The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPlanning Comm Reports/1987/09/23 AGENDA City Planning Commission Chula Vista, California Wednesday, September 23, 1987 - 7:00 p.m City Council Chamber~ PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - SILENT PRAYER INTRODUCTORY REMARKS APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Meeting of August 12, 1987 Meeting of August 26, 1987 (approved at Workshop Meeting Oral Communications of September 16, 1987) Opportunity for members of the public t~ speak to the Planning Commission on any subject matter within the Commission's jurisdiction but not an item on today's agenda. Each speaker's presentation may not exceed 5 minutes. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Variance ZAV-87-35M: Request to reduce required parking and to encroach into the required rear yard setback at 1181 Broadway - Creative Blends 2. Modification to ~QA Findings: Bonita Long Canyon Estates EIR-79-2A 3. PUBLIC HEARING: Variance ZAV-87-25M: Consideration of an appeal of the City Zoning Administrator decision disapproving a non-conforming satellite dish at 1122 First Avenue - David Vega 4. PUBLIC HEARING: Major Use Permit PCC-87-39M: Request to maintain an existing R.V. storage lot now operating illegally at 1383 Broadway - Broadway Equities Ltd. (Continued) 5. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit PCC-87-46: Request to allow 24-hour operation of a proposed convenience store located at the southeast corner of East rienstra Street and Hilltop Drive - Circle K Markets 6. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use PErmit PCC-88-2: Request to establish service station and mini-mart located on the south side of Otay Valley Road directly west of the 1-805 freeway - Michael Ferdig and Patrick Palmer AGENDA September 23, 198~ 7. PUBLIC HEARING: PCZ-88-D: Consideration to rezone 0.10 acres located at 145 Willow Street from A-D to C-C-D Creaser Price Insurance Company 8. PUBLIC HEARING: (a) Rezone PCZ-88-B (b) PCS-87-12 (c) P-88-1: Consideration of a change in land use, a tentative subdivision map and a precise plan for Fieldstone Classics located on the south side of Lakeshore Drive, east of Clearbrook Drive in the EastLake Planned Community Fieldstone Company DIRECTOR"S REPORT COMMISSION COMMENTS ADJOURNMENT AT to the Regular Business Meeting of October 14, 1987 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers City Planning Commission Agenda Items for meeting of September 23, 1987 Page 1 1. Zoning Variance ZAV-87-35M: Request to reduce reuired parking and to encroach into the required rear yard setback at 1181 Broadway - Creative Blends See attached memo. September 18, 1987 TO: Chairman, Members Planning Commission Committee FROM: Julie Schilling, Assistant Planner,/~ RE: ZAV-87-35M, Creative Blends, Inc. The applicant, Creative Blends had filed an application for a Zoning Variance to encroach into the required rear yard setback and reduce required parking in order to construct a commercial center. The application has now been withdrawn, as the property has fallen out of escrow and been sold to another party. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of September 23, 1987 Page 1 2~ Modification to CEQA Findings: Bonita Long Canyon Estates EIR-79-2-A A. Background In April of 1981, the City adopted CEQA findings for the Bonita Long Canyon project. The traffic study on the project assumed that East "H" Street would not be extended from 1-805 to Otay Lakes Road. The applicant has requested consideration of the fact that East "H" Street has been extended from 1-805 to the project. B. Recommendation Adopt the attached revisions to the CEQA findings (EIR-79-2-A) on the Bonita Long Canyon Equestrian Estates project. C. Analysis Since the preparation of the environmental documents for this project, East "H" Street has been extended in a two to four lane configuration to serve this and other projects and is now being widened to six lanes from Terra Nova to Otay Lakes Road. The CEQA findings for the project were based on the old traffic study without this link. Under the previous assumptions many of the trips generated by the project were assigned northerly along Corral Canyon Road and Central Avenue to Bonita Road. This resulted in mitigation measures designed to increase the capacity of these roads. The project proponent has submitted a request, supported with a traffic report, to re-evaluate the level of improvements required on Central Avenue to serve this project. The Engineering Department has reviewed the study and the request and concurs that conditions of approval regarding units of development should be modified to reflect current requirements to serve this development. The proponent is being required to widen Central Avenue to provide 36' of pavement, improve the intersection of Bonita Road and Central Avenue and install a signal at Central Avenue and Carrol Canyon Road. In addition, to meet the intent of Council and provide adequate traffic facilities for the Bonita Long Canyon Project, the capacity of Central Avenue should not be exceeded; therefore, it is proposed that the Development Agreement be amended to state that building permits will not be issued if the ADT on Central Avenue exceeds 8,000 or the facility be widened to four lanes. WPC 4331P MODIFICATION TO BONITA LONG CANYON EQUESTRIAN ESTATES EIR-79-2(A) CEQA FINDINGS Section C.lO. of the "CEQA Findings" for Bonita Long Canyon Equestrian Estates, EIR-79-2(A) is modified as follows: 10. Traffic The project could have a significant impact on street or intersection capacities in the vicinity of the project. The following mitigation measure, tied to each phase of the project, are necessary to avoid any significant impact. Phase I East "H" Street shall be extended from Rutgers westerly to Otay Lakes Road. Otay Lakes Road shall be widened to four travel lanes between Bonita Road and Telegraph Canyon Road. Via Hacienda and Canyon Drive shall be extended to Otay Lakes Road. Phase III ~l~v/dddd~/~/~d~yr/dv/~/~/~/j~/~/d~F/f~dd~qi~d~/~l A 36' roadway and a 5' sidewalk on the south side shall be provided on Central Avenue from Bonita Road to Corral Canyon. The intersection of Bonita Road and Central Avenue shall be widened to ~rovide dual left-turn lanes for westbound Central Avenue and create or ~mprove separate right-turn lanes for each of the other three approaches to the intersection. The intersection of Central Avenue and Corral Canyon Road shall be signalized. A condition will be added to the Development Agreement that when the traffic on Central Avenue between Corral Canyon Road and Belle Brae Road reaches 8,000 Average Daily Trips (ADT), building pe~its will not be issued until Central Avenue is widened to four lanes to the satisfaction of the City of Chula Vista Director of Public Works and the County Department of Public Works. Finding Subject to the inclusion of the above noted mitigation measures in the project or their implementation prior to an appropriate phase of the project, the project will not have a significant traffic impact on street service levels. ~/ ~ /~Yd~ / ~J~/ ~ /E~ %/ /'~V / ~ ~ Y~ ~/ J~ / ~%~/ ~ / ) ~ ~) / ~ /~%~Y WPC 4325P August 4, 1987 ~File: To: Tom Harron, City Attorney From: Tom Garibay, Deputy Director of Public Works/Engineering Subject: Bonita Long Canyon Units 4-7, Development Agreement The City of Chula Vista's letter of June 26, 1987 to John Heck, Attorney at Law, regarding Bonita Long Canyon should be revised as follows: (1) Paragraph 5 should be deleted. (2) A new condition should be added to require the improvement of Central Avenue. It should read that the recommendations contained in the June 23, 1987 letter to Ken Baumgartner from Kenneth M. Bankston (attached) regarding improvements on Central Avenue should be, complied with, specifically the following improvements shall be secured with Unit #4 and commence construction within one year of the recordation of the final map: (a) A 36' roadway and a 5' sidewalk on the south side shall be provided on Central Avenue from Bonita Road to Corral Canyon. {b) The intersection of Bonita Road and Central Avenue shall be widened to provide dual left-turn lanes for west-bound Central Avenue and create or improve separate right-turn lanes for each of the other three approaches to the intersection. (c) The intersection of Central Avenue and Corral Canyon Road shall be signalized. 3. There should be a condition added to the Development Agreement that when the traffic on Central Avenue between Corral Canyon Road & Belle Brae Road reaches 8,000 Average Daily Trips {ADT), building permits will not be issued until Central Avenue is widened to four lanes to the satisfaction of the City of Chuta Vista Director of Public Works and the County Department of Public Works. TG:av/ljr xc: Ed Elliott, McMillin Development Co. Dave Solomon, County of San Diego (B28:UNITS4-7.AGR) Mr. Douglas Reid Environmental Review Coordinator City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 92010 SUBJECT: Modification of-CEQA Findings, EIR - 79-2-A Bonita Long Canyon Estates - Page 8, Para. 10 Traffic Phase III City Council Certification of EIR - 79-2-A, Resolution #10468 Dear Mr. Reid: The conditions as stated in the referenced CEQA Findings have been reviewed for modification. The County of San Diego and the City of Chula Vista Engineering Department have now prepared new recommendations for Central Avenue as shown in the attached memo from Mr. Garibay to Mr. Harron for the Bonita Long Canyon Units 4-7 Development Agreement. It is requested that procedures be initiated to modify the Certified CEQA Findings to conform to the new recommendations established by engineering. The new recommendations will replace the present Phase 3 requirements by reducing the four lane configuration through mitigating measures as shown in Mr. Garibay's August 4th memo under items 2 (a), (b) and (c). Additional mitigating measures are imposed by paragraph 3 of Mr. Garibay's memo. We have reviewed your suggestion relating to the preparation of an Addendum to the above referenced EIR. We concur that the incorporation of the new traffic study, as additional information, is necessary for the modifiation of the findings. If we may be of further assistance, please contact me at 477-4117. Yours truly, Ed Elliott Senior Vice President Development Engineering cc. Ken Baumgartner ~- 2727 Hoover Avenue National City, California 92050-9973 (619) 477-4117 Kenneth M. Bankston Associates 2820 Derby Street, Berkeley, CA 94705 Telephone: (415) 843-9746 June 23, 1987 Mr. Kenneth Baumgartner Acquisition and Development Planning Mc Millin Development, Inc. 2727 Hoover Avenue National City, CA 92050 Subject: Bonita Long Canyon/ Central Avenue Dear Mr. Baumgartner, As requested, KMBA ha~ analyzed the Central Avenue corridor between Bonita Road and Corral Canyon Road with consideration given to near term traffic demands as well as existing conditions related to vehicle and pedestrian operations and safety. Backqround Central Avenue between Bonita Road and just west of Dawsonia Street is presently built out to a 64 foot curb to curb width. With some exceptions, Central Avenue is a very substandard 30 foot wide street between Dawsonia Street and Corral Canyon Road. The exceptions are that one half of the planned 64 foot section is built over short sections. See Attachment 1 ( map of Central Avenue ). An even worse condition exists at the culvert at Station 12+70 (see Attachment 1) where the culvert headwalls narrow the roadway width to 28 feet. The general narrowness of the roadway prohibits on-street parking. No sidewalks exist along Central Avenue. between Dawsonia Street and Corral Canyon Road even though there is an