practice support the amendment to the Municipal Code.
D. The City Of Chula Vista Zoning Map established by Section 19.18.010 of the Chula
Vista Municipal Code is amended to rezone the Project Site as depicted in Exhibit "A" from the
R-l (Residential Single Family) Zone to the R-1-5-P (Residential Single Family, Precise Plan)
zone, with Precise Plan Modifying District, including Property Development Standards as
represented in Exhibit B.
FINDINGS FOR APROV AL OF REZONE AND PRECISE PLAN MODIFYING DISTRICT,
INCLUDING PRECISE PLAN STANDARDS.
Pursuant to Section 19.56.041 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, the City Council of the City
of Chula Vista finds that the following circumstances are evident, which allows the application
of the "P" Precise Plan Modifying District to the project site.
1. 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 City Council finds that the proposed precise plan standards contained in attached
Exhibit C will not have a negative impact on the surrounding neighborhood because the
proposed standards allow the applicant to design a Project that is more compatible with
the existing residential development in the area. The surrounding area includes single-
family homes to the north, south, east and west. These homes were developed pursuant
to the R-1-7 zone with predominantly 7,000 square foot lots. To provide a subdivision
design that is more compatible with the R-1-7 zone, the Project will include a minimum
rear yard setback requirement of 20 feet, which exceeds the R-1-5 requirement, and
matches that of the R -1- 7 zone. Through the use of three different floor plans at varying
setbacks, the front and rear yards of the Project will be staggered, which will vary the
alignment of homes to add visual interest. The applicant is proposing single-story plans
on 10 of the lots, which will complement the surrounding area, which also contains a
mixture of single-story and two-story development. Such standards will allow
construction of a single-family development that is more compatible with the surrounding
R-1-7 zone type of development than the typical R-1-5 development.
2. That such plan satisfies the following principles for amendment of the "P" modifying
district as set forth in CVMC 19.56.041:
Ordinance
Page 4
(a) The basic or underlying zone regulations do not allow the property owner
or the City the appropriate control or flexibility needed to achieve an efficient and
proper relationship among the uses allowed in the adjacent zone
The City Council finds that application of the "P" modifying district is appropriate
because the underlying R-1-5 zone regulation does not allow development
standards needed to achieve a project design that is compatible with the adjacent
residential area, and therefore a precise plan modifying district is needed to allow a
more compatible design. Development of the site under the standard R-1-5 zoning
would potentially result in massing issues created by rows of rear elevations of
homes developed with a 15 ft. rear yard setbacks. The Precise Plan standards will
allow the Project to be designed with development standards which will make a
more appropriate transition between adjacent single family development on 7,000
square foot lots, and will also be designed to include walls, fencing and landscaped
open space lots that will help buffer the units adjacent from the adjacent uses, in a
manner that the development of the site will better coexist with adjacent uses.
3. That any exceptions granted which may deviate from the underlying zoning requirements
shall be warranted only when necessary to meet the purpose and application of the "P"
Precise Plan Modifying District.
With the exception of the rear yard setback of20 feet and the front yard setback to the
porch of 10 feet, the development standards are the same as the R-1-5 zone.
Development of the lot using the development standards of the R-1-5 zone would limit
the ability of the applicant to propose a design that meets the goal of achieving an
efficient and proper relationship among the uses allowed in the adjacent zone. The
Precise Plan will provide special development standards that will make the project more
compatible with adjacent single-family housing, which was developed under the R-1-7
development standards.
The City Council finds that these requested deviations under the Precise Plan are
warranted in order to achieve the purpose of the Precise Plan Modifying District.
4. That the approval of this plan will conform to the General Plan and the adopted policies
of the City OfChula Vista.
The Project has been designed and evaluated in accordance with the goals and objectives
of the General Plan. The Precise Plan, as described above, will allow the Project to be
consistent with the goals and objectives of the General Plan, and the Chula Vista
Municipal Code.
F. The Precise Standards as depicted in Exhibits B are adopted and are supported by the
required findings (CVMC Section 19.56.041, as outlined in Section II (E) above.
III. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the thirtieth
day from and after its adoption.
Ordinance
Page 5
Presented by
James D. Sandoval
Planning and Building Director
Exhibits:
Exhibit A: Rezone Map
Exhibit B: Precise Plan Standards
Approved as to form by
Ann Moore
City Attorney
Ordinance
Page 6
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City ofChula Vista,
California, this 8th day of January, 2008, by the following vote:
AYES:
Councilmembers:
NAYS:
Councilmembers:
ABSENT:
Councilmembers:
Cheryl Cox, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan Bigelow, MMC, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO)
CITY OF CHULA VISTA)
I, Susan Bigelow, City Clerk of Chula Vista, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Ordinance No. _ had its first reading at a regular meeting held on the 8th day of January, 2008
and its second reading and adoption at a regular meeting of said City Council held on the _ day
of , 2008.
Executed this _ day of
,2008.
Susan Bigelow, MMC, City Clerk
CHULA VISTA PLANNING AND
LOC)CATOR ~~~~I~<;1T: Brookfield Shea Otay, LLC.
~~~~~~: 267 E. Oxford Street.
SCAlE: FILE NUMBER:
No Scale PCZ-07 -08
BUILDING
DEPARTMENT
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
ZONE CHANGE
Request: 36 5FD development on a 3.9 acre lot. Zone change
proposed from R1 to R2. Located at 267 E. Oxford 5t
NORTH
Related cases: 1~7-o31, PCS-07-o7 & GPA-07-04
J:\Planning\Public Notices\PCZ\PCZ0708.cdr 04.26.07
ORDINANCE #
12/12/07
Exh.8
OXFORD STREET PROJECT
PCZ-07 -08 / PCM 08-02
PRECISE PLAN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Lot Size 5,000 sq. ft. minimum
Lot Width 50 ft. minimum, except 35 ft. for cul-de-sac lots
Building Coverage 40% maximum
Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 50% Maximum
(including garage)
Front Yard Building Setback:
(all setbacks measured ftom property line except
where noted)
. To Building (living area) 15 ft.
. To Porch 10 ft.
Width of porch shall not exceed 1/3 width of
house
. To Garage 22 ft. from closest edge of sidewalk to face of
garage
Rear Yard Building Setback: I
20 ft, with the following exception:
Up to 1/3 of the width of the first story of any
house may encroach 5 ft. into the required 20 ft.
rear yard setback, as long as the second
story meets the main 20 ft. setback.
Interior Side Yard Building Setback 5 ft.
Exterior Side Yard Building Setback 10ft.
Building Height: 28 ft. / 2 stories
(Measured to mean height level between eave
and ridge -per CVMC 19.04.038)
Fencing/Walls: Decorative stucco, rail (view) or wood privacy
fencing and walls are pennitted.
Maximum height is 6 feet from adjacent grade level.
Garage Minimum 400 square foot, 2 car garage with
(Continued on Pg.2) minimum dimension of 20 feet.
ORDINANCE # OXFORD STREET PROJECT
12/12/07 PCZ-07 -08 / PCM 08-02
Notes:
a. Minor modifications to Precise Plan map are permitted pursuant to approval
of a Site Plan and Architectural Review by the Zoning Administrator, per
CVMC 19.14.420. Amendments to the Precise Plan Map shall comply with
the Precise Plan Development Standards. All other Precise Plan amendments
shall comply with Precise Plan Modification requirements per CVMC
19.14.577.
b. Uses and Development standards not addressed in this Precise Plan shall
comply with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, CVMC Title 19.
c. Accessory Uses and Structures shall comply with requirements ofCVMC
19.24.030, with the following exceptions:
(1) The first 300 square feet of any attached or detached open structure, such
as a patio cover or gazebo, which are open on 2 or more sides, are exempt
from the Floor Area Ratio requirements.
(2) The first 100 square feet of detached enclosed buildings such as a pool,
storage, or garden building is exempt for the floor are ratio requirement.
(3) A 5-foot rear and side yard setback is required for any accessory structure
in the required rear or side yard area.
'"C
.,
UQ
"
.....
o
....,
w
o
/
f
v:.-
~
6
~
'"
IV
o
o
.....
"'J
~.
.,
..
.....
I
."
.,
..
:::.
'"
..
."
0;
=
ili.~
If I :..~ ~
,I '~~ ~
II ;~f:J ..
! 'CI
~ So ~
I im~
.~ -I 0 ~
I ~""T"I ~
. -.JJ >:
I fOz
!
IN !fi I\) ~
,
,.
1/
, ,
MEsh.ElI MANoR :
!JfUT No~ 8 J
MAp NO. 614j i
APN 680.670-11 THRU 15
I I
I I
~ I ~ 1
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
NnW..HT' ,
~
fg
"-
"
~
to<
:tI
a
~
'"
~
,
,
,
,
,
,
it """""
'"
s.
'"
"
"
~ ~ ~ ~
.. ~ ("J
. -------~~<::_-- ...,
....:~~ ~
~ih~ :tI
~ '" "'S:>f ~
~ ~~~~
-------~---t-
~
~
~
~
fg
15
'"
---------------
/
I
I
I
I
I
'" I
" I
I
I
I
I
/
-----------~-------
15
'"
~
---------------
15
~
15
'"
E. OXFOh i::: (iREET
a
~
l;j
~
'<
;...
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
- -- -- - - -- -- -- ---i----- ------ -----
I
I
I
I
I
I
---------~y~~O~~~~~~~;r~2~1----
AP!* 8~0.4a-1 THRU 18
---------------------
---------------------
~
~
~
V)
~
~
~
~
Q
~
~
~
'tI
0 ~
;:
~
~ ~
~ ~
.s:.
:t ~
'"
t ....
\:::J
~
~ '"
ti
~.
....
:So
=:
G'-
-- ....- ..-
'"
.,
~
00
o
....,
w
o
$?
f
.."
tv
o
o
-.J
-
I!!II
I" :~2
iI ~~~ !/
I "51
""J
dO'
"
...
..
,j;o.
I
...,
..
s.
~
:1'
..
::
..
'"
!
I ~O....
~ ~ X ~
~i,,~
1 fa ~
!~:IJ~
1 ~ 0
i
01~.j>.;
;:-..-
~ -
,
~
1/
!~
,
MEshER MANoR
UfUT No. 8
M4P No. 8141
APN 839+87041 THRU
,
,
I ~] ~rg
,
,
,
,
,
~'"
. ~
~
t-<
::0
o
~
,~ ~ ~ II:
--~-it-------- I
~~1Ii: II
":b.B} I
~~~
~~ti1 ~ 11
__;:~':'________-H I
~"'~ I' ,
~ z~ ~ ! I
~tQ ...."
"I
I
I
, I
, I
,~ ,.' :
Je' '!
I
>
~
~
~
~.C\
::.v:)
.56'R/W
'7'c.u.c..
!@
~ ~
-------------
~ ~
---------------
"
'"
E. OXFOh is: ~REET
'0 II
~
~
::0
ttJ
'<
>
~
,
,
,
I
,
,
,
,
----------------r---------------
,
I
,
I
,
,
---______.ly!2.li.P.!L€lir~ I€/!:!!t!.t!._N.2:..!.__
, M.Ifp NO. 8948 --
APi/J 8~04a-1 THRU 18
I",
i:fC
~@
~@
!@
~8
!8
!8
~8
: I
I
!8
~8
Z...
!'"
----
---------------
~
~
~
VJ
~
~
"-J
~
Q
g;
~
~
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
I~
I
,',
\
\
',I
"\
\
\
\
',\
\
~8
~8
~'"
----
!~
h ~ " ~
. <> ~ g
---------~~~-- ~
,... ~ ~~~ ;2:
. '" :;! ~ "'!: ttJ
:Q" fg
---------~---~-
:\\ '"
!~
--------
//,/"
~~
---------
---------------------
---------------------
~r:
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
_1._______
1
!~ ~
i~
t
~
1
--...J
~
~.
~
~
~
~
Q
t.
~.
