HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Reports/1985/10/23 AGENDA
City Planning Commission
Chula Vista, California
Wednesday, October 23, 1985 - 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - SILENT PRAYER
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
1. PUBLIC HEARING: (Continued) Consideration of tentative subdivision
map for £astLake Area R-12 (Bridgewater Cove), Chula
Vista Tract 86-2, within the EastLake Planned
Community - McKellar Development Corporation
2. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit PCC-86-8: Requests permission
to establish a San Diego County Department of Social
Services office at 33 Naples Street - Chuvila Properties
3. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit PCC-86-7: Requests permission
to construct 18 residential condominium units at
341 'K' Street - Theoka Village II
4. PUBLIC HEARING: Variance ZAV-86-8: Requests permission to increase the
allowable density from 14 units to 18 units at 341 'K'
Street - Mary Kaye
DIRECTOR'S REPORT
COMMISSION COMMENTS
ADJOURNMENT AT to the Regular Business Meeting of November 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
October 23, 1985
1. PUBLIC HEARING PCS-86-2 o Consideration of tentative subdivision map
for EastLake Area R-12 (Bridgewater Cove) Chula Vista
Tract 86-2 - McKellar Development Corporation
A. BACKGROUND
The applicant has submitted a tentative subdivision map known as EastLake
Area R-12 (Bridgewater Cove), Chula Vista Tract 86-2 in order to develop a
23-1ot condominium project consisting of 366 units on 20.27 acres within
the EastLake Shores area of the EastLake Planned Community.
This item was continued from the meeting of October 9, 1985, in order to
resolve City concerns over access to the project. These concerns have
~ince.been addressed and the necessary modifications have been made to the
en~a~lve map.
EIR-81-3 EastLake Master Environmental Impact Report and EIR-84-1 EastLake
I Sectional Planning Area SPA Plan have been prepared and address the
environmental impacts of the proposed project.
B. RECOMMENDATION
1. Certify that EIR-81-3 and EIR-84-1 have been prepared in accordance
with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 and that the
Planning Commission has reviewed the information contained in each
EIR prior to making a decision on the project.
2. Based on the findings contained in Section "E" of this report, adopt
a motion recommending that the City Council approve the tentative
subdivision map for EastLake Area R-12 (Bridgewater Cove), Chula
Vista Tract 86-2, subject to the following conditions:
a. Development of the lots shall comply with the plan approved by
the Design Review Committee {PCM-85-14).
b. The following shall be included as notes on the Final Map:
(1) Prior to the issuance of any building permits for
development within EastLake, the following must occur:
(a) The City's requirements for schools must be satisfied.
(b) Needed off-site water improvements must be satisfied.
{c) Off-site roadway needs, as identified by the Public
Facility Financing Plan, must be guaranteed by a
financial mechanism such as a Facilities Benefit
Assessment or other appropriate financing technique.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of October 23, 1985 Page 2
(d) A purchasing agency concept to be implemented to
finance the reserve fund discussed in the Development
Agreement and Public Facilities Financing Plan.
(2) All lots created by this subdivision and Lots "A" and "L"
identified on the tentative map shall be placed under the
control of a single homeowners association, and shall be
subject to precise plan approval, thus precluding any
modifications thereto without prior City approval.
c. The developer shall include in the CC&Rs provision for:
(1) Maintenance of private streets and parking areas.
(2) The homeowners association to regulate guest and resident
parking.
(3) Enforcement by the homeowners association of regulations
regarding guest and resident parking (included but not
limited to fining and/or towing which may be added to
resident assessments).
d. The public streets abutting the project and the project's
internal private street system shall be named prior to City
Council consideration of the Tentative Map.
e. The structural section of all private streets and parking areas
shall be determined from City of Chula Vista requirements based
on "R" values and T.I.'s. The design of all sections shall be
reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. Private drive
construction is subject to review and inspection fees.
f. An additional access driveway shall be constructed on "C"
Street, approximately midway between the two that are proposed.
g. There shall be a minimum of 15 feet driveway width on both sides
of the proposed center island curbs within access driveways.
h. The developer shall agree to not protest the establishment of a
Facilities Benefit Assessment District. Said District will
allow the developer to anticipate future reimbursement by other
benefitting parties.
i. The lowest habitable floor elevation of each dwelling shall be
at least one foot above the lO0-year water surface elevation.
The proposed public and private street lights shall be reviewed
and approved by the City Engineer.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of October 23, 1985 Page 3
k. The developer's engineer shall be responsible for the design of
all internal storm drains and their connections to exterior
storm drains. The design will be reviewed by the City's
Engineering Department. If there are any public storm drains,
drainage easements need to be granted to the City.
1. All eight-inch sanitary sewers shall be public in accordance
with City standards and maintained by the City of Chula Vista.
Ten-foot wide sewer easements shall be granted to the City.
m. The developer shall enter into an agreement with the City
wherein developer agrees to the following:
(1} Pay his fair share of the cost of public improvements to be
provided under the "Public Financing Plan," Phasing Plan
and Development Agreement as needed for access.
(2) Not protest the establishment of a Facilities Benefit
Assessment District. Said District will allow the
developer to anticipate future reimbursement by other
benefitting parties.
C. DISCUSSION
Project Setting
The project site is identified as a multiple family lot (R-12) within the
EastLake Shores area of the EastLake I Planned Community and designated
for a maximum development of 426 units. Mass grading for the EastLake I
area including the project site, is currently underway. The property is
located above the level of the adjacent loop street (identified as "C"
Street on the site plan) and the adjacent beach club and lake property
located to the northeast.
Planned Community District Regulations
Development standards for the property are contained in the EastLake I
Planned Community District regulations. Most of the standards for the
site in question are listed as SP which means that the issues are to be
addressed at the site plan level. In this regard, the Design Review
Committee conditionally approved the site plan and elevations for the
project on October 17, 1985. Further staff discussion elaborating on the
DRC's action will be forthcoming at the Planning Commission hearing.
Project Description
The tentative map involves the creation of 23 condominium lots containing
366 units on 20.27 acres. Two model complexes located adjacent to each
entry drive are not part of the map but are part of the overall project
bringing the total number of lots to 25 and the total number of units to
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of October 23, 1985 Page 4
422 to be constructed in 12 phases. Two points of access have been
provided to "C" Street (as yet unnamed), and internal project circulation
consists of two 24-foot wide drives (called Lakeridge Circle and
Bridgewater Road). Two common open space/recreation areas are
provided--each with a swimming pool and recreation building.
D. ANALYSIS
As noted above, the Design Review Committee were scheduled to
conditionally approve the site plan and elevations for the project on
October 17, 1985. Conditions of approval include the requirement that tot
lot facilities be provided throughout the project subject to Planning
Department review and approval.
The project complies with all of the City's standards for condominium
developments including storage and parking.
The applicant has not as yet submitted a name for the public street
abutting the project ("C" Street on the map). A recommended condition of
approval has been added which would require this street as well as the
internal private street to be named prior to City Council consideration of
the tentative map.
E. FINDING
Pursuant to Section 66473.5 of the Subdivision Map Act, the tentative
subdivision map for EastLake Area R-12 (Bridgewater Cove), Chula Vista
Tract 86-2, is found to be in conformance with the various elements of the
City's General Plan based on the following:
1. The site is physically suitable for the residential development and
the proposal conforms to all standards established by the City for
such projects.
2. The design of the subdivision will not affect the existing
improvements -- streets, sewers, etc. -- which have been designed to
avoid any serious problems.
3. The project is in substantial conformance with the Chula Vista
General Plan Elements as follows:
a. Land Use - The EastLake SPA Plan designates the area for 15-25
dwelling units per acre. The project density of 17.4 dwelling
units per acre is within this range.
b. Circulation The private streets proposed meet the internal
circulation needs of the project.
c. Housing - The project will provide medium-high density attached
housing and thus broaden the choice of housing types within the
EastLake I community.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of October 23, 1985 Page 5
d. Conservation The project is located on a site which has
already been graded for development.
e. Park and Recreation, Open Space The project conform to the
EastLake SPA Plan which will result in the retention of over lO0
acres of natural open space and approximately 150 acres in total
open space plus nearly 24 acres of park land.
f. Seismic Safety - The closest identified fault in the area is the
La Nacion Fault located near 2 miles to the west of the site.
g. Safety - The site will be within an acceptable response time of
fire and police services.
h. Noise - The units will be required to meet the requirements of
the Uniform Building Code as regards to protection from exterior
noise sources.
i. ~i~ r~r~ay The project does not contain a designated
j. Bicycle Routes The streets within the project are not
designated bike routes but will accommodate bicycles. A bicycle
lane is being provided on the public loop street abutting the
site.
k. Public Buildings - No public buildings are planned for the site.
4. 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.
WPC 2228P
SPA PLAN
EAS'rL~E HILLS &
F~£7b
RESIDENTIAl NON- RESIDENTIAl
EASTLAKE
FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
VOLUME 1
City of Chula Vista Case Number: EIR 81-03
State Clearinghouse Number: 80121007
Prepared for:
City of Chula Vista
Environmental Review Committee
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, California 92010
Prepared by:
WESTEC Services Inc.