elementary school north of Central Avenue at Belle Bonnie Brae. A crosswalk is in place at Belle Bonnie Brae. Existing and projected traffic in this corridor is the same at 6,600 ADT. With the proposed opening of Corral Canyon Road between Central Avenue and East "H" Street, it is expected that aproximately 1680 ADT will be added to Central Avenue in this corridor but that about the same amount of traffic would shift from this corridor to East "H" Street via Corral Canyon Road. The intersections at either end of the corridor are in need of improvements now. The intersection of Bonita Road and Central Avenue is signalized but with existing traffic, operates at Level of Service (LOS) "E" in the AM Peak Hour and "D" in the PM Peak Hour. See Attachments 2 and 3. ~ Transportation Planning and Traffic Engineering Consultants Page Two Mr. Baumgartner June 23, 1987 The intersection of Central Avenue and Corral Canyon Road is unsignalized with a poor sight distance condition for northbound Corral Canyon Road drivers versus westbound Central Avenue drivers. Traffic counts used in the LOS analysis were obtained from the firm of JHK Associates, consultants who performed the Sweetwater Valley Traffic Study for the City of Chula Vista. While it is apparent that the County of San Diego plans to achieve, over time, a 64 foot width for Central Avenue in this corridor, the socia~ and economic costs of continuing with this plan will be great. To complete the planned widening, 10 to 12 existing homes would have to be removed, most of which would involve condemnation proceedings and relocation of residents. This action would most likely trigger the need for an Enviornmental Impact Report. In addition, a substantial flood control problem exists in the corridor which will affect the overall feasibility of widening to the 64 foot width given other physical constraints. With the above problemens and constraints in mind the following interim improvements are recommended: 1. Keeping the existing AC Dike in place along the north edge of Central Avenue, create by widening southward, a 36 foot wide roadway and a 5 foot sidewalk on the south edge. See Attachment 1. 2. At the intersection of Bonita Road and Central Avenue perform minor widening to provide dual left turns for westbound Central and create or improve separate right turn lanes at each of the other three approaches to the intersection. These changes will improve LOS to "C" in both the AM and PM Peak Hours. See Attachments 4 And 5. 3. Signalize the intersection of Central Avenue and Corral Canyon Road. Signalization will correct the sight distance problem and a safer pedestrian crossing. Sincerely, · Bankston, P.E. T316 CE13846 ~ /Attachments 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 C~ITY COUNCIL, PLANNING COMMISSION AND ALL OTHER OFFICIAL BODIES. The following information must be disclosed: I. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the application. BONITA LONG CANYON PARTNERSHIP A California General Partnership, composed of Home Capital Corporation, a California Corporation and M~Millin D~v~l~pm~nt~ Tn~ a California Corporation List the names of all persons having any ownership interest in the property involved. BONITA LONG CANYON PARTNERSHIP ~a~e as Abov~ 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. McMILLIN DEVELOPMENT, INC. HOME CAPITAL CORPORATION A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION 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) I Person is defined as: "Any individual, firm, copartnership, joint venture, association, ~ 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." (.NOTE: Attach additional pages as necessary.) ~~ Signatur~ of applicant/~ate By: Ed Elliott WPC 070]P Vice President, Development Engineerir A-1lO Print or type name of applicant McMillin Development, Inc. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of September 23, 1987 Page 1 3, PUBLIC HEARING: Zoning Variance ZAV-87-25M; appeal of the decision of the Zoning Administrator to allow continuance of a nonconforming satellite dish at 1122 First Avenue Sy~vio Metlvler A. BACKGROUND On April 28, 1987, the Zoning Administrator considered a request for a zoning variance filed by Sylvio Metivier to permit expansion of a legal nonconforming dwelling unit to allow a bedroom addition, and to maintain an existing satellite dish on the roof of the main residence. The satellite dish was installed in 1985, prior to inception of the satellite dish ordinance in Montgomery, which does not permit installation of a satellite dish on the roof of a residence. The dish would be required to be removed by January l, 1989, under the abatement schedule for nonconforming dishes outlined in Municipal Code Section 19.70.015. The Zoning Administrator approved the request for the bedroom expansion but denied the request to retain the satellite dish on the roof of the residence on a permanent basis. The applicant has appealed this decision, stating that the dish can only be placed on the roof to achieve proper reception. The Montgomery Planning Committee, at their meeting of September 16, 1987, voted to grant the variance subject to the condition that the variance would expire on July 19, 1990, giving the application an additional 18 months to either remove the dish from the roof or reapply for the variance. In order to overturn a recommendation of the Montgomery Planning Committee, the Commission must have a vote of 5 of 7 members. B. RECOMMENDATION 1. Based on the findings contained in Section "E" of this report, adopt a motion to uphold the decision of the Zoning Administrator and deny the request to maintain a satellite dish on the roof of the residence at 1122 First Avenue on a permanent basis. C. ANALYSIS The property in question is a long rectangular lot 60 feet w~de and 186 feet long containing three single-family residences which have been in existence since 1946. The dwellings existed prior to the inception of zoning in 1947 and do not conform with the present zoning of RV-15, which limits residential development to two dwelling units per legal lot. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of September 23, 1987 Page 2 The 10-foot diameter satellite dish is located on the roof of the primary residence, and was installed in 1985 prior to annexation of Montgomery to the City of Chula Vista. Under the satellite dish ordinance enacted in 1986, legally established nonconforming dishes must be brought into conformance by January l, 1989, or removed. In this case, the satellite dish would have to be removed from the roof and placed within the rear yard of the residence so that it is hidden from view from First Avenue. Although the dish is presently mounted on the roof toward the rear of the primary residence, it is clearly visible to passers by. The applicant has appealed the denial of his variance request to maintain the present location of the satellite dish stating that he cannot place the dish in the rear yard and still achieve adequate reception. A letter was received by staff from Mr. David Smith, the manager of Leo's Stereo, stating that he concurs with Mr. Metivier's assertion, and that he is of the opinion that Mr. Metivier would lose the ability to receive all the programming that it was designed to receive. After examining the location of the dish at present, and the option of placing the satellite dish in the rear yard, staff is recommending denial of the appeal due to evidence that the dish can be brought into conformance with the ordinance without significant loss of reception. The site was surveyed by the City's Electronics Technician for the Communications Division of the Department of Building and Housing. After examining potential signal blockage at all angles of reception, he concluded that the dish could be placed in the rear portion of the rear yard without loss of reception. Although one existing fruit tree located by the rear yard could partially block reception, it can be trimmed or removed to alleviate the condition. Based on these findings, staff is of the opinion that the applicant has not presented compelling evidence to establish that a substantial hardship would be suffered as a result of the requirement to conform to the ordinance. Conformance need not occur until January 1, 1989, giving the applicant ample time to relocate the dish and absorb the costs incurred in doing so. The Montgomery Planning Committee heard the appeal of the variance denial and voted 5 to 1 with one member absent to grant the variance to maintain the satellite dish on the roof of the residence until July 19, 1990. The Committee's concern was that the applicant had not been cited for any present violations with regard to the satellite dish. They indicated that the applicant should not be required to remove the dish until all owners of illegal dishes and nonconforming dishes have been notified to bring their dishes into compliance. The additional 18 months was granted before abatement (or granting of a new variance) to allow the applicant time to resolve the issue of whether or not the dish will have adequate reception if placed within the rear yard. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of September 23, 1987 Page 3 D. FINDINGS 1. That a hardship peculiar to the property and not created by any act of the owner exists. Since evidence has been submitted that the nonconforming satellite dish can be brought into conformance with the ordinance by placing it within the rear yard, a hardship peculiar to the property has not been established. 2. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial 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 neighbors. The variance is not necessary for the preservation of substantial property rights possessed by other properties in that the satellite dish can be brought into conformance without substantial loss of reception. Other properties within the same zone and vicinity must also be in compliance with the satellite dish ordinance by January l, 1989, so that granting of this variance would constitute a special privilege not enjoyed by others. 3. That the authorizing of such variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, and will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, and will not materially impair the purposes of this chapter or the public interest. The authorizing of this variance will maintain a condition which creates the potential for a visual detriment to adjacent properties to occur. 4. 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 authorizing of this variance will have no effect upon the general plan of the City. WPC 4308P/2652P LEO'S STEREO 255 BROADWAY · SAN DIEGO, CA 92010 PHONE: (619) 426'8260 ~4e \1-,~ c t~°~ '~'°''~' P-1 APLES STREET I I 1 ! I I I EMERSON i I I I I ' ~LOCATOR ZAV-87-25M ----200'I I 1122 First Avenue ZAV-87-25M 1122 FIRST AVE. , CITY OF CHULA VISTA DISCLOSURE STATE~NT IAPPLICANT'SSTATEMENT OF DISCLOSURE OF CERTAIN OWNERSHIP INTERESTS ON ALL APPLICATIONS WHICH WILL REQUIRE DISCRETIONARY ACTION ON THE PART OF THE CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING J 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 propert~ 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 owni~ 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 organiz;il~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) ~rm, .c. opartne'~-ship, joint venture, a~ I~~io'~[..~state;. trust, receiver, syndicate, I~~:_k~j~j__m?!cipality, district or other po~ v s~on, or any other group or combination actin as a unit." ~ ~ ~ ~,vup or comomas~on acting as a unit." (.NOTE: Attach additional pages as necessary.)