:::
Mitigated Negative Declaration
AlIA{ ~6/lJT ~
PROJECT NAME: Oxford Street! Concordia Lutheran Church Residential
PROJECT LOCATION: 267 East Oxford Street
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO: APN #639-392-14-00
PROJECT APPLICANT: Brookfield Shea Otay, LLC
12865 Pointe Del Mar, Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92014
(858) 481-8500
CASE NO.: 1S-07-031
DATE OF DRAFT DOCUMENT: October 19, 2007
DATE OF RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION MEETING: November 19, 2007
PREP ARER:
Richard Zumwalt, A.I.C.P., Associate Planner
DATE OF FINAL DOCUMENT:
November 20, 2007
Revisions made to this document subsequent to the issuance of the notice of availability of the
draft Mitigated Negative Declaration are denoted by underline.
A. Proiect Setting
The 3.9 -acre project site is located at 267 East Oxford Street, within the urbanized area of Western
Chula Vista, (Exhibit 1- Locator Map). The site is approximately 100 feet east of the intersection of
Melrose Avenue and East Oxford Street. Primary access to the site is currently provided directly off
of East Oxford Street. The entire project site has been partially disturbed with previous uses including
a church, pre-schoo1/daycare, and parking lot on the south side of the lot and play fields on the north
side of the lot. The land uses immediately surrounding the project site are as follows:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Single-Family Residential
Single-Family Residential
Single-Family Residential
Single-Family Residential
B. Proiect Description
The project proposes demolition of the existing Concordia Lutheran Church, daycare/community
building, and accessory buildings, and redevelopment of the 3.9 ac. site with 24 single-family
detached residential dwelling units, (Exhibit 2 - Site Plan). The site is designated Residential Low-
Medium (3-6dwe1ling units per acre) on the City of Chu1a Vista General Plan and is zoned R-1-7
Single Family Residential. The project proposes a rezone from R-1-7 to R-1-5-P (Min. lot size of
5,000 sq. ft. with a Precise Plan Modifying District); a Precise Plan; and Tentative Subdivision Map
proposing 24 residential lots ranging from 5,006 sq. ft. to 6,249 sq. ft. in size, with 2 garage parking
spaces per home, a public street and HOA-maintained open space lots.
1
Proposed on-site improvements include drainage facilities, sewer system facilities, fire hydrants,
retaining walls, fencing, improved paved areas, open space and landscape treatments. The project is
identified as developable area within the City of Chula Vista Multiple Species Conservation Program
Subarea Plan, however, it is not located within the City's designated conservation area.
C. Compliance with Zoning and Plans
The proposed project site is within the General Plan RLM (Low-Medium Residential Density/3-6
dwelling units per acre) and Rl (Single-Family Residential) Zone. The project proposes a rezone
iTom R-l to R-I-5-P (Min. lot size of 5,000 sq. ft. with a Precise Plan Modifying District). The
proposed project has been found to be consistent with the applicable site development regulations and
the General Plan.
D. Public Comments
On September 12,2007, a Notice of Initial Study was circulated to property owners within a 500-foot
radius of the proposed project site. The public review period ended September 24,2007. One e-mail
response was received during this period regarding how project grading will affect the adjacent
properties and how the design of the future homes would affect the neighbor's privacy. These issues
will be addressed in the Planning staff report regarding the project.
On October 19. 2007, the Notice of Availability of the Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration for
the project was posted in the County Clerk's Office and circulated to property owners within a 500-
foot radius of the proiect site. The 30-day public comment period closed on November 19.2007. No
written comments were received as a result of this notice.
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 may have potential significant environmental
impacts however; mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project to reduce these impacts
to a less than significant level. This Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance
with Section 15070 of the State of Cali fomi a Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.
Air Quality
Short- Term Demolition and Construction Activities
The project proposes demolition of the existing Concordia Lutheran Church, daycare/community
building and accessory buildings. The proposed project will result in a short-term air quality impact
created iTom construction activities. The grading of the site for future single-family residential
development and worker and equipment vehicle trips will create temporary emissions of dust, fumes,
equipment exhaust, and other air pollutants associated with the construction and demolition activities.
Air quality impacts resulting iTom construction-related operations are considered short-term in
duration.
In order to analyze potential project impacts/emissions, the emission factors and threshold criteria
contained in the 1993 South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Handbook for Air
Quality Analysis were used.
A comparison of daily construction emissions to the SCAQMD's emission thresholds of significance
for each pollutant was analyzed. Emissions were calculated using the URBEMIS 2002 model. The
addition of emissions to an air basin is considered under CEQA to be a significant impact.
Implementation of the Mitigation Measure 1 contained in Section F below would mitigate short-term
construction and rough grading and emissions related air quality impacts to below a level of
significance. These measures are included as a part of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program.
2
Combined Short-Term and Long-Term Impacts
In order to assess whether the project's contribution to ambient air quality is cumulatively
considerable, the project's emissions were quantified with respect to regional air quality. The
proposed project, a small residential infill development, once completed will not result in significant
long-tenn air quality impacts. The project is consistent with the Chula Vista General Plan Update.
The minimal project generated traffic volume of 240 trips would not result in significant long-tenn
local or regional air quality impacts. Through project design, emission-controlled construction
vehicles and efficiency building products and vehicles as mitigated, no area source or long tenn
operational vehicle emission estimates will exceed the Air Quality significance thresholds.
Implementation of the Mitigation Measure I contained in Section F would mitigate construction and
grading related air quality impacts to below a level of significance. These measures are included as a
part of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Biological Resources
A Biological Resource Analysis was prepared by Dudek, dated August 31, 2007, to assess the
potential biological resource impacts of the project. A biological reconnaissance survey of the project
site was conducted on March 30, 2007 to identify existing vegetation on the site. The biological
resource analysis is summarized below.
Habitat Loss Incidental Take (HLIT) Permit
The project site is located within in the City of Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan boundary under the
City's MSCP Subarea Plan. The site is located in an area designated as a Development Area, but is
not located within a strategic preserve or conservation area. The project is subject to the requirements
of the Habitat Loss illcident Take (HUT) Ordinance. ill accordance with the HUT Ordinance, those
projects that are greater than one acre, contain sensitive biological resources, and are located outside
the "Covered Projects," must demonstrate compliance with the Ordinance and obtain Take authority
from the City of Chula Vista for impacts to Covered Species. The following is a summary of the
findings contained within the biological resource report as required by the City's HUT Ordinance,
Section 17.35.
Existing Conditions/ Plant Species
The 3.9-acre project site consists entirely of 1.8 acres of developed land on the south side of the site
with the existing church and accessory buildings, parking lot, and ornamental plantings, and 2.1 acres
of disturbed lands including the playfield and non-native grasses and vegetation on the north side of
the site. Developed land includes two mature illdian Laurel Figs and one Brazilian Pepper Tree, six,
I-ft. diameter eucalyptus trees, and turf-grass under-story. The non-native grasses and vegetation in
the disturbed lands result from establishment of a Bennuda-grass playfield which is mowed but
otherwise is no longer maintained and irrigated, resulting in a mixed growth of grasses and broad-
leaved weeds. Native vegetation cover is less than one percent of the vegetative cover onsite,
occurring on the perimeter of the site adjacent to fencing where the plants are not mowed. No
endemic or special status plants exist on the property.
Wildlife/Sensitive Species/Sensitive Habitats
The biological report stated that wildlife species such as birds and butterflies occupied the site,
although no mammal, amphibian or reptile species were detected during the survey.
Ten bird species and two butterfly species were detected on site. Most bird species observed were
common, disturbance-adapted species. Cooper's hawk (Accipiter cooperi), which is a covered species
3
under the City of Chula Vista's MSCP Subarea Plan and a State species of special concern, was
observed during the site survey. Existing large Indian Laurel Fig and Brazilian Pepper trees occurring
on-site may provide suitable habitat for raptors, and a nest was observed in the Brazilian Pepper tree
on site. Due to the territorial /behavioral characteristics of the Coopers Hawk, it was assumed that
nest was used by them. No special status/wildlife species were reported within one mile of the
project site. No state or federally listed threatened or endangered wildlife species were observed in
the study area and are not expected to occur, due to the low quality of habitat onsite. Potential impacts
of the project on these resources and sensitive species, and mitigation measures are further discussed
in Project Impact section below.
Project Impact
The existing lot supports 2 large ornamental Indian Laurel Fig trees and 1 large Brazilian Pepper tree.
The proposed removal of these trees during development could impact potential habitat for the
Cooper's Hawk and other migratory bird species if the vegetation clearance occurs between January
15 thru August 15 during breeding season. If vegetation clearance occurs between August 16 and
January 14, development of the site would not result in significant impacts to biological resources. If
removal of habitat or construction activities must occur during the breeding season, pre-construction
surveys shall be conducted to detennine the presence or absence of nesting raptors. The proposed
project may result in impacts to sensitive biological resources and nesting raptors, and therefore,
mitigation measures are required. The project will be required to implement the mitigation measures
specified in Section F, and therefore no impacts to Cooper's Hawk or other migratory birds are
anticipated. The project will not be required to obtain a HUT Pennit pursuant to Section 17.35 of the
Chula Vista Municipal Code.
Further mitigation measures include implementation of construction BMPs, and clearing, grubbing or
grading pennits. Implementation of the mitigation measures identified in Section F of this Mitigated
Negative Declaration would reduce potentially significant biological impacts to a level below
significance.
Geology and Soils
To assess the potential geological/soils impacts of the project, a Geotechnical Investigation evaluation
was prepared by Geocon, Inc. dated Apri118, 2007. No groundwater was encountered on the site and
no groundwater related problems, either during or after construction, are anticipated. No significant
geological or soil impacts would be created as a result of the proposed project as conditioned. The
potential for soil liquefaction is considered to be low. The project site is not located in an active
Earthquake Fault Zone. The nearest active fault is the Rose Canyon fault approximately 6 miles
away.
The site was graded previously with the development of the existing church. Proposed fill grading will
occur over the entirety of the 3.9-acre site. Grading is balanced, including 3,400 cubic yards per acre to be
excavated and filled, with a maximum cut and fill slope ratio of2:1. In the event of a major earthquake, the
area could be subject to moderate to severe ground shaking. However, the site is considered comparable to
others in the general vicinity. The site is also underlain with artificial fill and San Diego Formation and is
not suitable for support of s1ructures. The project will require issuance of a grading pennit to require
excavation of undocumented fill, re-grading and re-compaction of the site, and review by the consultant of
project grading and foundation plans prior to submittal to regulatory agencies for approval, to minimize the
potential for damage to future s1ructures as a result of unstable soils, ground-shaking, or subsidence.
4
According to the City's Engineering Division, the project will require a grading pennit. The
preparation and submittal of a final soils report will be required prior to the issuance of the grading
pennit as a standard engineering requirement. In order to prevent silt discharge during construction,
the developer will be required to comply with best management practices in accordance with RWQCB
NPDES Municipal Permit, Order No. R9-2007-0001. The appropriate erosion control measures
would be identified in conjunction with preparation of final grading plans and would be monitored
and implemented during construction by the Public Works Department. Therefore, the potential for
the discharge of silt into City stonn drainage systems would be less than significant. Implementation
of the mitigation measures contained in Section F below would mitigate potential geological/soils
impacts to a less than significance level. These measures are included as a part of the Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
In order to assess potential hazardslhazardous material impacts, dated Apri12007, Dudek prepared the
"Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment - Concordia Lutheran Church and School" Report for the
project. The project proposal includes the demolition of the existing church, accessory buildings and
parking lot. The report found that the potential exists for impacts to result from the demolition of
structures that may contain lead and asbestos. Therefore, prior to any demolition activities, a licensed
and registered asbestos and lead abatement contractor will perfonn asbestos and lead-based paint
abatement in accordance to all applicable local, state and federallaws and regulations, including San
Diego County Air Pollution Control District Rule 361.145 - Standard for Demolition and Renovation.
No evidence of additional hazards or hazardous materials or undocumented fill was observed on the
site. Implementation of the mitigation measures contained in Section F below would mitigate
potential hazardslhazardous materials impacts to a less than significant level. These measures are
included as a part of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Hydrology and Water Qualitv
In order to assess potential hydrology and water quality impacts, a "Tentative Map Drainage Study
for Oxford Street", dated October 3, 2007, and amended October 17, 2007 and the "Tentative Map
Water Quality Technical Report for Oxford Street" dated October 3,2007, prepared by Hunsaker &
Associates, were submitted for the project and is summarized below:
Existing Conditions
The existing site is bordered on the north, west and east by existing single-family development.