3211 Fifth Avenue
San Diego, California 92103
DRAFT
October 1981
FINAL
February 1982
SECTION l
INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY
1.1 PURPOSE
This environmental document addresses the 3073-acre Janal Ranch property,
located in an unincorporated area of the southern portion of San Diego County,
approximately 7.5 miles east of downtown Ch, la Vista and 7 miles north of the
U.S./Mexieo border. The property is located in the County's Otay Subregional
Planning Area but is also shown on the City of Chula Vista's General Plan Land
Use Map. Although the site is generally considered to be within the City's
Planning Area, the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) has not
adopted a sphere of influence for Chula Vista.
The applicant is proposing to amend the Land Use and Circulation Elements of
the Chula Vista General Plan to designate a mixture of residential, commer-
cial, industrial, public and open space land uses. If the proposed project is
approved, other elements of the General Plan would need to be updated where
appropriate to maintain consisteney. Additional actions included in the proj-
ect proposal are prezoning of the property to PC (Planned Community) and
annexation to the City of Chula Vista from the County of San Diego.
This document is designed to serve as a Draft Master Environmental Impact
Report (MEIR) for the proposed General Plan Amendment, prezoning and Gen-
eral Development Plan (GDP) and annexation for the Planned Community of
EastLake. The annexation will require approval by LAFCO and the Chula
Vista City Council. Approval of the GPA, draft prezoning and GDP are also
required from the City Council. The objective of this report is to provide a
base of information regarding the resources and constraints of the project site,
and to discuss the environmental effects of the proposed actions, thus permit-
ting the City of Chula Vista to complete the Final EIR without additional
major research effort. Both the annexation and the proposed land use designa-
tion changes are analyzed, in eonjunction with the general development plan
associated with the prezoning. This document will serve as a master EIR to
expedite the environment review of future specific developments within the
project area by: 1) providing information the City can use to decide whether
certain environmental effects are likely to occur and whether those effects
would be significant; 2)providing a central source of information for use in
preparing individual EIRs and/or negative declarations; and 3) identifying long-
range, areawide and cumulative impacts of individual developments proposed
in the project area.
As noted above, this Draft EIR is intended to serve as a Master EIR for the
EastLake project. The Administrative Guidelines to CEQA provide in Section
15069.5:
"(a) Where a large capital project will require a
number of diseretionary approvals from governmen-
tal agencies and one of the approvals will occur
more than two years before construction will begin,
a staged EIR may be prepared covering the entire
project in a general form. The staged FIR should
evaluate the proposal in light of current and con-
templated plans and produce an informed estimate
of the environmental consequences of the entire
project. The aspects of the project before the pub-
lic agency for approval shall be discussed with a
greater degree of specificity.
(b) When a staged EIR has been prepared, a supple-
ment to the FIR shall be prepared when a later
approval is required for the project, and the infor- ..
marion available at the time of the later approval
would permit consideration of additional environ-
mental impacts, mitigation measures, or reasonable
alternatives to the project."
As noted in Table 1-1, Sectional Area Plans, Tentative Maps, and Planned Unit
Development must themselves be subjected to environmental review with
raspeet to the resources and issues listed in Table 1-1 prior to any approval
which may result in a significant effect On the environment. When subsequent
environmental documents are prepared with respect to later discretionary
approvals, further opportunity to recommend further mitigation measures and
project alternatives.
As provided for by the Administrative Guidelines to CEQA in Section 15002(f),
where subsequent environmental review demonstrates that the project under
eonsideratien and its attendant approvals would cause a substantial adverse
change in the environment, the lead agency must respond to such information
by one or more of the following actions:
. _ "(1) Changing a proposed activity;
"(2) Imposing conditions on the approval of the
activity;
"(3)' Adopting plans or ordinances to control a
broader class of activities to avoid the prob-
lems;
"(4) Choosing an alternative way of meeting the
same need;
"(5) Disapproving the project, or
"(6) Finding that changes in, or alterations, the
project are not feasible.
"(7) Finding that the unavoidable, significant
environmental damage is acceptable as prO-
vided in Section 15089."
2
Table 1-1
SUMMARY OF FUTURE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FOR EASTLAKE
General
Development Seetional Tentative Map/
Area Plan Precise Plan
Issue
Plan
Land Use X X X
Agricultural Resources X
Transportation and
Circulation X X
"
Sewer Services X X
Water Availability X
X X
Schools
Poilce Proteeticm X
Fire Proteetic~ X X
Energy X X (X)
Parks and Recreation X X
Other Utilities and
Services X X
Biological Resources X X (X)
Visual Resources X X (X)
Geologs' X X
Soils X X (X)
Groundwater X
Drainage X X
Mineral Resources X
Water Quality X X (X)
Air Quality X
Socioeconomic Factors X X
Archaeology/History X (X)
Paleontology X X
Noise X X (X)
Key
X - issue to be addressed
(X) - issue to potentially be addressed
blank - issue not to be addressed
This report is submitted to the City of Chula Vista in accordance with the
California Environmental Quality Act and EIR Guidelines, as amended Janu-
ary 1, 1981.
In designing the EastLake planned Community, the applicant used a planning
process which included environmental studies from the initial stages of the
project. Subsequent to finalizing the General Development Plan for EastLake,
an Environmental Data Base was prepared and submitted to the City of Chula ~I
Vista. This data base was used during preparation of the Environmental Con- i
straints Inventory for the project, and, in turn, this EIR. Future planning
studies for EastLake will include Sectional Area Plans, site plans and tentative
maps. The topics for which environmental review may be neceSsary as these
later plans are submitted are identified on Table 1-1. ~
1.2 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Proieet Description
The 3073-acre EastLake project site is located in the eastern portion of the
Chula Vista Planning Area in an unincorporated portion of San Diego County. '!
Upper and Lower Otay Lakes are adjacent to the eastern project boundary, and
Otay Lakes Road traverses the site from west to east. The site's topography is
gently rollings hills, and current land use is primarily agriculture (dry-farmed
barley).
The existing County land use designations are Intensive Agriculture over the ~ ~
majority of the site, and Very Low Density, non-urban residential uses for the
remaining areas. The Chula Vista General Plan also designates the majority of
the site for AgricUlture and Reserve. The northwestern portion of the site is
designated for Medium Density Residential uses.
The EastLake project as proposed would be developed as a Planned Community
including a mixture of residential, industrial, commercial, office, community
educational and open space land uses. The applicant is requesting a prezone to
Planned Community and adoption of a General Development Plan and phasing
schedule to guide development of the site. To allow such development, a
General Plan Amendment for the Land Use and Circulation Elements of the
Chula Vista General Plan would be required. If the GPA and prezone are
approved, a request for annexation to Chula Vista would be made to LAFCO. ~
Environmental Analysis
The environmental impactS of the proposed project are summarized below.
Mere detailed discussions of impacts and mitigation measures for each issue
are contained in Section III of this report.
Land Use: The proposed changes in land use designations and ultimate devel-
opment according to the General Development Plan were identified to have a
significant impact on agricultural resources. This is discussed further in the
following paragraph. ConflictS with surrounding land uses are not anticipated,
except for the area adjacent to Otay Lakes Park. This potential impact can be
mitigated through specific site design. Internal land uses would be compatible
4
and no significant impacts would occur. EastLake development would be a
substantial change from City policy regarding land use designations for this
area, and would vary from density assumptions used for Series V population
projections. As a result of this change in policy, there could be secondary
effects on traffic, community services and air quality as discussed below.
Agricultural Resources: The majority of the project site contains soiis suit-
able for agricultural use which, due to location within the coastal climate,
would be highly productive given imported water. The loss of the current dry
farmed barley production is not eoasidared significant but the loss of resources
for the potential production of coastal dependent crops would be a significant
adverse impact of project development. ..
Transportation and Circulation: Traffic generated from development of the
proposed project would represent an increase in total area trips of 16 to
18 percent. On a cumulative basis, this traffic would have a significant
impact on the regional circulation system. Mitigation of the impact is possible
with phased improvements to roadways and intersections constructed in con-
junction with need. At the City's discretion, some of these improvements
should be the responsibility of the developer, while other property owners and
various public agencies would need to construct other links. The major road
improvements which will be aeeded to avoid significant impacts include:
· SR 125 between the project and SR 54 should be constructed as a four-
lane prime arterial; eventual widening to six lanes with selected grade
separations may be required.
· Otay Lakes Road should be extended south of Telegraph Canyon Road
to an intersection with Orange Avenue; Orange Avenue should be
extended from that point to the EastLake property.
· Several roads (see Appendix C) presently designated as collectors will
have to be reclassified as major arterials, including:
Sweetwater Road (SR 54 - Bonita)
Bonita Bridge
Sweetwater Road (SR 54 - Bonita Bridge)
Corral Canyon Road
Brandywine Avenue
· Bonita Road between 1-805 and the Bonita Bridge will need to be
widened to a six-lane divided major artieral.
