HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Reports/1985/01/23 A G E N D A
City Planning Commission
Chula Vista, California
Wednesday, January 23, 1985 - 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - SILENT PRAYER
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Meeting of January 9, 1985
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
1. PUBLIC HEARING: Draft EIR-83-2: E1 Rancho del Rey
2. Consideration of Final EIR-84-1: EastLake I (Continued)
3. PUBLIC HEARING: (Continued) PCM-84-9, Amendment of adopted General
Development Plan and consideration of the Sectional
Planning Area (SPA) Plan, Public Facilities and
Financing Plan, Development Agreement - EastLake I
4. PUBLIC HEARING: PCZ-85-D, Consideration of an amendment of the EastLake I
Planned Community District Regulations
5. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of tentative residential subdivision map
for EastLake I, Chula Vista Tract 84-9 - EastLake
Development Company
6. Consideration of "Candidate CEQA Findings" - EastLake I (Continued)
DIRECTOR'S COMMENTS
COMMISSION COMMENTS
ADJOURNMENT AT to the Regular Business Meeting of February 13, 1985
at 7:00 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
January 23, 1985
1. PUBLIC HEARING: Draft EIR-83-2, E1 Rancho del Rey
A. BACKGROUND
This draft EIR involves a revision to the E1 Rancho del Rey Specific
plan. The document was issued for public review on October 19, 1984. The
Draft EIR was circulated by the State Clearinghouse and their 45-day review
period has closed. Letters of comment from state and other agencies are
attached. They will be included in the final EIR with appropriate responses.
This EIR is a master environmental document with more detailed evaluation
provided at the sectional planning area/tentative Subdivision map level.
B. RECOMMENDATION
Open the Public Hearing, take any testimony relevant to the adequacy of
the Draft EIR and after the hearing is closed the Final EIR will be presented
at the time of project consideration.
C. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project involves a Specific Plan Amendment for 1673.5 acres
of the 2450 acre E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan. Of this, 1582 acres are
under ownership of the Gersten Companies and the remaining 91.5 acres are'
under various other private ownerships. The property is located east of
Interstate 805 and north of Telegraph Canyon Road. Existing topography of the
site consists of east-west trending ridges and intervening valleys. Major
roads in the project area include Tele9raph Canyon Road on the south, East H
Street {which is presently constructed with two lanes) through the central
portion of the property, and Otay Lakes Road along the eastern and
northeastern portion of the site.
The proposed Specific Plan Amendment would involve an increase in the
maximum permitted dwelling units from 4220 to 5928. This increase would
reflect a shift from predominantly single family units as envisioned by the
adopted plan to more small lot single family and multiple family units. The
proposed plan would provide a 93.4-acre Employment Park designation adjacent
to East H Street. This would permit the development of industrial, office and
commercial support uses wi thin the area, which were not provided for under the
adopted plan. Other land use changes proposed by the project include the
addition of a public facilities designation to accommodate community service
uses (9.9 acres), an increase in acreage designated for parks/recreation uses
(from 27.0 acres to 90.5 acres), and a decrease in natural open space acreage.
The north leg of Rice Canyon, which was shown as natural open space in the
adopted plan, would be partially filled under the proposed plan, and used for
active parks/recreation uses. The center leg of Rice Canyon would include
designation of a larger open space area than under the proposed plan, with
this canyon envisioned as the natural open space area.
City Planning Commis~ n
Agenda Items for Meeting of January 23, 1985 Page 2
The circulation system for the project site would be changed from the
adopted plan's modified grid system. The proposed amendment would create a
loop system with fewer direct connections through the site, which will reduce
through-trips in this area.
Future approvals required for development within the Specific Plan area
will include Sectional Area Plans, Precise Plans and Tentative Tract Maps.
Some areas of the site will also require approval by the Design Review
Committee.
D. ANALYSIS
l) Land Use
The land use designation changes proposed by the Specific Plan
Amendment would increase the residential density of the project, and would
introduce Employment Park uses. The proposed land use designations would be
compatible with existing and planned developments surrounding the project
site, and would also be internally compatible. No significant land use
impacts would be associated with the compatibility of internal uses or
adjacent offsite uses.
2) Traffic Circulation
Development according to the proposed Specific Plan Amendment would result
in traffic generation that is substantially higher than the adopted plan.
Total trips would increase from 44,000 ADT with the proposed amendment to
73,900 ADT. The project trips when considered on a cumulative basis with
other development in the area, would require the improvement of roads
throughout the project vicinity. Potential impacts would be associated with
this traffic if required improvements are not provided, or are not phased in
accordance with need. However, all potential impacts can be mitigated to
insignificance by providing a combination of road improvements as outlined in
Section 3.2.3 of the draft EIR.
The major road improvements needed to avoid significant impacts include
construction of onsite roads, and some offsite segments, to their designated
widths. Several changes in these widths are required by the cumulative
traffic volumes including the proposed project. These are the internal
roadways "A" and "C" which are shown as two-lane collectors but should be
upgraded to four-lane collectors, and East H Street which should be upgraded
from four lanes to six lanes. The segment of East H Street between 1-805 and
Ridgeback Road would require a change in classification from a major road to a
prime arterial, due to the proposed project's increase in traffic generation.
If project development is phased with needed circulation improvements,
potential impacts would be reduced to insignificance. If improvements are not
made, a significant adverse traffic impact would result.
City Planning Commiss n
Agenda Items for Meeting of January 23, 1985 Page 3
3. Fiscal Analysis
The operating costs and revenues for the development of E1 Rancho del Rey
under both the adopted and proposed plans were projected by a fiscal
consultant to determine the approximate fiscal effect of the project on the
City of Chula Vista. It was estimated that revenues exceed costs for both
plans for all phases of the project. However, the proposed plan would provide
substantially greater net revenues to the City than the adopted plan (a total
of $12-$14 million in 20 years plus about $825,000 per year thereafter). This
would result in significant beneficial fiscal effects to the City with the
proposed project.
4) Biological Resources
The proposed Specific Plan amendment would reduce the natural habitats of
the project site and retains substantially less sensitive habitats and species
than the adopted plan.
Given the unique character of the low scrub vegetation (Maritime Desert
Scrub) in the area, the rapidly declining status of this habitat along the
coastal plain of San Diego County, and the use of this habitat by a number of
declining plant and animal species, the implementation of either the proposed
and the adopted Plans would cause significant biological effects.
The difference between the two plans is due primarily to the retention of
the north leg of Rice Canyon and the majority of the canyon in the
northwestern corner of the site in the adopted Plan. The proposed Plan would
potentially retain more natural open space in the central and southern legs of
Rice Canyon. While this is positive biologically, it would not have the
long-term potential to preserve the local ecosystem that a more complete
retention of the north leg of Rice Canyon would have. While both Plans
adversely affect the resources of the project area, the spatial difference or
location of natural habitats retained by these two Plans is considered
significant with the adopted Plan being preferred biologically. The
significant biological effect of development of E1 Rancho del Rey by the
proposed Plan is essentially cumulative. It is a combination of the loss of a
variety of declining regional habitats and species. The long-term viability
of the open space system in the proposed Plan is considered substantially less
than the adopted Plan.
An impact associated with both this biological issue and that of land
form/aesthetics is that of the loop road crossing the northern leg of Rice
Canyon near its western and eastern end. The adopted plan includes the
crossing of Paseo del Rey at the eastern end but is open at the western end.
This not only divides this large open space area into small less genetically
stable communities but also these crossings contribute to the adverse visual
impact of land form alteration.
A revegetation plan is included as part of the proposed project. Elements
of this plan include revegetation of manufactured slopes adjacent to natural
City Planning Commis. ~n
Agenda Items for Meeting of January 23, 1985 Page 4
areas with native vegetation, reestablish canyon bottom biota in the north leg
of Rice Canyon, modify natural slopes through brush removal and transplantings
of indigenous cacti, and create a cacti refuge on the south facing slope of
the canyon south of East H Street. The mitigation program for the proposed
Plan only partially mitigate? th~ significant effects .of dgv~lopm~pt of the
project area. The proposeo wan Goes not preserve an aoequa~e oase/lne system
and cannot mitigate to insignificance the cumulative effects of urbanization
of the project area. It preserves pieces of habitat which, albeit
substantial, when added up do not have the potential biological value of the
open space of the adopted Plan. The significant biological impacts of the
proposed Specific Plan can be fully mitigated only through design alternatives.
5) Cultural Resources
A total of six archaeological sites are located within the project
boundaries, and development of the plan area under the adopted or proposed
plans would result in potentially significant adverse impacts to these
resources. Mitigation would be necessary as part of project approvals and
prior to grading of the property. This would include a testing program and
subsequent preservation or data recovery program.
6) Paleontological Resources
The project site includes extensive paleontological resources within the
rich fossiliferous San Diego Formation which occurs over much of the plan
area. Significant impacts would occur for either the adopted or proposed plan
from exposure and possible destruction of fossil material during grading.
Mitigation measures are available to avoid significant impacts to
paleontological resources. These include a program of onsite monitoring and
fossil salvage which should be made a condition of project approvals.
?) Geology/Soils
The project site is generally geologically suitable for development.
Onsite geotechnical conditions would not pose major constraints to development
as proposed. Potential seismic activity would be no greater at the site than
elsewhere in southern California. Construction in accordance with the Uniform
Building Code will minimize the effects of earthquake shaking. Prior to final
project design, a detailed geological investigation will be required to
provide grading, foundation and construction recommendations.
8) Landform/Aesthetics
The proposed landform alteration includes major grading of ridgetops under
both plans. However, the proposed plan would result in filling the bottom of
the north leg of Rice Canyon. The filling of the bottom of the north leg of
Rice Canyon is a significant impact of the proposed amendment that is
mitigable only through an alternative project design.
City Planning Commis. ~n
Agenda Items for Meeting of January 23, 1985 Page 5
The Specific Plan incorporates requirements for grading and design review
as part of subsequent project actions, such as Sectional Area plans, tentative
maps, etc. which will permit appropriate mitigation measures to be
incorporated should adverse impacts be identified.
9) Noise
The major source of noise affecting the project site will be from future
years' traffic on the existing and planned roadway network. Future
residential development in some portions of the plan area would be subject to
noise levels that exceed standards for exterior and/or interior uses.
However, the noise levels can be feasibly reduced to acceptable levels through
the use of barriers, building shell modifications and siting of structures.
Specific noise mitigation should be determined for each project as part of
subsequent approvals.
lO) Schools
The precise number of students to be generated by project development has
not been determined, however, the additional 1708 dwelling units would
generate more students than would result under existing land use designation.
Four school sites have been identified within the Specific Plan area.
Adequate school facilities must be provided in conjunction with the proposed
development to avoid any significant impact. Details regarding school
facilities phasing construction and capacity would be resolved before the time
SPA plans and tentative maps are filed.
ll) Parks, Recreation and Open Space
The proposed Specific Plan Amendment includes substantially more
parks/recreation designated land than the adopted plan. This is located
primarily with the community spine in the north leg of Rice Canyon, with
smaller park designations in other portions of the plan area. The total
acreage for parks exceeds the City's standard requirement, thus no park
impacts would be associated with the project.
The proposed plan retains less natural open space than the adopted plan.
The major area of change is the filling of the north leg by the proposed plan,
which is not consistent with the open space goals of the General Plan, and is
thus considered a significant impact of the proposed project. The designation
of a larger portion of the central leg of Rice Canyon as open space reduces
this impact, although not to insignificance.
E. ALTERNATIVE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT
During the preliminary planning process for the E1 Rancho del Rey project,
an Alternative Specific Plan was developed, which retains the north leg of
Rice Canyon as natural open space, similar to the adopted plan, but
incorporates changes in the land use mix and intensity similar to the proposed
Specific P1 an Amendment.
City Planning Commis ~n
Agenda Items for Meeting of January 23, 1985 Page 6
The key area of change with the alternative plan is in the north leg of
Rice Canyon. By retaining this area as natural open space, the impacts to
land use and landform alteration would be reduced. Biological impacts would
be substantially reduced by retaining additional natural habitat including
sensitive species. Impacts to the upper elevations of south facing slopes
would still be significant. Other impact areas would have no substantive
differences between the proposed and alternative plans. Greater detail
regarding this alternative is possible in Section 4.2 of the EIR.
WPC 1651P
OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH
· o November 30, 1984
Douglas D. Reid
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA. 92010
Subject: E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan Amendment, SCH #83060803
Dear Mr. Reid:
The state Clearinghouse submitted the above named draft Environmental Impact Report
(EIR) to selected state agencies for review. The review period is closed and the com-
ments of the individ,m] agency(ies) is(are) attached. If you would like to discuss
their concerns and recommendations, please contact the staff from the appropriate
agency(ies).
~en preparing the final EIR, you must include all comments and responses (CEQA
Guidelines, Section 15132). The certified EIR must be considered in the decision-
Faking process for the project. In addition, we urge you to respond directly to the
commenting agency(ies) by writing to them, including the State Clearinghouse number on
all correspondence.
In the event that the project is approved without adequate mitigation of significant
effects, the lead agency m~st make written findings for each significant effect and it
mst support its actions with a written stat~maent of overriding considerations for
each unmitigated significant effect (CEQAGuidelines Section 15091 and 15093).
If the project requires discretionary approval from any state agency, the Notice of
Detemmination must be filed with the Secretary for Resources, as well as with the
county Clerk. Please contact Mark Boehme at (916) 445-0613 if you have any questions
about the environmental review process.
Sincerely,
John B. Ohanian
Chief Deputy Director
cc: Resources Agency
Business and '~ransportatlon Agency
State of California
Memorandum
To : Mrs. Terry Roberts Date: November 20, 1984
Manager, State Clearinghouse
Office of Planning and Research File: 11-SD-805-6.1 .
From : DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
District 11
Subi~d: SCH#83060803, E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan Amendment
Caltrans District 11 comment on the draft EIR for this amendment is as follows:
Page 1-3 acknowledges an increase in traffic from 44,000 ADT to 73,900 ADT but
concludes that all potential impacts can be mitigated to insignificance. That
conclusion, however, is flawed by the failure of the EIR to consider impacts to
Interstate Route 805.