Drainage from the existing development, including the buildings and playfield, flows southerly
toward East Oxford Street south of the site. The flows are then conveyed via existing curb, gutter and
sidewalk in a westerly direction towards the intersection of Melrose and East Oxford Street.
Proposed
The project proposes construction of a stonn drain system, including a curb and gutter system, a
cross-gutter, SwaleGard curb inlet filters, and a grass-lined swale. Low flows fonn the site would be
intercepted and diverted by proposed cross-gutters to curb-inlet filters which will screen out larger
materials and discharge water directly into a proposed grass-lined swale located at the southwestern
corner of the project site. The grass-lined swale will convey flow in a westerly direction, and will be
graded at approximately 0.2% slope to pennit water to percolate prior discharge to the public
curb/gutter system on East Oxford Street at the southwestern comer of the site.
Peak flows from the east side of the site will be conveyed along the proposed public street and bypass
the cross gutter, flowing directly to East Oxford Street. A portion of the peak flows from the west
side of the site will enter the curb inlets filters and be diverted to the grass-lined swale before
5
discharge to the public curb/gutter system on East Oxford Street at the southwestern comer of the site
while the remaining will bypass the inlets and flow out to East Oxford Street.
According to the Engineering Department, the proposed improvements appear adequate to handle the
project stonn water runoff generated horn the site. The existing flows to East Oxford Street were
analyzed under the 2, 10, 50 and 100-year flood event. Additional Best Management Practices
(BMPs) included as part of the project design consist of a stonn drain inlet protection system (curb
inlet filters), grass-lined swale, and permeable pavement in the driveways. No adverse impacts to the
City's drainage threshold standards will occur as a result of the proposed project.
As a standard condition, a final drainage study will be required in conjunction with the preparation of
the project grading plans. Properly designed drainage facilities will be installed at the time of the site
development to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. In addition, compliance with required NPDES
regulations and construction BMPs such as de-silt basins and silt fences will reduce water quality
impacts to a less than significant level. Implementation of the mitigation measures contained in
Section F below would mitigate potential hydrology and water quality impacts to a level of less than
significance. These measures are included as a part of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program.
Noise
In order to assess potential noise impacts of the proposed project, a noise study was prepared by
Dudek, entitled "Concordia Lutheran Church - Residential Project, City of Chula Vista Exterior
Noise Study", dated April 17, 2007,.and addendum dated August 31,2007 for the project. The study
anticipated that on-site workers and adjacent residential population may be exposed to construction
noise associated with short-tenn construction activities. However, the project will be required to
comply with the City's Noise Ordinance. In addition, due to the minimal construction activities
associated with the project, impacts to surrounding residential properties related to construction noise
levels are not expected to be significant. The proposed residential project is not located within the
Health Risk Assessment Area (HRAA), within 500 feet of any adjacent heeway or highway. The
project is not anticipated to potentially violate the noise limits of the City's noise control ordinance.
Residences on lots I and 24 will be directly exposed to auto traffic on East Oxford Street, and are
likely to be affected by exterior CNEL noise levels of approx. of 61 decibels. Typical residential
construction may lower the interior noise level approx. 20 dB with windows closed. Installation of
mechanical ventilation and/or air conditioning in the homes on lots I and 24 in accordance with the
Ca. Building Code is necessary to ensure that windows can be closed to achieve compliance with the
45 dB interior standard. In addition, submittal of a subsequent noise study after installation of the
rooftop and HV AC equipment for review. Implementation of the mitigation measures contained in
Section F below would mitigate potential noise impacts to a level of less than significance. These
measures are included as a part of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
F. Mitigation Necessary to Avoid Significant Impacts
Air Qualitv
1. The following air quality mitigation requirements shall be shown on all applicable grading, and
building plans as details, notes, or as otherwise appropriate, and shall not be deviated horn unless
approved in advance in writing by the City's Environmental Review Coordinator:
· Minimize simultaneous operation of multiple construction equipment units.
· Use low pollutant-emitting construction equipment.
· Use electrical construction equipment as practical.
· Use catalytic reduction for gasoline-powered equipment.
· Use injection-timing retard for diesel-powered equipment.
6
. Water the construction area twice daily to minimize fugitive dust.
· Stabilize graded areas as quickly as possible to minimize fugitive dust.
. Pave permanent roads as quickly as possible to minimize dust.
· Use electricity rrom power poles instead of temporary generators during building, if
available.
. Apply stabilizer or pave the last 100 feet of internal travel path within a construction site
prior to public road entry.
· Install wheel washers adjacent to a paved apron prior to vehicle entry on public roads.
. Remove any visible track-out into traveled public streets within 30 minutes of occurrence.
· Wet wash the construction access point at the end of each workday if any vehicle travel on
unpaved surfaces has occurred.
· Provide sufficient perimeter erosion control to prevent washout of silty material onto public
roads.
· Cover haul trucks or maintain at least 12 inches of rreeboard to reduce blow-off during
hauling.
· Suspend all soil disturbance and travel on unpaved surfaces if winds exceed 25 miles per
hour.
· During rough grading, use of cooled exhaust gas re-circulation in conjunction with the
following:
a) Reduction of the number of pieces of equipment that operate simultaneously
b) Reduction of the number of hours that equipment operations daily. The reduction in
emissions would be directly proportional to the reduction in aggregate operating hours
and/or
c) Use equipment with lower horsepower ratings (emissions reduction would be directly
proportional to the reduction in aggregate horsepower)
· Requirement of one or a combination of the following measures for reduction of emissions:
a) Reduction of the number of pieces of equipment that operate simultaneously
b) Reduction of the number of hours that equipment operations daily. The reduction in
emissions would be directly proportional to the reduction in aggregate operating hours
and/or
c) Use equipment with lower horsepower ratings (emissions reduction would be directly
proportional to the reduction in aggregate horsepower)
Biological Resources
Migratory Birds / Cooper's Hawk
2. To ensure no direct and indirect impacts to raptors and/or any migratory birds occur during
construction (including clearing and grubbing), construction activities adjacent to nesting habit
should occur outside of the combined breeding season of January 15 to August 15 for these
species. If removal of habitat and/or construction activities adjacent to nest habitat must occur
during the breeding season, a pre-construction survey must be performed by a City-approved
biologist to determine the presence or absence of nesting birds on and within 300 feet of the
construction area and nesting raptors within 500 feet of the construction area. The pre-
construction survey must be concluded within 10 calendar days prior to the start of construction,
the results of which must be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to initiating any
construction activities. If nesting birds and/or raptors are detected by the City-approved biologist,
a bio-monitor must be present on-site during construction to minimize construction impacts and
ensure that no nests are removed or disturbed until all young have fledged.
7
Indirect Impacts
3. Prior to issuance of any land development permits, including clearing and grubbing or grading permits, the
project shall implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) identified in the Stonn Water Pollution
Prevention Plan. BMPs shall be noted on grading and improvement plans and implemented during clearing
and site development to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Environmental Review Coordinator in
order to avoid short-tenn indirect impacts to any biological resources in the project vicinity.
Geology and Soils
4. Prior to the issuance of construction permits, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City Engineer and
City Building Official that all the recommendations in the GeoTechnical Investigation prepared by Geocon,
dated April 18, 2007, have been satisfied.
Hazards/Hazardous Materials
5. Prior to any demolition activities, a licensed and registered asbestos and lead abatement contractor shall
perfonn asbestos and lead-based paint abatement in accordance to all applicable local, state and federal
laws and regulations, including San Diego County Air Pollution Control District Rule 361.145 - Standard
for Demolition and Renovation.
Hydrology and Water Quality
6. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a final drainage study shall be required in conjunction with the
preparation of the fmal grading plans and must demonstrate that the post-development peak flow rate does
not exceed the pre-development flows as indicated in the "Tentative Map Drainage Study for Oxford
Street, prepared by Hunsaker & Associates, dated October 3, 2007", and amended October 17,2007, to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer. Additionally, the City Engineer shall verify that the final grading plans
comply with the provisions of RWQCB NPDES Municipal Permit, Order No. R9-2007-0001 with respect
to construction-related water quality best management practices. If one or more of the approved post
construction BMPs is non-structural, then a post-construction BMP plan shall be prepared to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to the commencement of construction~ Compliance with said plan
shall become a permanent requirement of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
7. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, temporary de silting and erosion control devices shall be installed.
Protective devices shall be provided at every stonn drain inlet to prevent sediment from entering the stonn
drain system. These measures shall be reflected in the grading and improvement plans to the satisfaction of
the City Engineer and Environmental Review Coordinator.
Noise
Interior - Vehicle Noise Mitigation
8. The windows of homes facing East Oxford Street (Lots I, 24) would need to remain closed to achieve a
45 CNEL interior noise level. The design of these homes must include a means of mechanical ventilation
and/or air-conditioning. The mechanical ventilation should be in accordance with the latest addition of the
California and Unifonn Building Code and to the satisfaction of the City Building Official and
Environmental Review Coordinator.
9. Prior to approval of building permits, the applicant shall submit a subsequent noise study for the homes on
Lots 1 and 24 to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator demonstrating that the final
roof-mounted HV AC and/or Air Conditioning equipment complies with the City's noise control ordinance
at the property boundaries of 45 dBA Leq during nighttime hours and 55 dBA Leq during daytime hours or
ambient noise levels, whichever is greater.
Construction Noise and Vibration Mitigation
10. To minimize the potential noise and vibration impacts during construction upon adjacent residences, the
following shall be required:
8
3. Prior to issuance of any land development permits, including clearing and grubbing or grading permits, the
project shall implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) identified in the Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan. BMPs shall be noted on grading and improvement plans and implemented during clearing
and site development to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Environmental Review Coordinator in
order to avoid short-term indirect impacts to any biological resources in the project vicinity.
Geologv and Soils
4. Prior to the issuance of construction permits, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City Engineer and
City Building Official that all the recommendations in the GeoTechnical Investigation prepared by Geocon,
dated April 18, 2007, have been satisfied.
Hazards/Hazardous Materials
5. Prior to any demolition activities, a licensed and registered asbestos and lead abatement contractor shall
perform asbestos and lead-based paint abatement in accordance to all applicable local, state and federal
laws and regulations, including San Diego County Air Pollution Control District Rule 361.145 - Standard
for Demolition and Renovation.
Hydrology and Water Qualitv
6. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a final drainage study shall be required in conjunction with the
preparation of the fmal grading plans and must demonstrate that the post-development peak flow rate does
not exceed the pre-development flows as indicated in the "Tentative Map Drainage Study for Oxford
Street, prepared by Hunsaker & Associates, dated October 3,2007", and amended October 17,2007, to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer. Additionally, the City Engineer shall verify that the final grading plans
comply with the provisions of RWQCB NPDES Municipal Permit, Order No. R9-2007-0001 with respect
to construction-related water quality best management practices. If one or more of the approved post
construction BMPs is non-structural, then a post-construction BMP plan shall be. prepared to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to the commencement of construction. Compliance with said plan
shall become a permanent requirement of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
7. Prior to the issuance of a grading pennit, temporary desilting and erosion control devices shall be installed.
Protective devices shall be provided at every storm drain inlet to prevent sediment from entering the storm
drain system These measures shall be reflected in the grading and improvement plans to the satisfaction of
the City Engineer and Environmental Review Coordinator.
Noise
Interior - Vehicle Noise Mitigation
8. The windows of homes facing East Oxford Street (Lots 1, 24) would need to remain closed to achieve a
45 CNEL interior noise level. The design of these homes must include a means of mechanical ventilation
and/or air-conditioning. The mechanical ventilation should be in accordance with the latest addition of the
California and Uniform Building Code and to the satisfaction of the City Building Official and
Environmental Review Coordinator.
9. Prior to approval of building permits, the applicant shall submit a subsequent noise study for the homes on
Lots 1 and 24 to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator demonstrating that the final
roof-mounted HV AC and/or Air Conditioning equipment complies with the City's noise control ordinance
at the property boundaries of 45 dBA Leq during nighttime hours and 55 dBA Leq during daytime hours or
ambient noise levels, whichever is greater.
