Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Reports/1984/10/10 AGENDA City Planning Commission Chula Vista, California Wednesday, October 10, 1984 - 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - SILENT PRAYER INTRODUCTORY REMARKS APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Meeting of September 12, 1984 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 1. Consideration of Final EIR-84-4, Otay Small Electric Generating Plant, Otay Landfill - Central Plants, Inc. (Continued) 2. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional use permit PCC-84-2, Request to construct a small electric generating plant on the northeast corner of the Otay Landfill Property - Central Plants, Inc. (Continued) 3. PUBLIC HEARING: Draft EIR-84-3, Otay Valley Road proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezoning DIRECTOR'S REPORT COMMISSION COMMENTS ADJOURN~ENT AT to the Boards & Commissions' Workshop of October 17, 1984 at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers TO: City Planning Commission FROM: George Krempl, Director of Planning SUBJECT: Staff Report on Agenda Items for Planning Commission Meeting of October 10, 1984 1. Consideration of Final EIR-84-4, Otay Small Electric Generating Plant, Otay Landfill - Central Plants, Inc. (Continued) 2. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional use permit, PCC-84-2, Request to construct a small electric 9eneratin9 plant on the northeast corner of the Otay Landfill Property - Central Plants, Inc. (Continued) A. BACKGROUND 1. On June 13, 1984 the Planning Commission decided to continue consideration of the final EIR-84-4 and the public hearing for conditional use permit PCC-84-2 until the project proponent obtains an "authority to construct" permit from the San Diego Air Pollution Control District or for a maximum period of 60 days. 2. On October 8, 1984 the project proponent, Central Plants, Inc. requested that the Planning Commission consideration be extended to a date in September. The Planning Commission thereby continued the item to October 10, 1984. 3. The project proponent has requested that due to delays in testing and obtaining the APCD permit, the Planning Commission should continue the hearings to a future meeting date. B. RECOMMENDATION Continue review of final EIR-84-4 and conditional use permit PCC-84-2 to a future meeting date to be specified at a later time. City Planning Comission Agenda Items for t,~eting of October 10, 1984 Page 1 3. Public Hearing: Consideration of Draft EIR-84-5, Otay Valley Road General Plan Amendment Prezonin9 and Annexation A. BACKGROUND 1. This EIR was prepared under an agreement with PRC Engineering, Inc., the project proponent, and the Environmental Review Coordinator (ERC). The financing for the document was supplied by the City of Chula Vista's Redevelopment Agency through tax increment financing. The ERC issued the draft EIR for public reviml and coment on August 24, 1984. 2. The discretionary acts which will be considered to implement the project include: a General Plan Amendment, prezoning of the property, and annexation to the City of Chula Vista. 3. The various written comments have been received on the document and they are attached to this report for your information. The draft EIR is being circulated through the State Clearinghouse and October lOth is the end of their review process. Staff will contact the State Clearinghouse prior to the public hearing and inform the Commission if there any comments from State agencies. B. RECO~IENDATION Open the public hearing and take testimony relative to the adequacy of the EIR. It is anticipated that a response to any written or verbal comments will I~ave to be prepared and therefore, it is recommended that the public hearing be closed and that consideration of the final EIR be scheduled for October 24 when the General Plan Amendment and prezoning will also be considered by the Planning Commission. C. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1. The project is located to the east of 1-805 and south of Otay Valley Road. The 241-acre property is bound on the south by lands under the jurisdiction of the City of San Diego and to the east by areas within the County of San Diego. 2. Tile 241-acre project is in the southern portion of the 771-acre Otay Valley Redevelopment Project. A final EIR for that Redevelopment Plan has been previously certified by the Chula Vista City Council and Redevelopment Agency. This EIR ~lill address only the 241-acre portion of the overall redevelopment project. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of October 10, 1984 Page2 3. This proposal involves an amendment to the Chula Vista General Plan )~hich would change the designation of the area north of the Otay River floodway to research and limited industrial and retain the area to the south of the floodway as parks and public open space. Prezoning of the area to be designated as research and industrial will be to the I-L-P zone (limited industrial subject to the approval of the precise plan) and the southern portion of the property within the flood plain )~ould be prezoned F-1 k~hich would preclude construction within the floodway area. The result in these changes would be the creation of 104 acres of limited industrially zoned area of which about 90 acres would be available for development, 23 acres ~ould be necessary for the existing and widening of Otay Valley Road, and ll4 acres would be within the open space floodway area. Section 2.4 of the EIR describes other projects in the project vicinity. The status of several of these projects needs to be updated to provide better information. An example is that the Chula Vista Sanitary Service Operation Center location on Brand~q~ine Avenue has no~ been dropped and it should not be included in this listing. 