The traffic generated by the proposed amendment and by other developments in the'
area has the potential to overload the interchanges and main lanes of Interstate 805.
The final EIR should analyze peak-hour impacts to the freeway and identify any
additional mitigation needed. Mitigation measures generally require funding by local
government or project proponents.
If you wish to consult us regarding traffic information, our contact person is
Kurth Barnes, District Project Studies Engineer, (619)237-6952.
mes T. Cheshire, Chief
vironmental Planning Branch
.1TC:jk
NOV2 91984
OFFICE OF PLAI'~KI,~O
& P. ESEA~CH
. ~'~ ~"' Business and ~'ransportation Agency
State of Callfornia
Memorandum
To : Mrs. Terry Roberts Dote: November 20, ~98/4
Manager, State Cleadnghouse
Office of Planning and Research File: 11-SD-805-6.1 .
¢
From : DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
District 11
Subiect: SCH#83060803, E! Rancho del Rey Specific Plan Amendment
Caltrans District 11 comment on the draft EIR for this amendment is as follows:
Page 1-3 acknowledges an increase in traffic from 44,000 ADT to 73,900 ADT but
concludes that all potential impacts can be mitigated to insignificance. That
conclusion, however, is flawed by the failure of the EIR to consider impacts to
interstate Route 805.
The traffic generated by the proposed amendment and by other developments in the'
area has the potential to overload the interchanges and main lanes of interstate 805.
The final EIR should analyze peak-hour impacts to the freeway and identify any
additional mitigation needed. Mitigation measures generally require funding by local
government or project proponents.
If you wish to consult us regarding traffic information, our contact person is
Kurth Barnes, District Project Studies Engineer, (619)237-6952.
roes T. Cheshire, Chief
vironmental Planning Branch
3TC:jk
NOV2 91984
OFFICE OF
& RESEARCH
STATE OF CALIFORNiA--THE RESOURCES AG~ GEORGE DEU~IAN, ~mor
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME ~.
245 W. Broadway, Suite 350
Long Beach, CA 90802-4467
(213) 590-5113
RECEIVED
December 3, 1984 o¥ .......................................................
DEO 1984
Mr. Douglas D. Reid
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 92010
Dear Mr. Reid:
We have reviewed the Draft EIR describing a proposed amendment to
the E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan (SCH 83060803) for the express
purpose of increasinq the maximum permitted dwelling units from
4,27.0 to 5,928 within the 1,673-acre project site. Also, the
proposed amendment would allow development of industrial
commercial, and office uses that are not provided for in the
adopted Specific Plan. The subject property is located east of
Interstate 805, south and west of 0tay Lake Road and north of
Telegraph Canyon Road.
The document adequately assesses the biological resources that
could be affected by the proposed project. However, the proposed
mitigation measures are inadequate to reduce cumulative impacts to
a level of non-significance.
We agree with the assessment on pages 3-39 through 3-43
identifying impacts that the proposed specific plan could have on
biological resources as compared to the adopted plan. That
assessment clearly indicates that the proposed plan would be
substantially more detrimental to biological resources than the
adopted plan. Additionally, our field biologist familiar with the
project site reports that the proposed plan significantly reduces
the biological resources within the project site and provides less
protection to sensitive wildlife habitat than does the adopted
Specific Plan. For these reasons, we recommend that the proposed
Specific Plan be denied and that the adopted plan remain in
effect.
The project sponsor should be advised that diversion of the
natural flow or changes in the channel, bed, or banks of any
river, stream, or lake will require notification to the Department
of Fish and Game as called for in the Fish and Game Code. This
notification (with fee) and the subsequent agreement must be
completed prior to initiating any such changes. , Notification
should be made after the project is approved by the lead agency.
Mr. Douglas D. Reid -2- December 3, 1984
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this
project. If you have any questions, please contact Jack L.
Spruill at (213) 590-5137.
Sincerely,
Fred A. Worthley Jr.
Regional Manager
Region 5
cc: ESB, Sacramento
State Clearinghouse
Resources Agency
H. McKinnie
...q~/teatcd to ~a~tts ~auiee
10595 JAMACHA SOULEVARD, SPRING VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92078
TELEPHONE: 462-2222, AREA CODE 619
August 29, 1984
Mr. Douglas Reid
Environmental Review Coordinator
City of Chula Vista
Planning Department
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 92010
Subject: E1 Rancho Del Rey Specific Plan Amendment EIR
Work Order NO. 1102.3
Dear Mr. Reid:
We appreciate the opportunity you have given us to review the
check print draft EIR for the E1 Rancho Del Rey Specific Plan
Amendment. All of the statements made in the water service
section (3.14) are correct except for the anticipated funding
to construct the required water facilities. It is not antic-
ipated that funding will be provided by the Otay Water District.
It is assumed that funding will be by local developers only.
If you have any questions please call me.
Very truly yours,
Manuel Arroyo
District Planning Engineer
MA: cp
RECEIVED
LU , 3 0 1984
$::.~LA VIST,%
620 'C Street. Suite 400 Son Dieoo California 92101 5568 (619', 251 !466
November 7, 1984 G~E 4
Mr. Douglas Reid
Environmental Review Coordinator
City of Chula Vista
P.O. Box 1087
Chula Vista, CA 92012
Dear Mr. Reid:
SUBJECT: EL RANCHO DEL REY SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT -
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (DEIR) EIR 83-2
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this DEIR. Our comments
concern transit impacts and mitigations associated with implementa-
tion of the proposed plan.
The EIR states that the "proposed Specific Plan Amendment has the
potential for adverse traffic impacts when combined with traffic
from other developments in the project vicinity." A number of
road improvements are outlined as mitigations to reduce impacts to
insignificance. However, the EIR neglects to consider transit
mitigations for traffic impacts. The proposed plan amendment would
permit 5,928 dwelling units, as well as a 93.4 acre employment
park. The EIR should consider the issue of transit access for
residents and employees in the plan area. Consideration should be
given to a plan policy requiring developer participation in enhancing
transit facilities and operations as an integral part of plan
implementation. Such developer participation would help mitigate
traffic impacts, and help ensure that adequate transit facilities
and service are available for potential project-generated transit
users.
Please contact me if I may be of assistance in addressing these
comments.
Helene B. Kornbl att
Senior Environmental/Transportation Planner
HBK:dkd
cc: Mr. Bill Gustafson, SCOOT j
Member Agenoes Gib of Chula Vista, City of El Caion City of Imperial Beach. City of La Mesa
Cib of Lemon Grcve City of National Cily, City of .?.,an Diego Coum~ of San Diego, State of California
San Diego Gas & Electric
FILE NO
November 6, 1984
City of Chula Vista
Planning Department
P.O. Box 1087
Chula Vista, CA 92012
Attention: Douglas Reid
Environmental Review Coordinator
RE: E1 Rancho Del Rey - EIR-83-2
Notice of Public Review and Planning Commission
Public Hearing
Dear Mr. Reid:
Thank you for notifying San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E)
about the subject notice. SDG&E appreciates having the opportunity
to comment.
Of special concern to SDG&E are the electric transmission
facilities and 2 8" gas lines located within the project area as stated
in the letter sent to you by Robin S. Pike dated June 7, 1983 (copy
enclosed).
If you have any questions about this matter, please call me
at 696-2388.
For questions about the distribution of energy to or within
the project, please contact our South Bay District Planning Office at
425-3060.
Sincerely,
Donna M. McGuire
Land Assistant
Dm:ac REC E I-V~ED
Attachment
NO~ 08 ' ~
PLANNING DEPAi~'[f~ENT
CHULA V!STA, CALIFORNIA
POSTOFFICE BOX 1831 .SAN DIEGO. CALIFORNIA92112.TELEPHONE:619/232'4252
San Diego Gas & Electric ;
~une 7, 1983 ~,~o
Mr. Douglas Reid
Environmental Review
Coordinator
Planning Department
City of Chula Vista
P.O. Box 1087
Chula Vista, CA 92012
RE: HOP OF A DRAFT EIR - EL RANCHO DEL REY
Dear Mr. Reid:
Thank you for notifying us about the proposed project. We
appreciate having the opportunity to con~nent.
Of special concern to San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E) are
the electric transmission facilities located within the project area.
I have indicated the approximate location of two 69 kV and a 138 kV
transmission line and two 8" distribution gas mains on the attached
map. The following is a list of SDG&E's concerns:
1. Continued access to these facilities for repair and
maintenance is imperative.
2. Any proposed encroachment into the transmission rights
of way must be reviewed and approved by SDG&E.
3. Impacts of increased drainage in the rights of way
due to grading or other actions should be examined
in the EIR.
4. Any aspects of project design and function that
could affect these utility uses should be considered
and SDG&E should be given the opportunity to comment
further.
5. Impacts to energy uses by proposed adjacent uses or
impacts to proposed adjacent uses by existing and
future energy uses should also be examined.
R~o Do Re~d - 2 - Oune 7~ ~983
If you have any questions regarding this letter, please call
the Land Planning Section of the Land & Environmental Department at
232-4252, extension 1253. If you have any questions about distribution
of energy to or within the project site, please call the South Bay
Planning Department at 425-7673. Questions on distribution would
probably be more appropriate when the project is further along.
Sincer
R~bin S. Pike
~and Assistant
RSP:dc
Attachment
cc: J.S. Espinoza
M.W. Danna
H.E. Richmond
D.L. Rose
San Diego
Suite 524 Security Pacific Plaza
1200 Third Avenue
San Diego. California 92101
(619) 236--5300 November Z, 1984
Mr. Douglas Reid
Environmental Review Coordinator
City of Chula Vista
Z76 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista~ CA 9Z010
Dear Mr. Reid:
The SANDAG staff has reviewed the draft EIR for the E1 Rancho del Rey Specific
Plan amendment and has the following comments. The comments have not been
reviewed by the SANDAG Board of Directors.
1. There is no mention of the Regional Feeder Bikeway planned along H Street
through the Specific Plan area. If this link is to be provided, it should be
made a part of the Specific Plan. {See map enclosed)
Z. The Water Consumption {Table 3-1Z} for parks/recreation indicates 1,340
gallons/acre/day, or 1.5 acre feet/year. This appears to be somewhat low for
fully developed, largely turfed playfields and park area. Perhaps the ERDR
Supplemental Report justifies this amount through specific water conser-
vation techniques. If not, they should be added to the EIR, because water use
in public parks is a major (and increasing) cost to park operation and mainte-
nance budgets. It is assumed that the open space areas will not be provided
with water service, except as required for protection from wildfire in the
canyons.
Thank you for the opportunity to review this EIR.
Sincerely,
STUART R. SHAFFER
Director of Land Use & Public Facilities [~ [: C E [ ~. [~ ~
SRS/RP/ce 6Y .......... · ..... -
Enclosure NOV 0 5 '~C~
c-85-9 PLAN[,qNG DEPARTMENT,
CHULA'91STA, C, LIFORNI/ .
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of January 23, 1985
2. Consideration of Final EIR-84-1, EastLake I
The attached staff report from the meeting of January 9 has not been revised
and it still represents an appropriate evaluation and recommendation for the EIR.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of January 23, 1985 Page I
2. Consideration of Final EIR-84-1, EastLake I
A. BACKGROUND
A public hearing on the draft of this document was held on November 14,
1984. During that hearing, written comments were presented by Michael Spata
and Wendy Longley-Cook of Longley-Cook Engineering, both representing United
Enterprises. Other written comments were received and all have been included
in the Comments/Response section of the Final EIR.
B. RECOMMENDATION
Certify that Final EIR-84-1 has been prepared in accordance with the
California Environmental Quality Act, the State CEQA Guidelines, the Environmental
Review Procedures of the City of Chula Vista and that the Planning Commission
has reviewed and considered the information in the Final EIR.
C. REVISIONS
The most significant revision to the text of the Final EIR is the section
on "astronomical dark sky" which begins on page 3-58. This section was
written for the draft EIR based on incorrect information that the City standard
street lighting was low pressure sodium lamps, while in fact, the City's standard
is high pressure sodium lamps. High pressure lamps, according to Astronomers,
if installed throughout the County, would destroy the usefulness of optical
astronomical observatory's at Mt. Palomar and Mt. Laguna. The City of San Diego
and several other jurisdictions in San Diego County have begun a conversion to
low pressure sodium lamps. Such a conversion program throughout San Diego County
would avoid a cumulative impact on these sensitive scientific instruments. The
EastLake I will result in an adverse though not significant impact to astronomical
dark sky.
There have been no other substantial changes in the document and no conclusions
have been changed.
D. CONCLUSION
It is the conclusion of this Final EIR that all significant environmental
impacts can be reduced to a level of insignificance through the incorporation of
mitigation measures identified in the EIR. During the consideration of the project
and "Candidate CEQA Findings" it will be determined which mitigation measures are
feasible, which are under the jurisdiction of another agency and which have been
incorporated into the project.
January 23, 1985
To: Members of the Planning Commission
From: George Krempl, Planning Director~
Subject: Report on EastLake I Referrals from Planning Commission
Meeting on January 9, 1985
1. At your EastLake I public hearing on January 9, Commissioner Cannon asked
when CALTRANS plans to improve State Route 54.
According to CALTRANS staff, the Project Studies Report for the improvement
of State Route 54, between 1-805 and future Route 125, is nearing completion
and will be forwarded to Sacramento for authorization to conduct the environ-
mental assessment. After the environmental assessment is completed, the
project must be added to the Regional Improvements Program and then obtain
funding authorization. The best estimate of timing is probably 8 to 10 years
from now.
2. Chairman Green asked if staff could provide the Commission with information
regarding the amount of assessment fees that a typical homeowner in EastLake I
would have to pay to finance public facilities.
Preliminary estimates of the cost to finance public facilities, such as schools,
water facilities, park, transit center for EastLake I and the effect on the
average homeowner, is a function of the actual construction cost of the facilities,
the conventional interest rates, and the tax-exempt municipal bond market
interest rates at the point of sale. Any precise numbers quoted today will
undoubtedly change.