Construction Noise and Vibration Mitigation
10. To minimize the potential noise and vibration impacts during construction upon adjacent residences, the
following shall be required:
8
A. All construction equipment shall be equipped with improved noise muffling, and have the
manufacturers' recommended noise abatement measures, such as mufflers, engine covers,
and engine vibration isolators in good working condition.
B. If possible, hydraulic equipment instead of pneumatic impact tools and electric powered
equipment instead of diesel-powered equipment shall be used for all exterior construction
work.
C. All equipment shall be turned off if not in use.
D. Pursuant to Section 17.24.050(J) of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, project-related
grading, demolition or construction activities shall be prohibited between the hours of
10:0 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Monday through Friday and between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.
Monday through Friday and between 10:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. Saturdays and Sundays.
G. Agreement to Implement Mitigation Measures
By signing the line(s) provided below, the Applicant and Operator stipulate that they have each read,
understood and have their respective company's authority to and do agree to the mitigation measures
contained herein, and will implement same to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review
Coordinator. Failure to sign the line(s) provided below prior to posting of this Mitigated Negative
Declaration with the County Clerk shall indicate the Applicant's and Operator's desire that the
Project be held in abeyance without approval and that the Applicant and Operator shall apply for an
Environmental Impact Report.
~. V\CI:-- p~~ ~
I ~ e,p..o~ ~ ()'tnl u..~
M>f\fV\ O. fbV IV-' - Pif: 6IJ)fh::k~ otIC{ t,.J....&
Printed Name and Title of Applicant
r orized rep tative)
(0 !~ If.( ';2.OD 7-
Date
Iv Iler. ( :wo'9-
Date
Signature of Applicant
(or authorized representative)
N/A
Printed Name and Title of Operator
(if different from Applicant)
Date
N/A
Signature of Operator
(if different from Applicant)
Date
H. Consultation
1. Individuals and Organizations
City of Chula Vista:
Steve Power, Planning and Building Department
Luis Hernandez, Planning and Building Department
Maria Muett, Planning and Building Department
Ben Guerrero, Planning and Building Department
Josie Gabriel, Planning and Building Department
9
Glen Laube, Planning and Building Department
Lynnette Tessitore- Lopez, Planning and Building Department
Tom Adler, Engineering Department
Mario Ingrasci, Engineering Department
Silvester Evetovich, Engineering Department
Jim Newton, Engineering Department
Hasib Baha, Engineering Department
Richard Hopkins, Public Works Operations
Steven Gonzales, Public Works Operations
David McRoberts, Public Works Operations
Khosro Aminpour, Public Works Operations
Muna Cuthbert, Public Works Operations
Kelly Briers, Fire Department
Others:
Rafael Munoz, Chula Vista Elementary School District
Hector Martinez, Sweetwater Authority
Laurie Edwards, Sweetwater Authority
Sweetwater Union High School District
David Gottfredson, RECON
2. Documents
City ofChula Vista General Plan, 2005 (as amended).
Title 19, Chula Vista Municipal Code.
City ofChula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, February 2003.
Biological Resource Analysis prepared by Dudek, dated August 31, 2007 and addendum.
Geotechnical Investigation for Oxford Street, Chula Vista, Ca.
dated April 18, 2007, and addendum dated October 8, 2007, by Geocon, Inc.
Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment - Concordia Lutheran Church and School, 267 East
Oxford Street, Chula Vista, Ca. prepared by Dudek, Apri12007, and addendum dated August 31,
2007.
Tentative Map Drainage Study for Oxford Street, dated October 3, 2007 and amended October
17, 2007 prepared by Hunsaker & Associates
Tentative Map Water Quality Technical Report for Oxford Street, dated October 2, 2007 and
amended October 2007 prepared by Hunsaker & Associates.
Air Quality URBEMIS Model, dated October 2007
Concordia Lutheran Church - Residential Project, City of Chula Vista Exterior Noise Study",
prepared by Dudek, dated April 17, 2007, and addendum dated August 31, 2007.
10
Archaeological Survey Report for Concordia Lutheran Church Project, 267 East Oxford Street,
Chula Vista, Ca., prepared by Brian F. Smith & Associates, dated April 3, 2007, and addendum
September 2007.
Overview of Sewer Service for the Oxford Street Proiect, dated September 26,2007 and amended
October 2007, prepared by Dexter Wilson Engineering.
3. Initial Study
This environmental determination is based on the attached Initial Study, and any comments
received in response to the Notice of Initial Study. The report reflects the independent judgment
of the City of Chula Vista. Further information regarding the environmental review of this
project is available from the Chula Vista Planning and Building Department, 276 Fourth Avenue,
Chula V' ta, CA 91910.
Date:
/I / 'Z/ ! 09-
/
J :\Planning\RichardZ\Environmental\ IS-07 -031.finaIMND
11
CHULA VISTA PLANNING AND
LOCATOR PROJECT
C) APPLICANT: Brookfield Shea Otay, LLC.
~~J~: 267 E. Oxford Street.
SCALE: FILE NUMBER:
No Scale 18-07-031
BUILDING
DEPARTMENT
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
INITIAL STUDY
Request: 24 SFD development on a 3.9 acre lot.
NORTH
Related cases: PCS-07-07, PCZ-07-08 & GPA-07-04
J:\Planning\Public NoticesllSIIS07031.cdr 04.26.07
~KHlarr I
,....
o
r:..
o
(J)
o
a.
.
:;1 fll1Hl. 1'$M-~9 WoiV
fJ..8C '0101 cVW
----'~aN-~~~~q3~VG~onr---------
,.. Q...- !?... ~ I ~
'% ~ ~....~ a. "~I: ... I S ~
t1..! ~ ~~ ~ _ ~-:~ ~: :t; ~
~Z a ~ l== ~~!~~ ~ Ii, ~
;,," ~... ~ ~!! t~~!t" ~ I 3 a
:i!;rirl~;-l~r-- -'r'ff------:--
~~ ~.~. E~ ~1I!~ii~. ~ S ~~
1
.1
l
I'
I"
--------------------
~
."
.,----..
'"
...
'.
~.
\.
.,
.~
'\
\
"
~
\,
,; f:4
",;::):
.~ r
kfl
;Q.... I.
'" j'
a:: ,
>41
~ ~
~I
j
,
. . '->",
'"
,
"-
,.
',,-
"
"
",,'
"
'.
~
:'-,\ ~.
"
"
\.
\
\
\ "';
\ '"?-z
,
,
\
,
\
"
~,i
"'~
,i'
t
t
t
I
I
"'.
~~
~.'
..
iV~1l)
'--
Ot
11. a: ~
~ 0 ii
;:: ~
~. LLj
" f-"X
~, ~.
f- .0' ~
. !3
~
\:::
'9
~
--:
it .
::II" f
';:.t =. .1
~ "~. Hil
iii ;z:~~"...
g- III
fill
-------
-----
------
--------
------.....
---.-----
-------
--------
ATTACHMENT "A"
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM (MMRP)
OXFORD STREET/CONCORDIA LUTHERAN CHURCH RESIDENTIAL -IS-07-031
This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program has been prepared by the City of Chula Vista
in conjunction with the proposed Oxford Street/Concordia Lutheran Church Residential project.
The proposed project has been evaluated in an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and City/State
CEQA Guidelines (IS-06-007) The legislation requires public agencies to ensure that adequate
mitigation measures are implemented and monitored for Mitigated Negative Declarations.
AB 3180 requires monitoring of potentially significant and/or significant environmental impacts.
The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for this project ensures adequate
implementation of mitigation for the following potential impacts(s):
1. Air Quality
2. Biological Resources
3. Geology and Soils
4. Hazards/Hazardous Materials
5. Hydrology and Water Quality
6. Noise
MONITORING PROGRAM
Due to the nature ofthe environmental issues identified, the Mitigation Compliance Coordinators
shall be the Environmental Review Coordinator and City Engineer of the City of Chula Vista.
The applicant shall be responsible to ensure that the conditions of the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program are met to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator and
City Engineer. The applicant shall provide evidence in written form confirming compliance with
the mitigation measures specified in Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-07-031 to the
Environmental Review Coordinator and City Engineer. The Environmental Review Coordinator
and City Engineer will thus provide the ultimate verification that the mitigation measures have
been accomplished.
Table 1, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Checklist, lists the mitigation measures
contained in Section F, Mitigation Necessary to Avoid Significant Effects, of Mitigated Negative
Declaration IS-07-031, which will be implemented as part ofthe project. In order to determine if
the applicant has implemented the measure, the method and timing of verification are identified,
along with the City department or agency responsible for monitoring/verifying that the applicant
has completed each mitigation measure. Space for the signature of the verifying person and the
date of inspection is provided in the last column.
J :\Planning\MARIA \InitiaJ Study\Oxford Map\IS-07 -031 MMRPtext.doc
E
~
c:
.;::
.8
'E
o
:2:
c:
.2
ro
....
:2:
..-
C'?
o
~
o
en
]j
'E
CD
"0
'w
CD
a::
J::
~
::J
J::
()
c:
ro
Q5
J::
"5
...J
ro
:0
....
o
t}
c:
o
()
+:>
CD
~
Ci5
"0
~
o
"I'""
~
.Q
ns
I-
II)
'E
QI
E
E
o
o
:!:
~
C)
o
n::
11.
C)
z
i=
n::
o
11.
LU
D::
C
Z
<
C)
Z
~
o
~
z
o
:!:
z
o
~
C)
I-
~
QI
...
~
II)
ns
QI
::!!:
c
.S!
1ii
CI
:2
::!!:
CI
c
:E
.2;,':;
>. .- cc
.... U"C
o 01:0:> c....
:o:>.5:Bns:B
cQjEOIE
rJ Q) 1:: .5 1::
=.5raCra
2:g>g-~g-
<(woa.o
><
><
><
2
U5
:>2
U C
Q)O
..c~
ug
Co.
rail)
a::.s
Q)
.011)
rora
.s:::1I)
II)C
.!1~
co.
Q)OI
E.5..
.~;g ~
~.5'~
Q) "C 0
'-c'-
5":2:
"" 01 ra
.~=5 .~
~ra2:
E 5> Q)
g~=E
~~cn
0"= ra
'- 0. '-
'iij at <:
01_ V>
C-Q)
"_ co ......
3 C 0
.Qoc
(5cui'
';~s
.s:::.s:::Q)
f-v>"C
..;
Q)
;g.
::;
E
'0
c
.Q
~u)
(])~
o.C
o ::J
~c:
~ ~
co.
~'g.
EQ)
._ C
v>0
CDts
.~ ::J
.S 1;;
cc
~8
c
Q)
E
0.
':;
0"
Q)
c
"Q
1:5
2
1;)
c
o
U
01
C
E
"E
cp
c
co
2 ~
(5 "C:
0. 1:5
3 Q)
.Q Qj
Q) Q)
V> V>
:J :J
.
. . .
~
~
co
C.
V>
ra
c
Q)
E
0.
':;
0"
Q)
c
.Q
1:5 c
2 0
U) t5
c ::J
o "C
U ~
"C
Q)
~
o
0.
d>
.5
(5
V>
co
01
'-
.E
~.
>.....
-c
co Q)
roE
Uo.
~":;
:Jg
"C
~
Q)
3
o
9-
Qj
V>
Q)
'5
'-
.E
"C
Co
~
01
c
"E
:tt
c
.Q-
~ffi
'2E
.- 0.
~':;
:Jg
.
Q)
N
'E
"c
'E
.9
z.
"iij
"C
Q)
U
~
ra
Q)
Co
c
.Q
1:5
2
1;)
c
o .
u1;)
Q)::J
.s:::"C
....CD
'- >
"*:2
:>01
:>.2
.
.9
Q)
:a
';n
V>
o
0.
V>
ra
>.
~
u
':;
0"
V>
ra
V> .
ra....
CD v>
'- ~
ra"C
"CQ)
(])~
"C "_
raOl
'- ::J
01.....
Q) Q)
N.~
:a .S
coe
ii5 'E
.
.9
Q)
:a
';n
~
0.
V>
ra
>.