~~ ~~~ S ig~Fa~t ute, of a~ l i ca~J-a~'- . ~-~ WPC 0701P ~/~//~ ~, ~/~//~ A-110 Print or type name of applicant Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of September 23, 1987 Page 1 4. PUBLIC HEARING: Major Use Permit PCC-87-39M; request to maintain an existing R.V. storage lot now operating illegally at 1383 Broadway - Broadway Equities Ltd. (Continued) A. BACKGROUND The applicant, Broadway Equities Ltd. established an R.V. storage lot two years ago without obtaining a major use permit from the County. Upon annexation to the City of Chula Vista, zoning enforcement personnel received complaints that storage contained within this lot was unsightly. The owners were notified that the lot was established illegally and that a major use permit must be obtained or the use must be abated. The storage lot is located on San Diego Gas and Electric utility property on the east side of Broadway, south of Palomar Street. An Initial Study, IS-87-56M of possible adverse environmental impacts of the project was conducted by the Environmental Review Coordinator on May 22, 1987. The Environmental Review Coordinator concluded that there would be no significant environmental effects and recommended that the Negative Declaration be adopted. The Montgomery Planning Committee, at their meeting of August 5, 1987, voted to recommend denial of the major use permit request, and to schedule abatement as outlined in the recommendation section of this report. B. RECOMMENDATION 1. Find that this project will have no significant environmental impacts and adopt the Negative Declaration issued on IS-87-5644. 2. Based on findings contained in Section E of this report, adopt a motion to deny the applicant's request to maintain an RV storage lot at 1383 Broadway and set an abatement period for the use to cease operation and vacate the property effective March 31, 1988. Adopt a recommendation to allow the applicant to refile the major use permit, after January l, 1988, if open storage is determined as an appropriate long term land use at this location via the Montgomery Specific Plan. C. DISCUSSION Adjacent zoning and land use North C-36 Commercial center South M-52, C-36 Commercial auto center, mini warehouses East RMH-9, S-94 Mobilehome park, SDG&E utility property West S-94, C-36 Vacant, mixed use commercial/residential Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of September 23, 1987 Page 2 Existing site characteristics The project site is a rectangular shaped property of 4.5 acres with utility transmission towers bisecting the property from east to west. The existing storage lot contains 373 storage spaces and 35 customer parking spaces surrounded by a 6-foot chain link fence. No screen fencing or landscaping is evident on the property. A.C. paving is present over the front portion of the lot where customer parking takes place; the vehicle storage area is graveled. Proposed use The applicant proposes to maintain the RV storage lot with the addition of wood slats in the existing fence, and installation of curb, gutter and sidewalk along Broadway adjacent to the property, with a landscaping strip 15 to 25 ft. wi de along the front of the property adjacent to Broadway. A sign is al so proposed at the southwest corner of the property. D. ANALYSIS The issue of illegal establishment of the RV storage yard located at 1383 Broadway first came to the attention of staff in February 1986, when zoning enforcement received complaints that a truck filled with refuse was creating an unsightly appearance within the storage lot as seen from the street. Research into the matter resulted in the finding that no major use permit had been filed or approved for the lot. The major use permit is required under the S-94 zone assigned to all property currently in use for utility transmission lines under ownership by San Diego Gas and Electric. Staff informed the owners of this requirement who indicated that the application would be filed accordingly. When the application was not filed by November of 1986, staff referred the matter back to zoning enforcement, which was then referred to the City Attorney's office for further action. The application was finally submitted for filing on April 27, 1987. During this time period, work on the Montgomery Specific Plan had proceeded to the point, where goals of the specific plan have been formulated, which would discourage the continuation of open land uses in the Montgomery Area as well as encouraging the preservation of the SDG&E right-of-way for either open space or park usage. The RV storage use which the applicant is requesting to maintain stands in direct conflict with this goal. In addition to this, existing zones surrounding this lot do not permit open storage. New commercial developments located on the north side of this lot, the mobilehome park located on the east side of the storage lot and the auto center and mini-warehouse development on the south side all have restrictions in their respective zones prohibiting storage of Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of September 23, 1987 Page 3 materials or equipment outside of enclosed buildings. The one exception to this requirement is a small area within the SDG&E right-of-way under license to store RV's owned by the residents of the Orange Tree Mobilehome Park, as an accessory use. this accessory use was approved under the major use permits granted for development of the park in the late 1960's. It is for these reasons that staff is recommending denial of the application, with an abatement period for the owners to vacate the property effective March 31, 1988. Staff is of the opinion that interim approval of the use pending completion of the specific plan is not appropriate due to the numerous conditions of approval not proposed by the applicant which would need to be fulfilled before the lot met City standards. Those conditions are as follows: 1. Paving within the storage area. 2. Adequate solid fencing on all sides of the lot, since the lot is visible from Broadway, Palomar Street, Orange Tree Mobilehome Park, and the retail auto center adjacent to the lot. 3. Installation of two fire hydrants on site accompanied by adequate water supply. 4. Landscaping along the Broadway frontage consistent with the City Landscape Manual and approved by the City Landscape Architect. 5. A limitation on the height of storage items. 6. Sign subject to Design Review Committee approval. Continuance of the matter pending completion of the draft plan is also not appropriate since as the lot is in existence now, such action would constitute interim approval. The lot is not protected under any ~randfather provisions nor has it any vested rights as it was never egally sanctioned by the County and did not meet County standards for such use. Since the specific plan has not been completed or public hearings yet held, the applicant should be afforded the opportunity of refiling a major use permit application after January l, 1988, if the plan indicates that open storage uses would be appropriate at this location. If the plan indicates that refiling is appropriate, processing the application and evaluating the above-noted conditions could be accomplished prior to the March 31 abatement date provided that the application is filed at least 8 weeks prior to that time. Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of September 23, 1987 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. The proposed alterations to the existing use are inadequate to shield unsightly views of the use from the vicinity, and will not contribute to the general well being of the neighborhood. 2. That such use will not under the circumstances of the particular case, be detri~ntal to the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity. Lack of effective visual screening and would be detrimental to property or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions specified in the code for such use. The proposed use does not meet regulations outlined within the City Landscape Manual or, and as such does not comply with the regulations and conditions specified in the Code for such use. 4. That the granting of this conditional use permit will not adversely affect the general plan of the City or the adopted plan of any government agency. The granting of this major use permit would conflict with goal #19 of the Draft Montgomery Specific Plan, and therefore, will adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Chula Vista. WPC 3901P/2652P negati . declaration PROJECT NAME: Broadway RV Center PROJECT LOCATION: 1383 Broadway PROJECT APPLICANT: Broadway Equities Ltd. " 1431 Stratford Court Del Mar, CA 92121 CASE NO: IS 87-56M DATE: May 22, 1987 A. Project Settin9 The project site is a rectangular shaped oroDertv of 4.5 acres with utility.transmission towers bisecting the pro~er~y f~om east to west. The existing storage lot contains 373 storage spaces and 35 customer parking spaces suFrounded by a 6 foot chain link fence. No screen fencing or landscaping is evident on the property. AC paving is present over the front portion of the lot where customer parking takes place; the vehicle storage area is graveled. B. Project Description The applicant proposes to maintain the RV storage lot with the addition of wood slats in the existing fence; curb, gutter and sidewalk along Broadway adjacent to the property, and limited landscaping along the front of the property adjacent to Broadway. A sign is proposed at the southwest corner of the property. C. Compatibility with' Zoning and Plans The zoning in effect for the area is S-94, a utility transmission zone which allows open storage uses with approval of a major use permit. The General Plan land use d~agram designates two land uses over the project area, Thoroughfare Commercial uses for the front 300 feet adjacent to Broadway and High Density Residential land uses for the eastern portion ~? ~le ~.)~)er~y. A qew specific plan is currently being drafted for the 'l~)at~o.ae~ area which is scheduled for completion in December. Continuation of the existing use for a short interim period pending completion of the plan document would represent compliance with the General Plans policy of gradual conversion of the subject area to the long term uses outlined in the new specific plan. D. Mitigation necessary to avoid s~gnif~cant effects 1. Fire Protection The Fire Marshal for the City of Chula Vista requires provision of a maximum of two fire hydrants on site and access to the site via a knox box. These are standard development regulations required by sections 10.301(c) and 10.209 of the Uniform Fire Code. Since these city of chula vista planning department CIWOF environmental review section_CHULAVISTA ~.t,.~,,.~s are required t.lroug~l standard development regulations, any .t,l~er~e environmental impacts resulting from lack of adequate fire protection are mitigated below a level of significance. F. Findings of Insignificant Impact 1. The existing RV storage yard, with provision of adequate fire protection measures required by .the Uniform Fire Code, will not degrade the quality of the environment. The [}.~,)j,~,;~ is ,x[sti~lg arid, .~s a short iaberim use, ~ill not create ~l ~:tverse impact to long term environmental goals. 3.. ~ll potential adverse environmental impacts associated with continuing the RV storage lot are mitigated below significance and are not cumulative in nature. 