If projeot development is phased with needed circulation improvements, poten-
tial impacts would be reduced to insignificance. If improvements are not
made, a significant adverse traffic impact would result.
Sewer Services: Sewage generation from the EastLake project would be sub-
stantially higher than that anticipated under current, lower density General
Plan designations. Sewage disposal facilities do not currently exist onsite, and
full development of the project would require extensive construction of both
on and offsite lines or separate sewage treatment facilities. Such improve-
ments would need to be phased with development to avoid significant impacts.
5
First phase construction would have some allotted capacity in the Telegraph
Canyon trunk line, and pumping into existing lines over a short-term period is
being requested by the applicant. If the extension of sewage lines is the option
selected for sewering the project site, there is a potential for contributing to
growth inducement of adjacent parcels.
~: Project development would require the construction of
water distribution facilities onsite, which would be the responsibility of the
developer. The Otay Water District has indicated an ability to supply water to
the site. However, the losS of imported water from the Colorado River as a
result of Arizona's withdrawal would have regional water supply implications.
The project as proposed would represent an incremental impact o.n limited
regional water supplies which could be significant on a cumulative basis. The
use of reclaimed water for irrigation of open space and recreation areas as
well as conservation measures would reduce the demand for imported water
from the community. However, the problem of adequate supply must be
solved on a regional scale.
~nehOOls: Students generated by project development would create a need for
al school facilities within the project area. The General Development
plan indicates school sites for 5 elementary, 1 junior and 1 senior high. Based
on current generation rate and average school capacities, there may be a need
for 2 additional elementary and 1 each junior and senior high schools within
the community. The provision of adequate school facilities should be coordi-
nated with the Districts and provided by the developer in conjunction with
need to reduce potential impacts to insignificance.
Police Protection: Initial emergency response time to development within
~astLake would be below the preferred time. The addition of police staff and
equipment to meet the demands of new development would eliminate the
short-term impaet which would occur during the initial phase of the project.
Fire protection: Significant short-term impacts on the City's Fire Department
would occur du~ing the first phase of development, until a new station is oper-
· rea. A second station may be necesSary during later
ational in the project a .............
phases of project buildout. The aeve~op~r wv~,, r- provision of
station site, and construction of the station structure as well as
the necessary apparatus and equipment, may also be required to mitigate
potentially significant impacts.
Ener~: Project development would result in an incremental increase in
demand for energy. No unique or unusual demands for energy are anticipated
to result from implementation of the project in this area due to the provision
of a mixture of land uses which would help to reduce future residents travel
distances. Conservation measures being considered for the development would
further reduce energy demand and consumption.
Parks and Recreation Facilities: The proposed General Development Plan for
EastLake includes the provisio~'~ of open space and park areas to serve future
project residents. No adverse impacts related to parks would occur.
6
Library Services: Project development would result in an incremental increase
in demand for library services. Due to the size of the project and distance
from the central library, a significant impact
could
occur
unless
mitigation
measures are implemented. Those reeommended by the City librarian include
provision of temporary space for a branch library, purchase of books, funding
of staff for 1 year and dedication of a site for a permanent branch library.
Other Utilities and Services: Project development would incrementally
increase the use of and demand for other services including solid waste dis-
posal, telephone service, churches, hospital and paramedic
services.
No
signif-
icant impact to these services and facilities are anticipated.
Biological Resources: The majority of the natural vegetation on t~e project
site has been disturbed through agricultural cultivation. The proposed project
design includes retention of almost all the remaining native vegetation onsite
and associated sensitive species. No significant biological impacts are antici-
pated as a result of project development, although there will be an incremen-
tal reduction in the foraging area for raptors.
Visual Resources: The proposed development of the EastLake Planned Com-
munity would substantially alter the visual character of the site from its pas-
toral appearance to an urbanized community. Specific grading and design
features are not available at this time, but mitigation measures to minimize
visual impacts are included in the proposed PC regulations. These address
grading and architectural design, as well as visual considerations for projects
adjacent to designated Scenic Highways. Site-specific visual impacts should
be addressed subsequent project review.
during
Geology': The designation of land uses on the project site has generally been
responsive to geologic conditions except in several possible minor landslide
areas. Potential impacts related to slope instability can be mitigated by
remedial grading or use of fill to buttress and stabilize the landslides. Poten-
tial seismic activity would be no greater at the site than elsewhere in southern
with the Uniform Building Code will
California.
Construction
in
accordance
minimize the effects of earthquake shaking. Prior to final project design, a
detailed geologic investigation is required to be conducted to provide grading,
foundation and construction recommendations.
Soils: The project site contains areas with highly expansive soils. Unstable
soils conditions can be mitigated to insignificance by following the recommen-
dations of an engineering geologist.
Groundwater: Development of the project site would not affect local or
regional groundwater conditions in the project vicinity.
Drainage: Development of the proposed project would increase runoff from
the site, which would represent an incremental inerease in the existing flood
discharge of the Sweetwater and Otay Rivers. Several areas downstream are
currently subjeet to flooding problems, and the project contribution to peak
runoff could be significant on a cumulative basis.
The portion of EastLake which is drained by Telegraph Canyon represents
14 pere~nt of the total watershed. Development of this site with urban uses,
rather than the assumed agrieultural use, would result in an underestimation of
the projected peak discharge, and could impact drainage facilities. Develop-
ment in the portion of the site drained by Long Canyon eould also aggravate
the existing drainage problem southeast of Bonita Road. Measures to control
peak runoff discharge to pre-projeet levels and provide drainage improvements
eould mitigate potential drainage impacts.
Mineral Resources: No mineral deposits are known or expected onsite.
Water (~ualit~,: Development of the site with urban uses would result in a
change in the type of contaminants contained in surface rupoff and would
deerease sediment loads of runoff. No significant impant on water quality is
anticipated from projeet implementation. The wastewater reclamation plant
being eonsidered for sewage treatment would involve the use of treated waste-
water for irrigation. Disposal of the treated effluent may be restricted along
the eastern margin of the property whieh drains into Otay Lakes by the
RWQCB. No signifieant water quality impaet would oecur onsite or in down-
stream areas.
Air (~ualit~,: The proposed EastLake development would represent a signifi-
eant increase in the planned growth levels within the Chula Vista Plmming
Area, with a resultant increase in pollutant emissions from mobile and station-
ary sources. The impact of project implementation would be significant on a
cumulative re~ionwide level due to the departure from planned growth within
the air basin. Mitigation measures are available to reduce project-related
emissions, but eannot mitigate the impact to insignifieance.
Soeioeconomies: Development of the proposed projeet would result in a redis-
tribution of planned housing units and population within the Chula Vista Plan-
ning Area. This would affect the rate and density of development in other
portions of the Planning Area. Seeondary impaets associated with growth of
this property, and the potential indueed growth on surrounding pareeis are
diseussed individually and in Section IV. The proposed development would pro-
vide additional employment opportunities in the Chula Vista area. The fiseal
analysis for the project indieated a net benefit to the City during all phases of
the project.
Arehaeolo{~ical/Historieal Resources: Field investigation of the EastLake
property identified three arehaeological/historical sites and 14 artifact iso-
lates. Future development of the projeet area would result in the loss or
impairment of the eultural resourees present onsite unless appropriate mitiga-
tion measures are taken, including surfaee and subsurfaee testing.
Paleontoloi~ical Resources: There is a potential for paleontological resources
to be present within the extreme southwestern portion of the project site. A
more precise determination of the resource presenee can be made through
field examination of future soil and geotechnieal borings or cut slopes during
grading operations. Mitigation measures are available to avoid significant
impacts to any paleontological resources onsite.
Noise: Ambient noise levels in the project vieinity would increase as a result
~ urban development. Significant noise impacts would occur if residential
uses were constructed within the 65 dB(A) CNEL contours adjacent to road-
ways in the project area. Mitigation of noise impaets is possible through
construction techniques or noise barriers. Specifio noise impacts would need
to be determined at the time of individual project review.
Growth Indueement: The project as proposed would introduce an urban devel-
opment into a currently rural setting, and would involve the extension of
roads, sewage facilities, and community services. Development of EastLake
could affect both the timing, type and location of growth of adjacent parcels
and could encourage additional annexation requests. Although devel.opment of
the project site is planned to be phased over a 20-year period, t~{e projeet
proposal is considered to have significant secondary impacts associated with
growth inducement. If adjacent parcels were to develop at densities similar to
EastLake, an overload of facilities such as roads, sewers and drainage struc-
tures could result. Other secondary effects would be air quality and commu-
nity service availability.
EASTLAKE I
SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) PLAN
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
City of Chula Vista Number: EIR 84-1
State Clearinghouse Number: 84022206
Prepared for:
City of Chuki Vista
Department of Planning
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 92010
Prepared by:
WESTEC Services, Inc.