~
u
':;
0"
V>
ra
V>
"C
ra
e
c
Q) .
c....
ra~
E"C
'- CD
Q)N
0..-
CDE
>"c
ra.-
a.E
.
2:-
ra
o
0.
E
2
'0
"C
ra .
CD~
.....0
~.!!!
.;;; 'iij
Q) >
_ra
0.....
0.'-
'-0
CD c
3"-
o:g
0.":;
E'c
001
'- C
..... "-
>.'-
....~
'0 "C
"C: C/'J
UQ
Q)....
-ra
Q) '-
CD Q)
v>C
:J~
rou
c=
'-.0
Q) ::J
co.
:';:0
0....
....0
mOL:
__ 0.
OQ)
o~
..-v>
....c
v>o
E!'t5
Q) ::J
.s:::'-
;Ci)
105
o.U
,-ra
Oc
Cii;5
~'3'
:g:5 ;::.
....ra....
v>o.c
>.- Q)
a.~-g
~g e
.
.
'-
o
.~
c
o
C.
ra
"C
~
ra
0.
ra
.9.
....V>
C"C
Q)ra
Uo
ra '-
'5'"~
ra-
.0
~ ::J
CD 0.
.s:::c
V> 0
~2:-
-c
~Q)
.s:::Q)
3<3
=:C
raQ)
1;)>
E.9
.
"~
:a
~
0.
"C
,*ai
> U
ra c
.b~
.9::J
.58
'S~
90
""'v>
~2
;.~
:aE
';no
"> '"
1:-E
ra~
Q)3
15.!1
~~
0:::1;)
'0
"C
C
Q)
Q)"C
:5~
....co
COo.
....c
.5 ~
o c
0.0
v>-
V> Q)
Q) >
U co
U '-
co....
c~
o.~
"" .s:::
UCD .
::J>"C
.b>.~
v>c'-
graij
~~g
:5rav>
"Cra
.s:::"",.s:::
v> '-v>
ra~Q)
3 ;> U
(j)"fi~
:>ra::J
:>Q)V>
.
.
I
OJ
~
p..
c
Q)
>
Q)
C.
.9
ecn
.... "C
Cra
8e
gg
";n .g
eO.
Q)O
'-....
25
CD_
.s .~
ev$
o.ra
cE
Q)>'
"0=
!EV>
~o
CD:]
"Co
'>~
era
a.3
'0
V>
Q)
.s:::
.~ ci>
c
N=
....::J
....ra
v>.s:::
~g>
...... ";:::
ra::J
c"C
yg:g
.5 ~
rao
E:a
o Q)
~g
g~
~O
~E
.s:::ra
'-0
CD,c
>Q)
OQ)
U.::
.
.
E
ro
L..
I::
'L:
.8
'c
o
~
I::
.2
ro
+::
~
.,....
C'?
o
I
I"-
o
I
CJ)
]j
'E
Q)
'0
'00
Q)
0:::
.r::
2
::s
.r::
()
I::
ro
CD
.r::
'5
....J
C\J
'6
o
C,)
I::
o
()
:;::.
Q)
Q)
L..
U5
'0
~
o
T""
Q)
::0
CIS
I-
"0
Q)
>
ro
0.
C
::> L..
C ::>
00
_.r::
Q) L..
> Q)
~o.
m
"OQ)
c: ==
roE
~Il)
cN
ro"O
.oQ)
L.. Q)
~~
.- Q)
""Om
=""0
Oc
~ '3:
ca~
""Om
5j ~
0.(\1
m,!::
::1::1
C/)m
.
m
(\I
0)
en
::I
(\I
.r::
><
0)1:>>
~.~
-0
SQ
0)
'0:5
O)E
m 5:
::I C
_ 0
.~g
""0::1
~ "C'
0)8
.r::c
0)'-
::IC
eg
(\I
0)::;
.5 e
L..'(J
6~
.
e
Q)
E
0.
'5
0-
Q)
'0
m
~
0)
'C,
'0
L..2:-
0) m
.0::1
EO
::I:g
cj9
Q)::;
:5E
'+- "Ci)
00)
cro
~Q;
uo.
::10
in;
~:5
c:g .5
0) ::I
EO
.9- 5: g
5-~'fl
0) .Q -5
ro.~ ~
:5E
I!! 0)0)
::I .EO :5 L..
,ggo~
'O'fl-ffi
1...0 ~ co ~
~~g5
EQ)'E.r::
2t=8.~
Q) . e 15
:5 ,?;o 0. a;
...... (\I 0.
0""0 >'0
a~1).m
~~.~ ~
::1(\1""00)
.~ ii> CD
~g.~~
ro
D
a~
.S 0
ro'E
L.. 0
0.
L.. e
~ 0.-;::-
o >, ~
g.:g 8.
~.~ ~
.r::""OL..
L..~,g
~:g*
.250)
"" ~
:5""0)
'3: g ~
..... 13.5
5j-5g
[~'B
__ CI) ::]
5-g~
Q)'~ ;n
0) 'E :5
~~.9
0'
0)
C
'3:
.2
:E
0)
:5
......
o
5U>
~.~
C m
:c .!!1
EE
8~
(\10
L.. C
00
~fJ
0-5
......0)
o L..
_ L..
55..9
~~
.= ~
::> m
0-(\1
0)0)
~E
.
:>.
o~
gj g
UC
Q)(\I
00..3
'OE
'-"en
~.J!!
E ~
::10)
co.
0) 0
:510
.......r::
0-
ce
00)
g~
"0 'S
~g
-mc
c C'-
0)0
E'ii) g
a.cn~
'-.- U
::IE::I
0-0)""0
0) Q)
~.5 ~
-;;;c:5
~2.90
og_:o
.r::""O(\IC
'-Q)ccu
0'-.2 en
0>C1)t:~
.o.r::oo
EI- g..r::
::I L..C)
C 0. C
Q)~B~
:5 Oco ~ Q>
'0 "0.: g.
C m ""0 Q)
OCQ)-
tsg.c ~
::1(\1""00)
-g CD ~ CD
~g.5:~
ro
D
N
I
Q)
~
p.,
m >, 0)
C)~ ......
C U (\I
~_.~ ~
'- "'C C>>
C)
(\I
a;
5: 0)
8. .0 .S
Q)
S:g :5
..cg+:;
5: g
""0
~
a;
5:
.Qc
.cg~
jg-
""0
c~.9
0)
[r.nrn CD
'5 C g 5:
g'~ 'E 8.
mOQ)
Q)'E g.1!!
:3 ~ a.~
0'
E
C\J
L..
I::
.;::
g
I::
o
2
I::
o
~
.....
~
"""
.Q)
:is
C1S
I-
I2
'E
(])
'C
'w
(])
0::
..c:
~
:J
..c:
()
I::
C\J
L..
(])
..c:
'5
-'
C\J
:c
<5
u
I::
o
()
~
(])
(])
L..
U5
'C
~
o
0)
c:
'2
c:
ca
~ a::
C3 O)~ g>c
:;:,.SQ)uQ)
ai<DE=E
oQ)t::=>t::
=.ScalDca
2: g> fir -g fir
<(WOcaO
x
x
2
en
:>2
01::
Q)o
~;
UO
c: Q)
ca5r
a:E
L..O)OUQ)C:Q)Q)Q)OC:C:L..Q)OOOUO)Q)O)
~~=~~gS~5g~g.g~:~~~~~
ffi ~ ~ :oE-:5 2 g>Ci) :g.s -:: 2 ~~.g.c ~ ~ ~ ~
oogca L..-~=>~5oo-~E~0)~ -
L..-~8S~=>E~-~~ca _~ca2u~
~;ro ~8~~s~~8~ti~~h~~=
ca 0 oo~...... => Q) Q)U ca . ca:2 0 Q);, C:.E!c
-;.~___o~u~-~u~~c~ou~
oo~~~oo~o rn~C ~~ -co
-~~O~U~0=a~~~oro-~~~~
~ooOQ)=>aiooc:~ OO~~.E!U -oo~~
cac:cau<( =>oO)OOQ)~ -c:~ Q) L..
~8c'- E~oEc O~ro~~-C3
Eo .!1 ,g ..... 0 - .- . ~ rJ) +:I..c a. ,0 rJJ
.- 0)"" => :1)! iii 2 .Q ~ U ca c: ~ 3: .;;; Q) 15 u
~.~go~~~~..cg~~~~~~u..c2_
~~~- ~~cu; ro._~>ro~_~o
~u008~ ~8ioo~c:3:-~ ~3c:u
-gL..8Cg~~-~e:g~.Qu~_coSE8~
._~ rJJ_a. ~~OO ~ >
~g~uffiro~a.~o52~~:~uo~E
rno~S2>om~m~~TI~~~~~~!
o~:a~ o~:: ..== g 2 a C8 ~() ~ ro O'c
~~~ooC:Q)C:C:U~~o 8Q)o E~~
~..c2~~-~~ro..cc~~ 5u~.~oro
o~a:::ro~~m~~85_~o~,g.c-s~
cB~~m u~..co ~rJJt-ca.rnCrJJID
~~ro..cCl) ro u ~o:Jro-oro~ ~g~
::JO> 0) .CI)O)Q)~--E-Q)Q) -0 u
~~.~~~.~~~~~~J~:~~~~gg~
Q)~m~~~~~tmmo~5..c~u~~ro~
~~TI:g~~~~~~~g~B~:~~~852
0)
I::
'2
c:
ca
~ a:
C3 O)~ g>c
:;:,.SQ)uQ)
ai<DE=E
oQ)t::=>t::
=.ScalDca
2: g> fir -g fir
<(WOcaO
x
x
x
x
2
en
:>2
o c:
Q) 0
B15
c: Q)
ca5r
a:E
~~ ~ ac:~-g:2.5
E-o""Q)00 caooo
L.. -15 c: E L.. iU ~
~~ ca i i U Q) L..
_Ea:~e5~.95
c:L.. a..~'v,- 00
Q)Q)_ E O)L..Q)
E ~ c: c: ._ O).TI Q) L..
~O)Q) 0 c: "E-
o.S E'5-g.;::z,o ~
1! a! 8> '5 ca ]1 C3 c: '5
Q) 5~a.. g>o Q)'-.g
"U '- co CD:C C).s o:a
-g o~m ~ c'4-cu ~
.!!! 0..... ~ C).~ ~.5 5
C(J) c- "'0""
~.- Q) s:: oU.Q '-
C:~aJt::"'O t5gB
ca2 .9Q)u.!!!u.E!
oCDc(JJo2.~ ~
uQ)Q)C:C:iii3:~
Q)c:E:SQ)Q)ooQ)E
g ca~ c:..o E Q)'5.-
ro: 0.-- - ~ .r= Q)..... .
=> ~Eu~ ~-a:: g._
oo._.-Q)~Eo L..C:
.~ (ij_~ (f).--Ciju'o
Q)~caca..U)__ cc.So>
.J::.U.J::.Q) -Q}Q) .......
-O)oo:2~aiEEEg
.9.S t) Ci)1D g. 5 2'0
o -g.~a.. C ~Q).~t '-
.-oo~caca>c:oQ)
0:.5 o..~a:c..~W~=
""
0)
c:
:Q
'5 Z,
ID .-
E-g g 0)-
UcaC:c:C:
~O)~'~~
~.St::Q)t::
'a. 2 ~..~ ca
~.!!! Q) c: Q)
<(a..owo
M
11)
~
p..
c $
~z,Q)ca
._._~u
a.U- r:::
g.-g .S 8
Q)ca~o
5 Q).Q ~
J1':giii ~
'E '5 -g ..0
,-ca>"'C
~WE~-o
c: E E ~c2?
.QU 8 ~.!(!
oQ)~a.ro
2 € Q) c" (/)
~.9:5~a;
8 ~ 'ai ~2
....c.......:;:.Q)
oQ)jg~>
~~~E:~
ffiQ)'~::r----
=>Q)!EctlO
gj ~ 0 .~ ~
.- 0 ~-
.9 c..~ ~ ~
o7ijgg=2
it~~CD<(
E
ro
'-
c:
.;::
,g
c:
o
::2:
c:
.2
ro
:;::::;
~
.....