4. The continuance of the existing RV storage yard, with adequate fire protection measures incorporated, will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings. G. Consultation 1. Individuals and Organizations City of Chula Vista: Julie Schilling, Assistant Planner Roger Daoust, Senior Civil Engineer William Wheeler, Building and Housing Department · Carol Gove, Fire Marshal Chuck Glass, Traffic Engineer Applicant"s Agent: HedenJ~amp and Associates 1331 India Street San Diego, CA 92121 2. Documents 1) Chapter 19.70 of Title 19 (Zoning) of the Chula Vista Municipal Code 2) General Plan, City of Chula Vista 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. ENVIRONSqENTAL REVIEW COORDINATOR WPC 4057P/O175P EN 6 (Rev. 5/85) city of chula vista ptanning department CITY OF environmental review section CHUIAVIST, CITY OF CHULA VISTA DISCLOSURE STATE~NT ~S STATE~£NT OF DISCLOSURE OF CERTAINO~HIP INTF~rKTK --'---"-'-" )~ICH WILL REQUIRE DISCRETIONARY ACTION ON THE PART nF'"~"~TVON ALL APPLICATION% ~N AND ALL OTHER 0FFICIAL__.__~BODIES. - ........ COUNCIL, PLANNING The following information must be disclosed:' l. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the application. BROADWAY EOUITIB LIMITED, A California Limited Partnership List the names of all persons having any ownership interest in the property involved. San' Diego Gas ~ Electric ' 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. B~ty Oeveloprnent Company - IVianagi~ ~ral Partner ~d-thur E. ~le - Llrnlt~ Partner 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 x If yes, please indicate person(s) ~ny individual, firm, c~artner~h(- ~*~-~ ................ I ~ ~,sal~n~ltb.'v f~:~ntL,,~[gan izat ion, corporat io~, I~,..a_n_~ ~Y_O?? county, city and county, city )political subdivision, or .... ,~ ..... ............... , ~, o,,~ v~ner group or como~nation acting as a unit." (NOTE: Attach additional pages as nece= ~sar= ~ ~)~C}J(/'e~-Y~EOUITI~ LIN~I'T-J~D WPC 070lP ~') S~ A-Il0 P~Int or type name of applicant City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of September 22, 1987 Page 1 5. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit PCC-87-46: Request to allow 24-hour operation of a proposed convenience store ~ocated at the southeast corner of East R~enstra Street and Hilltop Drive - Circle K Markets A. BACKGROUND This item is a request to allow 24-hour operation of a proposed convenience store with self-serve gas to be located at the southeast corner of E. Rienstra Street and Hilltop Drive in the C-N zone. The Municipal Code limits hours in the C-N zone to between 7:00 a.m. and ll:O0 p.m. unless specifically approved by the Planning Commission. The proposal is exempt from environmental review. B. RECOMMENDATION Adopt a motion to approve the request for 24-hour operation provided no significant opposition is expressed by the residents of the neighborhood, and subject to the condition that if any problems arise and/or complaints are received, the matter shall be forwarded to the Planning Commission for reconsideration of hours. C. DISCUSSION The 0.52 acre site is presently developed with an older service station facility. The property will be cleared for the construction of a new 2,700 sq. ft. mini-market to be located at the southeast corner of the site and four self-service gas islands with canopy on the westerly portion of the site adjacent to Hilltop Drive. The site plan and elevations for the project are subject to approval of the Design Review Committee. Adjoining land uses include Castle Park High School to the north across E. Rienstra Street, single and multiple family dwellings to the west across Hilltop Drive, multiple family dwellings adjoining the site to the east, and neighborhood commercial uses adjoining the site to the south. The C-N zone is designed to provide convenience goods and services to surrounding residents. These zones are located within the neighborhoods they serve, and the limitation on hours is intended to protect adjacent residents from excessive traffic and noise during the late evening and early morning hours. The restriction is flexible, however, in that the Planning Commission may grant an extension of hours upon a finding of no adverse impact. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of September 22, 1987 Page 2 In the past the Commission has approved the extension of hours for various businesses in several C-N zones, typically to midnight or 2:00 a.m. The only businesses approved for 24-hour operation were convenience markets and one donut shop. Recently the Commission approved a 24-hour 7-Eleven store with self-service gas at 4300 Otay Valley Road. D. ANALYSIS The areas of potential conflict because of extended hours are the apartments directly to the east of the site and the single and multiple family dwellings to the west across Hilltop Drive. The adjoining apartment complex maintains a 30 ft. setback from the common property line, and a driveway and parking area separate the units from the Circle K site. Also, the convenience market as well as the pump islands are oriented to the west, away from the apartments. These factors along with a proposal to require a 6 ft. high zoning wall to separate the two uses should minimize the potential for adverse impacts. The single and multiple family dwellings to the west are located some 80 ft. from the site across Hilltop Drive. Further, the single family dwellings front upon Kingswood Drive rather than Hill top, and thus have sideyard rather than front yard exposure to the site. On the other hand, the convenience store and pump islands are oriented toward these units, and the late evening and early morning traffic and noise potential could be a concern and annoyance to these residents regardless of the separation. A study conducted several years ago indicated there was no correlation between extended hours and the number of disturbances at such businesses, generally the activity level is minimal between ll:O0 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., and the extended hours do offer a service and convenience to adjacent residents. The ready availability of mini-market goods and gas represents a particular convenience for residents. Since the purpose of the C-N zone is to provide for convenient shopping without unduly effecting the residential enjoyment of the area, the sentiments of adjacent residents should be given considerable weight in the decision to extend hours of operation. Consequently, we have recommended approval provided no significant opposition is expressed at the hearing and subject to the condition that problems or complaints regarding the operation will require the matter be reconsidered by the Planning Commission. WPC 4324P PROJECT AREA MFD MFD COMM. , ~*~ COMM. COMM..~ ~.~, CO' $, ~). O. LOMA VERDE ELEMEN'I ARY SCHOOL ~ , ~LOC^TO, ,._.c,~ PCC-87-46 '(J.J/NORTH CITY OF CHULA VISTA DISCLOSURE STATE~NT 'APPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF DISCLOSURE OF CERTAIN OWNERSHIP INTERESTS ON ALL APPLICATIONS IWHICH 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. Circle K Market 17781 Cowan Street Irvine, CA. 92714 List the names of all persons having any ownership interest in the property involved. Circle K Market 17781 Cowan Street Irvine~ CA. 92714 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, Commissions, Committees and Counci! within the past twelve months? Yes No__ If yes, please indicate person(s) Person is defined as: "Any individual, firm, copartnership, joint venture, association, soc~a~ club, fraternal organization, corporation, estate, trus~, receiver, syndicate, this and any other county, city and county, city, municipaT~ty, district or other political subdivision, or any other group or combina~ion,acting//q/s a unit." (N__OT_E: Attach additional pages as necessary. ).~(. ~.h~/t~ ~/~t/~¢ WPC 0701P Howard J. Schuss~(Schuss, Clark & Assoc.) A-110 Print or type name of applicant City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of September 23, 1987 Page 1 6. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit PCC-88-2; request to establish service station and mini-mart on the south side of Otay Valley Road directly west of the 1-805 Freeway - Michael Ferdig and Patrick Palmer A. BACKGROUND The proposal is to establish a service station and mini-mart on 0.95 acres located on the south side of Otay Valley Road directly west of the 1-805 Freeway in the C-V-P zone. A service station, or in this case a self-service gas facility, is a conditional use in the C-V zone. An Initial Study, IS-88-12, of possible adverse environmental impacts of the project was conducted by the Environmental Review Coordinator on September ll, 1987. 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-88-12. 2. Based on findings contained in Section "E" of this report, adopt a motion to approve the request, PCC-88-2, to establish a service station with mini-mart subject to the following conditions: a. Development of the site shall comply with the plans approved or conditionally approved by the Design Review Committee. b. The second-story office shall be clearly accessory to the mini-mart/self-service gas facility. Access to the second-story shall be from inside the mini-mart in a manner subject to review and approval of the Zoning Administrator with the objective to minimize any potential for the space to be used contrary to this condition. C. DISCUSSION Adjacent zoning and land use North - R-3-P-12 - Multiple family South - R-3-G - Multiple family East - C-V-P - Motel (under construction) West - C-N-P - Commercial center City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of September 23, 1987 Page 2 Existing site characteristics The property is a vacant, level 0.95 acre site with 200 ft. of frontage on Otay Valley Road. A motel is presently under construction directly to the east of the site at the interchange of Otay Valley Road and the 1-805 Freeway. A condominium project and a neighborhood commercial center adjoin the property to the south and west respectively. .Proposed use The proposal includes a 1,600 sq. ft. mini-mart with take out food and outdoor eating area, a 1,600 sq. ft. second-story office above the mini-mart, two self-service pump islands with canopy, and associated circulation drives and off-street parking -- all on the westerly portion of the property. The northeasterly portion of the site will serve as a common driveway for the subject property and adjacent motel. The southeasterly portion of the property is reserved as a future restaurant site. The applicant is required to submit an overall plan showing the coordination in site planning with the future restaurant site. Several concepts have been discussed with staff which could alter the actual site plan proposal now before the Commission. However, the overall precise plan is subject to review and approval of the Design Review Committee. D. ANALYSIS Section 19.58.280 of the Municipal Code provides that service stations shall clearly be required by public convenience, that they shall not cause traffic hazards or undue congestion, and that they shall not result in a nuisance to residences or other surrounding uses. The requirement to find a clear need based upon public convenience is designed to provide some control over the tendency of conventional service stations to sprout on every available commercial corner. This is a less important consideration when, as in the present case, gas is simply one of the items offered by a convenience store. The closest full-service station is on the south side of Otay Valley Road, east of 1-805, approximately 1/4 mile from the site. The Commission has also approved a single-island, self-service facility which has yet to be constructed at the 7-Eleven store at the southwest corner of Otay Valley Road and Melrose, approximately 1/4 mile to the west of the site. There are no other gas facilities in the area. Considering the needs of local motorists and freeway travelers, the proposal would appear to satisfy the public convenience requirements. In terms of traffic hazards and congestion, the pump islands have been oriented parallel with Otay Valley Road in order to facilitate circulation and stacking of vehicles. The circulation drives have also been designed to allow for by-pass of vehicles unable to safely stack at the pumps. As noted above, the details of coordinating circulation and parking with the future restaurant site have yet to be finalized. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of September 23, 1987 Page 3 The proposal should not have an adverse impact on adjacent residents. The rear portion of the mini-market is located 50 ft. from the common boundary with the condominiums to the south, and the pump islands are located on the opposite or northerly side of the building. The portion of the residential property adjacent to the common boundary is occupied by carports and open parking, and the closest units are oriented to the east with no window openings on to the site. The proposed 1,600 sq. ft. second-story office represents a concern to staff in that the C-V zone prohibits offices except as an accessory component to a principle permitted use. The applicant's have stated that the space will be used solely in support of this facility, but the size of the office is substantially larger than would ordinarily be required for an operation of this size and therefore may present a reuse and/or enforcement problem in the future. In order to avoid this eventuality, and to keep the office use consistent with the support function it is intended to serve, we have recommended a condition of approval which prohibits separate access to the second floor; the office would be accessible only from inside the mini-mart. For the reasons noted above, we believe it is appropriate to recommend approval of the proposal based upon the following findings. 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 self-service gas facility will provide a convenience to motorists in the vicinity of Otay Valley Road and 1-805. This facility represents the third self-serve station at the Otay Valley/I-805 interchange. 2. That such use will not under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity. The site plan will be coordinated with adjacent property to the east to avoid creating traffic hazards or congestion. The pump islands are located away from residential areas to the south and separated therefrom by the convenience store structure. 3. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions specified in the code for such use. The proposal complies with all conditions specified in the Zoning Ordinance for service stations. Compliance with all applicable Codes, regulations and conditions will be required prior to the issuance of development permits for the project. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of September 23, 1987 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 recognizes the need for service station facilities at appropriate locations convenient to the motoring public. The proposal in question is such a facility. WPC 4326P/2652P · I I , MFD(92) I · OTAY VALLEY RD. COMM. CONDOS(64) --co,oos DR. MFO(48) ~ r ~LOCATOR · PCC-88-2 200°I 1 OTAY VALLEY RD./805 'negative declaration__ PROJECT NAME: Pacific Diamond Petroleum Gas Station/Mini Mart PROJECT LOCATION: South side of Otay Valley Road west of 1-805 PROJECT APPLICANT: Michael Ferdi9 & Patrick Palmer 3930 Oregon St., #260 San Diego, CA 92104 CASE NO: IS-88-12 DATE: September ll, 1987 A. Project setting The project site has a motel under construction to the east, a condominium to the south, a commercial development to the west and a condominium project across Otay Valley Road to the north. The site has been previously graded and is void of any natural resources or cultural resources. All utilities are present to serve the property. B. Project Description The project consists of a 1,567 sq. ft. mini market with associated gas pumps. At a second story would be offices for Pacific Diamond Petroleum, Inc. There also would be an outdoor eating area with the mini market. C. Compatibility with Zoning and Plans The proposed project is in conformance with the visitor commercial designation on the General Plan and the visitor commercial zoning of the property (subject to the issuance of'Conditional Use Permit). D. Identification of Environmental' Effects In accordance with the Initial Study for this project, there will be no significant environmental impacts. E. Findings of Insignificant Impact 1. The project site contains no environmental resources or hazards. There are no geological hazards, adverse soil conditions or known hazardous waste materials present. Because of the grading of the property, no natural, biological or other cultural resources present which could be adversely effected by the proposed project. Prior technical reports on the site, referenced below, support this position. city of chula vista planning department CI]YOF environmental review section. CHULA VISTA 2. The project conforms to the long range goals of the various elements of the General 'Plan and therefore will not achieve any short-term goals to the disadvantage of long-term goals. 3. The project site is located within an urbanized area and is so minor in nature it will have little cumulative impact. 4. The project includes stage one and stage two vapory recovery systems that will avoid any significant air quality emission. Performance standards and the nature of the project will avoid any other significant impact on human beings. G. Consultation 1. Individuals and Organizations City of Chula Vista: Julie Schilling, Assistant Planner Roger Daoust, Senior Civil Engineer .- William Wheeler, Building and Housing Department Carol Gove, Fire Marshal Chuck Glass, Traffic Engineer Applicant's Agent: Michael Ferdig 2. Documents Municipal Code Chula Vista General Plan - All Elements EIR-78-7 EIR-78-10 IS-78-50 IS-79-16 .. IS-81-49 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. ENVIR~ENTAL REVIEW COORDINATOR EN 6 (Rev. 5/85) city of chula vista planning department C1TYOF environmental review section CHLJ[,~ VJ~'rA. 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 h-aving any ownership interest in the property in¥olved. 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, Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months? Yes No~ If yes, please indicate person(s) IPerson is defined as: "Any individual, firm, copartnership, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal organization, corporation, estate, ~rust, receiver, syndicate, this and any other county, city and county, city, municipality, district or other political subdivision, or any other group or combination~cting as a unit. (NOTE: Attach additional pages as necessary.) Signature of ap fca~ '--~'7- I ~- <,~ ,PC O, OlP A-110 vr~n~ or type name of applicant City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of October 23, 1987 Page 1 7. PUBLIC HEARING: PCZ-88-D - Consideration to rezone O.lO acres located at 145 Willow Street from A-D to C-C-D - Creaser Price Insurance Agency A. BACKGROU)~D 1. The proposal is to rezone O. lO acres from A-D (Agricultural/Design control) to C-C-D (Central Commercial/Design control) in order to expand the parking area for the office building at 145 Willow Street in the C-C-D zone. 2. An Initial Study, IS-88-7 of possible adverse environmental impacts of the project was conducted by the Environmental Review Coordinator on September ll, 1987, who 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-88-7. 2. Adopt a motion recommending that the City Council enact an ordinance to change the zone for 0.10 acres from A-D to C-C-D as shown on Exhibit A . C. DISCUSSION Adjacent zoning and land use. North A-D Golf course South C-C-D Office building parking East A-D Golf course West C-C-D Medical center Existing site characteristics. The triangular-shaped property is a level, unimproved site with approximately 70 ft. of frontage on Willow Street. The parking lot for the Creaser Price office building abuts the site to the south and the Municipal Golf Course abuts the site to the east. The property is designated as Retail Commercial on the Chula Vista General Plan. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of October 23, 1987 Page 2 D. ANALYSIS Approval of the request will allow additional parking to serve an addition to the adjacent office building. The new spaces will be tied in with the existing parking lot, requiring no new curb cuts on Willow Street. The existing zoning boundary coincides wih a previous County zoning pattern which extended across properties on a line parallel to Bonita Road. The property in question is under the same ownership as the adjacent office and is presently divided by the zoning designation of commercial for the office project and agriculture for the vacant area. The proposal is consistent with the General Plan and adjacent zoning and land uses. WPC 4310P PROJECT (A-D TO C-G-D) vACANT COMM. COMM- MEDICAL CENTER · co~ ~ ~ CHU.CH ~ aOCATOR THOM L. SANDERS ASSOCIATES ARCH ITECTS PHOTOGRAPHS OF PROPOSED AREA TO BE REZONED 06-24-87 Looking North/west Looking North/West Creaser Price Insurance Agency 145 Willow Street Bonita, California Initial Study 5120 Robinwood Road, Suite B-11, Bonita, California 92002 (619) 470-1575 THOM L. SANDERS ASSOCIATES ARCH ITECTS PHOTOGRAPHS OF PROPOSED AREA TO BE REZONED 06-24-87 Looking North/West Looking South/East Creaser Price Insurance Agency 145 Willow Street Bonita, California Application for Rezone 5120 Robinwood Road, Suite B-11, Bonita, California 92002 (619) 470-1575 negative declaration PROJECT NAME: IS-88-7 PROJECT LOCATION: 145 Willow Street PROJECT APPLICANT: Creaser Price Insurance Co. CASE NO: IS-88-7 ~ATE: September 4, 1987 A. Project Setting The project site is located on the eastern site of Willow Street to the north of 'Bonita Road and south of the Willow Street bridge. The site is within the lO0-year flood boundary of the Sweetwater River. The project is not anticipated to significantly effect the flood plain and existing drainage facilities are adequate to serve the project. The nearest geologic hazard is the La Nacion earthquake fault zone which is located about 1,500 feet east of the project site. B. Project Description The project consists of the expansion of an existing office building by 1,836 sq. ft. in two floors. A rezoning request from A-D (agricultural subject to design review) to C-C-D (Central Commercial subject to Design Review) to provide parking for the expansion is also proposed. Only minor grading is proposed at this time. However, new construction is required to be above the 65 foot elevation. C. Compatibility with Zoning and Plans The proposed project involves .a zone change that is in conformance with the retail commercial designatfon of the General Plan. The proposed office expansion is also in conformance with the General Plan and the proposed zoning of the property. D. Identification of Environmental Effects In accordance with the Initial Study of this project, there are no significant environmental impacts. E. Findings of Insignificant Impact 1. The project site is within the flood plain of the Sweetwater River. However, the area is so small that no significant flooding or backwater impacts will result. The La Nacion Earthquake Zone is about 1,500 feet to the east of the project site. city of chula vista planning department CI]YOF environmental review section CHUIA VISTA -2- 2. The project conforms to the General Plan and therefore, short-term goals will not be achieved to the disadvantage of the long-term goals. 3. The project impacts are so minimal as to avoid any cumulatively significant impacts. 4. The project will not result in emission of any substance, noise, vibration, or glare that would significaStly effect human beings. G. Consultation 1. Individuals and Organizations City of Chula Vista: Julie Schilling, Assistant Planner Roger Daoust, Senior Civil Engineer .