In general, the financing of capital facilities by a developer is executed
by borrowing from a lender at conventional rates. The cost of the facilities
and debt repayment is calculated into the sale price of the home. If a tax
exempt form of financing is substituted for conventional financing, such as
a Mello-Roos District, the developer's financing burden is reduced and the
sales price of the home is lower. Correspondingly, the initial downpayment
requirements are lower and the monthly mortgage payment is lower.
The bonds sold by the Mello-Roos District must be repaid, but because they
are tax exempt, the interest rate paid to bond holders is usually 2 to 3 points
lower than conventional interest rates. This savings (from the lower tax-exempt
interest rate on the bonds) is passed through to the homeowner because all of
the property owners pay for the bonds and interest on their annual tax bill.
The net difference in financing public utilities through a Mello-Roos District
versus conventional financing (depending on interest rate levels, etc.) is
about 5% lower monthly payment with Mello-Roos.
Additional information as to the cost impact is being tabulated and will be
presented verbally to the Commission at the January 23, 1985 public hearing.
Members of the Planning Commission
January 23, 1985
Page 2
3. Chairman Green also requested staff to report on the questions raised by
Mr. Will Hyde.
Mr. Hyde asked why the parks in EastLake I were private instead of public; why
the neighborhood park adjacent to the Elementary School was less than 5 acres;
why a police facility was not needed; why a branch library facility wasn't
being required and why a Public Works Center wasn't required.
A. With respect to parks, the normal city requirement (pursuant to State law)
is to assess each new subdivision with park land dedication for local parks
and/or fees in lieu of dedication. Based upon existing standards, EastLake I
(2384 du.) would dedicate 14.6 acres of park land. In addition to dedicating
14.6 acres of land, Section 17.10.070 requires the subdivider to grade,
install street improvements, extend utilities to the park site, install
automatic irrigation system, plant turf and plant one tree per 1000 square
feet of land area.
If a subdivider is not required to dedicate park land and improve it per
the City code, he must pay in-lieu fees. In the case of EastLake I, if the
required 14.6 acres of land is not dedicated and improved for parks, then
the subdivider would be required to pay fees to the City ($611,800).
The total acres of private park land proposed by EastLake is 34.4 acres,
which is 19.8 acres more than the City standard of 14.6 acres.
In addition, EastLake proposes to improve the parks as required by the
Municipal Code, plus install recreational facilities such as swimming pools,
restrooms, storage rooms, children's play apparatus, picnic facilities, boat
launching facility, beach areas, multi-use buildings, 15 acre lake, softball
and soccer fields, basketball and volleyball courts and off-street parking
facilities.
The estimated cost of the 34.4 acres of private parks is approximately
$7.4 million, which will be borne by the EastLake Development Company.
Due to the total amount of park land provided, the applicant is seeking
Planning Commission and City Council approval of the seven private neighbor-
hood parks (34.4 acres) ranging in size from .5 acre to 17.5 acres in lieu
of dedicating 14.6 acres of park land with required improvements (grading,
sprinklers, turf, and trees). The Master Homeowners Association would
maintain the 34.4 acres of private parks at no cost to the City. All of
the parks would be open to the general public except fenced facilities such
as swimming pools, etc.
The rationale for private neighborhood parks rather than public parks is:
1) The extra amount of park land and the higher level of recreational
facilities to be provided by the EastLake Development Company will
Members of the Planning Commission
January 23, 1985
Page 3
involve a higher cost of maintenance than the standard amount and type
of neighborhood park, therefore, EastLake residents rightfully should
bear the cost of maintenance.
2) The EastLake Development Company is obligated to provide a public park
that will be dedicated to the City within the area south of Otay Lakes
Road. This park will also provide park and recreational services for
the area in and around EastLake for the general public.
B. Section 17.10.120 of the Municipal Code sets forth principles and standards
as a "general guide" in determining the neighborhood facilities for which
park sites normally will be required. Regarding a park site, the Code states:
"A park site, if required, shall not normally be less than seven acres in
area, except that such site, when adjacent to a school, shall not normally
be less than three acres, and such sites shall specifically include acres
with natural advantages for park development."
The above language is sufficiently broad to permit a range of different
sized neighborhood parks within a large project such as EastLake. Park sizes
range from .5 acre mini-parks to the 17.5 acre recreation lake.
C. With respect to whether full development of EastLake I would require a new
policy facility, the Director of Public Safety has stated that police service
can be provided with the addition of staff to expand Beat 52. The extra
staff and equipment will be sufficient to provide adequate police service.
The cost of all city services to EastLake (including fire and police) is
projected to be $1,843,763 and revenues are projected to be $3,195,987 for
a net benefit of $1,352,224.
D. Regarding library service, the developer is providing a one acre site and
a "storefront" library within the Village Center. The City Librarian has
recommended that a branch library cannot be supported unless there is a
service area population of 10,000 users. If the need for a future branch
library is decided, EastLake may or may not be the preferred location. In
any event, the short term library needs will be served by a storefront
library, and the long term needs for a future branch library will need
to be studied further. A site is being reserved for a branch library,
if needed. It would be premature, at this point, to require EastLake to
commit to building a branch library facility that would serve the entire
area east of 1-805.
E. The need for a new Public Works Center has been discussed with the Director
of Public Works. The present location of the public works yard is not
well located to serve the city. However, a master facilities plan study is
budgeted to assess future needs and to identify a preferred location for a
new public works yard.
This facility will serve the entire city and a project such as EastLake I
will not materially increase the demand for street and drainage maintenance
on the city.
Members of the Planning Commission
January 23, 1985
Page 4
4. As indicated at your January 9 hearing, there are two additional conditions
to be added to the Conditions of Approval listed in Section 6 of the January 9
staff report on the EastLake I SPA Plan. These are:
f. The EastLake Development Company shall provide five percent of the total
dwelling units in EastLake I SPA Plan to affordable housing units for
low income households and five percent of the total dwelling units for
moderate income households. The following definitions shall apply:
"Affordable Housing Units" means housing units that do not exceed 30 percent
of the monthly income of the occupant household.
"Moderate-Income Households" means households whose annual income in between
80 percent and 120 percent of the HUD - published median income for the
San Diego Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area.
"Low-Income Households" means households whose annual income is not more
than 80 percent of the HUD - published median income for the San Diego
Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area.
One-half of the total number of low and moderate income units shall be constructed
by the time the number of constructed units reaches 50% of the total project
units (1192 du.).
The remaining one-half of the low and moderate income units shall be constructed
by the time the number of constructed units reaches 75% of the total project
units (1788 du.).
The City of Chula Vista will endeavor to work with the project sponsor of
affordable housing through various financing mechanisms including tax exempt
mortgage financing programs, redevelopment tax increment low and moderate
income housing program and any other programs designed to provide affordable
housing.
g. Modifications of lotting, grading, street patterns and connections approved
by the Planning Commission and City Council on a tentative subdivision map
may be subsequently reflected on the EastLake I SPA Plan as an administrative
matter.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of January 23,1985 Page 1
3. PUBLIC HEARING: PCM 84-9, Consideration 'of General Development Plan
Amendment, Sectional Plannin9 Area (SPA) Plan, Public
Facilities and Financing Plan and DevelopmenC
Agreement; EastLake Development Company
A. BACKGROUND
This item involves the consideration of the EastLake I Sectional Planning
Area (SPA) Plan and related items for a 1,267.9 acre project which was
approved as a General Plan Amendment in August 1982. The project represents
the first phase of development of the Janal Ranch which contains 3,073 acres.
The first phase was annexed to the City in August of 1983. The balance of the
property is still in the unincorporated area and will be planned and annexed
to the City at some future date.
The EastLake I SPA Plan covers a smaller area than the 1,267.9 acres
addressed in the EastLake I General Development Plan of 1982. The EastLake I
~SPA Plan does not include the area south of Telegraph Canyon Road (currently
named Otay Lakes Road). This area will be addressed in a supplemental SPA
Plan at a later time {375.8 acres and 1,299 du). Thus, this project consists
of 892.1 acres and proposes 2,384 dwelling units. The Environmental Impact
Report for the items described herein, is the preceding item.
B. RECOMMENDATION
1. Based upon the findings attached to this report (Attachment l) adopt
a motion recommending that the City Council approve the amendment to the
General Development Plan; and
2. Based upon the findings attached to this report (Attachment 2), adopt
a motion recommending that the City Council approve the EastLake I Sectional
Planning Area (SPA) Plan, subject to the Conditions of Approval listed in
Section 6; and
3. Adopt a motion approving in concept the preliminary Public Facilities
and Financing Plan and Development Agreement; and
4. Direct staff to continue negotiating with the applicant with respect
to the final draft of the Public Facilities and Financing Plan and Development
Agreement for City Council action.
C. DISCUSSION
1. EASTLAKE I GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT
The EastLake I General Development Plan adopted by the City Council in
1982 contained 1,267.9 acres with a maximum of 3,683 dwelling units, 145.3
acres of employment park, 34.2 acres of office and commercial, 59.9 acres of
schools, 301.4 acres of parks and open space and 106.4 acres of streets.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of January 23, 1985 Page 2
Since 1982, the EastLake Development Company has completed more detailed
planning studies for the project which have resulted in some changes to the
original General Development Plan.
These changes are consistent with the original design and intent, however,
they nevertheless require an amendment to ensure consistency between the
General Development Plan and the SPA Plan.
The principal changes involve moving the proposed lake from the Village
Center to the EastLake Shores residential neighborhood and the rearrangement
of land uses in the EastLake Shores area and in the Village Center. There has
also been a shift of residential dwelling units from south of Telegraph Canyon
Road to the west side of future Route 125. Density transfers are permitted by
the PC District Regulations.
The location of the future high school has been shifted from EastLake I to
EastLake II based on the recommendation of the high school district. The
employment park as been increased in size slightly (8.4 acres) due to the
redesign of the Village Center. The overall number of residential units has
not changed.
2. EASTLAKE SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) PLAN
The General Development Plan and text requires the preparation and
approval of a Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan before subdivision maps and
site plans are considered. The purpose of the SPA Plan is to provide a more
specific plan for the development of a planned community which, due to its
size or complexity cannot be subdivided and built in its entirety at one
time.
A second purpose of the SPA Plan is to provide the planning framework
(land use, density, open space, circulation, public facilities, and design
policy) to guide the preparation of individual project plans. Many building
firms will be carrying out specific projects within EastLake I at different
times over the next several years. The SPA Plan will ensure that individual
projects will be consistent with the purpose and intent set forth in the SPA
P1 an.
The SPA Plan is a summary prepared by the City based on an extensive
amount of research submitted by the EastLake Development Company. Substantial
refinements were made by the City and other public agencies.
Once adopted by the City Council, the SPA Plan establishes the basic
design, land use allocations and development guidelines for the project.
Plan Structure
EastLake is intended to be a balanced community with a broad range of
housing types and prices plus an employment park and village center. The
structure of the community is organized into four residential neighborhoods
with connecting open space, parks and trails. The high activity nodes are
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of January 23, 1985 Page 3
located on the east side of future Route 125 and the residential areas are
located on the west side. Each of the four neighborhoods contains a major
focal point such as elementary school/park, lake/beach club or water feature.
Low density residential is located on the north side of "H" Street and
moderately higher densities are located on the south side of "H" Street. The
Village Center will contain mixed uses such as retail, office, senior citizen
residential, apartments and public facilities. The employment park is planned
to have principally high tech firms located around the nine {9) acre park and
a variety of non-high tech and multi-tenant uses on the periphery.
Transportation System
The initial access to the industrial area will be Otay Lakes Road (to be
renamed Telegraph Canyon Road). Access to the residential areas will be East
"H" Street. The third major arterial will be a new road running north-south
which is referred to as Route 125. Actually, this road will not be built
qntil needed and, although it is being planned as a future 8-lane freeway,
initially it will be a two lane or four lane road extending north to Route 54.
The principal collector street within the boundaries of the project is
EastLake Parkway which will connect each of the residential neighborhoods and
extend over to the Village Center and southerly to the future high school.
EastLake Parkway will function as the main internal collector street providing
access between all four neighborhoods. Special landscaping, trails, and bike
lanes are planned for EastLake Parkway.
The major offsite streets include East "H" Street, Telegraph Canyon Road,
Rutgers, Otay Lakes Road and Route 125. The precise responsibilities for
improvements and time schedule are addressed in the Public Facilities and
Financing Plan. In addition, an area-wide benefit assessment analysis will be
conducted by the City to establish the fair share obligation for improving
major streets in the area east of 1-805 by respective developers in the area,
In addition to automobile transportation facilities, EastLake will build a
transportation center within the Village Center to serve the expanded local
and regional bus service. Park and ride facilities will be incorporated into
the Village Center parking areas.
Open Space and Recreation
The EastLake I SPA Plan provides for 250.8 acres of open space and 32.8
acres of park land. A General Landscape Plan is included within the SPA Plan
which describes the various treatment of the open space lands. Some will be
left in a natural condition and other areas will be planted and irrigated to
achieve neighborhood identity and/or linkages between neighborhoods. Major
entries into the development will receive highly manicured treatment to
identify the community.
Four private parks plus 3 mini-parks will be fully developed and
maintained by the Master Homeowners Association. The one public park is
proposed next to the fut~£re high school and will be treated in a future
submittal.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of January23, 1985 Page 4
The major recreational facility for the project will be a 17 acre lake
located in the EastLake Shores neighborhood. This lake will provide sailing
and fishing plus a trail system for jogging and walking around the lake.
Residential units will be sited back from the lake to allow people to use all
of the lake shoreline.
A beach-park facility is planned adjacent to the 17 acre lake to provide
swimming, water sports, volleyball and outdoor picnicing.
All of the park'facilities will be open to the public except the swimming
pools located in the neighborhood parks, which will be fenced for safety
purposes.
A system of bike lanes and pedestrian walkways are planned to provide
access within the project from residential areas to recreational, shopping and
other community facilities.
Public Facilities
Public facilities such as roads, sewers, water facilities, drainage
facilities, fire station, library, transportation center and other required
facilities needed to serve the project will be provided by the EastLake
Development Company. The developer will install the necessary public
facilities within the project in accordance with the phasing plan for the
development.