3211 Fifth Avenue
San Diego, CA 92103
January 1985
SECTION I
INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY
1.1 PURPOSE
This environmental document addresses the proposed 1267.9-acre EastLake I
Sectional Planning Area (SPA). Located in an area zoned as Planned Community (PC)
by the City of Chula Vista on August 24, 1982, the project site is located approximately
7.5 miles eest of downtown Chula Vista and 8 miles north of the United States/Mexico
border. _-
EastLake I is planned to be a functionally complete community within the City
of Chula Vista, and the SPA Plan prepared by the applicant is a refinement and imple-
mentation framework for the Planned Community Zoning (a copy of which is on file
with the City of Chula Vista Planning Department). EastLake I is a phased development
project and the SPA Plan projects development of 3683 homes'over a period of 8 to
10 years.
This document is designed to serve as a Supplemental Environmental Impact
Report for the EastLake I Sectional Development Plan (EIR-84-1). A Master EIR was
completed for the project in February of 1982, and the project received discretionary
approvals from the City of Chula Vista for the requested G.eneral Plan Amendment,
prezoning and General Development Plan, and annexation to the City of Chula Vista
from the County of San Diego.
EastLake I is the designation adopted for the current development area of
EastLake. On AugUSt 24, 1982, the City of Chula Vista adopted the EastLake Policy
Plan for the entire 3073-acre eommunity and the Planned Community Zoning for East-
Lake I. Combined, these constitute the General Plan designation for the property. A
provision of the Planned Community Zoning was that, prior to development, a SPA Plan
would have to be approved for the planning area. This phase of project approvals,
including the preparation of Sectional Development Plans and Tentative Tract Maps is
now in process. The site-specific SPA and Tentative Maps are subject to environmental
review and comprise the primary focus of this EIR. Discretionary action by the City of
Chula Vista will include an amendment to the General Development Plan. Land use
designations for the EastLake I SPA vary from the current General Development Plan in
terms of distribution, but are in compliance with the intent of the Planned Community
designations by type and density.
1-1
The objective of this report is to provide an updated base of information
regarding the resources and constraints of the projeet site, and to discuss the environ-
mental effects of the proposed antions. This EIR, together with the Master EIR (EIR
81-03), provides an assessment of the probable short- and long-term cumulative
impacts of the project and provides an evaluation of all feasible mitigation measures
necessary to reduce or eliminate adverse impacts. It also analyzes all feasible alterna-
tives to the project as proposed.
Future discretionary action for EastLake I includes the preparation and envi-
ronmental review of a Supplemental SPA Plan for EastLake Greens ~nd a Precise Plan
for Village Center.
The following Planned Community District Regulations adopted by the City of
Chula Vista are applieable to the EastLake I project site and are used as guidelines for
development of this EIR. The regulations are intended to:
a. Provide for the orderly preplanning and long-term development of
EastLake so that the entire community and subsequent extensions of planning areas will
provide an environment of stable and desirable character;
b. Give reasonable assurance that Sectional Development Plans prepared
in accordance with an approved General Development Plan will be acceptable to the
city;
c. Enable the city to adopt measures providing for the development of
the surrounding area compatible with the planned community zone;
d. Enhance and implement the General Plan;
e. Secure for the citizens of the city the social and economic advantages
resulting from an orderly planned use of its land resources;
f. Establish conditions which will allow land uses to exist in harmony
within the community;
g. Facilitate adequate provisions for community facilities, such as trans-
portation, water, sewage, schools, parks and other public requirements;
h. Provide flexibility in development standards and permit planned diver-
sification in the location of land uses and structures;
i. To recognize the inherent influence that economic conditions and con-
sumer needs will have in the implementation of EastLake I and,
j. Allow a diversity of uses, relationships and heights of buildings and
open space in planned building groups while insuring substantial compliance with the
spirit, intent, and provisions of the Municipal Code. (City of Chula Vista, 1982c.)
1-2
1.2 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Project Description
The 1267.9-acre EastLake I project site is located in the eastern portion of the
City of Chula Vista. Telegraph Canyon Road and Otay Lakes Road bisect the site,
which is comprised of a topography of gentle rolling hilis dry-farmed for barley produc-
tion.
The existing City of Chula Vista General Plan designates the project site as
the Planned Community of EastLake I (Amendment 1982). Development under the
Planned Community (PC) designation requires the preparation of a Section~l Planning
Area (SPA) Plan to guide the sequential implementation of the PC's General Develop-
ment Plan.
The EastLake I SPA Plan as proposed would be developed to include a mixture
of residential, employment park, office, commercial, circulation, recreational, educa-
tional and open space land uses as specified in the General Development Plan. Two
tentative maps, one for residential EastLake Hills and EastLake Shores, and one for
F~Lake Village Center and EostLake Business Center, are also proposed. The mixture
of land uses provides for the development of a balanced community.
Environmental Analysis
The environmental impacts of the proposed project are summarized below.
Mitigation measures os listed are required in order to reduce potential impacts to a
level of insignificance. If not applied, significant impacts could be expected to occur.
More detailed discussions of impacts and mitigation measures for each issue are con-
tained in Section III and the associated Appendices of this report.
Land Use: The land uses outlined in the proposed SPA Plan and Tentative
Maps vary slightly from land use designations of the Planned Community Regulations
and General Development Plan in terms of distribution. Types and density of land use
remain the same, however. The project would allow a maximum of 3683 dwelling units
within a total residential area of 819.9 acres (49 percent of the total site area). The
remaining 51 percent of the site would be developed for a variety of non-residential
]and uses on 848 acres. Although acreage within the non-residential land u~e categories
will vary somewhat from the General Development Plan designations, the SPA Plan
complies with the intent of the Planned Community Regulations. Even though the
employment park acreage is slightly higher than that designated on the General Devel-
opment Plan, limitations in the Planned Community Regulations will control the scale
of the structures. The SPA Plan's extensive design measures preserve the continuity of
1-3
a well-balanced community with a variety of land uses. No significant land use !mpaets
are expected to occur with complete implementation of the SPA Plan.
Transportation and Circulation: The Transportation and Circulation analysis
indieatas that a large number of streets in the East Chula Vista area will need to be
constructed or widened to accommodate cumulative growth from projected area devel-
opments. EastLake I, however, will not impact all of these streets. To evaluate which
roads will be impacted, a special SANDAG model was used which separates EastLake I
traffic from the rest of the study area. Results of this information indicated that
EastLake I, along with existing traffic, will create the majority of t{affie on the streets
within the project and on SR125 between the project and San Miguel Road, and East
Street between the project and Otay Lakes Road. Caltrans has indicated that a four-
lane intermediate configuration on SR125 is acceptable, with an ultimate configuration
consisting of eight lanes, diamond interchanges and a truck lane upgrade from the
Sweetwater River Valley. Several existing streets will need to be expanded and the
proposed project traffic will also necessitate a minimum of two lanes for SR125 north
of San Miguel Road, four lanes for SR125 between San Miguel Road and the southern
project boundary, and a minimum of four lanes on Telegraph Canyon Road west of the
project. Mitigation measures to reduce significant traffic impacts to a level of insig-
nificance are provided in Section 3.2.
Water Availability: In order to provide water to onsite development, the proj-
ect site will be annexed to Otay Water District's Improvement District 22. Project
development will require the construction of water distribution facilities both onsite
and offsite. Financing of the facilities will be accomplished through the combined use
of Improvement District annexation fees, OWD capacity charges, meter fees and use of
a form of bond funding. The use of reclaimed water for irrigation of open space and
recreation areas as well as conservation measures, are proposed as part of the project
to ultimately reduce onsite water requirements. As indicated in the Planned Commu-
nity Regulations, the developer will construct a dual water system in each phase of
development, such that reclaimed water, when available and where its use is deter-
mined to be feasible and practical, can be used for irrigation of open space, parks and
common areas. Even though the project would incrementally increase regional water
consumption, implementation of the SPA Plan would represent an insignificant impact
to water availability.
Sewer Services.. Project development would require the construction of sew-
age facilities as outlined in the Wastewater Master Plan to provide adequate service to
1-4
the project site. Furthermore, negotiations between the developer and the City of
Chula Vista must be continued to ensure the timely provision of future sewer service.
The location and capacity of the .Long Canyon sewer has not yet been determined.
Negotiations are currently underway between the applicant and the developer of Bonita
Long Canyon Estates to settle this issue. A Supplemental EIR will be prepared for
EastLake I wi{ich will address potential constraints associated with offsite improve-
ments such as the Long Canyon sewer line. Development of EastLake I would incre-
· mentally reduce the capacity at the Point Loma Metro Sewer System. However, due to
the large area served by the system and the comparatively small increase g.e_nerated by
EastLake I, the project will not represent a significant effect to sewer services.
Educational Facilities: Students generated by project development would ere-
ate a need for additional school facilities within the project area~ Based on an Elemen-
tary School Draft Master Plan prepared for EastLake I, two elementary school facilities
are required. The site for one elementary school is proposed in the EastLake Hi]la
neighborhood; the second site will be addressed by the Supplemental SPA Plan for East-
Lake Greens neighborhood. Negotiations for a high school site at the south boundary of
EastLake I (offsite) are currently underway with Sweetwater Union High School Dis-
trict. The establishment of the high school would eliminate the potential incremental
effect of EastLake I and other developments on educational facilities. The provision of
the facilities outlined above would adequately serve students generated by EastLake I.