C")
o
~
o
ch
]j
'E
Q)
"C
'00
Q)
a:::
..c:
e
::J
..c:
()
c:
ro
'-
Q)
..c:
:J
...J
ro
:e
o
()
c:
o
()
:;:,
Q)
Q)
'-
U5
"C
~
o
T"'
~
.c
CIS
I-
01
C
:2
'5 >.
(Q~
~'OU
U &j :g g>c
:g0l~'~~
B .5 t:: (]) t::
= C ca.5 ca
l5: ~ g. g> g.
<(c...OWO
ro
..c -,-,-
~=~<(.E
Bc""O~"C
-c~Q)~cCu
CL.,E'O:::J'O
cuc$coc
'OgcacaU$
Q) .c oen
~"E~,*~I
.~ ~.~ ~ i:5 ~
- Q) 0.- c: ~
caCii'O~ca"-:
",.c(])OenCO
(])caen-OIC")
EuE~.5~
~~-cB~~g
g ca._ 0 .-
c -g ~ "8:.5 :g ~
.Q ro -g co rn- en 0
........rnco-c.-c
'5.9 enro 00 (])
E[g.9:5~oQ::
Q).c Cl)o_-.l::"'O
'0 en (])::5c&j
>.caoo(])(])o
c'OgjOL.,UC
ca (]) &j -0 c.Q
.92E"Effig~
5.!!!.goCl)3E
'cg>(])8::o(])
c... L., a.ca1!!c...o
.0
01
C
:2
'5 >.
(Q~
~-g ~ 01-
~ca5j.55j
COlEQ;E
~.5t:: (])t::
=cca.5ca
l5: ~ g. g> g.
<(c...OWO
~g~~iQ;i~ca1!!gi~ca.9~~~
~~=-~~~!~~~iO~u-m-
_L.,ca'O(])en(])~Q)_(])(])Eo(]) _
~~5~.~~E~~~~~~~~B€O
u~Q)~mIroW:U&5Q)~Q)~~c
cc.~Q)E~-c~~~~~55~~Q)Q)
~(])oo-~ cU- O:::J_c(])a.gE
ca:5 c g. i ca (])~~ c~- enoO L.,.5!!.~ ~
....c 0 Q) '-r---..c"t:: 0 co c: ui"-- a>"Ci:J '-
~i~[g:5!g=~~~g~~~~Ei~
L., -ooc~NO >'0 ~~en-OL.,c...
~a0u~~ c~eroB~mc~U-o
0>1:5 ::1~~~Mg~ C.S........ a.c~W . ~.5
E~E~B~L.,g,-~_~-2a.>.g&j~
u--c .__Q)-Q)_oc.cu~_._~c.
~cc~~ooD2Q) ~U)Q)2~oocQ)
OIgcao- .9caE:5g~E-m :::J(])Q::
tt=cn"CoCJ)C>o- Q)U) ~o.
~E~~ca50(])c::U:5igc~~ -g
o-ocacaen~ ~W>.~~cog-gcaca
Q)~~~~O~~~~~ Ecng- (1)0>
g'50_~~~-OE0::1~ o~o~E~
rnC'".5c_~u""'" 0 'Ci)Q.(/) 00
::1~uQ)C:~ oQ)o,-~Q)ucc-u_
~(])~E~~",~:5enSg.c~g25j~~
;~~~c.m~~~~~~~e~~~_~
5~~Q)~Q)TI~~c._oca~o~o~c
o~~~~ogID5c>~Z&ro~rnffi~2
-~(])'O~~~.c~EoL.,L.,(])caCl)E ca
~u~~,.-~B~uo5~~~c Eco~
"~~-0~~ o~ro~~rn-~~ ro~
c...ooo&~O~O<(5~O::0:5:5g~~
cO
01
C
:2
'5~
m.-
B-g g 0)-
Ucaccc
:g 01 ~.~ ~
B.5t::(])t::
=cca.5ca
l5: ~ g. g> g.
<(c...OWO
x
x
x
S
i:i5
3;!
o C
(])o
..I::+:;:
UO
c~
ca en
c::.s
~-ci.5.5 g>~
~~~~:aU
RS"O"O~Q)
E ~ E E 01:5
Q)O-O""""0 (]) .
-Q)__~'t-o~
.oU)U)-o_
:'::!_ ~(]).5 c ~
E-(])~'Oo'-
Q;~>-Q);J"E
o.U)~ g>>o~ 8
01 en ca .<:: ~ .CI) U
.s~~..cg~~~
-g.~~ 5j~ en.~
5-0 15 E=~ (])
cao~e~ ~
~Q)'t-ou).9S
oaDem c
(])o~(])~~~
o c~.5 Cl)1!! c
COCl)-ocac,o
~-~ ~ ~ ~c"5
U)L-o_ Q)C
'!!!(])'>5jmEw
~-g~iD~~-g
- co ~ Cir- e ~
.9 g>'t$ 0 E E' ~
o~..cg:..cg"-.5
-~gJe~~-gc
c...'Oc....5(1)caW
,..:
01
C
:2
.5~
m.-
~-g ~ 01-
ucaccc
:g 01 (]) 'C (])
~.5~ ~~
=Cca.5ca
l5:~ g. g> g.
<(c...owo
""
,
CI)
bO
0:1
~
...: 5 ca en:5 01-0
'C (]) c's;.5 5
.!3 Q)U"c;>-O w
oc3.Q (])o'5ro
d,."- 0 ~ m "0
Q) -I .5 -g &j IE
(])W-o-oEO
.bZ~9RJ2
en U E.!:: (:) 'c g>
"ElOencaca::>:c
o.....~L-c ==
~ ca E.f!.--g:::J
O(])o-g~cam
->~ca ca(])'
gj.!11 m c~'c:5.9
w-fi (]).Q 0 50 ~
O)ra~~iii:;:c:a
"~.9o~ c8g 0
~-oc~2(])g8
~ ~"~(ij~:5~ ~
~.g~"2 ~o~"~
.cC(])&j>g(])(])
o'(ijt=-firiE:5~
Cl)E (])'c:go$
::~--,Ecaca-c
.g=~o-fi_'O~
cca(]) (])CI)C
'-.c- en ES ca c
::CI)(])&j 1!!(]).g
~ :;;:-'5 (]) ~ (]) -g ~
I-NcEI-:5uw
a:j
I::
'i::
~
I::
o
~
I::
o
~
.....
~
..-
C")
e
,
l"-
e
en
~
1::
Q)
"0
'Cij
Q)
a:::
..c::
~
~
..c::
U
I::
co
.....
Q)
..c::
:J
-l
co
'6
o
U
I::
o
U
:;:,
Q)
Q)
.....
Ci5
"0
~
o
E
~
C>
C
:E
':; >.
aJ~
pu()
i:31ij:gg>c
:gc>~'~~
rJ .5 1:: Q) 1::
= C C\3.S C\3
g~ g-g>g-
<{o..OWO
><
><
~
..!
.c
ns
I-
><
2
i:i5
:>2
Oc
Q)O
..c ~
()U
cQ)
C\3;E-
a:.s
- U 3: u.c >'10 ui
~ 1ij.!!1~ja;IOQj
UI T"" 1D :> UI g. -g 1D
c.J!la::oQ)~C\3-
rJo_~=a.o.f!!~
= --' 1:9 '0 E Q) :> '0
o.ccoo.coc
g.OQ)I... u-..c.....
Q)~grociii~~
.cE05Q) :;::;:3
;2r:.~S~~ -gc
.E.Ew:55-;.c.... t'U~
<D>'Q)_Q).~~o m~
a. "'O.c co C)"E";;:: ~ 00 co
.a--Eco:::::J:::J c
~ f/) '+- c>"2 "O.,g C
:c~o_=gegQ) ~8.u
3'5c~:a'E-JE c:::::J~
,C c.2 _ c 0 <{ :;::; 2 ':;
-"Eu ~8 om >.~ 0 c c-
o Q) ~ 0 u ~ 2 c..Q ~
ro 5-:2 E ~ ~ 10 c> ~ Q) '0 Q)
>Q)raQ) 'ooo::tc,--52.c
ef/)U)u,,-c'+--;;::o .......=
0.,C 0 0:> UI Q) UI C\3
c.:Ja>ou c/)"'O'-Nc.c
C\3 UI.c - c _m Q) ~Q) .E- S UI
co ...... co co.1:'";;:: t:T __ c>
B ~ 0:6 () i:3 .{g ~ 1D .5 c>.5
5E- 5<( 3<(~ E.~ ~
;t~c:!i8~~2fg~~-5:E
.J!IQ)
u.c
C\3-
a.
Eui
.- Q)
cU
OC
.- Q)
-u
C\3.-
.... UI
~~
ci
o
~
-g~c-g~
~- ~ ro:g
.- Q) CD ~ 0
5-1Viii~3:
Q).c~Su
~-g~Q)8
C\3'0.5 c>
]! cii c g> c
UI .5 ~ ~.-
c~u~rn
Q):>~Q)Q)
EEEEiii
.9- Q) E E ~
5-'5 S UI .-
Q)c::~cac:
6 U -m i3 g
+:JQ)"-:::::JCO
O>~(I).o
.5 e .a ui'S; en
Ulo.UQ) c
C.sJ'!!::;Q)g
8..c ~ ~.=u
__mQ)C>C:
<i:'~EE~S
<(
'0 -g -g ,2
UQ)CoCD
~~~x
en a. 9- Q)
.s.g~~
"E -o.~
Q)~U 0
EQ) --
.Q.-g ...... u
5-C\30~
Q) UI :>
.2 g U Q)
S-ra.c
~.J!I2 .
UO(J)=-X:
E~'S~o
E Ul3:
-'- c
~.9cc2
--1UQ)Q)o
gjEEE2
8. ~ .~.~~
:= g,ggS
a:i
ai
UI
:>
.5
-0
c
--
~cii~-g~"5,E
.E.5 C\3Q):>ai
()1iJ'iijE~eo
Q) a-c .~:5o
:6uUI~U>'cX)
'+-a>U)ocC'Ou
oiii.!!1..C\3Uc
-Q)~~ >-a co
fc~:g'+-~~ E.
LO (.) co 0".::
cO) ~lL'ci.
-<i '0' c :>.c E 0
~ c.2 ~ g> cO ~ .
~Q)g(1)eO~~
c:-o~:5:5~c~
oOcc I'--Q)c
:;::;() 0 Q) iU'u Q):>
~rouQ)uc~CI)
CI) a..... ~ co C\3 Q)U
.-OQ) ,CC
B.~ c,C~ EU ~
-:>ouE .c~
c~;:2 .c.coro
~ro~~cao~"E
~]2~e~6~~
0.. > U a. I'-- ..- LL CI)
:t::
o
U
Q)
E
.a
Q)
,C
ro
.c
UI
c
Q)
E
a.
':;
0'
Q)
<i:
cj
ci
V'>
C1)
W
iJ..
<.>
o
"'=!
:;g
~
::E
::E
-
M
o
,..:.
o
JJ
:::'
P-
oi
::E
1:
<8
><
~
'0
'"
u:;
~
]
<
C2
<
~
c:
.c:
c:
'"
~
-,
"
1. Name of Proponent:
~(~
-.-
-~
CnY OF
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM CHUIA VISTA
Concordia Lutheran Church c/o
Brookfield Shea Otay, LLC
2. Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of Chula Vista
Planning and Building Department
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
3. Address and Phone Number of Proponent:
Concordia Lutheran Church
c/o Brookfield Shea Otay, LLC
12865 Pointe Del Mar, Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92014
(858) 481-8500
4. Name of Proposal:
Oxford Street/ Concordia Lutheran
Church Residential
5. Date of Checklist:
October 17, 2007
6. Case No.:
IS-07 -031
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS QUESTIONS:
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Issues: Significant With Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
I. AESTHETICS. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 0 0 0 .
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, 0 0 0 .
but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or 0 0 0 .
quality of the site and its surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare,
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views
o
o
o
.
1
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
in the area?