Certain offsite facilities such as drainage facilities and major road
widenings or extensions are outlined in the Public Facilities and Financing
Plan. The timing and method of building the transportation facility referred
to as Route 125 from EastLake I to State Route 54 is the major offsite
facility being planned for future development within the next 5-10 years.
Transportation studies have been conducted by the EastLake Development
Company, the City Engineer and SANDAG, WESTEC Services, and a private traffic
engineering consultant, Mr. Gary Hansen. Mr. Hansen's analysis of the other
studies has provided the basis for the City Engineer's recommendation
contained in the Public Facilities and Financing Plan.
Design
The community design guidelines treat various design elements that
contribute to community character. Building scale, landscaping, fencing,
street design, lighting, signage and project design must work together to
create a well designed community.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of January23, 1985 Page 5
Many of the community design guidelines included in the SPA Plan represent
design principles to guide builders and City staff in reviewing more detailed
project plans at a later date. Those items that relate to community features
such as landscaping, fencing, lighting, signing, open space and recreation,
and the major and collector street system are treated in more detail to ensure
consistency with the overall project design. Future submittals involving site
plan and architectural review will address the remaining elements of site
design.
3. PUBLIC FACILITIES AND FINANCING PLAN
The requirement for preparation of a Public Facilities and Financing Plan
was established in 1982 with the City Council's adoption of the Planned
Community District Regulation for EastLake I. The purpose of the plan was to
set forth the method and source of funding by the developer to finance the
public facilities required to support the project and a development phasing
plan setting forth capital improvement program elements and schedules for
~-mplementation.
The actual preparation of the Public Facilities and Financing Plan was
carried out by a financial consultant retained by the City. The draft
facilities plan will require approval by the City Council before the project
can proceed.
The Public Facilities and Financing Plan is an essential component of the
SPA Plan. Together, these documents contain the City's official policy to
guide future decisions regarding public and private development of the
property.
The facilities required for the efficient and orderly development of the
project are as follows:
a. Road facilities
b. Water facilities
c. Sewer facilities
d. Educational facilities
e. Fire and Police facilities
f. Park and Recreation facilities
g. Library facilities
h. Public utility facilities
Road Facilities
All onsite road improvements will be built by the developer as conditions
of tentative subdivision map approval. Offsite road improvements identified
by the City's traffic analysis will be financed by developers or a Facilities
Benefit Assessment District, where each developer in the affected area will
participate in financing the improvements.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of January23, 1985 Page 6
The streets identified for improvement by 1995 are: East "H" Street,
Telegraph Canyon Road, Otay Lakes Road, Rutgers, Route 125, Proctor Valley
Road, Paseo Ladera, Paseo Del Rey, Corral Canyon Road, Bonita Road, and
Sweetwater Road. The level of improvement and timing will be determined by
the rate of cumulative development in the area.
An annual monitoring program will be established to track actual traffic
generation rates from development to ensure that improvements are built in
accordance with need. EastLake developers will construct offsite improvements
or will be assessed their fair share for the cost of offsite improvements.
Water Facilities
The Otay Municipal Water District will provide water service to the
project. EastLake will annex to Improvement District 22 and pay annexation
fees to the District. These fees will be used to construct water reservoirs,
pipelines, pump station,s and related facilities. All water facilities will
be financed by the developer.
Sewer Facilities
Since EastLake lies in several drainage basins, sewer lines will be
connected to the Telegraph Canyon Trunk Line, the Proctor Valley system and
Long Canyon. On-site facilities will be constructed by the developer. Fees
will be charged by the City for sewer connection and reimbursements for
capacity in the Telegraph Canyon Trunk Line.
Educational Facilities
£astLake I will generate approximately 875 elementary students and 418
secondary students. An elementary school will be built to serve the first
phase of EastLake I. A second elementary school will be necessary to serve
future phases of the project.
A location for a new high school has been identified by the high school
district, but based on available capacity, a new high school will not be
needed for this first phase.
Separate agreements will be signed by the elementary and high school
districts with the EastLake Development Company to guarantee educational
facilities will be available concurrent with need.
Fire and Police Facilities
The City is adequately served by the central police facility, however,
additional staff and equipment will be needed once EastLake I is occupied. No
new facilities are necessary to provide police services at this time.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of January23, 1985 Page 7
Fire protection facilities may need to be augmented with a new fire
station and start-up equipment to provide an adequate level of service to the
area.
EastLake Development Company is obligated to dedicate a site, build a
station and provide start-up equipment or contribute funds to a new station.
Further detailed analysis of the cost, demand, and location of the fire
station will be conducted prior to any final decision by the City Council.
Park and Recreation Facilities
There will be seven (7) private parks constructed and maintained by the
Master Homeowners Association. A complete range of facilities is planned
within the seven parks. All facilities will be open to the public except for
the swimming park which will be fenced. A total of 32.8 acres of park land
will serve the project.
Library Facilities
A "store front" library site has been reserved within the Village Center
for future use. In addition, a one (1) acre site is being reserved for
construction of a branch library, should future development in the eastern
area create the need for a larger facility.
Various options to provide library service will be studied by the City in
conjunction with the General Plan update for the total area.
Public Facilities
Telephone, gas, electricity and cable television facilities have been
planned in cooperation with the respective utility companies. Discussions
between EastLake Development Company and the City will continue with respect
to a telecommunications system to provide for traffic signal interconnections,
full service alarm capacity, emergency health telecommunications system, water
system telemetry and telecommunication capability for high technology firms
within the industrial park.
4. DEVELOPh~NT AGREE~NT
A development agreement, as permitted by California law, is a relatively
new tool that helps a public agency and a large scale development identify
what the rules are before large sums of public and/or private money are
invested in a project. A development agreement does not take the place of a
general plan or zoning or subdivision map. It is an agreement that sets forth
the things the developer will do and the things the City will do. In short,
the EastLake Development Company agrees to provide the public and private
improvements identified in the SPA Plan and the Public Facilities and
Financing Plan and the City agrees not to change the planning and zoning
approvals applicable to EastLake I during a specified period of time.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of Janua~23, 1985 Page 8
Future land use decisions must be made in accordance with the City's laws
and policies in effect when the agreement was entered into, with certain
exceptions regarding new State or Federal laws.
Development agreements may be deliberately written to be flexible to allow
the City and the developer to solve specific problems in a cooperative manner.
The implications for the City are essentially that a development agreement
specifies the time during which the City agrees not to change its regulations,
the permitted uses of the property, the density or intensity of uses, and
provisions for dedication or reservation of land for public purposes. The
agreement may also include any other tems and conditions including time
schedules for development or additional public services and facilities to be
provided by the developer.
The law does not prevent the City from subsequently denying or
conditioning the project so long as such decisions are not based upon a zoning
.Qr plan change which occurred after entering into the development agreement.
5. SUBSEQUENT ACTIONS
The subsequent actions scheduled for EastLake I implementation include
public hearings to adopt a more detailed set of zoning regulations (Planned
Community District Regulations) and master tentative subdivision maps.
The PC Zone has the flexibility to pennit adoption of "custom" zoning
standards for large scale planned communities. A Planning Commission workshop
will be held to review the EastLake I zoning regulation prior to formal public
hearing.
The master tentative subdivision maps (2) will be considered by your
Commission in late January 1985. These subdivision maps will show the total
project. The condominium parcels will be further subdivided as detailed
project plans are filed later on. Rough grading will commence early next year.
6. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OF EASTLAKE I SPA PLAN
a. The lotting and street pattern shown on the EastLake I SPA Plan
map may be modified by the Planning Commission and City Council during
tentative subdivision map consideration.
b. Street connections to the south in the EastLake Shores
neighborhood shall be as required on the tentative subdivision map.
c. The alignment of the street connection from EastLake Hills
neighborhood to Rutgers shall be as required on the tentative subdivision map.
d. Lot 64 located at the southeast quadrant of Route 125 and East
"H" Street shall be deleted.
e. The ultimate right-of-way width for future Route 125 shall be as
required on the tentative m~p to accommodate an eight lane freeway.
WPC 1583P
Attachment 1
EASTLAKE I GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT
RECOMMENDED FINDINGS
1. THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AS DESCRIBED BY THE GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN IS
IN CONFORMITY WITH THE PROVISION OF THE CHULA VISTA GENERAL PLAN.
The amendment to the General Development Plan is consistent with the
original intent and purpose of the overall development plan, and is,
therefore, in conformity with the provisions of the General Plan. The
amendment does not change the overall density or intensity of use, nor the
circulation system. Relatively minor changes in the location of open
space uses and rearrangement of residential densities within the project
boundaries constitute the principal changes.
2. A PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CAN BE INITIATED BY ESTABLISHMENT OF
SPECIFIC USES OR SECTIONAL PLANNING AREAS WITHIN TWO YEARS OF THE
ESTABLISHMENT OF THE PLANNED COMMUNITY ZONE.
The applicant has submitted tentative subdivision maps and a phasing plan
indicating construction will begin within two years.
3. IN THE CASE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, THAT SUCH DEVELOPMENT
WILL CONSTITUTE A RESIDENTIAL ENVIRONMENT OF SUSTAINED DESIRABILITY AND
STABILITY; AND THAT IT WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH OR PROVIDE COMPATIBLE
VARIETY TO THE CHARACTER OF THE SURROUNDING AREA; AND THAT THE SITES
PROPOSED FOR PUBLIC FACILITIES, SUCH AS SCHOOLS, PLAYGROUNDS AND PARKS,
ARE ADEQUATE TO SERVE THE ANTICIPATED POPULATION AND APPEAR ACCEPTABLE TO
THE PUBLIC AUTHORITIES HAVING JURISDICTION THEREOF.
The amendment to the General Development Plan enhances the quality of the
residential environment by providing a 17-acre lake and 3.8 acre beach
club facility in the largest residential neighborhood. The elementary
schools, playgrounds and parks are adequate to serve the projected
population.
4. IN THE CASE OF PROPOSED INDUSTRIAL AND RESEARCH USES, THAT SUCH
DEVELOPMENT WILL BE APPROPRIATE IN AREA, LOCATION, AND OVERALL DESIGN TO
THE PURPOSE INTENDED; THAT THE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ARE SUCH
AS TO CREATE A RESEARCH OR INDUSTRIAL ENVIRONMENT OF SUSTAINED
DESIRABILITY AND STABILITY; AND, THAT SUCH DEVELOPMENT WILL MEET
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS ESTABLISHED BY THIS TITLE.
The amendment to the General Development Plan adds 8.9 acres of land to
the industrial park area which is a result of more precise design studies
of the Village Center and major street alignments. The overall quality of
the industrial area is unchanged by the amendment.
EASTLAKE I GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN ~4ENDMENT (cont'd)
5. IN THE CASE OF INSTITUTIONAL, RECREATIONAL, AND OTHER SIMILAR
NONRESIDENTIAL USES, THAT SUCH DEVELOPMENT WILL BE APPROPRIATE IN AREA,
LOCATION AND OVERALL PLANNING TO THE PURPOSE PROPOSED, AND THAT
SURROUNDING AREAS ARE PROTECTED FROM ANY ADVERSE AFFECTS FROM SUCH.
The amendment to the General Development Plan improves the relationship
between residential uses and park uses by relocating the man-made lake to
the center of the major residential neighborhood. The relocation of the
future high school site to a more central regional location was
recommended by the Sweetwater Union High School after completing master
plan studies for future high school facilities throughout the district.
6. THE STREETS AND THOROUGHFARES PROPOSED ARE SUITABLE AND ADEQUATE TO CARRY
THE ANTICIPATED TRAFFIC THEREON.
The amendment to the General Plan does not alter the planned system of
streets and thoroughfares to serve the project.
7, ANY PROPOSED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT CAN BE JUSTIFIED ECONOMICALLY AT THE
LOCATION(S) PROPOSED AND WILL PROVIDE ADEQUATE COMMERCIAL FACILITIES OF
THE TYPES NEEDED AT SUCH PROPOSED LOCATION(S).
The amount and location of commercial development remains unchanged by
this amendment to the General Development Plan.
8. THE AREA SURROUNDING SAID DEVELOPMENT CAN BE PLANNED AND ZONED IN
COORDINATION AND SUBSTANTIAL COMPATIBILITY WITH SAID DEVELOPMENT.
The amendment to the General Development Plan will not alter the planned
land use pattern of EastLake I with respect to compatibility with adjacent
lands.
WPC 1586P
Attachment 2
EASTLAKE I SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA PLAN
RECOMMENDED FINDINGS
1. THE PROPOSED SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA PLAN IS IN CONFORMITY WITH THE
EASTLAKE I GENEP~AL DEVELOPMENT PLAN OF THE PC ZONE AND THE CHULA VISTA
GENERAL PLAN.
The EastLake I Sectional Planning Area Plan reflects land use,
circulation, open space, and public facility uses consistent with the
EastLake I General Development Plan, as amended.
2. THE PROPOSED SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA PLAN WOULD PROMOTE THE ORDERLY,
SEQUENTIALIZED DEVELOPMENT OF THE INVOLVED SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA.
The SPA Plan and Public Facilities and Financing Plan contain provisions
to ensure the orderly, phased development of the project over a 5-6 year
period. Public road improvements phasing schedules will control the
sequential development of the project.
3. THE PROPOSED SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA PLAN WOULD NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT
ADJACENT LAND USE, RESIDENTIAL ENJOYMENT, CIRCULATION OR ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY.
Perimeter open space and/or single family detached residential is planned
adjacent to existing residential areas to the west and south to ensure the
continued residential enjojanent of adjacent residents. Circulation is
provided by street connections to the west, north and south to ensure
orderly traffic movement. Supplemental environmental impact analysis
documents the overall benefits to the environment, including mitigation
measures to protect environmental quality of the region.
WPC 1§86P
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of Janaury 23, 1985 Page 1
4. PUBLIC HEARING: PCZ-85-D, Amendment of the EastLake I Planned
Community District Regulations {Ordinance No. 2002)
A. BACKGROUND
On September 7, 1982, the City Council adopted Planned Community District
Regulations for EastLake I. At that time, the regulations were general
because specific plans of development were not available. Now that more
definitive land plans have been completed, including master tentative
subdivision maps, it is appropriate to amend the PC zoning regulations. The
Environmental Impact Report for the item described herein, is a preceding item.
B. RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a motion recommending that the City Council approve the EastLake I
Planned Community District Regulation in accordance with Exhibit A attached
hereto and repeal the Planned Community District Regulations adopted by the
City of Chula Vista for EastLake on September 7, 1982 {Ordinance 2002).
C. DISCUSSION
The original PC Zone regulations adopted for EastLake I (Ordinance No.
2002, September 7, 1982) were fairly general because the General Development
Plan did not contain specific lotting patterns or development design.
Now that more detailed planning has been completed, it is appropriate to
revise the PC Zone regulations to provide more detailed use and development
standards for the project.
The proposed PC Zone regulations reflect a "custom" set of zoning
standards intended to carry out the goals and objectives of the overall master
plan.
The permitted uses, development standards, parking regulations, sign
standards and administrative procedures have been written specifically for the
intended type and intensity of development contemplated by the EastLake plan.
The zoning regulations will insure that the quality of the project will be
maintained and at that future development and use of the property will be
consistent with the original plan.
The proposed PC Zone regulations are organized into nine {9) sections:
Section I General Provisions
Section II Residential Standards
Section III Village Center Standards
Section IV Business Center Standards
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of January 23, 1985 Page 2
Section V Open Space Standards
Section VI Special Uses and Conditions
Section VII Sign Regulations
Section VIII Off-Street Parking Regulations
Section IX Administrative Procedures
Section I - General Provisions
The General Provisions (Section I) state that where there is a conflict
between the EastLake PC Zone regulations and the Chula Vista Zoning Ordinance,
the PC Zone regulations shall apply. All of the definitions listed in the
City Zoning Ordinance are incorporated by reference into the EastLake PC Zone
regulations.
Section II - RESIDENTIAL USES AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Section II contains the basic residential use and development standards.
The residential uses range from large lot single family detached homes to
apartment uses.
Use standards are established according to the compatibility of principle
uses within each of the residential districts {9). All public and semi-public
uses will require a conditional use permit. All home occupations, accessory
uses and temporary uses will require Administrative Review by the Director of
Planning.
Property development standards for the residential districts relate to
minimum lot area, lot width, lot depth, setbacks, building height and
off-street parking. Most of the property development standards for planned
developments (RP), condominium developments (RC) and apartment development
(RM) will be established at the time site plans are filed with the city. The
major requirement established for RC, RP, and RM uses at this time are the
off-street parking requirements.
Performance standards for the residential districts establish standards
for utility equipment, landscaping of yard areas, noise regulations, energy
conservation, wall and fence heights, storage areas, laundry facilities, trash
enclosures and provisions for recreational vehicles. The 10,000 square foot
lots (RE) will have a larger side yard on one side of the house to permit
parking of recreational vehicles off-street and out of view. The applicant
has stated his intention to prohibit recreational vehicles within the project
in total, however, in the event that recreational vehicles are permitted,
space will be provided on the large lots or within fully screened parking
areas.
Section III - Commercial Use and Development Standard~
The Village Center is not being developed within the first 2 or 3 years of
the project because there will not be enough population to support commercial
uses. The type of development is known, i.e. neighborhood shopping center,
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of January 23, 1985 Page 3
specialty restaurants, high density residential, office development, civic
uses and open space. Thus, the PC Zoning regulations establish permitted and
conditional uses for the Village Center in concert with the intended
development.
With respect to property development standards, the PC Zoning regulations
establish the requirement for a precise plan to be submitted for the entire
71.8 acres prior to any development within the Village Center.
Performance standards are included to establish certain guidelines for the
protection of adjacent areas. All uses within the Village Center will be
subject to site plan and design review.
Section IV - Business Center Districts
The industrial park contains approximately 157 acres and is planned to
accommodate two types of uses hi gh technology fi ms and 1 i ght
i ndu stri al/c ommerc i al
The high technology types of uses ~re classified as BC-1 and the other
light industrial/commercial uses are designated as BC-2. No heavy industrial
type of uses will be pemitted.
The property development standards are consistant with modern industrial
park standards. Each use will be subject to site plan and design review.
Performance standards are more stringent than in the residential and
commercial districts, to protect persons and property against temperature and
electrical disturbance, fire and explosive hazard, radioactivity, vibration,
toxic materials and liquid and solid waste disposal.
Section V - Open Space Districts
All of the open space parcels have been designated as Open Space 1, 2, 3,
4 or 5 on the land use district map. The PC Zone regulations allow each of
the open space parcels to be used for various forms of open space uses such as
interim agricultural, park and recreation facilities, tree farms, and public
and quasi-public uses.
In the event some use involving a structure is built on an open space
parcel, property development standards are established to govern the setbacks
and height of such structures on the site.
No sign or outdoor advertising structure is permitted in any open space
district.
Section VI - Special Uses and Conditions
Temporary uses that do not normally exceed a certain period of time,
including subdivision sales offices, outdoor sales, or recycling bins will be
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of January 23, 1985 Page 4
permitted subject to certain standards approved by the Director of Planning.
In every case involving a temporary use, time limits will be established.
Special types of uses requiring more elaborate standards, such as kennels
and video arcades will be permitted only upon issuance of a conditional use
permit by the Planning Commission.
Section VII - Comprehensive Sign Regulations
The proposed sign regulations are substantially more comprehensive and
detailed than current City requirements. The reason for this is twofold: (1)
EastLake I is a planned community requiring a higher level of sign control to
maintain a quality visual environment, and (2) the existing city sign
regulations are much broader to accommodate the strip commercial centers along
many of the principal streets such as Broadway and Third Avenue.
The sign regulations list all the types of signs that may be permitted
subject to approval of a sign permit. Likewise, all types of signs not
permitted in the project are also listed.
Signs relating to inoperative activities, enforcement procedures for
violations and construction and maintenance standards are specified.
Design standards are set forth to encourage signs that complement the
architectural style of buildings without impacting residential areas.
Section VIII - Off-Street Parking
The number of off-street parking spaces for residential uses are contained
in the respective residential sections of the ordinance. All other uses are
covered in the off-street parking section.
The number of off-street parking spaces required for business and
industrial uses are compatible with existing city standards. However,
additional standards are included that relate to handicapped parking, bicycle
spaces and motorcycles.
Parking lot dimensions are included to ensure safety in designing aisle
widths and parking spaces for group parking. Compact spaces may be approved
up to 1/4 of the minimum required off-street spaces.
Striping, drainage, landscaping and lighting will be required in
accordance with established standards.
Section IX - Administrative Procedures
The Administrative Procedures (Section IX) will adopt by reference the
same procedures used by the City for variances, conditional use permits,
zoning permits, precise plans, planned unit developments, site plan review and
architectural and design review by the Design Review Committee. In addition,
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of January 23, 1985
Page 5
an Administrative Review requirement has been created to provide for a review
of certain uses by the Director of Planning with the additional option of
requiring a formal conditional use permit hearing if the facts warrant.
WPC 1650P
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of January 23, 1985 Page 1
5. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Tentative Residential
Subdivision Map
for EastLake I, Chula Vista Tract 84-9 - EastLak~
Development Company
A. BACKGROUND
1. The subdivision map filed for the residential area identified as
EastLake Hills and EastLake Shores encompasses 282 acres of land proposed to
be subdivided into residential lots. In addition, nearly 150 acres of open
space, a l0 acre elementary school site, and nearly 24 acres of parkland which
includes a 17-1/2 lake are part of the residential package.
It should be noted that an additional l-l/2 acre of mini-parks area
is included with the residential development acreage and the major circulation
streets such as "H", the two north/south loop systems and the main connecting
roads are excluded from these acreage totals.
2. The Environmental Impact Report EIR-84-1 was considered as a
preceding item.
B. RECOMMENDATION
Based upon the findings attached in this report, adopt a motion
recommending that the City Council approve the subdivision map for EastLake
Hills and EastLake Shores subject to the following:
l. The developer shall be required to dedicate and/or construct all
public improvements and facilities, onsite and offsite, determined by the City
to be necessary to serve the EastLake Hills and Shores area. Specific
requirements shall be as specified in each phase of development in conjunction
with the proposed recordation of any final map.
2. Prior to the issuance of grading plans (for any area) the applicant
shall submit and the City's Landscape Architect and Environmental Review
Coordinator shall approve landscaping plan covering said area. The plans
shall include such items as supplemental canyon tree planting, slope planting
and trails as depicted on the overall trails plan. Signs and fencing shall
also be included.
3. The developer shall request the formation of an open space
maintenance district for the entire subdivision prior to the recordation of
any map. Areas to be included within a homeowners maintenance program shall
be excluded from the district responsibility.
4. The developer shall not be required to pay RCT or PAD fees based on
the subdivision plan approval obligating the developer to construct
approximately 26+ acres in park as shown in the SPA plan. The improvements of
said parks shall be completed prior to or concurrent with each development
phase, based on the City's adopted park standards.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of January 23, 1985 Page 2
5. The developer shall be obligated to provide a minimum of 198
low/moderate income units within the EastLake Shores/Hills Subdivision. A
minimum of 100 units shall be for low income families {80% or below the median
income) as approved by the City's Housing Coordinator. Units may be provided
outside of the EastLake Hills/Shores boundaries subject to the Housing
Coordinator's approval. The construction of said units shall occur in
accordance wi th a schedule outlined in the approved SPA plan.
6. Prior to the issuance of building permits in each area, the
applicant, working with the school districts, shall furnish evidence to the
satisfaction of the City that the school districts are able to provide school
service to the future residents of that area.
7. The rear 25 feet of each lot abutting open space areas will be
evaluated as to the need for fire retardant plant materials. Final selection
of materials will be determined by the City's Landscape Architect.
8. The applicant shall file a copy of the CC&R'S and the master
homeowners agreement with the City. Said documents shall:
a. Prohibit the resubdivision or parcelling of lots to provide for
an increase in the number of units specified.
b. Require the owner of any lot and subsequent owners to maintain
all required landscaping/paving/fencing and buildings in accordance with
acceptable City standards.
c. Prohibit the installation of any antenna system other than
authorized community or association operated systems.
d. Prohibit the parking of campers, boats, and trailers except as
specified in Section 11.4 of the EastLake Community District Regulations.
9. Prior to the submittal of a final map, the applicant shall submit a
master list of street names to cover the entire EastLake development.
lO. The rear slope banks of Lots 306-308 shall be maintained as part of
the homeowners master maintenance association. Together with all open space
tots not covered by the main district responsibility.
ll. Decorative block walls 6 feet in height shall be required in
accordance with the master fencing plan for all lots backing up to major or
arterial road system. Lower walls shall be allowed on residential collection
systems subject to final approval of landscaping plans for a given subdivision.
12. Specific methods of handling storm drainage and nuisance water are
subject to detailed approval by the City Engineer at the time of submission of
improvement and grading plans. Design shall be accomplished on the basis of
the requirements of the City's Subdivision Manual and the Grading Ordinance.
Drainage easements shall be provided as required by the City Engineer.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of January 23, 1985 Page 3
13. The developer shall provide street lights as determined by the City
Engineer.
14. The developer shall grade and construct Rutgers Avenue from "H"
Street south to the present improvements.
15. The developer shall grade and construct Corral Canyon Road from "H"
Street north to the intersection with street "Y".
16. Construction of any lots located south of "H" Street shall occur only
upon site plan and architectural approval as authorized by the City's Planning
Director.
17. All areas identified on the General Development Plan as medium
density or higher shall be depicted as single lots or limited to parcels of 2
acres or more until further subdivision of the properties is authorized
through site plan approval. All multi-family lots must have a minimum of 200
feet of street frontage unless a site plan has not been approved.
18. Lots 6-19 shall be reduced in depth to provide for a minimum 15 foot
wide landscaped area.
19. 60 foot wide offer for dedication and with bonded improvements for a
future road connection from the street "C" to the south property line (future
Gotham Street connection) shall be provided.
20. Provide a minimum of 4 feet of additional landscape area at the rear
of lots 506 and 507 at the entrance to street "QQ".
21. All above ground utility installations proposed in the right-of-way
shall be identified on future site plans and placed outside of the normal 5
foot wide sidewalk path. Additional right-of-way or appropriate easement will
be required prior to approval of the site plans.
22. The design of all protective fencing required by the City Engineer
where slope banks are located within l0 feet of the public right-of-way shall
be subject to the approval of City Planning Director.
23. The connection point of street "YY" with Corral Canyon Road shall be
subject to the review of the City Traffic Engineer to ensure coordination with
the street pattern already approved for the Bonita Long Canyon SPA located to
the west.
24. An open space easement shall be provided over the natural and
manufactured slopes contained in those lots abutting common open space areas.
Said easement shall be granted to the master homeowners association to limit
future grading and control maintenance/landscaping.
25. A revised preliminary grading plan shall be filed in compliance with
City regulations and the EastLake SPA plan requiring manufactured and natural
slope area to blend. Any cleaning of brush shall be limited to the boundary
lines shown on the approved grading plan.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of January 23, 1985 Page 4
26. A maximum of 20% of the lots within a given subdivision may have lot
areas 20~ below the minimum lot area specified on the PC Regulations provided
that the total lot area with the subdivision equals or exceeds the minimum lot
area specified times the number of lots in the subdivision.
27. A qualified paleontological monitor shall be present at the
pregrading conference with the developer, grading contractor and the
Environmental Review Coordinator. The purpose of this meeting will be to
consult and coordinate the role of the paleontologist in the grading of the
site. A qualified paleontologist is an individual with adequate knowledge and
experience with fossilized remains likely to be present to identify them in
the field and is adequately experienced to remove the resources for further
study.
The paleontologist monitor shall be present during the grading of the
Sweetwater formation (TSW) on the site. The monitor shall have the authority
to temporarily direct, divert or halt grading to allow recovery of fossil
remains (primarily marine mammals). At the discretion of the monitor,
recovery may include washing and picking of soil samples for micro-vertebrate
bone and teeth.
The developer shall authorize the deposit of any resources found on
the project site in an institution staffed by qualified paleontologists, such
as the Natural History of Museum (operated by the San Diego Society of Natural
History).