Assuming that the schools will be developed in the established time frames and in
accordance with need, the potential impacts to existing facilities would be reduced to a
level of insignificance.
Police Protection: An adverse though non-significant impact could occur to
police protection services due to an increased demand in a service area currently oper-
ating above the optimum response time. However, additional police staff is anticipated
to be added with funds generated by EastLake and other similar developments, and no
significant impacts would then occur.
Fire Protection: Development of EastLake I would constitute an adverse
impact initially, as existing facilities and personnel would be required to provide fire
protection services to a larger geographical area and population. This short-term
impact will ultimately be mitigated to a level of insignificance through the provision of
an equipped fire station, which is the responsibility of the developer.
Parks and Recreational Facilities: The proposed SPA Plan for EastLake I des-
ignates 284.4 acres of open space and 47.8 acres of parkland (32.9 acres of neighborhood
1-5
parkland and 14.9 acres of community parkland) to serve future project residents.
Three minor parks at approximately 0.5 acre each are proposed in the residential par-
cels of EastLake Shores. No adverse impacts related to parks would occur.
_Library Services: The proposed project would increase the demand for library
facilities and represents an adverse impact. This impact would be eliminated through
the provision of a temporary community-oriented library or bookmobile; and ultimately
with the development of EastLake I~, the construction of a separate library facility
financed by any combination of Mello-Roos, State library funds, grants and/or specially
earmarked City revenues, and acceptable to the Library Director o]~ the Chula Vista
Public Library.
.Energy Supply and Conservation: Adequate facilities will be available to
transport gas and electricity to the project site. Since the continued availability of
energy supplies cannot be assured, the SPA Plan has incorporated measures to reduce
natural gas and elaetricity consumption and conserve fuel. Thus, the development of
EastLake I would not adversely affect gas and electric facilities or the conservation of
energy resources.
Other Utilities and Services: Project development would incrementally
increase the use of and demand for other services including solid waste disposal, tele-
phone service, and hospital and ambulance services. No significant impact to these
services and facilities are anticipated.
yisual Resources: 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. The project site has been designated in the Chula
Vista General Plan for urban development, however~ and the SPA Plan does not present
a significant alteration to this commitment. To avoid potential visual impacts the
project has incorporated extensive design measures including designation of' open space
and parks, providing a landscape plan with visual buffer zones, landscape zones, a plant
matrix, a street tree plan, trails plan, signage plan, fencing pIan and a grading plan.
The plan also seeks to maintain the intent of the Scenic Highways Element. No signif-
icant visual impacts are expected to occur with complete implementation of the SPA
Plan.
_Geolog~f/Soils: Based on the preliminary geotechnical investigation of the
project site, it has been determined that development is feasible from a geotechnical
standpoint. There appear to be no significant geotechnical constraints onsite that
cannot be mitigated by proper planning, design and sound construction practices.
1-6
Mitigation measures as outlined in the investigation and provided in the SPA Plan will
reduce the potential impacts to a level of insignificance.
Hydrolok~y/Dralnage: The project site is located within five drainage basins
that are tributary to the Sweetwatar and Otay Rivers. Runoff volumes from the site
will increase slightly for each of these basins while total sediment loads would be
decreased after site development. In the Long Canyon basin, there are existing down-
stream flooding conditions for which improvements are planned. The proposed project
would avoid significant impacts to this basin by providing drainage improvements that
reduce the peak flows from the property. In the Telegraph Canyon basin, '~he minor
increase in surface runoff during a 50-year storm event would not have significant
impacts once the planned downstream improvements are in place. In meetings eon-
ducted with the City of Chula Vista and the applicant, downstream improvements have
been addressed. It was resolved that interim drainage facilities improvement on East-
Lake I would include a retention basin in the Commercial Center area, in order that
downstream flows would not increase beyond existing levels. Long-term drainage facil-
ities improvements would be financed under a fee district to be instituted by the City
of Chula Vista. The peak 50-year flows from the project site in the Proctor Valley
basin would decrease after site development and no significant impacts would result.
No adverse impacts would be associated with project development in the Salt Creek or
Poggi Canyon basins, tributary to the Otay River.
..Air Quality: Air quality emissions resulting from project implementation
would conform to the regional air quality management plan and the project would not
impede the attainment of air quality standards within the San Diego air basin. East-
Lake I includes several measures to reduce vehicle travel and the consumption of nat-
ural gas and electricity. The corresponding decrease in air quality emissions is consid-
ered a beneficial effect associated with project development. No adverse impacts are
anticipated concerning air quality.
Socioeconomic Factors: The proposed population for EastLake I SPA conforms
to population statistics projected for the EastLake Planned Community and would not
adversely affect socioeconomic factors. Proposed housing for the development meets
and exceeds the requirements of the Planned Community Regulations and General
Development Plan in providing low-and moderate-income housing and manufactured
housing. No adverse impacts to housing are anticipated. The slight increase in employ-
ment opportunity under the SPA Plan is considered a beneficial socioeconomic impact
and no mitigation measures are necessary.
1-7:
Fiscal Analysis: Based on the fiscal analysis prepared by Public Affairs Con~
sultants, the EastLake I SPA Plan is estimated to provide net revenues which would
result in a beneficial fiscal impact to the City of Chula Vista. No significant adverse
impacts are anticipated concerning the fiscal issue.
Noise., The noise analysis for EastLake I shows that nearly one-quarter to one-
third of the site development could be potentially impacted by roadway noise levels
above the City of Chu]a Vista's maximum residential limit of 65 dB CNEL. An even
greater area would potentially be impacted by roadway noise levels of 57 dB CNEL.
The area of potential noise impacts may be reduced considerably b'y the use of barriers
(berms and walls) and sensitive land use setbacks from major roadways. However, both
topography and the first "row" of development structures adjacent to a roadway will
have the potential to reduce noise impacts without specific barrier construction or
noise related property development setbacks. At the time of development in pOten~
tially noise impacted areas, site (and plan) specific noise studies must be performed to
assess the actual noise environment and provide any engineering designs to mitigate or
reduce potential adverse impacts. In addition to the use of barriers and setbacks for
reducing outdoor noise impacts, sensitive indoor Uses may be protected by the acous-
tical engineering design of building exterior walls, windows, doors, roofs and ventilation
systems.
The noise impacts from the initial construction phases of the proposed project
are expected to be minimal since the project is in a relatively unpopulated area with
the exception of the residential area to the southwest of the project area. Construction
of the major roadways and utilities services which will occur either with or without the
development of EastLake Phase I may be expected to cause Some impacts to existing
residents. Since the proposed project area would not be 'built out" for a number of
years, it can be expected that after initial stages of development, increasing numbers
of "new" residents could be exposed to noise impacts from interim and final stages of
construction. Therefore, the use of quiet equipment and good neighbor work sehedules
which would initially be important only in the area of existing residents, would in later
stages be necessary throughout the project region.
~: The biological resources concentrated in the northern
and northwestern portions of the project site have been placed in designated open
space, retaining the majority of existing native vegetation and the inclusive sensitive
species. As this habitat would be retained as natural, undisturbed open space, no signif-
icant biological resource impacts would occur.
~ Archaeological Resources: Archaeological site CA-SDi-7179, composed of
Con-
.vOUld ~ 5 loci, is located within the EastLake Business Center. A data recovery program has
Verse ~ been conducted for Locus B of the site to mitigate adverse effects of the SDG&E
Interconnection Project. The four remaining loci of the site would be impacted by
One- EastLake I development. Mitigation measures involve a two-stage investigative data
Vels recovery program to avoid potential significant impacts of project development.
,Yen Paleontological Resources: There is minimal potential for adverse impacts to
EL. significant paleontological resources on the project site. To ensure that significant and
ers potentially unique fossils and paleontological resources are not destroyed without exam-
~th ination and analysis, it is recommended that a qualified paleontologist monitor the
zill initial grading activities in the Sweetwater Formation as it appears in the drainage
wails. The mitigation measures presented would avoid potential adverse impacts to
or
subsurface resources.
Growth Inducement: The majority of the EastLake I project site is surrounded
:O
by land zoned for urban growth. The western and northwestern portions of the project
site would be contiguous with existing or approved development zoned for Iow- to
r
. medium-density residential use. The southern and eastern portions of the project site
would be eontiguons with land zoned as "future urban." Approval of the EastLake I SPA
I
would have some growth-inducing effects on the existing undeveloped land southwest
and northeast of the project boundaries; and may encourage surrounding planned devel-
opments to take place sooner than would otherwise occur without the project. Develop-
ment of EastLake I as an urban community in an area projected for future urban growth
does not present a significant adverse growth inducing impact and complies with the
intent of the City of Chula Vista growth management plan.