Comments:
a-b)The proposal includes the development of twenty-four single family residential units with site
improvements in accordance with the City of Chula Vista Municipal. The proposed landscape
improvements would enhance and improve the aesthetic quality of Oxford Street, the proposed
on-site public street and surrounding neighborhood. The proposed project would not damage any
scenic resources, vegetation, or historic buildings within a state scenic highway. The site is
located on the side of a ridgeline developed with single-family homes, which slopes uphill to the
east. Development of the project site with homes could affect views from these adjacent
properties. However, the development layout is designed to include side-yard setbacks, which
allow views between proposed homes and above the roofline of single-story homes. The
approval of the project will not substantially degrade existing views across the property,
therefore, no significant aesthetic impacts are anticipated.
c) The proposal is an infill residential development project. The proposed project will not
substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the project site or its adjacent
residential surroundings. The project site is planned for single - family residential development
according to the General Plan Land Use regulations.
d) The project proposes one public streetlight on the cul-de-sac, and private lighting for each
residence, which should not affect adjacent residences. An existing streetlight will serve the
project entry at the intersection of East Oxford Street and the proposed street. The proposal will
be required to comply with the City's minimum standards for roadway lighting. The project will
be required to comply with the light and glare regulations (Section 19.66.100) of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code (CVMC). Compliance with these regulations will ensure that no significant
glare, or light would affect daytime or nighttime views in the surrounding residential
neighborhood area.
Mith!ation:
No mitigation measures are required.
II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the
proj ect:
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?
o
o
o
.
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or
o
o
o
.
2
Issues:
a Williamson Act contract?
c) Involve other changes in the existing environment,
which, due to their location or nature, could result in
conversion ofFarrn1and, to non-agricultural use?
Comments:
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Significant With Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
0 0 0 .
a-c)The project site is developed with a church, pre-schoolldaycare, and parking lot on the south side
of the lot and play fields on the north side of the lot. The surrounding properties have been
developed with single-family homes. These properties are consistent with the Chula Vista
General Plan and zoning designation, and contain no agricultural resources or designated
fannland. The proposal would not convert Prime Fannland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of
Statewide Importance to non-agricultural use and no impacts to agricultural resources would be
created as a result of the proposed project.
Mitie:ation:
No mitigation measures are required.
ill. 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
3
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
Issues:
number of people?
Comments:
(a-e) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
Mitieation:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant air quality impacts to a level of less than significance.
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the
project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, 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?
4
o
o
o
.
.
o
o
o
o
o
o
.
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Issues: Significant With Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any 0 . 0 0
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species
or with established native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native
wildlife nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances 0 0 0 .
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat 0 . 0 0
Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
Comments:
a-f) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
Mitieation:
The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant biological resource impacts to a level of less than significance.
v. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defined in
State CEQA Guidelines 9 15064.5?
o
o
o
.
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant
to State CEQA Guidelines 9 15064.5?
o
o
o
.
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique geologic
o
o
o
.
5
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries?
o
o
o
.
Comments:
a) In order to assess potential historic resources located on the project site or surrounding areas, an
archaeologica1/historical evaluation entitled "Archaeological Survey for the Concordia Lutheran
Church Projecf' was prepared by Brian F. Smith & Associates, dated September 19, 2007. The
following details summarize the results of the study. The existing structures were constructed
between 1962-1965 and were not associated with any important events or individuals in terms of
local, state or national history. The existing structures and the site do not qualifY as a historic resource
under national, state or local register criteria. The proposed project will not constitute a substantial,
adverse change to the significance of an historical resource as the structure has been determined by the
analysis not to be historically or architecturally significant within the project impact area. Therefore,
no substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5
is anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
b) The site has been disturbed by development of the church on the south 1/3 of the property and
previous playfie1d use of the northerly 2/3 of the property. Based on the level of previous site
disturbance, the potential for significant impacts or adverse changes to archaeological resource as
defined in Section 15064.5 is not anticipated.
c) Based on the level of previous disturbance to the site and the relatively limited amount of additional
grading for the proposed project, no impacts to unique paleontological resources or unique geologic
features are anticipated.
d) No human remains are anticipated to be present within the impact area of the project site as the project
site has been previously disturbed with the existing church and auxilIary structures.
Mitigation:
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:
1.
Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
o
o
o
.
6
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Issues: Significant With Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State
Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault?
11. Strong seismic ground shaking? 0 . 0 0
111.
Seismic-related
liquefaction?
including
o
o
o
.
ground
failure,
IV.
Landslides?
o
o
.
b)
Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil?
o
o
o
o
.
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?
o
o
o
d)
Be located on expansive soil, creating substantial
risks to life or property?
.
e)
Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the
use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater
disposal systems where sewers are not available
for the disposal of wastewater?
o
o
o
.
Comments:
a-e) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
Mitigation:
o
o
o
.
The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant geological impacts to a level ofless than significance.
7
Issues:
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?
e) For a project located within an aiIport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public aiIport or public use
aiIport, would the project result in a safety hazard
for people residing or working in the project area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private
airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard
for people residing or working in the project area?
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere
with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
loss, injury or death involving wildland fires,
8
Potentially
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
o
.
o
o
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
Impact
.
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
No
Impact
o
o
.
.
.
.
.
.
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
including where wildlands are adjacent to
urbanized areas or where residences are
intermixed with wildlands?
Comments:
(a-b) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
c) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E. The proposed project site is located within one-quarter
mile of Palomar Elementary school located on East Palomar Street. The proposed project will not
emit acutely hazardous emissions or materials, therefore, will not create a significant impact to the
schools within the StUTounding area.
d) The proposed project is not located on a site included on the County of San Diego Department of
Environmental Health Services Hazardous List pursuant to the Government Code Section 65962.5,
therefore, will not create a significant impact to the public or the environment.
e) The project is not located within an airport land use plan nor within two miles of a public airport or
public use airport; therefore, the project would not expose people residing or working in the project
area to adverse safety hazards.
f) The project is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip; therefore, the project development
would not expose people working in the project area to adverse safety hazards.
g) The project is designed to meet the City's emergency response plan, route access and emergency
evacuation requirements. The proposed fire improvements include an emergency turning radius and
fire hydrant. No impairment or physical interference with the City's emergency response plan is
anticipated.
h) The project is designed to meet the City's Fire Prevention building and fire service requirements. No
exposure of people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death due to wildfires is
anticipated.
Mitigation:
The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant Hazards/Hazardous Materials impacts to a level of less than significance.
vm. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY.
Would the project:
a) Result in an increase in pollutant discharges to
receiving waters (including impaired water bodies
D
.
D
D
9
Issues:
pursuant to the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) list),
result in significant alteration of receiving water
quality during or following construction, or violate
any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer
volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table
level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby
wells would drop to a level which would not support
existing land uses or planned uses for which permits
have been granted)? Result in a potentially
significant adverse impact on groundwater quality?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the
site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, in a manner, which
would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or
off-site?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattem ofthe
site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, substantially increase the
rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which
would result in flooding on- or off-site, or place
structures within a lOa-year flood hazard area which
would impede or redirect flood flows?
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?
10
Potentially
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
o
o
o
o
.
Less Than
Significant
Impact
.
o
.
o
o
No
Impact
o
.
o
.
D
Issues:
Comments:
(a-f) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
Miti2ation:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant Hydrology/Water Quality impacts to a level ofless than significance.
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the
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) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation
plan or natural community conservation plan?
11
o
o
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
.
o
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Comments:
a) The project site is surrounded with single-family residentialland uses. The proposed residential infill
project would be consistent with the Chula Vista General Plan and character of the immediate
surrounding residential area. The project would not disrupt or divide an established community;
therefore, no significant land use impact would occur as a result of the project.
b) The project site is located within the Rl (Single-Family Residential) Zones and RLM (Low-Medium
Density) General Plan land use designation. The project is required to rezone the existing parcel to R-
1-5-P and be in compliance with the respective zoning. The project has been found to be consistent
with the General Plan guidelines and regulations, therefore; no significant land use impacts are
anticipated.
c) Refer to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E. Potential short-term construction noise/raptor
nesting impacts are addressed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section, under Biological
Resources.
Miti!!ation:
The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant Land U se/Planning impacts to a level of less than significance.
x. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
o
o
D
.
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally
important mineral resource recovery site delineated
on a local general plan, specific plan or other land
use plan?
o
o
o
.
12
Issues:
Comments:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
No
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact
a) The project site has been previously disturbed with the existing church. The proposed project would
not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource of value to the region or the residents
of the State of California.
b) The State of California Department of Conservation has not designated the project site for mineral
resource protection. Therefore, no impacts to mineral resources are anticipated as a result of the
proposed proj ect.
Mitieation:
No mitigation measures are required.
XI. NOISE. Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels
in excess of standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or groundbome noise levels?
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
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
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise levels?
o
o
o
.
Comments:
a-d) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
e-f) The project is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport, nor is it
located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. Therefore, the project development would not expose
people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels.
Mitigation:
The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant Noise impacts to a level ofless than significance.
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
.
c) Displace substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
o
o
o
.
14
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Comments:
a-c) The project is surrounded by existing residential development and involves the removal of the
existing church and daycare buildings and related improvements. The proposed project does not
involve the extension of public facilities that would induce substantial growth. Future residential
development of the site for the proposed 24 single-family residential units is consistent with the
General Plan and would not exceed the regional or local population projections. The proposed
project would involve the rezoning of the site from R-I-7 to R-1-5-P Zone, which is consistent with
the RLM General Plan designation of the site, which would be similar to the existing adjacent single-
family residential properties to the north, south and east. The proposed project would not involve
displacement of existing housing or individuals.
Miti2ation:
No mitigation measures are required.
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project:
Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated
with the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or physically
altered governmental facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental impacts, in order
to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or
other performance objectives for any public services:
a. Fire protection? 0 0 . 0
b. Police protection? 0 0 0 .
c. Schools? 0 0 0 .
d. Parks? 0 0 . 0
e. Other public facilities? 0 0 0 .
15
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Comments:
a) According to the Fire Department, adequate fITe protection services can continue to be provided to the
site. The applicant will be required to comply with the Fire Department policies for fire hydrant
placement, fITe flow, fITe truck access and new building construction. The City's Fire performance
objectives and thresholds will continue to be met.
b) According to the Chula Vista Police Department, adequate police protection services can continue to be
provided upon completion of the proposed project. The proposed project would not have a significant
effect upon or result in a need for substantial new or altered police protection services. The City's
Police perfonnance objectives and thresholds will continue to be met.
c) The proposed project would not induce substantial population growth; therefore, no significant adverse
impacts to public schools would result. According to the Chula Vista Elementary School District letter
dated May 22, 2007, the applicant would be required to pay the statutory building permit school fees
for the proposed residential construction or an alternative financing mechanism such as participation in
or annexation to a CFD is recommended.
d) The proposed project would not induce significant population growth, as it is a small residential infill
project. However, the applicant shall be required to pay Park Acquisition and Development Fees
(pAD) in accordance with Ordinance No. 2945 adopted by City Council on January 6, 2004.
e) The proposed project would not have a significant effect upon or result in a need for new or expanded
governmental services and would continue to be served by existing public inftastructure.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
XIV. RECREATION. Would the project:
a)
mcrease 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 would not induce significant population growth, as it is a small residential infill
project and would not impact existing or proposed recreational facilities. However, the applicant will
be required to pay Park Acquisition and Development Fees (pAD) in accordance with Ordinance No.
2945 adopted by City COlU1cil on January 6, 2004.
b) The project does not include the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. The project site is
not planned for any future parks and recreation facilities or programs. Therefore, the proposed project
would not have an adverse physical effect on the recreational environment.
Mitieation:
No mitigation measures are required.
xv. TRANSPORTATION / TRAFFIC. Would the
project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of
the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase
in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to
capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at
intersections)?
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level
of service standard established by the county
congestion management agency for designated roads
or highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic pattems, including
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in
location that results in substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design
feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
17
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
Issues:
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Significant With Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
0 0 0 .
0 0 0 .
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity?
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
supporting altemative transportation (e.g., bus
turnouts, bicycle racks)?