The developer should be aware of the random nature of fossil
occurrences and the possibility of a discovery of remains of such scientific
and/or educational importance which might warrant a long term salvage
operation.
28. Prior to the issuance of any grading permit or approval of any
grading plan which may impact any of the loci of archeological site
CA-SDi-7179 (loci A, C, D and E ), the subdivider shall provide the
Environmental Review Coordinator a report prepared in compliance with City
standards demonstrating compliance with the mitigation measures specified in
Section 3.12.3 of EIR-84-1.
29. A minimum of 157 manufactured homes are required to be located within
the Shores area. Such units may consist of mobile homes delivered to the site
or manufactured housing. All units shall be located on individual lots, for
sale lots or a condo, each located on permanent foundations.
30. Specific methods of handling storm drainage are subject to detailed
approval by the City Engineer at the time of submission of improvement and
grading plans. Design shall be accomplished on the basis of the requirements
of the Subdivision Manual and the Grading Ordinance (#1797 AS AbIENDED)
Drainage easements for all onsite and offsite facilities shall be provided a~
required by the City Engineer.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of January 23, 1985 Page §
31. Lots shall be so graded as to drain to the street or an approved
drainage facility. Drainage shall not flow over slopes.
32. An erosion and sedimentation control plan shall be prepared as part
of the grading plans.
33. The developer shall be responsible for the installation of all
drainage facilities approved by the City Engineer to carry drainage from the
subdivision to existing adequate facilities.
34. All energy dissipators proposed shall be permanent devices such as
shown on the Regional Standard Drawing D-41 or similar.
35. The developer shall grant/provide adequate drainage easements for all
offsite public drainage systems.
36. The magnitude and velocity of drainage flows leaving the boundaries
of this project shall be equal to or less than those under existing conditions.
37. No diversion of flows between tributary areas shall be permitted in
this project.
38. The developer shall be responsible for the connection of any drainage
siltation or erosion problem downstream resulting from this project.
39. The developer shall grant l0 foot sewer easements for all offsite
public sewers prior to approval of the Final Map.
40. All sewer facilities shall be designed and constructed in accordance
with criteria expressed in the City's Subdivision Manual.
41. Sewers serving lO or less units shall have a minimum grade of 2%.
42. The developer shall provide adequate offsite sewer facilities to
carry the sewage flow from the subdivision to existing adequate sewer lines.
43. The developer shall enter into an agreement with the City to
incorporate certain assurances relative to the proposed sewer pump stations.
Said agreement shall specify that the developer will be responsible for the
cost of:
a. Construction, maintenance, and operation of said proposed pump
station facilities.
b. Construction of all sewer relief facilities needed to be
provided if overload problems occur prior to the time the facilities are
scheduled for construction.
c. All damages might occur as a result of overloads created by this
project.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of January 23, 1985 Page 6
44. The developer shall extend sewer lines within the project to the
subdivision boundary as necessary for provision of service of upstream
properties.
45. Where construction of offsite facilities is required which are of
potential benefit to other properties, developer shall provide all necessary
funding for such work in anticipation of future reimbursement by benefitting
parties.
46. Paved access to all sewer manholes and pump stations shall be
provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
47. All sewer lines shall be designed in accordance with City standards
to accommodate flows from the entire related upstream gravity basin.
48. Those sewer facilities discharging into the Long Canyon gravity basin
shall flow by gravity only. The developer shall enter into an agreement
providing for the payment of his fair share of the cost of all offsite and/or
oversized facilities in this basin.
49. All work within the public right-of-way shall be done in accordance
with the standard specifications for Public Works construction, the San Diego
Area Regional Standard Drawings and the Design and Construction Standards of
the City of Chula Vista except as modified with this conditions.
50. The maximum grade at any intersection of two streets shall be 6%
within the intersection and for at least 50 feet past the curb lines of each
street.
51. All knuckles shall be in accordance with CVDS 6.
52. The developer shall be responsible for the ultimate disposition of
existing LeHigh Avenue north of Gotham Street in a manner acceptable to the
City Engineer.
53. No compound horizontal curves shall be incorporated in street designs.
54. The developer shall grant to the City, street tree planting and
maintenance easements along all public streets within the subdivision. Said
easements shall extend to a line l0 feet from the back of sidewalk in all
locations where street tree easements are granted.
55. Street lights shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer.
56. All facilities required to be constructed under the "Public Financing
Plan," phasing plan and Development Agreement shall be constructed as an
obligation of this developer. The actual amount of improvements shall be
dependent upon location and extent of growth of other developments;
improvements installed by other developers; results of an annual traffic study
to determine levels of service in the eastern sectors of Chula Vista.
57. The design speed for East "H" Street shall be 70 mph.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of January 23, 1985 Page 7
58. The developer shall pay the cost of a study to be prepared by an
assessment engineer. This study shall determine the proportionate
responsibility for each development in the financial plan. EastLake shall pay
its fair share and if required to install improvements in excess of its fair
share may request reimbursement from future developers.
59. The developer shall pay the cost of forming a maintenance district
for street lighting and landscaping to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
60. The developer shall provide for a future traffic signal interconnect
system to the satisfaction of the City Traffic Engineer.
61. Preliminary indications are that standard Traffic Signal
Participation fees under City Council policy will not be adequate to cover the
developer's fair share for those signal improvements needed for the streets
listed in the Public Facilities Plan. Therefore, the developer shall pay his
fair share as determined by the City Engineer.
62. The developer shall provide permanent traffic count stations on East
"H" Street,. east of Rutgers Street as required by the City Engineer.
63. The developer shall dedicate to the City the following street
rights-of-way within the subdivision.
a. East "H" Street: A varying width from 106 feet to llO feet to
the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
b. Corral Canyon Road: 42 feet half width (84 feet full
right-of-way width).
c. Streets "A", "B", and "C": As shown on Tentative Map.
d. Street D: Unnamed connection to Gotham Street: 60 feet and
property line returns at Street "C".
e. Street "D" and Route 125: Right-of-way width to the
satisfaction of the City EngineeR.
f. All other residential streets: 56 feet.
64. The developer shall be responsible for the improvement of the
following streets within the subdivision:
a. East "H" Street: Full width to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer.
b. Corral Canyon Road and Rutgers Street: The easterly half width.
c. All other streets shown on Tentative Map: Full width. (40 feet
curb to curb) with a temporary turnaround within the street right-of-way.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of January 23, 1985 Page 8
Said improvements shall include but not be limited to: A.C. pavement,
base, curb, gutter, sidewalk, landscaped islands, sewer and water utilities,
drainage facilities, street lights, signs, and street trees. Also, pavement
markings and conduit, pull boxes, signal standards with luminaires only
mounted on ultimate bases, and service points for future traffic signals shall
be provided.
65. The developers shall be responsible for the following offsite
improvements:
a. East "H" Street: Full street width from the subdivision
boundary westerly to meet the existing improvements in Otay Lakes Road. A
reimbursement district may be formed to assess costs from those future
projects that will benefit from said improvements.
b. Intersections on East "H" Street at Auburn and at Corral
Canyon/Rutgers: full intersection improvements to the PCR'S of the
intersecting streets.
c. Corral Canyon Road: Developer shall construct a half street
width of Corral Canyon Road as shown on the tentative map from the point where
the Corral Canyon right-of-way leaves the project boundary in the vicinity of
lot #394 at the north to East "H" Street and a half street width of Rutgers to
the same standard from "H" Street to the existing end of improvements south of
East "H" Street
Said improvements shall include but not be limited to: A.C. pavement,
base, curb, gutter, sidewalk, landscaped islands, sewer and water utilities,
drainage facilities, street lights, signs, and street trees. Also, pavement
markings and conduit, pull boxes, signal standards with luminaires only
mounted on ultimate bases, and service points for future traffic signals shall
be provided.
The following are Code requirements:
1. The developer shall plant trees along all dedicated streets within the
subdivision. The species, location and number shall be determined by the
City Engineer.
2. The developer shall pay Traffic Signal Participation fees in accordance
with City Council policy prior to issuance of building permits.
3. The developer shall pay all applicable sewer fees prior to issuance of
building permits.
4. The developer shall underground all existing overhead facilities lying
within the subdivision. All utilities serving the subdivision shall be
undergrounded.
5. All grading work shall be done in accordance with the City of Chula Vista
Landscape Manual and Grading Ordinance 1797 as amended.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of January 23, 1985 Page 9
6. The developer shall comply with all applicable sections of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code. Preparation of the Final Map and all plans shall be in
accordance with the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act, Subdivision
Ordinance and the Subdivision Manual of the City of Chula Vista.
7. The developer shall be subject to a fee of approximately 5300 per
equivalent dwelling unit for sewage facility participation as now
tentatively scheduled for public hearing on February 26, 1985 by the Chula
Vista City Council.
The following map revisions will be required:
1. Add all symbols used in the map to the legend.
2. Show tree planting and maintenance easements on cross-sections of all
streets.
3. Identify all lots shown on the map (i.e., O.S., for open space).
4. Add a statement following note no. 2 in the General Notes to present the
total number of units.
5. Show adequate right-of-way for a 4.5 foot utility strip along Corral
Canyon Road.
6. Show locations of all proposed energy dissipators.
7. Add a key/index map in the front sheet.
8. Add frontage width of all lots.
C. DISCUSSION
1. General Lottin9 of Area
a. The EastLake Hills and Shore areas are designed to accommodate a
variety of house types and lot sizes. The proposed residential area is
bisected by "U" street with the Hills area located on the north and the Shores
to the south.
b. The Hills area features the more traditional square foot lot with
some 54 acres in the northern section planned for 104 lots with a minimum lot
size of 8,000 sq. ft. Immediately adjacent to the south are 187 lots with
minimum areas of 7,000 sq. ft. The areas abutting "H" Street and a part of
the elementary school are 5,000 sq. ft. in size. These 162 lots are 50 feet
to 60 feet in width. The elementary school and adjacent park act as the focal
point of this 453 lot neighborhood.
Access to the Hills area will be via "H" Street, Corral Canyon Road
and the 1-125 corridor, early 94 acres of open space buffers this area from
adjoining areas.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of January 23, 1985 Page l0
c. The Shores area is considerably higher in density with 188 lots in
the 4,000-4,500 sq. ft. size. These lots are divided into two areas abutting
"H" Street, small 1/2 acre minimum parks are located on the loop road at the
entries to these two subdivisions. Five larqer lots totalling 66 acres are
located against the loop road and are planne~ to accommodate 663 attached or
detached units. One of the parcels abuts the 17 acre lake located in the
Shores. Two lots which will accommodate up to 676 attached units are planned
for the remaining 35 acres.
A total of 1,525 dwelling units will be accommodated in the Shores on
137 acres resulting in an overall density for the area at over ll D/U's per
acre.
The 17+ acre lake and adjacent 4 acre park will serve as the focal
point of the Shores. In addition, 3 mini parks of 1/2 acre each are located
on the loop road and an additional 55 acres of open space is located on the
periphery.
d. The applicant has indicated a further parceling of the higher density
multiple family areas will be necessary to satisfy financing programs for the
builders of such parcels. A condition as has been placed on the tentative map
limiting such lots to a 2 acre minimum until site plan approval has been given
by the City.
2. Circulation/Street Improvements
Approval of this subdivision for nearly 2,000 dwelling units necessitates
conditions of onsite and offsite street improvements which are tied to the
EastLake facilities financing plan and yet must be conditioned somewhat
independent of that plan.
The financing plan and necessity for various road segments is based on an
areawide assessment of traffic demands with EastLake development being part of
the total area. However, since approval of the EastLake subdivision map would
authorize the development to proceed independent of other projects planned in
the area, conditions must be applied to this map. The development of EastLake
Hills and Shores will require the improvement of:
a. "H" Street, both widening and extension from 1-805 to the project to
function as the primary east-west traffic corridor.
b. The construction of a road in close alignment with the 125 corridor
extending from the project boundary to 1-54. This construction will most
likely involve a bridge constructed over the Sweetwater River.
c. The completion of Corral Canyon and Rutgers Avenue from street "Y" to
the present improvements in Rutgers.
d. The widening of Telegraph Canyon Road and Otay Lakes Road to four
lane segments to the project boundaries.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of January 23, 1985 Page ll
e. The completion of all onsite roads in accordance with the subdivision
map design.
It should be noted that the construction of the various offsite
improvements can be phased with actual construction programs. The number of
units developed in a given phase will determine the need for offsite street
improvements covered as overall conditions of approval.
3. Street Names
The applicant is in the process of submitting a list of street names which
will require review by the various City.departments. Final approval, of the
street names is required by the Planning bommission, therefore, it is ~ntended
that such names will come back at a later date for your consideration.
4. Lot Areas
Although the P.C. Regulations establish minimum lot areas for the various
zoning classifications listed, certain lots within a given subdivision will be
less than the minimum specified in P.C. Regulations. The City's Zoning
Ordinance presently allows for these deviations by allowing for averaging.
The conditions placed on EastLake Hills/Shores would allow for a maximum
deviation of 20% the lots to be below the minimum lot area specified, provided
that no more than 20% of the lots within the subdivision were effected. In
addition, the total lot area (within the subdivision) must average out to the
minimum standard. In a 5,000 sq. ft. minimum subdivision design having 100
lots, 20 lots could be 4,000 sq. ft. in size provided that the total area of
the 100 lots equalled 500,000 sq. ft. Thus, if 20 lots were designed at 4,000
sq. ft. the remaining 80 would have to average 5,250 sq. ft.
5. Low/Moderate and Manufactured Housing Requirements
a. The applicant is obligated by the SPA requirements to provide 10% of
the housing units for qualified low/moderate income families. The City's
Housing Coordinator has further determined that a further breakdown is
necessary to ensure the construction of low income units. Therefore 5% or 100
units must qualify for low income families. It is anticipated that a portion
of these units will be constructed in the Shores area and a portion will be
construction offsite from this subdivision in the proposed Village Center area
east of the 125 corridor. The project has been conditioned to allow for the
optional location once subdivision map for the Village area is approved.
b. The original P.C. Regulations stipulated that 6.6% or approximately
157 manufactured homes would be required for EastLake. These units may be
either mobile homes or manufactured units placed on permanent foundations and
offered for sale. It is anticipated that such housing would be built in the
Shores area in the one or more of the RP designated density subdivisions.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of January 23, 1985 Page 12
6. Schools
The applicant is proposing to dedicate and construct one elementary school
within the subdivision boundaries. In addition, space within existing junior
high schools is available together with other approved or acquired sites
located outside the boundaries of EastLake. EastLake is planning for the
dedication and construction of a high school and one additional elementary
school in the area located south of Telegraph Canyon Road outside the
boundaries of the subdivision.