1-9
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
OISCLOSURE STA?E~NT
IAPPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF DISCLOSURE OF CERTAIN OWNERSHIP INTERESTS ON ALL APPLICATIONS
WHICH WILL REQUIRE DISCRETIONARY ACTION ON THE PART OF THE CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING
COMMISSION AND ALL OTHER OFFICIAL BOOIES.
The following information must be disclosed:
1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the application.
McKellar Development o~ La Jolla (619~ 587-1334
5151Shoreham Place, Suite 200
San Diego CA 92122
List the names of a11 persons having any ownership interest in the property involved.
Eastlake Development Corp. (619) 231-2858
701 "B" Street, Suite 730
San Diego CA 92101
2. If any person identified pursuant to (l) above is a corporation or partnership, list
the names of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation
or owning any partnership interest in the partnership.
Christopher S. McKellar
William F. Miller Jr.
James A. McKellar
3. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a non-profit organization or a
trust, list the names of any person serving as director of the non-profit
organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust.
4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City
staff, Boards, Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months?
Yes No × If yes, please indicate person{s)
(NOTE: Attach additional pages as necessary.)~ .
Signature of appllca~t./~fa~e
WPC 0701P Cheryl Legate
A-llO Print or type name of applicant
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of October 23, 1985 Page 1
2. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit PCC-86-8; request to establish
a San Diego County Department of Social Services
office at 33 Naples Street - Chuvila Properties
A. BACKGROUND
This item involves a request to establish a San Diego County Department of
Social Services (Welfare) office within an existing shopping center at 33
Naples Street in the C-N zone.
San Diego County, as the lead agency for environmental review on this
proposal, has issued a notice of exemption declaring that the project is
exempt from environmental review as a Class 1 exception under Section
15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines.
B. RECOMMENDATION
Based on findings contained in Section "E" of this report, adopt a motion
recommending that the City Council approve the request, PCC-86-8, to
establish a County Department of Social Services office at 33 Naples
Street subject to the following condition:
"The site plan and elevations for the project shall be subject to
review and approval by the Design Review Committee prior to the
issuance of building permits."
C. DISCUSSION
Adjacent Zoning and Land Use
North R-1 Single family residential
South R-1 Single family residential
East C-N Stores and service station
West R-1 Vacant {proposed condos)
Existin~ Site Characteristics
The site in question is the westerly 2.26 acres of a 4.13 acre
neighborhood shopping center located at the northwest corner of Naples
Street and Hilltop Drive. The center consists of a contiguous series of
structures located along the northerly portion of the property, with a
service station at the corner of Naples and Hilltop. The Social Services
Office would be located in a vacant supermarket building and adjoining
space currently occupied by a health studio. Combined, these spaces total
31,700 sq. ft. of floor area, or 70% of the center's total floor area of
41,§00 sq. ft. The remainder of the 2.26 acres consists of an unstriped,
asphalt-paved parking area.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of October 23, 1985 Page 2
Proposed Use
The proposal is to use the site as the South Bay Regional Office of the
County Social Services Department. The structures would be remodeled on
both the interior and exterior, and the parking area would be striped for
182 spaces and upgraded with landscaping. The proposal also includes
leasing 30 additional parking spaces located within the parking area
fronting the adjoining shops to the east. The balance of the stores and
shops within the center would remain, as would the service station on the
corner.
D. ANALYSIS
Operations
The Social Services Office would be one of seven regional facilities
distributed throughout the County. This represents a relocation from the
existing South Bay Regional office in San Ysidro in order to obtain larger
accommodations and to be more centrally located with respect to their
South Bay service area.
The office would administer income, maintenance programs, including Aid to
Families with Dependent Children {AFDC), food stamps, and Medi-Cal
assistance. The hours of operation are from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, and the facility would employ 175 people. The
staff would consist entirely of office personnel, there would be no case
workers operating out of the facility.
According to a representative from the Department of Social Services,
during normal operations, the office would serve an average of lO0 clients
per day, with approximately 30 clients at the facility at any one time.
During peak periods, which generally occur during the first five work days
of each month and during the summer months, the office would serve from
150-200 clients per day, with perhaps 75 clients at the facility at any
one time. The office would have at least one and sometimes two security
officers on-site during work hours.
Remodeling and Site Plan
The interior of the structures would be entirely gutted and replaced with
offices and client service areas. The front elevations of the buildings,
which concurrently consists of glass window panels, would be replaced with
a combination of plaster, plywood siding, glass, and split face concrete
block. The parking area, which is currently unstriped, and devoid of
landscaping, would be striped for 182 spaces and planting areas and the
wells would be interspersed throughout the lot. A block wall topped with
chain link fencing would replace the existing chain link fencing on the
westerly property line, and a monument sign would be erected adjacent to
the main entrance to the site on Naples Street.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of October 23, 1985 Page 3
Parking and Traffic
As stated above, the 31,?00 sq. ft. of floor area in question would be
served by a total of 212 parking spaces--182 on-site and 30 leased from
the adjoining parking area. This works out to a parking ratio of one
space for every 150 sq. ft. of floor area, or twice the number of spaces
required for offices under the Code, which requires one space for every
300 sq. ft. of floor area. The remaining 9,800 sq. ft. of retail/service
floor area in the center would be served by 49 parking spaces, or a ratio
of one space for every 200 sq. ft. of floor area, which would also meet
the Code standard for general retail uses.
In terms of the specific parking situation at social services facilities,
the Social Services Department representative has stated that the majority
of clients arrive by either public transportation or are dropped off by
friends or relatives. Staff has visited the present office in San Ysidro,
which was 175 employees and serves the same clientele with a total of 150
parking spaces and which also shares a shopping center location with
retail stores and a service station. We found no parking problems at the
San Ysidro office.
Since the Naples Street office would ultimately be projected to
accommodate 212 employees, the Social Services Department has also
included within their lease a cancellation clause which requires the
property owner to develop within 3-5 years a plan to provide no less than
250 parking spaces for their exclusive use.
In terms of traffic, using the peak-day periods noted above, the social
services office would generate approximately 750 average daily trips (175
employees plus 200 clients multiplied by a factor of 2). In comparison,
the "ADT" for neighborhood shopping centers is calculated on the basis of
120 trips per 1,O00 sq. ft. of floor area, which translates into 3,804 ADT
for the 31,700 sq. ft. of floor area in question {grocery stores are
calculated on the basis of 500 trips per 1,O00 sq. ft. of floor area).
Conclusion
The use of the subject site for office use appears entirely supportable.
The site has apparently not been found to b desirable by retail commercial
users, and the location will allow the Social Services Department to
better serve the public. The structures and site will be substantially
upgraded from their present condition and appearance, and parking
standards will be maintained. Furthermore, the associated impacts of
traffic and noise should be markedly less.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of October 23, 1985 Page 4
E. FINDINGS
1. That the proposed use at the location is necessary or desirable to
provide a service or facility which will contribute to the general
well being of the neighborhood or the community.
This location will provide the Department of Social Services a larger
and more centrally located facility from which to meet their
important public responsibilities.
2. That such use will not under the circumstances of the particular
case, be detrimental to th~ health, safety or ~eneral welfare of
persons residing or working in the vicinity or injurious to property
or improvements in the vicinity.
The proposed use will result in the upgrading of the condition and
appearance of the site and will generate less traffic and noise than
an alternate retail commercial use.
3. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and
conditions specified in the Code for such use.
The proposed use complies with the parking standards of the Municipal
Code.
4. That the granting of this conditional use permit will not adversely
affect the General Plan of the City or the adopted plan of any
government agency.
The General Plan contemplates the establishment of public uses at
appropriate locations within any zoning district.
WPC 2241P/OOlSZ
PROJECT AREA
ST, E A ST
IPcc-e6-e
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT -'
IAPPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF DISCLOSURE OF CERTAIN OWNERSHIP INTERESTS ON ALL APPLICATIONS
WHICH WILL REQUIRE DISCRETIONARY ACTION ON THE PART OF THE CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING
COMMISSION AND ALL OTHER OFFICIAL BODIES.
The following information must be disclosed: ~
1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the application.
List the names of all persons having any ownership interest in the property involved.
2. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list
the names of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation
or owning any partnership interest in the partnership.
3. If any person identified pursuant to {1) above is a non-profit organization or a
trust, list the names of any person serving as director of the non-profit
organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust.
4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City
staff, Boards, Co~issions, Co~ittees and Council within the past twelve months?
Yes No ~ If yes, please indicate person{s)
Person is defined as: "Any igdividual, firm, ~opartnership, joint venture, association,
~ club, fraternal organization, corporation, estate, ~rus~, receiver, syndicate,
th~s and any other county, city and county, city, municipality, d~strict or other
political subdivision, or any other group or combination acting as a unit."