- William Wheeler, Building and Housing Department Carol Gove, Fire Marshal Chuck Glass, Traffic Engineer Applicant's Agent: Thom L. Sanders Associates 2. Documents Chula Vista Municipal Code Chula Vista General Plan EIR-76-9 IS-76-16 IS-76-40 IS-76-103 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. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COORDINATOR EN 6 (Rev. 5/85) city of chula vista planning department CIWOF environmental review section CHULAVISTA,, 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. CREASER, PRICE INSURANCE AGENCY, INC. List the names of all persons having any ownership interest in the property involved. CREASER. WARWICK, INC. 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, Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months? Yes X No__ If yes, please indicate person(s) VARIOUS INSURANCE CONTRACT Person is defi_ned as: "Any individual, firm, copartnership, joint venture, association, social 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." (NOTE: Attach additio n al p ages as necessary )~_~-/~~._~~ Creaser, Warwick, Inc. . ~--6- By: ~..~____%,~ ~ Signature of app l icant/d~l~e W?U U/q~Y/SiGNAT~RE--OF OWNER/~. Frederick A. Hahn A-]10 k~REASER & WARWICK, INC ~'rint or type name of applicant Creaser, Price Insurance Agency, Inc. Print or type name of Owner City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of September 23, 1987 Page 1 8. PUBLIC HEARING PCS-87-12 Fieldstone Classics, Chula Vista Tract 87-12 - The Fieldstone Company P-88-1 - Consideration of precise plan and development standards for Fieldstone Classics, Chula Vista Tract 87-12 PCZ-88-B Consideration to redesignate 10.107 acres from RP-13 to RP-8 in EastLake Shores - Fieldstone Classic A. BACKGROUND 1. The applicant, the Fieldstone Company proposes to develop 60 residential lots on 10.107 acres located on the south side of Lakeshore Drive. The proposal involves a tentative subdivision map, precise plan, and a change in land use district from RP-13 to RP-8. The EastLake Master Environmental Impact Report, EIR-81-3, and the EastLake I SPA Plan Environmental Impact Report, EIR-84-1, have been prepared and address the environmental impacts of the proposed project. B. RECOMMENDATION 1. Certify that EIR-81-3 and EIR-841 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 to recommend that the City Council approve PCS-87-12, P-88-1, and PCZ-88-B, subject to the following conditions: A. Map Revisions: 1. Show name of subdivision in heavy letters directly under Tract title. 2. General Notes shall be revised as follows: a. Add: "IN ACCORDANCE WITH REGIONAL STANDARD DRAWINGS" at the end of Note #5. b. Note #ll shall be revised and shown as: ALL UTILITIES SHALL BE UNDERGROUNDED, EASEMENTS TO BE PROVIDED AS NECESSARY. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of Page 2 c. Add Notes #8, #20 and #21 shown on Page 23 of the Chula Vista Subdivision Manual. 3. Notes regarding Total Number of Lots and Total Number of each Type of Lot IResidential, Open Space) shall be included with General Notes and revised as follows: a. Total number of lots : 63 b. Total number of units = 60 c. Total number of open space lots = 3 4. Show Subdivision Boundary, storm drain cleanout and curb inlet symbols under Legend. 5. Existing contours shall extend a minimum of 100 feet beyond the subdivision boundaries. 6. Show range spread of lot sizes as shown on Page 23 of the Chula Vista Subdivision Manual. 7. Show the existing slope rights and drainage easements located at the south side of the subdivision. 8. Indicate that Lot A is not a building site. 9. Add "East" to "H" Street on Vicinity Map. 10. Show full dimensions of Lots 1, 8, 9, 17, 31 and 40. B. Conditions of Approval: 1. The developer shall dedicate to the City all the streets shown on the Tentative Map within the subdivision boundary for public use. 2. The developer shall be responsible for the construction of full street improvements in all the streets shown on the Tentative Map within the subdivision boundary. Said improvements shall include, but not be limited to: A.C. pavement, base, concrete monolithic curb, gutter and sidewalk, sewer and water facilities, drainage facilities, fire hydrants, street lights and signs. 3. 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. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of Page 3 4. Lots shall be so graded as to drain to the street. Drainage shall not flow over slopes. 5. Sewers serving 10 or less units shall have a minimum grade of 1%. 6. An erosion and sedimentation control plan shall be prepared as part of the grading plans. 7. The land incorporated in this project lies within EastLake Assessment Districts 86-1 and 85-2. Participation in those districts is required as specified in Resolutions 12288 and 12546 of the City Council. The developer will be responsible for all costs incurred by the City for the redistribution of assessments. The exact amount shall be paid prior to the approval of the Subdivision Map. 8. A vertical curve of 125 feet (minimum length) is required in Meadowbrook Lane to account for the 7,5% {percent) grade break. 9. The developer shall grant to the City a one-foot control lot at the south end of Creekwood Way. This should be done by a separate instrument and will be considered by the City Council concurrently with the approval of the Subdivision Map. 10. Prior to the approval of the Subdivision Map, the developer shall submit preliminary plans demonstrating the feasibility of extending Creekwood Way south of the Subdivision boundary. 11. 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 10 feet from the back of sidewalk. The west side of Creekwood Way is exempt from the above requirement. However, the 4.5-foot parkway shall be landscaped and irrigation subject to the approval of the City Landscape Architect, and included in the Master EastLake Homeowners Association Landscape Maintenance District. 12. The developer shall enter into an agreement with the City wherein developer agrees to do the following: a. 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. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of Page 4 b. Not protest the establishment of a Facilities Benefit Assessment District. Said District will allow the developer to anticipate future reimbursement by other benefiting parties. 13. Open Space Lots B and C shall be fenced and landscaped subject to review and approval by the City Landscape Architect and shall be included within the master landscape maintenance district for EastLake. 14. The rear property boundary for lots 38 through 42 shall be fenced in accordance with the wall details shown on the site plan submitted. Lots 43 through 60 shall be fenced at top of slope with gate access on the east side of Creekwood Way adjacent to the rear yard of Lot 60, in accordance with the wall details design submitted. Slope areas at the rear property boundary between Lots 43 through 60 shall be landscaped with drought resistant plant materials as approved by the City Landscape Architect. An open space easement over those slope areas shall be granted to the City and shall be maintained by the master landscape maintenance district for EastLake. 15. Detailed development standards which include tabulation of the exact lot size and coverage for each lot as well as proposed standards for setbacks, building height, lot coverage and floor area ratio shall be submitted as a single document for review and approval by the Planning Department and shall be recorded concurrently with the final map. The following development restrictions shall be included within the standards: a. Lot coverage shall be limited to 40%, excluding open sided patios with an area not greater than 300 square feet. b. Future additions to all residential lots shall be limited to the first story only. c. The maximum allowable floor area ratio shall be 50%, excluding open sided patios with an area no greater than 300 square feet. d. Building height shall be limited to 28 feet in accordance with current R-1 standards. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of Page 5 16. Revise the map to show adequate access for fire vehicles to serve Lot 30, subject to review and approval by the City Fire Marshal, prior to approval of the final map. 17. Show wall details on the site plan submitted of the extension of the theme wall separating Lot A Iproposed park entry) from Lots 26 and 27. 18. Proposed street names for the subdivision must be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department prior to approval of the final maps. In the event that proposed street names are determined to be not approved, the developer shall submit alternate names. The following are Code Requirements: 1. The developer shall pay Traffic Signal Participation Fees in accordance with City Council Policy prior to issuance of building permits. 2. The developer shall pay all applicable sewer fees, including but not limited to Sewer Participation Fee, prior to issuance of building permits. 3. The developer shall underground all utilities serving the subdivision. 4. All grading work shall be done in accordance with the City of Chula Vista Landscape Manual and Grading Ordinance 1797 as amended. 5. 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 provisions of the Subdivision MaP Act, Subdivision Ordinance and the Subdivision Manual of the City of Chula Vista. 6. The developer shall plant trees along all dedicated streets within the subdivision. The species, location and number shall be determined by the City Engineer. C. DISCUSSION Existing Site Characteristics The project site consists of lO.lO7 acres identified as area R-10 on the EastLake SPA Plan. The site has been previously graded and is elevated above Lakeshore Drive with views to the south. The Camelot development, an attached residential project, is located to the north of the project across Lakeshore Drive. Vista Cortina, a recently approved project totalling 162 detached dwellings is located on the east side of the project. Fieldstone is in the process of constructing a single family City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of Page 6 development on the west side of the project for which 118 units are permitted. United Enterprises property is located on the south side of the project site. The site is the last remaining uncommitted development area within the EastLake Shores neighborhood. The EastLake SPA Plan presently designates the site for attached development at a target density of 10 dwelling units per acre, which would allow a total of lO1 units for the site. The EastLake Planned Community (PC) District Regulations place the site in the RP-13 District which allows for either attached or detached development with a minimum lot size of 3,000 square feet. Many of the development standards for the RP District such as setbacks and lot coverage are listed as "SP" which means they are not predetermined but are addressed and approved with the Precise Plan. Tentative Map The proposed project involves subdivision of 60 lots with single family detached homes served by a public street system with access from two points along Lakeshore Drive. In addition, three lots, two forming a band along Lakeshore Drive and one forming a small strip between Willowbrook Court and a designated park site are proposed as landscaped open space lots. The density for the proposed project is 6 dwellings per acre. The street system serving the project consists of two access roads from Lakeshore Drive; Creekwood Way which serves Lots 1-4, and Meadowbrook Lane which serves Lots 16-22. Crosscreek Road runs in an east-west direction through the project ending in a cul-de-sac and would serve Lots ll-15 and 32-60. Two cul-de-sacs, Coldbrook Court and Willowbrook Court would be located on the north side of Crosscreek Road and would serve Lots 5-10 and 23-31 respectively. Minimum lot widths are approximately 45 feet, excluding cul-de-scas and corners, with a minh,~m depth of approximately 95 feet. The minimum lot size is 4,320 square feet, with an average lot size of 5,098 square feet. Precise Plan. The project would feature the same four floor plans and elevations which were used for the Fieldstone Classics project adjacent to the project site. Those models were approved by the Design Review Committee on December 5, 1985, and consist of four models with three design schemes for each. Plans 1 and 2 are three bedroom, one-story structures: plan 3 is a three bedroom, two-story structure; and plan 4 is a four bedroom, two story structure. The architectural style for the development is "Mediterranean," which is consistent with the EastLake Design Manual. Elevations are attached for review. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of Page 7 Each of the dwellings would be served by a two-car garage to meet off-street parking requirements. The minimum length of driveways would be 15 feet from the edge of driveway to the property line (19.5 feet to the edge of the sidewalk). Approximately 91 on-street parking spaces would be available which equates to 1.5 spaces per unit. A1 though proposed development standards have not been submitted as a single document, the developer's proposed setback standards are 15 feet for the front yard setback, 5 foot sideyard setback, and a 15 foot rear yard setback. Lot coverages and floor area ratios for each lot have been submitted. Because of variations in lot sizes, lot coverage varies from 11% to 38% with the average at 28%. Floor are ratios for the lots range from 18% to 49% with the average ratio at 40%. Staff is recommending that development standards be submitted which limit lot coverage to 40% excluding open sided patios with an area no greater than 300 square feet, and that the maximum allowable floor area ratio be limited to 50% with the same exclusion for open sided patios. The restrictions would pe~it the b~ilding product proposed by the developer, but would also serve to limit bulk and scale of the homes in the future resulting from remodeling additions. By the same token, staff is also recommending that future additions to all residential lots be limited to the first story, and that initial building heights be limited to 28 feet. These development standards would be recorded with the final subdivision map. The precise plan submittal includes a fencing plan which carries forward the plan used for the Fieldstone projects in areas 7A and 8B. Interior open space Lots A & B will be landscaped and included in the master landscape maintenance district. Lot A is to be included in the designated park site to create a second entrance to the park from Willowbrook Court. Lots 26 and 27 would be separated from Lot A by an open theme wall stepped in height from 3 to 5 feet and extended along the side property lines to the sidewalk. The selection of plant materials and planting and irrigation plans will be subject to review and approval by the City Landscape Architect. Rezone The developer has proposed to rezone the project site from its present designation of RP-13 to RP-8. The difference between the two land use groups is that lot depths in the RP-8 group ~ust !,~ ,~i: I , '.: ~,q ~, while the minimum lot depth in the RP-13 group can be 50 feet. The targe': density of l0 dwellings/acre and the density range of 5-15 dwellings/acre would not change with the rezone. The project density proposed by the developer lies at the low end of the density range at 6 dwellings per acre. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of Page 8 A band of slope area located at the southern boundary of the project site is designated for open space lOS-4) on the SPA Plan. The open space designation was originally intended to protect steep slope areas present on the property from development. At the time the SPA Plan was created, those slope areas were anticipated to result after grading in this area due to United Enterprises refusal to grant permission to allow off-site grading on their property. Subsequent permission was obtained later to allow a large portion of the slopes to be placed offsite, outside the boundaries of the plan. However, some of the slope remains within the southern boundary, and staff is recommending that the OS-4 designation be aligned with the top of the slope. In addition, staff is also recommending that an open space easement be granted within the OS-4 designation at the rear of Lots 42 through 60, and that the top of the slope be fenced for thos~ lots with a single access point located on the east side of Creekwood Way adjacent to Lot 60. Under this condition, the slope area within the property boundary, al though owned by individual property owners, would be landscaped, irrigated and maintained as part of the master landscape maintenance district for EastLake. The property owners would be precluded from placing balconies, patios or any other accessory uses or structures within the slope. D. ANALYSIS In summary, the project proposed by the developer complies with the development standards required by the EastLake SPA Plan and the EastLake Planned Community Distr~ct Regulations. The subdivision precise plan and rezone would allow construction of the single family detached product theme used in the adjacent subdivision to the west to continue through the subject parcel. The resultant density from the project is substantially less than the target density proposed Sy the SPA ~lan. Therefore, in light of these aspects of the project, staff recommends approval of the tentative map, precise plan and rezone. E. FINDING Pursuant to Section 66473.5 of the Subdivision Map Act, the tentative subdivision map for Fieldstone Classics, Chula Vista Tract 87-12, 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. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of Page 9 3. The project is in substantial conformance with the Chula Vista General Plan Elements as follows: a. Land Use - The proposed 60-unit project is in conformance with the EastLake SPA Plan, which permits residential development with a density range of 5-15 dwellings per acre. The proposed subdivision would have a density of 6 dwellings per acre. b. Circulation The subdivision with two access points, from Lakeshore Drive, is in compliance with the circulation element of the EastLake SPA Plan. c. Housing The detached small lot housing product proposed is consistent with surrounding development. d. Conservation The project is located on a site which has already been graded for development. e. Park and Recreation, Open Space - The project is a component of the EastLake Community, which has designated areas within EastLake Hills and Shores totaii~n~ 148 acres reserved for open space, and 23.8 acres reserved for parks. f. Seismic Safety - The closest identified fault in the area is the La Nacion Fault located over two miles to the west. g. Safety - The site is within an acceptable response time of fire and police services. h. Noise - The units will be required to meet the standards of the UBC with regard to acceptable interior noise levels. i. Scenic Highway - The project will create two linear open space lots with theme walls along Lakeshore Drive. j. Bicycle Routes The streets within th~ project are not designated bike routes but will accommodate bicycle travel. k. Public Buildings - No public build~nj~ ,~re 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 4327P/2659P CITY OF CHULA VISTA DISCLOSURE STATE~NT APPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF DISCLOSURE OF CERTAIN OWNERSHIP INTERESTS ON ALL APPLICATIONS IWHICH WILL REQUIRE DISCRETIONARY ACTION ON THE PART OF THE CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING ICOMMISSION 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. The Fieldstone Co. List the names of all persons having any ownership interest in the property involved. The Fieldstone Co. 2. If any person identified pursuant to Il) 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. ~ith .lnhnsnn Peter Nrht 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. N/A 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 X If yes, please indicate person(s) Person is defined as: "Any individual, firm, ?partnership, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, this and any other county, city and county, city, ~nicipality, district or other political subdivision, or any other group or combination acting as a unit.' (NOTE: Attach additional pages as necessary.) Si~re 6f ~pplicant/date WPC 0701P A-110 Print or type name of applicant PROJECT AREA / / E/ff- SECTION I 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 Chula Vista and 7 miles north of the U.S./Mexico 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 consistency. 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 conjunction 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 discretionary approvals fr~m 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 EIR 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- lie 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 EIR shall be prepared when a later approval is required for the project, and the infor- matior~ 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 respect to the resources and issues listed in Table 1-1 prior to any approval which may result in a significant effect ~)n 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 consideration and its attendant approvals would cause a substantial adverse change in the environment, the lead agency must resp~)n¢ 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 a~ceptable as pro- vided in Section 15089." Table 1-1 SUMMARY OF FUTURE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FOR EASTLAKE General Development Sectional Tentative Map/ Issue Plan Area Plan Precise Plan Land Use X ~ X X Agrieulturel Resources X Transportation and Circulation X X Sewer Services X X Water Availability X Schools X X Police Protection X Fire Protection 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) Geology 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 Ch, la Vista in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and EIR Guidelines, as amended Janu- ary 1, 1981. In des~ing 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 Devalopment Plan for EastLake, an Environmental Data Base was prepared an.d submitted to the City of Chula Vista. This data base was used during preparation of the Environmental Con- 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 Project DeseriDtion 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 LAFCOo Environmental Analysis The environmental impacts of the proposed project are summarized below. More 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 project~i~ns. 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 soils suit- able for agricultural use which, due to loca{ion within the coastal climate, · would be highly productive given imported water. The loss of the current dry farmed barley production is not considered significant but the loss of resources for the potential production of coastal dependent crops would be a significant adverse impact of project developmeat. 