Comments:
(a,b,d,e) According to the Traffic Engineering Division, in their memorandum dated September 25,2007,
the proposed residential infill project is not anticipated to result in any significant traffic, circulation or
emergency access impacts. The existing church and daycare generates approximately 304 Average Daily
Trips (ADTs), as compared to the proposed project, which will generate approximately 240 ADTs. The
traffic generated by the project will amount to a reduction of 64 ADT's. In addition, the project-
generated trips will not exceed the level of service standard established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or highways. Therefore, due to the minimal traffic increase and
reduction of previous vehicular volume, the project will not create significant traffic operations impacts
along East Oxford Street and surrounding residential or collector streets.
c) The proposal would not have any significant effect upon any air traffic patterns, including either an
increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks.
f) The proposal includes garage spaces in accordance with the Chula Vista Zoning Code, and parking
on the proposed public street. The proposal meets ADA requirements for accessibility and parking.
g) There is an existing bus stop located 1 block westerly of the site at the intersection of Melrose and
East Oxford Street.
h) The proposal would not conflict with adopted transportation plans or alternative transportation
programs.
Mitieation:
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
.
18
Issues:
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?
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 ITom 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?
19
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Significant With Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
0 0 0 .
o
o
.
o
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Comments:
a) The project site is located within an urban area that is served by all necessary utilities and service systems.
According to the Engineering Department, wastewater requirements of the Regional Water Quality
Control Board not be exceeded as a result of the proposed project.
b) According to Sweetwater Authority correspondence dated April 24, 2007, an existing 8-inch water main is
located on the south side of East Oxford Street, with one existing water service to the site. The proposed
improvements will include a new water main extension within the proposed public road that connects to
the existing Authority water main in East Oxford Street, and terminates in the proposed cul-de-sac. This
would include new separate laterals and meters for each parcel. As the water facility improvements are
designed in accordance with water authority standards, no significant impacts to existing facility systems
will occur as a result of the proposed project. Adequate storage facilities exist to serve the project.
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 [mal
grading plans to be implemented during construction. The proposed project will result in the construction
of new storm water drainage facilities, including grassy swales and a detention basin located at the
southwest comer of the site. Installation of these improvements in conjunction with the proposed project
will result in a reduction of storm water flow. The proposed project is subject to the 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 be
conditioned to 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). No significant impacts to the City's storm drainage facilities are
anticipated as a result of the proposed project.
d) The project site is within the potable water service area of the Sweetwater District. Pursuant to
correspondence from the Sweetwater Authority, dated September 25, 2007, adequate storage facilities
exist, and the project may be serviced from the 8"-water main on East Oxford Street and the applicant will
need to install a service main to service this site. A fire flow of 1,500 gallons per minute fire flow at 20 psi
pressure for a two hour duration, as required by the Chula Vista Fire Department, is available to serve the
project. The proposed project will be required to construct expansions to existing water facilities as
described in Section b above.
e) An Overview of Sewer Service for the project was prepared on September 26,2007 and amended October
2007, prepared by Dexter Wilson Engineering. The project site is within the boundaries of the City of
Chula Vista wastewater services area. The existing sewer facility system includes 8-inch sewer lines along
East Oxford Street and one sewer lateral to serve the existing church. There are currently no sewer mains
serving the northerly part of the site. Therefore a new 8-inch sewer lateral line within the proposed public
street, connecting the sewer main in East Oxford Street is proposed to service the lots. The applicant shall
be required to submit a final sewer report and plan showing compliance with the City's Sewer Design
Criteria, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. No adverse impacts to the City's sewer system or City's
sewer threshold standards will occur as a result of the proposed project.
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.
Mitigation: The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
identified storm water/storm drainage and wastewater impacts to a level ofless than significant.
20
Issues:
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% of the cases (measured annually).
D) Traffic
The Threshold Standards require that all intersections must
operate at a Level of Service (LOS) "C" or better, with the
exception that Level of Service (LOS) "D" may occur
during the peak two hours of the day at signalized
intersections. Signalized intersections west ofI-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 fi-eeway ramps
are exempted from this Standard.
21
Potentially
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
No
Impact
.
.
.
.
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Issues: Significant With Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
E) Parks and Recreation Areas 0 0 0 .
The Threshold Standard for Parks and Recreation is 3
acres of neighborhood and community parkland with
appropriate facilities/I,OOO population east ofI-80S.
F) Drainage 0 0 . 0
The Threshold Standards require that storm water flows
and volumes not exceed City Engineering Standards.
Individual projects win provide necessary improvements
consistent with the Drainage Master Plane s) and City
Engineering Standards.
G) Sewer
o
o
.
o
The Threshold Standards require that sewage flows and
volumes not exceed City Engineering Standards.
Individual projects win provide necessary improvements
consistent with Sewer Master Plan(s) and City Engineering
Standards.
II) Water
o
o
.
o
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 conservation or fee offset program the City of Chula
Vista has in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
22
t I tiO
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Comments:
a) The project would not induce substantial population growth; therefore, no impacts to library facilities would
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 project would not have a significant effect upon or result in a
need for substantial new or altered police protection services. No adverse impact to the City's Police Threshold
standards would occur as a result of the proposed project.
c) According to the Fire Department, adequate fire protection and emergency medical services can continue to 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. No adverse impact to the City's Fire
and Emergency Medical Threshold standards would occur as a result of the proposed project.
d) According to the Traffic Engineering Division, the surrounding street segments and intersections including East
Oxford Street and Melrose Avenue will continue to operate at the same Level of Service in compliance with the
City's traffic threshold standard with the proposed project traffic. No adverse impact to the City's traffic
threshold standards would occur as a result of the proposed project.
e) The proposed project would not induce significant population growth, as it is a small residential infill project and
would not impact existing or proposed recreational facilities. However, the applicant shall be required to pay
Park Acquisition and Development Fees (pAD) in accordance with Ordinance No. 2945 adopted by City Council
on January 6, 2004.
f) Based upon the review of the project, the Engineering Department has determined that there are no significant
issues regarding the proposed drainage improvements of the project site. The proposed drain system includes
improvements to existing drainage culverts to handle 2, 10, 50 and 100-year stonn events, a series of inlets,
private catch basins and culverts, underground detention systems, discharge controls, and filtering systems. No
adverse impacts to the City's drainage threshold standards will occur as a result of the proposed project.
g) An Overview of Sewer Service for the project was prepared on September 26, 2007 and amended October 2007
by Dexter Wilson Engineering. The project site is within the boundaries of the City of Chula Vista wastewater
services area. The existing sewer facility system includes 8-inch sewer lines along East Oxford Street and one
lateral to serve the existing church. There are currently no sewer mains serving the northerly part of the site.
Therefore a new 8- inch sewer lateral line within the proposed public street, connecting the sewer main in East
Oxford Street is proposed to service the lots. The applicant shall be required to submit a final sewer report and
plan showing compliance with the City's Sewer Design Criteria, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. No
adverse impacts to the City's sewer system or City's sewer threshold standards will occur as a result of the
proposed project.
h) The project site is within the potable water service area of the Sweetwater District as noted in their
correspondence. Pursuant to correspondence ttom the Sweetwater Authority dated 4/24/07, the project may be
serviced ITom the 8" -water main on East Oxford Street and the applicant will need to install a service main to
service this site. No significant impacts to existing facility systems or the City's water threshold standards will
occur as a result of the proposed project.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
23
, ,
Issues:
XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF
SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the range
of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current project, and the
effects of probable future projects.)
c) Does the project have environmental effects, which
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
Comments:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
No
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
a) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E. Potential short-term construction raptor nesting impacts
are addressed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section F, under Biological Resources.
b) The project site has been previously disturbed with a church land use and site improvements. No
cumulative 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 the
proposed project has been mitigated to lessen any potential significant impacts to a level of less than
significance.
Mitigation: The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant impacts to a level ofless than significance.
24
r. , t ~
XIX. PROJECT REVISIONS OR MITIGATION MEASURES:
Project mitigation measures are contained in Section F, Mitigation Necessary to Avoid Significant
Impacts, and Table 1, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, of Mitigated Negative Declaration
IS-07 -031.
xx. AGREEMENT TO IMPLEMENT MITIGATION MEASURES
By signing the line(s) provided below, the Applicant and/or Operator stipulate that they have each read,
understood and have their respective company's authority to and do agree to the mitigation measures
contained herein, and will implement same to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator.
Failure to sign below prior to posting ofthis Mitigated Negative Declaration with the County Clerk shall
indicate the Applicant and/or Operator's desire that the Project be held in abeyance without approval
and that the Applicant and/or Operator shall apply for an Environmental Impact Report.
ASf:.\'. V\ci:-- ~~
MAA D- Pf-\lNt3( - ~~~~ ~t.-
Printed Name and Title of Applicant
(or authorized representative)
Signature of Applicant
(or authorized representative)
tD 1(1 ( ^OO ry--
Date
N/A
Printed Name and Title of Operator
(if different from Applicant)
N/A
Signature of Operator
(if different from Applicant)
Date
25
('+ I' , ('
XXI. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at
least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated,"
as indicated by the checklist on the previous pages.
D Land Use and Planning
D Population and Housing
. Geophysical
D Agricultural Resources
. Hydrology/Water
. Air Quality
D Paleontological
Resources
DTransportation/Traffic
. Biological Resources
D Energy and Mineral
Resources
D Public Services
D Utilities and Service Systems
D Aesthetics
lIHazards and Hazardous
Materials
D Cultural Resources
. Noise
D Recreation
D Mandatory Findings of Significance
26
.- 1" . r-
XXII. DETERMINATION:
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the
environment, and a Negative Declaration will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in
the project have been made or agreed to by the project proponent. A Mitigated
Negative Declaration will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment,
and an Environmental Impact Report is required.
I find that the proposed project may have a "potentially significant impact" or
"potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one
effect: 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable
legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier
analysis as described on attached sheets. An Environmental Impact Report is
required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed
adequately in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable standards
and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Negative
Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the
proposed project, nothing further is required.
/I 121!tJ T
Date I
J:\Planning\MARIA \Initial StudyWillas De! Mar\IS-04-022draftChecklist.doc
27
o
.
o
o
o
;:lff;fc #vU e:-fff 9'.
~ {f?-
-.-
0:--- ----
~---i:~
- - --
Plan n i ng & B u i I din g De par t men t
Planning Division I Development Processing
em OF
CHULA VISTA
APPLICATION APPENDIX B
Disclosure Statement
", Pursuant to Council Policy 1 01-01, 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..
Brookfield Shea Otay LLC
Brookfield Otay LLC .
Concordia Lutheran Church of Chula Vista. California
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.
N/A
3. If any person* identified pursuant to (1) above is a non-profit organization or trust,list the names of
any person serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of
the trust.
N/A
4. Please identify every person, including any agents, employees, consultants, or independent
contractors you have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter.
Hunsaker & Assoc. ( Lex Williman) Brookfield Otay LLC ( Adam Pevney )
Hunsaker & Assoc. ( Marvbeth Murray) Nancy Keenan ( Dahlin Group)
Hunsaker & Assoc. ( Terry Barker)
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. YesD- No ~
If Yes, briefly describe the nature of the financial interest the official** may have in this contract.
6. Have you made a contribution of more than $250 within the past twelve (12) months to a current
member of the Chula Vista City Council? No [2J Yes D If yes, which Council Member?
276 Fourth Avenue I Chula Vista I California I 91910 I (619) 691-5101
~{~
-.-
~....,;:'......- --
~~- --
Planning & Building Department
Planning Division I Development Processing
eflY OF
CHUlA VISTA
APPLICATION APPENDIX B
Disclosure Statement - Page 2
7. Have you provided more than $340 (or an item of equivalent value) to an official** of the City of Chula
Vista in the past twelve (12) months? (This includes being a source of income, money to retire a legal
debt, gift, loan, etc.) Yes Cl-. No~_
If Yes, which official** and what was the nature of item provided?
Date: 4/05/2007
Adam D. Pevnev - Assistant Vice President
Print or type name of Contractor I Applicant
*
Person is defined as: any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint venture, association, social club,
fraternal organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, any other county, city,
municipality, district, or other political subdivision, -or any other group or combination acting as a
unit.
**
Official includes, but is not limited to: Mayor, Council member, Planning Commissioner, Member of
a board, commission, or committee of the City, employee, or staff members.
276 Fourth Avenue I ChulaVista I California 191910 1(619)691-5101