(NOTE: Attach additional pages as necessary.)~ ~ ,
Signature of applicant/date
WPC 0701P ~,~A~ ~,
A-110 Print or type name of applicant
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of October 23, 1985 Page 1
3. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit PCC-86-7; request to construct
an 18-unit condominium project at J~) "K" street
Mary Kaye
A. BACKGROUND
1. The applicant is requesting permission to construct an 18-unit
condominium project on 0.47 acres located at 351 "K" Street in the
C-C Central Commercial zone.
2. An Initial Study, IS-86-12, of possible adverse environmental impacts
of the project was conducted by the Environmental Review Coordinator
on October lO, 1985. The Environmental Review Coordinator concluded
that there would be no significant environmental effects and
recommended that the Negative Declaration be adopted.
B. RECOMMENDATION
1. Find that this project will have no significant environmental impacts
and adopt the Negative Declaration issued on IS-86-12.
2. Based on findings contained in Section "E" of this report, adopt a
motion to approve the request, PCC-86-7, to construct a condominium project at
351 "K" Street in the C-C zone. subject to the following conditions:
a. The density of the project shall conform to the standards of the
R-3 zone district.
b. The project shall be subject to site plan and architectural
review by the Planning Department in order to ensure
coordination with the remainder of the development.
c. All lots constituent to the total 2.15 acre development shall be
consolidated prior to the issuance of any building permits for
the project.
d. The developer shall pay Traffic Signal Fees in the amount of
$1,152.00 prior to the approval of the Final Map.
e. The developer shall install one 250-watt HPSV street light at
the location determined by the City's Traffic Section.
f. The developer shall dedicate a two foot wide strip of land along
"K" Street frontage for future street widening.
9. The developer shall grant to the City a 5.5 foot wide Tree
Planting and Maintenance Easement along the frontage of "K"
Street.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of October 23, 1985 Page 2
C. DISCUSSION
Adjacent Zoning and Land Use
North C-C Vacant (proposed condos)
South R-3 Apartments
East C-C Vacant {proposed condos)
West C-O Vacant (proposed condos)
Existing Site Characteristics
The subject property is a rectangular site of 0.47 acres with 170 feet of
frontage on "K" Street and a depth of 120 feet. The site presently
contains a vacant welding shop building and open storage yard.
Prior Conditional Use Permit
In February 1984, the Planning Commission approved a conditional use
permit (PCC-84-6) for a 51-unit condominium project on 1.68 acres of C-C
and C-O zoned property surrounding the site in question. This project was
submitted by the same applicant and involves three 3-story structures
containing all two-bedroom units, a swimming pool and laundry/storage
structure in the central portion of the property, and parking for 93 cars
on the site. The land is now being prepared for the construction of the
project.
Proposed Use
The proposed project would become an addition to the 51-unit project
previously approved. It would consist of one 3-story structure containing
18 two-bedroom units, a tot-lot/recreation building/open space area which
would serve the entire project, and additional parking which would
increase the project total to 126 spaces.
D. ANALYSIS
The primary issue of whether or not multiple family residential land use
is appropriate at this location was resolved at the time of the previous
request. It was found that residential land uses bounded the project on
all sides and that the size and configuration of the site was adequate to
provide a suitable residential living environment. The same factors
(prevalent in the previous C.U.P.) would argue for approval of multiple
family development on the site in question.
Furthermore, the addition of the tot-lot/recreation building/open space
area component of this proposal to the total development will substantial
enhance the liveability of the project as a whole. The total project also
meets the condominium requirements relating to common and private open
space, parking and private storage.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of October 23, 1985 Page 3
The issue which cannot be resolved through the conditional use permit
process is the applicant's request for an increase in density beyond that
provided for under the R-3 standards which are applied to multiple family
developments within the C-C zone. Under the R-3 density standards, the
combined properties could accommodate 65 dwelling units, while the
applicant is proposing 69 units--the 51 units previously approved plus the
18 units for the present request.
The density issue is addressed in the following agenda item--a variance
request from the R-3 density standards. For the purposes of this
application, we have recommended that multiple family development of the
site be approved on the basis that the density conform to the standards of
the R-3 zone. This would result in a recommendation of approval for 14
dwelling units on the 0.47 acre site in question.
On March l, 1984, the Design Review Committee (as a condition of approval
on the prior CUP) approved the site plan and elevations for the 51-unit
project (DRC-84-10). Since the present proposal is of the same design and
coordinates well in te~ms of site planning, we have recommended that any
details to be resolved regarding these aspects of the project be subject
to staff review and approval.
The Engineering Department has submitted several requirements which have
been included as recommended conditions of approval.
E. FINDINGS
1. That the proposed use at the location is necessary or desirable to
provide a service or facility which will contribute to the general
well being of the neighborhood or the community.
The property in question is surrounded by residential development.
Commercial development of the site would adversely affect these
adjoining residential areas.
2. That such use will not under the circumstances of the particular
case, be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of
persons residing or working in the vicinity or injurious to property
or improvements in the vicinity.
Multiple family development of the site is in keeping with adjacent
uses. The common area components of the project will actually
enhance the residential environment of the surrounding development of
which it will become a part.
3. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and
conditions specified in the Code for such use.
The project will be required to comply with all City codes and
regulations prior to the issuance of building permits, includin§ site
plan and architectural review by the Planning Department.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of October 23, 1985 Page 4
4. That the granting of this conditional use permit will not adversely
affect the General Plan of the City or the adopted plan of any
government agency.
The General Plan as implemented by the Zoning Ordinance allows for
such residential developments in appropriate commercial districts and
locations. The site in question has been found to offer a suitable
residential living environmental compatible with surrounding
residential uses.
WPC 2234P/OO15Z
negative declaration
PROJECT NAME: Theoka Village II
PROJECT LOCATION: 341 "K" Street
PROJECT APPLICANT: Mary Kaye, 4175 The Hill Road, Bonita, CA 92002
CASE NO: IS-86-12 DATE: October 10, 1985
A. Project Setting
The project site consists of a 120' x 170' (20,400 sq. ft.) lot located at
341 "K" Street. A welding supply warehouse is currently located on the
project site. The adjacent land uses consist of vacant property (approved
for multiple-family development) to the north, east and west. Located to
the south is a multiple-family complex across "K" Street.
The project site is void of any significant vegetation or wildlife and
there are no significant natural or manmade resources present. No known
geologic hazards have been identified in the project vicinity.
B. Project Description
The proposed project consists of 18 condominium units (all two-bedroom)
located in one three-story structure and a recreation building. In
addition, the proposed project contains 11 on-site parking spaces with the
remaining required parking to be located on the adjacent lot, which will
contain a previously approved, but not built, 51-unit condominium
development.
C. Compatibility with Zoning and Plans
The project site is currently zoned C-C (Central Commercial). The project
is proposed to be combined with the adjacent 51-unit condominium project
and, therefore, requires a Conditional Use Permit for multiple family
development in a commercial zone. The allowable density for the combined
project amounts to a total of 65 units (30 d.u./ac.) based on the R-3
zoning standards of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. In addition to a
Conditional Use Permit the applicant is requesting approval of a variance
to permit the proposed 18 units totaling a combined 69 units (32
d.u./ac.). The proposed density conforms to the General Plan and
associated elements.
D. Identification of Environmental Effects
1. Soils
A soils report prepared by Southern California Soil Testing,
Incorporated in 1981 was submitted to staff for the adjacent 51-unit
project site. As a standard development requirement, the soils
city of chula vista planning department ~
environmental review section
report shall be expanded to include the proposed project site.
Recommendations from the expanded report shall be incorporated into
the project to reduce impacts to a level of insignificance.
2. Schools
An additional 4 elementary school children and a total of 9 junior
and senior high school students will be generated by the 18-unit
project and will further tax an existing condition of overcrowding
within local schools. The developer shall comply with School
District requirements to assure that adequate classroom space will be
available.
3. Parks
This project will increase the need for park facilities in this
area. Standard development requirements dictate that the applicant
will be required to pay in-lieu fees for the acquisition and
development of future parkland.
E. Findings of Insignificant Impact
1. The project site is void of any significant natural or manmade
resources. Potentially adverse soil conditions will be addressed by
an expanded soils report required through standard development
requirements.
2. The residential proposal is consistent with the General Plan and
associated elements although the approval of a zone variance by the
Planning Commission will be necessary to construct the requested
number of units.
3. No impacts are anticipated to occur which could interact to create a
substantial cumulative effect on the environment.
4. The project will result in limited additional vehicle traffic and no
significant increase in related emissions or noise. No significant
adverse impacts on human beings are anticipated with project
implementation.
F. Consultation
1. Individuals and Organizations
City of Chula Vista: Mando Liuag, Associate Planner
Roger Daoust, Senior Civil Engineer
Duane Bazzel, Assistant Planner
Gene Grady, Building and Housing Department
Carol Gove, Fire Marshal
Chuck Glass, Traffic Engineer
Applicant's Agent: Lawrence Rueden, Designer
2. Documents
IS-80-54, Snug Harbor Condominiums
IS-84-9, Snug Haven
Soils Report (Southern California Soil Testing, Inc. 1981)
The Initial Study application and evaluation forms documenting the findings of
no significant impact are on file and available for public review at the Chula
Vista Planning Department, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 92010.