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 needed 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 'l~elegraph Canyon Road to an intersection with Orange Avenue; Orange Avenue should be extended from that point to the EastLake property. · Several roads (see Append/ix 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 project 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 ~ot 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 select,for sewering the project site, there is a potential for contributing to growth inducement of adjacent parcels. Water Availability: 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 on 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. Schools: Students generated by project development would create a need for additional 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 i 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 EastLake 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 impact which would occur during the initial phase of the project. Fire Protection: Significant sl~o~t-term impacts on the City's Fire Department woldd occur during the first phase of development, until a new station is oper- ational in the project area. A second station may be necessary during later phases of project buildout. The developer would be responsible for providing a station site, and construction of the station structure as well as provision of the necessary apparatus and equipment may also be required to mitigate potentially significant impacts. Ener~'y: 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 provision of open space and park areas to serve future project residents. No adverse impacts related rd'parks would occur. 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 measure~are implemented. Those recommended by the City iibrarian 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 the 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 during subsequent project review. 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 landslideso Poten- tial seismic aotivity 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 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 increase in the existing flood discharge of the Sweetwater and Otay Rivers. Several areas downstream are currently subject 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 percent of the total watershed. Development of this site with urban uses, rather than the assumed agricultural use, would result in an underestimation of the projected peak discharge, and could impact drainage facilities. Develop- ment~ the portion of the site drained by Long Canyon could also aggravate the existing drainage problem southeast of Bonita Road. Measures to control peak runoff discharge to pre-project levels and provide drainage improvements could mitigate potential drainage impacts. Mineral Resources: No mineral deposits are known or expected onsite. ..Water Quality: Development of the site with urban uses would result in a change in the type of contaminants contained in surface runoff and would decrease sediment loads of runoff. No significant impact on water quality is anticipated from project implementation. The wastewater reclamation plant being considered 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 which drains into Otay Lakes by the RWQCB. No significant water quality impact would occur onsite or in down- stream areas. Air Quality: The proposed EastLake development would represent a signifi- cant increase in the planned growth levels within the Chula Vista Planning 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 regionwide level due to the departure from planned growth within the air basin. Mitigation measures are available to reduce project-related emissions, but cannot mitigate the impact to insignificance~ Socioeconomics: Development of the proposed project 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.. Secondary impacts associated with growth of this property, and the potential induced growth on surrounding parcels are discussed individually and in Section IV. The proposed development would pro- vide additional employment opportunities in the Chula Vista area. The fiscal analysis for the project indicated a net benefit to the City during all phases of the project. Archaeological/Historical Resources: Field investigation of the EastLake property identified three archaeological/historical sites and 14 artifact iso- lates. Future development of the project area would result in the loss or impairment of the cultural resources present onsite unless appropriate mitiga- tion measures are taken, including surface and subsurface testing. Paleontological 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 presence can be made through field examination of future soil and geotechnical 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 vicinity would increase as a result o--i~-~-ban 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 impacts is possible through construction techniques or noise barriers. Specific noise impacts would need to be determined at the time of individual project review. Growth Inducement: 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 development of the project site is planned to be phased over a 20-year period, the project 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. SECTION I INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY 1.1 PURPOS~'~ 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 east 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. General Plan Amendment, prezoning and General Development Plan, and annexation to ]~he C'ity' of Chula Vista from the County San Diego. of 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 community and the Planned Community Zoning for East- Lake Io 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 project site, and to discuss the environ- mental effects of the proposed actions. 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 a~o 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 and a Precise Plan for Village Center. The following Planned Community District Regulations adopted by the City of Chula Vista are applicable 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. F~tablish 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 hills 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 Sectional 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 EastLake Village Center and EastLake 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 as listed are required in order to 'reduce'potent. iai 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 ~ould allow a maximum of 3683 dwelling units within a total residential area of 619.9 acr~} (49 percent of the total site area). The remaining 51 percent of the site would be developed for a variety of non-residential Although acreage within the non-residential land use categories land uses on 648 acres. 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 R,~gulations 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 !mpacts are expected to occur with complete implementation of the SPA Plan. Transmutation and Circulation: The Transportation and Cireulation analysis indicates 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 traffic on the streets within the project and on SR125 between the project and San Miguel Road, and East "H" Street between the project andOtay 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 requiremer~ts. 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 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 which 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 generated by EastLake I, the project will not represent a significant effect to sewer services. Educational Facilities: Students generated by project development would cre- 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 faeilities are required. The site for one elementary school is proposed in the EastLake Hills 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 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 ~res. 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 librar~ or bookmobile; and ultimately with the development of EastLake H, the construction of a separate library facility financed by any combination of Mello-Roos, State library funds, grants and/or specially City revenues, and acceptable to the Library Director of the Chula Vista earmarked Public Library. Energy Su~l)ly 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 electricity consumption and conserve fuelo 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~ I~o-signiflcant ilnpact to these · services and facilities are anticipated. Visual Resources: The proposed EastLake I development w. ould 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 urn)an 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 visu'al buffer zones, landscape zones, a plant matrix, a street tree plan, trails plan, signage plan, fencing plan 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'y/Sei]s: 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. Mitigation measures as outlined in the investigation and provided in the SPA Plan will reduce the potential impacts to a level of insignificance. Hydrolo,~o?/Drainage: The project site is located within five drainage basins that are tributary to the Sweetwater and Otay Rivers. Runoff volumes from the site wi]]. 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, the 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 con- 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 b~neficial 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 potent'tally~im~a-cted by roadway noise levels above the City of Chula Vista's maximum residential limit of 65 dB CNEL. An even greater area would potentially be impacted by roadway noise levels of 57 dB CNELo The area of potential noise impacts may be reduced considerably by 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 '~auilt 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 schedules which would initially be important only in the area of existing residents, .would in later stages be necessary throughout the project region. Biological Resources: 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 vegetatio~n 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 5 loci, is located within the EastLake Business Center. A data recovery program has 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 EastLake I development. Mitigation measures involve a two-stage investigative data recovery program to avoid potential significant impacts of project development. Paleontological Resources: There is minimal potential for adverse imPacts to significant paleontological resources on the project site. To ensure that significant and potentially unique fossils and paleontological resources are not destroyed without exam- ination and analysis, it is recommended that a qualified paleontologist monitor the initial grading activities in the Sweetwater Formation as it appears in the drainage walls. The mitigation measures presented would avoid potential adverse impacts to subsurface resources. Growth Inducement: The majority of the EastLake I project site is surrounded 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 medium-density residential use. The southern and eastern portions of the project site would be contiguous with land zoned as "fLlture urban." Approval oi~ the EastLake I SPA would have some growthuinducing effects on'the existing undeveloped land southwest and ~northeast of the project boundaries; and may encourage Surrounding pla~med 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 managemenl plan. 1-9 RE-3 BC-2 --.~ L_~_~ (RM-25) \~.// RESID~IAL - VILLA~ C~ - ~ND USE DISTRICTS J I ~- 1 OPEN SPACE ~SINE~ CENT~ - ~D us~ DISTRICTS ~'I~['OCATOR /1 - l )l SPA PLAN EASTLAKE HILLS & EASTLAKE HILLS (112 unit~) VILLA ITINIQUE units) VISTA CORTINA RESIDENTIAL NON-RESIDENTIAL (162 units) ,,r- .... I FIELDSTONE CLASSICS ]~irLOCATOR ~ ' |PC~S~8=7_~ 12/P-88-1 / - { )L.cz-. .. J