A condition of approval requiring letters from each of the school
districts (Chula Vista Elementary and Sweetwater High School) will be required
prior to the issuance of building permits. Those letters require verification
by the district that school service will be available to serve the units
proposed for construction.
7. Landscaping
The Shores and Hills areas feature nearly 150 acres of open space not
included proposed park land. These open space areas which involve a
combination of natural and manufactured slopes will be the maintenance
responsibility of a master homeownerss association. In addition, a
maintenance district will also be established to cover any areas dedicated to
the City. The natural areas will be left natural in most cases. However,
supplemental tree planting of certain canyons and ornamental planting of key
entry areas will occur. Many of the manufactured slopes will be landscaped
with native materiaLs to minimize water needs. Highly visible entry and
corridor areas will have ornamental planting which will be manicured to
achieve a desired design effect. The overall concept and landscaping
classifications for given areas is shown in the EastLake SPA plan.
8. Parks
The proposed construction of 641 sq. ft. detached units and 1,339 multiple
family units within the Hills and Shores area would require the construction
of just over 10 acres of park land, if the entire 1,339 units of multiples,
recorded as condos, the total park requirement would increase by 3 acres to a
total of 13 acres.
The plan for the Hill and Shores development is to have nearly 9 acres of
traditional park land and a 17-1/2 acre lake or just over 26-1/2 acres total.
In addition, a 9 acre park is planned for dedication with the high school site
located south of Telegraph Canyon Road. The SPA Plan proposes a formula for
park credit which recognizes the semi-private nature of some of the parks and
features proposed within the them. In other words, certain facilities or
areas within the parks are open to the members of the EastLake community and
not the general public. Therefore, a credit of 50% is suggested in the SPA
plan which still enables the applicant to meet the City's park standards.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of January 23, 1985 Page 13
In addition to park standards the City requires developers to pay RCT
{residential construction tax) monies to finance park construction as well as
other needed public facilities {drainage, sewer, fire stations, libraries,
etc.). Since EastLake is obligated for all the necessary public facilities as
part of the SPA and financial plan, conditions of the subdivision conditions
recommend the waiver of any fees connected with parks or residential
construction tax.
D. FINDINGS
1. Pursuant to Section 66473.5 of the Subdivision Map Act, the tentative
subdivision map for EastLake Hills and EastLake Shores, Chula Vista
Tentative Map Act 40-9, is found to be consistent with the EastLake
General Development Plan and Sectional Planning Area Plan adopted by the
City Planning Commission on January 23, 1985, and the City's General Plan
based on the following findings:
a) Land Use Element the Specific Plan designates the area for a
combination of uses which includes 1,979 dwelling units, just under
24 acres of park land, nearly 150 acres of open space, and one
elementary school. The Plan specifies that the residential land use
will be at an average density of 7 dwelling units per acre.
b) Circulation Element all of the on-site public roads will be
installed as shown on the adopted SPA Plan as well as various
off-site improvements which involve the widening of Telegraph Canyon
Road, the extension and widening of "H" Street, the construction of a
north-south road identified on the Plan as Route125, as well as other
minor off-site road connections.
c) Housing Element - the proposed project will provide for a mixture of
housing types including single-family detached, attached and various
densities of condominiums or apartment units. Ten percent of the
units, or approximately 198 units, will be committed to low and
moderate income persons, a percentage of this housing requirement may
be transferred to Village Center section of EastLake subject to
subsequent approval of that subdivision at a future date by the City
conservation element. The developer is maintaining a substantial area
in natural open space in coordination with the adjacent natural areas
presently established adjacent to the EastLake Development. In
addition, other areas of manufactured slopes will be placed in
permanent open space belts and landscaped to provide buffer areas
between the main traffic arteries and the residential development. A
paleontologist will be required to be on the site during the critical
grading period so that valuable specimens can be recovered and
catalogued and recorded.
d) Parks and Recreation and Open Space Elements - the proposed project
will result in the retention of over 100 acres of natural open space
and approximately 150 acres in total open space plus nearly 24 acres
of park land. The amount of land and the locations comply with the
adopted Sectional Planning Area plan.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of January 23, 1985 Page 14
e) Seismic Safety Element - the closest identified fault in the area is
the La Nacion Fault located over 2 miles to the west. The
Environmental Impact Report indicates that the Coronado Banks Fault,
which is most likely to affect the project site with ground shaking,
is located some 20 miles from the project area. There are no
inferred faults located within the subject site. Specific mitigation
relating to slope stability and techniques dealing with fill slopes
will be incorporated in the grading of the project. All dwelling
units within the project will be required to be designed so as to not
exceed the maximum interior noise level of 45 dBA. Additionally, all
exterior private open space will be shielded by a combination of
earth hems, walls, or buildings. Subsequent noise studies will need
to be prepared when precise plans for specific developments are
submitted.
f) Scenic Highway Element - Manufactured slopes adjacent to "H" Street
have been designed to undulate and vary in steepness with extensive
landscaping planned to soften and beautify their appearance. In
addition, a landscaped median is being provided and decorative walls
will be used in areas where development interfaces with "H" Street.
Building locations, design and signing will all be controlled through
the use of development standards incorporated in the PC Regulations
to ensure compliance with the Scenic Highway Element.
g) Bicycle Routes - the proposed development will include bicycle lanes
on the major streets such as "H" as well as the interconnects with
the loop roads which will link up with bicycle paths connecting the
elementary school and various parks within the development. "H"
Street is identified in the Bicycle Routes Element as a major bicycle
link.
h) Public Building Elements - the applicant has identified and offered
for dedication and is obligated for construction of an elementary
school site located in the EastLake Hills area. In addition, the
applicant is obligated to dedicate and construct a high school site
located off-site of this subdivision but within the EastLake
ownership located on the south side of Telegraph Canyon Road. A fire
station and a possible branch library will also be constructed
off-site from this development to satisfy the Public Building Element.
2. Pursuant to Section 66412.2 of the Subdivision Map Act, the Commission
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
3. Pursuant to Section 19.48.100 of the Chula Vista Zoning Ordinance, the
Commission also finds
WPC 1653P
- 14 -
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of January 23,1985 Page 1
6. Consideration of "Candidate CEQA Findings".- EastLake !
A. BACKGROUND
The Final EIR for the EastLake I project identifies several potentially
significant impacts. Therefore, it is necessary to adopt "C£QA findings"
to describe how the project, in its final form, mitigates those impacts or
why it is not feasible to mitigate those impacts.
B. RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the attached "Candidate CEQA findings" on the EastLake ! project.
C. ANALYSIS
It is the conclusion of these findings that:
1. Changes have been incorporated into the project which mitigate or
avoid the significant environmental effects as identified in the
final EIR,
2. None of the significant environmental effects anticipated as a
result of the proposed project are within the responsibility or
jurisdiction of another public agency, and that
3. No specific economic, social or other considerations make infeasible
the mitigation measures identified in the EIR.
D. Several sections of these findings have been modified since the previous
submission to the Commission. These revisions are attached and will be
discussed at the Commission's meeting on January 23.
EASTLAKE I
EIR-84-1
CANDIDATE CEQA FINDINGS
IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 21081
OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
AND SECTION 15091 OF TITLE 14
OF THE CALIFORNIA ADMINISTRATION CODE
JANUARY 1985
I. INTRODUCTION
Section 21081 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires
that no project shall be approved by a public agency when significant
environmental effects have been identified, unless one of the following
findings is be made and supported by substantial evidence in the record:
l) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into
the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR.
2) Changes or alterations are the responsibility of another public
agency and not the agency making the finding.
3) Specific economic, social or other considerations make infeasible the
mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final
EIR.
The following findings are made relative to the conclusions of the Final
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed EastLake I Sectional
Planning Area (SPA) Plan (SCH #84022206) and all documents, maps,
illustrations listed in Section II of these findings. The project's
discretionary actions included an amendment to the General Development Plan,
approval of the SPA Plan and Tentative Maps. Future discretionary action
includes the preparation and environmental review of a Supplemental SPA Plan
for EastLake Greens and a Precise Plan for the Village Center.
Implementation of the 1267.9-acre project as proposed would result in a
mixture of residential, employment park, office, commercial, circulation,
recreational, educational and open space land uses as specified in the General
Development Plan. The project would allow a maximum of 3683 dwelling units
within a total residential area of 619.9 acres. The remaining 51 percent of
the site would be developed for a variety of non-residential land uses on 648
acres. The following findings have been prepared pursuant to Sections 15088
and 15089 of Title 14 of the California Administrative Code and Section 21081
of the California Public Resources Code.
II. CITY OF CHULA VISTA FINDINGS
l) The Chula Vista City Council and Planning Commission, having reviewed
and considered the information contained in the Final EIR for the
EastLake I Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan and the record, finds
that changes have been incorporated into the project which mitigate
or avoid the significant environmental effects thereof, as identified
in the final EIR. These measures are outlined in summary form below.
2) The Chula Vista City Council and Planning Commission, having reviewed
and considered the information contained in the Final EIR and the
record, finds that none of the significant environmental effects
anticipated as a result of the proposed project are within the
responsibility or jurisdiction of another public agency.
-2-
3) The Chula Vista City Council and Planning Commission, having reviewed
and considered the information contained in the Final EIR and the
record, finds that no specific economic, social or other
considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures identified in
the EIR.
Changes incorporated into the project which will mitigate or avoid th,.
following significant environmental effects:
Traffic
Impact
EastLake I will have both project level and cumulative level
environmental effects. At a project level, EastLake I will contribute a
substantial percent of traffic on SR-125 alignment north of East "H" Street
and south of SR-54, East "H" Street and Telegraph Canyon Road east of 1-805
and to a lesser degree other streets in the project's vicinity. The streets
noted above will reach or exceed their design ADT with EastLake I contributing
a major portion of the projected ADT.
Cumulative impacts were also identified in the final EIR. These
impacts occur when the design ADT is approached or exceeded and only a small
percent of the ADT is contributed by EastLake I. These include San Miguel
Road east of SR-125, Telegraph Canyon Road east of SR-125, Corral Canyon Road,
Otay Lakes Road south of Bonita Road, and East "H" Street east of 1-805.
Mitigation
Measures have been incorporated into the project to mitigate the
potential traffic impacts. See the EastLake I Public Financing Plan for
details, phasing, and financing methods. {Specific area-wide and/or off-site
phasing plans pg. 14-36 and specific on-site phasing plans pg. 38-50.) These
include:
Reserve the right-of-way for SR125 alignment on site as
ultimately an eight lane freeway; initially construct four lanes
between the project and San Miguel Road; two lanes north of San
Miguel Road.
Construct East "H" Street as a six lane prime arterial east of
1-805 to Otay Lakes Road and with four lanes east of Otay Lakes
Road.
Construct Telegraph Canyon Road with six lanes and four lanes
offsite to 1-805. Construct San Miguel Road with four lanes
west of SR125 to Bonita Road.
Install traffic signals on all streets required to be
constructed at the intersections of collector streets, major
roads and prime arterials with each other, plus locations where
local collectors intersect major roads or prime arterials.
A traffic monitoring system will be established to provide an
annual report on the adequacy of these facilities to support not
only the EastLake project but the cumulative impacts of this and
other future developments.
Finding
With the inclusion of the above specified mitigation no significant
environmental impact will result.
Educational Facilities
Impact
Students generated by project development would create a need for
additional school facilities within the project area.
Mitigation
The Project includes the reservation of one elementa~ school site in
the EastLake Hills neighborhood and one site need established in the Greens
neighborhood. Also, one high school site is proposed just off site.
Alternative construction financing mechanisms have been proposed to assure
construction of these facilities.
Findin~
Measures have been incorporated into the project to mitigate
potential educational facility impacts. One elementary school is proposed in
the EastLake Hills neighborhood; a second school is proposed in the
Supplemental SPA Plan for the EastLake Greens neighborhood. While the
development of EastLake I would not adversely effect the existing junior high
in the short term, negotiations for a high school site and interim facilities
are nevertheless underway with the Sweetwater Union High School District to
avoid any possible long term impacts.
Fire Protection
Impact
A short-term adverse, but not significant, impact to fire protection
services would occur as existing facilities and personnel would be required to
provide services to EastLake I during initial phases.
-4-
Mitigation
The provision of an equipped fire station within EastLake Village
Center, or a financial contribution to a new offsite fire station is part of
the project.
Finding
Measures have been incorporated into the project to ultimately
mitigate the fire protection impact, which include an equipped fire station
within EastLake Village Center or at a site designated by the City of Chula
Vista which is the responsibility of the developer.
Library Services
Impact
EastLake I would increase the demand for library facilities.
Mitigation
The provision of a community-oriented interim storefront library, and
ultimately a branch library on or off the project site is included as part of
the project.
Finding
Measures have been incorporated into the project to mitigate
potential library service impacts. When EastLake's population reaches lO,O00,
a community-oriented library would include use of commercial space at EastLake
Village Center; or construction of an addition to the EastLake community
meeting center. The ultimate need for a branch library would be mitigated by
construction of a separate library facility financed by any combination of
Mello-Roos, State library funds, grants or specially earmarked City revenues.
Visual Resources
Impact
The proposed EastLake I development would change the appearance of
the project site as the pastoral character of the existing landscape would be
replaced by urban development.
Mitigation
The project site has been designated in the Chula Vista General Plan
for urban development. Extensive design measures to avoid potential visual
impacts have been incorporated into the project.
-5-
Finding
Measures have been incorporated into the project to mitigate
potential visual impacts, and include designation of open space and parks;
provision of a landscape plan with visual buffer zones, landscape zones, a
plant matrix, a street tree plan, trails plan, signage plan, fencing plan and
grading plan. The plan also seeks to maintain the intent of the Scenic
Highways Element.