ENVIRONM~OORDINATOR WPC 2240P
EN 6 (Rev. 5/85)
city of chula vista planning department
environmental review section
u~
Ii ~1~ II
~3 I ~ ~ IFAST
~ I FOOD
m I I REST.
I
CITY OF CHULA-VISTA
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
APPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF DISCLOSURE OF CERTAIN OWNERSHIP INTERESTS ON ALL APPLICATIONS
WHICH WILL REQUIRE DISCRETIONARY ACTION ON THE PART OF THE CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING
COMMISSION AND ALL OTHER OFFICIAL BODIES.
The following information must be disclosed:
1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the application.
List the names of all persons having any ownership interest in the property involved.
2. If any person identified pursuant to (1)' above is a corporation or partnership, list
the names of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation
or owning any partnership interest in the partnership.'
3. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a non-profit organization or a
trust, list the names of any person serving as director of the non-profit
organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust.
' MIA
4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City
staff, Boards, Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months?
Yes No ~ If yes, please indicate person(s) ~y/~
IPerson is defined as: "Any individual, firm, copartnership, joint venture, association, I
~ club, fraternal organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate,
this and any other county, city and county, city, municipality, district or other
political subdivision, or any other group or combination acting as a unit."
(~OTE: Attach additional pages as necessary.]~ /~
Signature ~7~pplicant(~at~
WPC O701P ~.¥ ~-.4~y~_..
A-110 Print or type name of applicant
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of October 23, 1985 Page 1
4. PUBLIC HEARING: Variance ZAV-86-8; request to increase the allowable
density from 14 units to 18 units at 341 "K" Street -
Mary Kaye
A. BACKGROUND
1. This item involves a request to increase the density from 14 dwelling
units to 18 dwelling units in order to construct a condominium
project at 341 "K" Street in the C-C Central Commercial zone. A
conditional use permit application to authorize multiple family
residential use on the commercial site in question is the preceding
item on the agenda (PCC-86-7).
2. The Negative Declaration issued on the project (IS-86-12) is to be
considered by the Commission in conjunction with the preceding
conditional use permit application.
B. RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a motion to deny ZAV-86-8.
C. DISCUSSION
Adjacent zoning and land use.
North C-C Vacant (proposed condos)
South R-3 Apartments
East C-C Vacant (proposed condos)
West C-O Vacant (proposed condos)
Existing site characteristics.
The subject property is a rectangular site of 0.47 acres with 170 feet of
frontage on "K" Street and a depth of 120 feet. The site presently
contains a vacant welding shop building and open storage yard. The
property is surrounded on three sides by 1.68 acres of land approved for a
51-unit condominium development, of which the 18-unit project in question
would become a component.
Proposed request.
The request is to allow the 0.47 acre site to accommodate 18 two-bedroom
dwelling units rather than the maximum 14 two-bedroom units allowed under
the R-3 zone density standards which are applied to multiple family
developments in the C-C zone. The units would be contained in one 3-story
structure, which would become an addition to the 51-unit project
previously approved. The site would also have a tot-lot, recreation
building and open space area which would serve the entire project and
additional parking which would increase the project total to 126 spaces.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of October 23, 1985 Page 2
D. ANALYSIS
The C-C Central Commercial zone provides for the development of multiple
family residential uses at appropriate locations subject to the
development standards of the R-3 zone. The R-3 density standards provide
for one 2-bedroom unit for every 1,430 sq. ft. of land area and is the
highest allowable density of any residential zone within the City with the
exception of the R-3-H zone {which is tailored to "high rise" development,
and provides that no principal building shall be less than 46 feet or five
stories in height).
Based upon the "one 2-bedroom unit for every 1,430 sq. ft. of land area"
standard, the 0.47 acres in question can accommodate 14 units.
Furthermore, since the surrounding 1.68 acre 51-unit proposal was approved
at the maximum R-3 density, there is no benefit to the applicant in
allowing the density to be calculated on a combined project basis. In
either case, the applicant's proposal exceeds the maximum density allowed
by the R-3 zone by four dwelling units.
In support of the application, the applicant has submitted a proposed set
of findings to meet the prerequisites for granting a variance set forth in
Section 19.14.190 of the Municipal Code {see applicant's statement
attached hereto). These proposed findings suggest that the density
variance should be granted because the project would represent an
improvement to the site and that it may not be financially feasible to
develop the project without the additional units.
Although it is theoretically legal to do so, our most basic concern with
this application is the use of the variance procedure to adjust
residential density. The City has a wide range of multiple family zones
distinguished primarily on the basis of density, and thus the only
appropriate mechanism for adjusting density is a rezoning or to fully
abide by the ordinance provisions. Secondly, the issue of multiple family
density from an applicant's perspective is generally one which revolves
around the questions of financial feasibility and potential
profits--neither of which can be the basis for granting a variance.
In regard to the second point, prerequisite, 19.14.190A reads in full as
follows:
19.14.190 Variance-Prerequisites for granting.
The zoning administrator shall grant a variance only when the
following facts are found:
A. That a hardship peculiar to the property and not created by any
act of owner exists. Said hardship may include practical
difficulties in developing the property for the needs of the
owner consistent with the regulations of the zone; but in this
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of October 23, 1985 Page 3
context, personal, family, or financial difficulties, loss of
prospective profits, and nei~hborin~ violations are not
hardships justifying a variance. Further a previous variance
can never have set a precedent, for each use must be considered
only on its individual merits. (emphasis added.)
Clearly the subject request cannot meet the test of this prerequisite as
evidenced by the applicant's own proposed statement of findings. The
statements regarding redeveloping the site versus new development, and
eliminating non-conforming uses merely refer to the financial aspects of
the development, while the statements regarding zoning imply some
perceived disadvantage when the zoning of this property is compared to
adjacent properties--although the site is zoned commercially and can al so
accommodate high density multiple family upon the approval of a
conditional use permit.
As a result of these factors, we find no hardship peculiar to the property
nor any disadvantage in comparison with the property rights possessed by
other properties in the same zoning district and in the same vicinity; and
that the granting of a density variance to exceed the maximum density
permitted by the R-3 zone would represent a special privilege not enjoyed
by neighboring properties Isee 19.14.190B). The application does comply
with two of the four variance tests (Neighborhood Compatibility and
General Plan compliance) but must meet all four tests.
WPC 2236P/O426P
Statement with respect to Chula Vista Municipal Code 19.14.190 entitled "Variance -
Prerequisites for granting".
The zoning adminsitrator shall grant a variance only when the following facts
are found:
A) That a hardship peculiar to the property and not created by any act of the
owner exists; (Said hardship may include practical difficulties in developing
the property for the needs of the owner consistent with the regulations of the
zone; )
The subject property is composed of a number of parcels zoned from R-3 through
C-C, The property was previously occupied by two single family dwellings; a moving
and storage company with two warehouses and an open yard used for the storage of
empty furniture boxes, bric-a-brac plus vehicle storage and maintenance; and a
welding and chemical supply firm. The industrial (moving/storage - welding/chemical)
occupancies were grandfathered uses when the zoning regulations of the City of Chula
Vista were promulgated.
Therefore, the subject project is a redevelopment, as opposed to a development,
project and the fact of redevelopment plus the elimination of non-conforming occup-
ancies and the effective down-zoning of the bulk of the subject property constitutes
sufficient hardship upon the redeveloper/applicant to sustain the granting of the
requested variance. As no two properties are alike, this hardship is therefore
peculiar to the property. The occupancies and zoning were not created by any act
of the present owner.
8) That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substan-
tial property rights possessed by other properties in the same zoning district and
in the same vicinity, and that a variance, if granted, would not constitute a special
privilege of the recipient not enjoyed by his/her neighbors;
The right to develop or redevelop property to it's highest and best use is a
substantial property right which is possessed by other properties in the same zoning
district(s) in the same vicinity. The requested variance is necessary in order for
the applicant to preserve and enjoy that right. Without the variance, it is unlikely
that the project can be successfully redeveloped in it's entirety.
The occupancies to the east, southeast and due south are commergial and industrlal
occupancies. The occupancy to the west is commercial office. These properties are
zoned and developed beyond the subject property and are not comparable with respect
to privilege. The mulit-family uses to the southwest, north and northeast are devel-
oped to their highest and best use. The granting of the variance to allow the devel-
opment of the entire project to it's highest and best use would not constitute a
special privilege as respects those neighbors.
C) That the authorizing of such variance will not be of substantial detriment to
adjacent property, and will not materially impair the purposes of this chapter or the
public interest;
The variance will allow the development of a quality multi-family residential
project and the redevelopment of the subject property, thereby removing non-conforming
occupancies. Accordingly, the project will certainly not be detrimental to, and, in
fact will enhance, the adjacent properties as well as the overall neighborhood area.
D) That the authorizing oF such variance will not adversely affect the general plan
of the city or the adopted plan of any governmental agency.
The project is in conformance with the general plan of the city.