4. This project involves only a change in land use designations on the General Plan and prezoning of the property for annexation. No precise development plans are available at this time, however, when they do become available, additional environmental revie~ ~ill be required. Additionally, development plans and land uses will likely be revim~ed by the Project Area Committee for the Redevelopment Plan, the City's Design Revie~ Committee, and tile Redevelopment Agency. D. IMPACT ANALYSIS SUIqiqARY 1. Drainage/Flood Plain All idle floodway and the southern portion of the flood plain of the Otay River are recommended for designation as parks or public open space with prezoning to the F-1 zone. Such a zone would ensure uses that would be incompatible with the floodway of the Otay River would not be permitted. Mitigation measures for the potential modification of the flooduay should be developed when those precise plans are available. Increased runoff which could accompany the limited industrial development can be accommodated by a storm drain system which will also be a part of the final precise plans for development of the property. The significance of potential future modifications of the flood plain cannot be precisely determined until precise improvement plans are available. Any flood plain improvements will require future environmental review. Increased runoff if handled through appropriately designed storm drain facilities can be reduced to a level of insignificance. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for )~eting of October lO, 1984 Page3 2. Water Quality Runoff from the project site currently contains agricultural pollutants such as fertilizers and pesticides as it enters the Otay River. In general, however, water quality in the Otay River is good. Biological surveys are conducted at the mouth of the Otay River jointly by the State Fish and Game Department and the State Water Research Board. The studies which test concentrations of heavy metals and pesticides show no evidence of pollutants. Fish originating in Bay waters near the mouth of the Otay River have been found to contain relatively high concentrates of PCB, the origin of ~hich is not clear. Three industrial ~aste disposal sites are or were located in the vicinity of the project. Two are legal permitted operations subject to strict regulations. The third ~as an illegal use uhich was recently investigated and undem~ent cleanup. All these sites are no~ closely monitored by the Regional )~ter Quality Control Board, State Department of Water Resources and the County Department of Heal th Services Hazardous Waste ~nagement Division. Water quality conditions including any illegal discharge of pollutants from eventual industrial operations will be monitored and controlled by these agencies. This control would eliminate the possibility of adverse industrial discharges into the Otay River and eventually the South San Diego Bay do~nstream. 3. Mobile Noise Source Increased traffic ~hich will be generated by cumulative regional growth would significantly increase mobile noise in the project area. The project ~ill contribute incrementally to this increase in future noise levels. Project noise would not adversely affect the proposed industrial development, but ~ould have significant effects on existing residential areas adjacent to Otay Valley Road. Noise mitigation measures will be incorporated into the future design guidelines for the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Area. 4. Aesthetics Eventual industrial development would permanently alter the existing visual environment of the project site from that of a scenic agricultural valley to that of an industrial park development. Careful site design and retention of the flood plain of the Otay River in parks and public open pace, as proposed, would help to reduce the adverse visual effects which could result from limited industrial development on the project site. City Planning Comission Agenda Items for )~eting of October 10, 1984 Page4 5. Transportation/Access The results of the traffic analysis indicate that the level of service of roads and intersections in the area would not be adversely affected by eventual development of the project site. Improvements to Otay Valley Road to Circulation Element Standards will be necessary when development occurs on the project site. Such improvements would accommodate projected traffic from cumulative development in the subregion. 6. Sewer Availability Under present conditions, sm~er service availability represents a significant constraint to development. A lO-inch line located in Otay Valley Road, ~hich would serve eventual industrial development on the project site, is currently estimated to be at 70 to 80 percent capacity. Improvements to this line could be required in conjunction with development of the property. On-site storage capacity ~hich could permit discharge during off-peak periods could also be required. Sewer availability in the project area is under consideration on an areawide level by the applicable jurisdictions in the project area and may be solvent through cooperative action. 7. Air Quality Increased traffic generated by cumulative regional growth ~ould contribute to air quality degradation in the San Diego region. The proposed project represents an incremental part of this growth. Implementation of the Revised Regional Air Quality Strategies (RAQ's) may reduce potential impacts on region-wide basis. WPC 1343P ...q~d/cated to 0c.~tmits ~a~ie~ 105gE JAIVtAOHA BOULEYARD, SPFtING VALLEY, CAUFORHIA 9~078 TELEPHONE: 462-2222, AREA CODE 619 September 19, 1984 Mr. Douglas Reid Environmental Review Coordinator ~.ity of Chula Vista Planning Department P.O. Box 1087 Chula Vista, CA 92012 Subject: Draft EIR for 241 acres East of 1-805 and South of Otay Valley Road Dear Mr. Reid: Thank you for having given us the opportunity to review the draft EIR on the proposed general plan amendment pre-zoning and annex- ation of approximately 241 acres east of 1-805 and south of Otay Valley Road. The statement regarding water availability to the subject area is correct, however, we believe it should be under its own section or indexed so one can easily refer to it. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. Very truly yours, Manuel Arroyo District Planning Engineer MA: cp SF_.P ~ ''~ 1984 PLANNING DEPARTMENT "HULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA ~. (~19) P3~-POIS · san Local a ncu fmTnation commission ~ ~ hl~ · r~)m 4S;~ ~n d~. ~ 9~ September 20, 1984 Ghmirman Doug D. Reid J. B. Bennett Planning Department Co,,cilman, Ci~of City of Chula Vista imperial Beach 276 Fourth Avenue Members Chula Vista, CA 92010 County Board of Dear Doug: Supervisors P~ulW. Ford,m SUBJECT: Draft Environmental Impact Report for Otay Countv Board of Valley Road-South General Plan Amendment Supervisors MikeGotch LAFCO staff has reviewed the Dr'aft EIR for the Otay Valley Councilman, Cityof Road General Plan Amendment and would like to offer the sa.O~ego following comments. The annexation to the City of Chula MarjorieHer~om Vista is being processed as part of a reorganization that Alpine Fire Protection District concurrently involves detachment from the Montgomery Fire Protection District and the San Diego County Flood Control Dr. Charles W. Hostler Public Member District - Zone 4. We would like to suggest that the project description be changed to discuss the reorganization Stanlmv~Mmhr SO that it is clear that all LAFCO actions are covered San Marcos County WaterDistrlct i n the EI R. Lindm Oravec Councilwoman, City of In several sections of the EIR, the potential loss of Powav revenue to the Montgomery Fire Protection District is Alternate Members mentioned· The City of Chula Vista and the County have adopted a master property tax agreement which pertains AlexL. Adams to this reorganization proposal. The agreement established Greater Mountain Empire Re$ourceConservetio. the percentage of property tax revenues to be exchanged District among the County, detaching special districts and the P~trickM. Boam~an City upon annexation. If the reorganization is approved, Coun~Boa~of the Montgomery Fire Protection District ~;ould retain their Supervisors current level of property tax revenues and would not suffer Uv&ldoMarUnez a loss in revenue. However, the district would not receive Counci~m~,,C~o~ a portion of growth in property tax resulting from the in- SanDiego crease in assessed value after development. Reference is Ro~rtPre~cott also made in the text to the San Diego County Department of Councilmen, City of Fire Services· This office was disbanded in 1982. Carlsbad Executive Officer Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Jane P. Merrill R E C E I V E D Counsel Sincerely), , ~ Lloyd M. Harmon, Jr, BY .................... · MERRILL Executive Officer ~! ~ ~ ' :~ JPM:RLM:iw September 26, 1984 RECEIV: Douglas D. Reid~¥ .................................. Enviornmental Review Coordinator Planning Department SEP 81984 City of Chula Vista P. O. Box 1087 PLA~',,n Chula Vista, California 92012 CHUL/~ V Subject: DRAFT EIR 84-5 (OTAY VALLEY ROAD - SOUTH) In accordance to your request for comments on the adequacy of the subject draft EIR, we offer the following conments: 1. The draft report seems to use the words "floodway" and "floodplain" inter- changeably particularly with respect to designation of parks and public open space. It is our understanding that portions of the floodplain (outside of the floodway) are intended for reclamation and development. The draft EIR is con- fusing throughout on this subject. 2. The Draft EIR available at the Public Liabrary was missing pages 25 - 26, page 44, and various appendixes referred to in the text (Geology, Soils, Biology, Archaeology, Traffic and Noise). 3. On page 30, the draft EIR makes some assumptions on an as yet uncompleted study . . ."being conducted for the City of Chula Vista Redevelopment Agency on the development potential and feasibility of various alternatives for industrial development adjacent to the floodplain" (does the report mean floodway?). The draft EIR assumes that channelization would not be an acceptable alternative because: a) . . ."this approach would destroy extensive areas of riparian habitat". · .(no'mention is made-~hat there could be acceptable mitigation if there was restoration and improvement of wetlands in the existing floodway). b) . . ."create alterations in flow downstream" (this is nonsense because a channel could be designed to discharge flow at the downstream end in volume and velocities similar to that without a channel). and c) . . ."incur high costs" (Costs must be weighed against benefit. It may indeed be cost effective to remove dirt from the north side of the Otay Valley Road to fill the floodplain fringe on the south side of the road. This could either create additional useable land on the north side of the road, or allow widening or relocation of the road to the north to maximize useable land south of the road). It is presumptious and subjective for this draft EIR to . . ."indicate,, that floodway channelization would not be an acceptable altemative .... September 26, 1984 Douglas D. Reid Enviornmental Review Coordinator Page Two 4, Page 66 The trip generation rates are too low. Recent studies by the City of San Diego indicate that light industrial uses generate between 14 - 18 trips per 1000 square feet of building. A typical light industrial complex utilizes its land area 50% building; 40% parking; 10~ landscaping. A one-story complex will generate between 305 - 392 trips per acre (and not 130 as used in the Draft EIR). 5. Page 67 Sewer Availability. The Draft EIR expresses concern about sewer trunk line carrying capacity to serve the subject area. At this time, the City of Chula Vista could negotiate for sewer trunk line capacity rights for this area to utilize a small portion of the City of San Diego's Otay Mesa Sewer Trunk line that will be constructed through the Otay Valley within the next two (2} years. 6. Page 68 Date - Faivre Trunk line {misspelled). 7. Page 72 Industrial Park acreage shown as 70 acres (but 142.3 acres on Page 66, and 90 acres on Page 2). If you have any questions please give me a call. Yours very truly, H. G. FENTON MATERIAL COMPANY TI Mk~OTH y ' C~. LANAG~AN ,~p r~e r TCF/mcw