Hydrology/Drainage
Impact
Runoff volumes as a result of EastLake I development would increase
slightly for Long Canyon and Telegraph Canyon drainages.
Mitigation
The project will provide drainage improvements that reduce peak flows
from the property.
Finding
Measures have been incorporated into the project to mitigate the
potential hydrology/drainage impacts. In Long Canyon, a reduction in peak
runoff can be achieved through construction of a culvert under Corral Canyon
Road. Concerning Telegraph Canyon drainage, interim drainage facilities
improvement will include a retention basin in the Commercial Center area in
order that downstream flows would not increase beyond existing levels.
Longterm drainage facilities improvements would be financed under a fee
district to be instituted by the City of Chula Vista.
Archaeological Resources
Impact
Construction of EastLake I would impact archaeological site
CA-SDi-7179 with 5 loci, located in the EastLake Business Center area.
Mitigation
Locus B of site CA-SDi-7179 has been mitigated under the SDG&E
Interconnection Project. Loci A, C, D and E will be mitigated by the
developer.
Finding
Measures have been incorporated into the project to mitigate the
potential archaeological resource impacts. Mitigation measures for site
CA-SDi-7179 involve a two-stage investigative data recovery program.
-6-
Paleontological Resources
Impact
The development of EastLake I could have adverse impacts on
significant paleontological resources.
Mitigation
Paleontological resource impacts will be mitigated by monitoring
during initial grading activity.
Findin~
Measures have been incorporated into the project to mitigate the
potential paleontological resource impacts. A qualified paleontologist would
monitor initial grading activities in the Sweetwater Formation as it appears
in the drainage walls. Grading operations could be halted for a period of
time to allow for examination and, if necessary, removal of significant fossil
resources.
III. INSIGNIFICANT IMPACTS
In accordance with the evaluation provided in EIR-84-1 the project would
clearly not result in any significant impact and therefore have not been
discussed any further in these findings:
1. Land use (3.1)
2. Water availability (3.3.1)
3. Water availability {3.3.1)
4. Police protection {3.3.4)
5. Parks and recreation {3.3.6)
6. Energy supply and conservation (3.3.8)
7. Other utilities and services (3.3.9)
8. Geology and soils (3.5)
9. Air quality {3.7)
10. Socioeconomic factors {3.8)
ll. Fiscal impact (3.9)
12. Noise {3.10)
-7-
13. Biology (3.11)
IV. THE RECORD
For the purposes of CEQA and these findings the record of the Planning
Commission and City Council relating to these actions include:
1. Alfred Gobar Associates, Inc., 1981 Fiscal Efficiency of EastLake Planned
Community, March. '
2. Artim, R.R. and D.L. E1 der, 1979, Late Quaternary deformation along the La
Nacion fault system, San Diego, California: Geological Society of America
Abstracts with Programs, v. ll, no. 7, p. 381.
3. Artim, E.R. and D. Elder-Mills, 1982, The Rose Canyon Fault: A Review in
P. L. Abbott, ed., Geologic Studies in San Diego, San Diego Association
Geologists, pp. 35-45.
4. Artim, E.R. and C.J. Pickney, 1973, La Nacion fault system, San Diego,
California: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 84, pp. 1075-1080.
5. Association of Engineering Geologists, 1973, Geology and Earthquake
Hazards, Planners Guide to Seismic Safety, Association of Engineering
Geologists, Southern California Section, July, pp. 6-8.
6. Boyle Engineering Corporation, 1981, Water Resources Division Hydrologic
and Hydraulic Analysis, August.
7. Burchell, Robert W. and David Listokin, 1978, The Fiscal Impact Handbook.
The Center for Urban Policy Research, New Brunswick.
8. California Air Resources Board {CARB), California Air Quality Data, 1977,
1978, 1979, 1980.
9. California Department of Fish and Game, 1979, Endangered and Rare Plants
of California. The Resources Agency, October 5.
lO. Chula Vista, City of, 1970, General Plan 1990, December.
ll. Chula Vista, City of, 1974, Scenic Highways Element of the Chula Vista
General Plan. -
12. Chula Vista, City of, 1975, Special Census Report, April 1.
13. Chula Vista, City of, 1979, Parks and Recreation Element of the Chula
Vista General Plan.
14. Chula Vista, City of, 1981, Department of Sanitation and Flood Control
Subdivision Manual, May.
-8-
15. Chula Vista, City of, 1982a, Chula Vista: Facts About San Diego County's
Second Largest City.
16. Chula Vista, City of, 1982b, EastLake Final Environmental Impact Report~
EIR 81-03, prepared for City of Chula Vista by WESTEC Services, Inc.
17. Chula Vista, City of, 1982c, Master Fee Schedule, November 9.
18. Chula Vista, City of, 1982d, Planned Community District Regulations for
EastLake I. Adopted by the City of Chula Vista on August 24, 1982.
19. Chula Vista, City of, 1983-84, Proposed Budget, May 19.
20. Chula Vista, City of, Municipal Code.
21. Cole, Lane F., 1982, Memorandum "Full-Cost Recovery Council Workshop,"
September 21.
22. EastLake Development Company, March 1984, EastLake I: Draft Sectional
Planning Area {SPA) Pan, Volumes I and II, prepared by Cinti and
Associates.
23. Farrand, T.T., ed., 1977, Geology of Southwestern San Diego C?nty,
California, and Northwestern Baja, California San Diego Association of
Geologists.
24. Kennedy, M.P., 1975, Geology of the San Diego MEtropolitan Area.
California, California Division of Mines and Geology, Bulletin 200,
Section A, 39 p.
25. Kennedy, M.P. and Siang S. Tan, 19777, Geology of National City, Imperial
Beach and Otay Mesa Quadrangles, Southern San Diego Metropolitan Area,
California, Map Sheet 29.
26. Kennedy, M.P., Sian9 S. Tan, Roger H. Chapman, and Gordon W. Chase, 1975,
Character and Recency of Faulting, San Diego Metropolitan Area,
California~ Special Report 123, California Division of Mines and Geology.
27. Lar~ Seeman Associates, Inc. 1983, Archaeological Data Recovery at Locus
B, CA-SDi-7197, San Diego County, California. Prepared for Lane-Kuhn
Pacific Development Company, September.
28. Leighton and Associates, 1979, Geotechnical Reconnaissance of An Area in
San Diego County, East of Chula Vista and West of Otay Reservoir, 8 p.
29. Leighton and Associates, 1980a, Phase 2 Geotechnical Investigation, Janal
Ranch, San Diego, California.
30. Leighton and Associates, 198Ob, Review of Agricultural Soil Maps, Phase 2
Geotechnical Investigation, Janal Ranch, San Diego County, California.
-9-
31. Leighton and Associates, 1980c, Sand and Gravel Resources, 3,200 Acr~
Janal Ranch, Eastern Chula Vista, California.
32. Leighton and Associates and Woodward-Gizienski and Associates, 1974,
Seismic Safety Study for the City of San Diego.
33. Lowry & Associates, 1984a, East~ake I Water System Subarea Master Plan,
January.
34. Lowry & Associates, 1984b, EastLake I Wastewater System Subarea Master
Plan, January.
35. McGuire, Donna, 1984, Land Assistant with San Diego Gas & Electric.
Correspondence dated March 26, 1984.
36. The McKinley Associates, Inc. 1984., 1984, EastLake I Draft of Public
Facilities Finance Plan, March.
37. Minch, J.A., 1970, Stratigraphy and structure of the Tijuana-Rosarito
Beach area, Northwestern Baja California, Mexico: Geological Society of
America Bulletin, v. 78, pp. 1155-1178.
38. Moore, G.W. and M.P. Kennedy, 1970, Coastal geolo~Lv of the California-Baja
California border area, E.C. Allison, et al., editors, Pacific slope
geology of northern Baja California and adjacent Alta Baja California:
American Association Petroleum Geologists IPacific section) Fall Field
Trip Guidebook.
39. Munz. [.A., 1974, A Flora of Southern California, University of California
Press, Berkeley.
40. Rahnau et al., 1983, Sweetwater Union High School District Master Plan
Sub-area Report, Chula Vista, October.
41. SANDAG ICPO), 1976, 1975 Special Census Selected Data, December.
42. SANDAG ICPO), 1978, Info 78, 1978 Employment Estimates, San Diego Re~ion~
September.
43. SANDAG /CPO), 1979, Regional Ener~ Plan for the San Diego Region, January.
44. SANDAG ICPO), 1980a, Preliminary 1980 Census Data by Tract, July 29.
45. SANDAG ICPO), 1980b, Final Series V Regional Development Forecasts
46. SANDAG, 1984, A Housing Stud~ for the Cit~ of Chula Vista.
47. San Diego County Air Pollution Control District, Air Quality in San Die~o,
Annual Air Monitorin~ Report, 1977, 1978, 1979, 1980.
- l0 -
48. San Diego County Air Pollution Control District, and Comprehensive
Planning Organization (CPO), 1978, Regional Air Quality Strate~x.
49. San Diego, County of, 1969, Soils Interpretation Study, Jamul Mountains.
50. San Diego, County of, 1975, Scenic Highways Element.
51. San Diego, County of, 1976, Integrated Planning Office, 1975 Special
Census Bulletin, January.
52. San Diego, County of, 1978, Regional Growth Management Plan, June.
53. San Diego, County of 1981, Department of Sanitation and Flood Control
Hydrology Manual, May.
54. San Diego, County of 1982-83, Auditor and Controller, 1982-83
Proportionate Increase by Fund, July 21.
55. San Diego, County of, 1983-84, Assessor's Secured Property Assessed
Valuations.
56. Scheidemann, Jr., Robert C., 1977, Correlation of the Otay and Rosarito
Beach Formation in G.T. Farrand, ed., Geology of Southwestern San Diego,
Count~, California and Northwestern Baja California: San Diego
Association of Geologists, pp. t7-28. --
57. Stereoscopic Aerial Photograhy, flown in November 1978, Line No. 210-30D
{5-8), 210-31D (1-8), 210-32E {6-7), 210-32F (lA, 1-5) scale 1 inch :
lO00 feet. '
58. Thorne, Robert F., 1976, The Vascular Plant Communities of California, In:
Symposium Proceedings - Plant Communities of Southern California, edited
by June Latting, California Native Plant Society, Special Publication No.
2.
59. United States Department of Agriculture {USDA), Soil Conservation Service,
1973, Soil Survey, San Diego Area, California, December.
60. United States Department of Commerce, 1972, Soil Conservation Service
National Engineering Handbook, Hydrology, August.
61. United States Department of Interior, 1975, Geological Survey topographic
map, Jamul Mountains quadrangle.
62. United States Fish and Wildlife Service, 1980, Endangered and Threatened
Wildlife and Plants: Review of Plant Taxa for Listing as Endangered or
Threatened Species, Federal Register 45 {242):82480-82509, Monday,
December 15.
-ll-
63. University of California, Agricultural Extension Service, 1970, Climate of
San Diego County; A~ricultural Relationship, November.
64. Urbanplan, 1984, EastLake Elementary School Draft Master Pla% prepared
for City of Chula Vista, Chula Vista City School District and EastLake
Development Company, May.
65. Van Dell and Associates, Inc., 1984, Lon~ Canyon Basin Preliminary
Hydrology Report, May.
66. Weber, F. Harold, 1963, Mines and Mineral Resources of San Diego County,
California, County Report 3, California Division of Mines and Geology,
309 p.
67. WESTEC Services, Inc. 1982, EastLake Final Environmental Impact Report
(SCH #80121007). Prepared for the City of Chula Vista.
68. Willdan Associates, 1984, Traffic Analysis, EastLake I Specific Plan, July.
Also included in the record are the following studies prepared for the
EastLake I Planning Program:
1. EastLake El ementa~ School Master Plan, Urbanplan (October 1984)
2. East "H" Street & Telegraph Canyon Road Scenic Highway Report, Wimmer
Yamada & Associates (March 1984)
3. General Landscape Plan, ONA, Inc. (November 1984)
4. EastLake I Water System Sub-Area Master Plan, Lowry & Associates (January
19B4)
5. EastLake I Wastewater System Sub-Area Master Plan, Lowry & Associates.
6. EastLake I Lakes-Design Development Report, J. Harlan Glenn & Associates
(December 1983).
7. Geotechnical Investigation for Plannin~ Purposes - EastLake I, Leighton
and Associates (July
8. Prelimina~ Transportation Analysis and Improvement Phasino Plan, Urban
Systems Associates, Inc. (March 1984).
g. EastLake I Sion Program, R. Jacks & Company (March 1984).
10. EastLake I Draft Environmental Impact Report, Westec Services, Inc.
(September 1984)
- 12 -
11. Sweetwater Union High School District Master Plan Sub-Area Report, Ruhnau,
McGavin, Ruhnau/Associates (October 1983)
12. Long Canyon Basin Preliminary Hydrolo~ Report, Van Dell & Associates (May
1984)
13. EastLake Policj/ Plan, Chula Vista General Plan, (August 1982)
14. EastLake I PC District Regulations, (August 1984)
15. EastLake I Public Facilities Financin~ Plan, Wedin Enterprises (December
16. Review of Traffic Impacts of EastJ_ake I Chula Vista, California, Gary R.
Hansen, Transportation Consultant (November 1984).
A1 so included as part of the Planning Commission and City Council record are:
1. Final EIR-84-1, EastLake I, WESTEC Services, Inc., December 1984
( SCH #84022206)
2. "The Candidate CEQA Findings" for the Planned Community of EastLake,
revised 6/29/82.
3. Documentary and oral evidence presented to the Planning Commission and
City Council during public hearings on EIR-84-1 and the EastLake I project.
4. Matters of common knowledge to the Planning Commission and/or City Council
such as:
a. The City of Chula Vista General Plan, including the Land Use Map and
all elements thereof;
b. The Zoning Ordinance of the City of Chula Vista as most recently
amended.
c. The Municipal Code of the City of Chula Vista.
d. All other formally adopted policies and ordinances.
WPC 1581P
-13-