Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResource Conservation Commission Min 1993/02/08 4820582 EXPRESS SECRETARIAL 534 P02 FEE 11 '93 11:57 A --,~! I ~ . MINUTES OF A SCHEDULED REGULAR MEETING Resource Conservation Commission Chula. Vista, California 6:00 p.m. Monday, February 8, 1993 Conference Room #1 Public Services Building f CALL MEETING TO ORDER/ROLL CALL: Meeting was called to order at 6:07 p.m. by Vice-Chairman Hall. City Staff Environmental Review Coordinator Doug Reid called roll. Present: Commissioners Hall, Johnson, McNair, Myers. Absent: Kracha, Ghougassian. AFPROV AL OF MINUTES: It was MSUC (Johnson/Myers) to approve the minutes of the meeting of January 25, 1993. It was MSUC (Myers/Johnson) to approve the minutes of the meetin~ of February 1, 1993. OLD BUSINESS was moved up on the agenda: 1. Review of Negative Declaration IS-93-14: Ed Batchelder presented the document with comments by Commissioners from the January 25th meeting incorporated. Letter received this date from Latham & Watkins, attorneys for APTEC, was aJso distributed and presented. This letter raised concerns as to the appropriateness of the Negative Declaration. Further discussion . of this Negative Declaration was trailed until Mr. Kracha arrives later in the meeting. 2. Final Action on Draft Supplemental EIR-90-02, Rancho San Miguel: Discussion on this item was continued from the meeting of February 1, 1993 for final approva1. Myers stated she still does not approve the project due to too many issues being unmitigable (see comments summary in minutes of February 1, 1993, page 2). She specifical1y noted the unavaiJability of water and sewage capacity, potential hazards of electro-magnetic fields from SDG&E towers, environmental impact, and concerns on the future of 125. Additionally, the EIR does not comply with CEQA requirements. [Mr. Kracha arrived at 6:34 p.m.]. After discussion, it was then moved and seconded (Myers/McNair) that Draft Supplemental Em- 9<).02 not be accepted due to the number of unmitigab1c impacts, specifically: (1) the unknown future of 125; (2) impact of the run-off waters polluting the reservoir with development of the northern portion; (3) potential health hazard in the southern portion near SDG&E power lines; (4) inadequate funding of schools; (5) unavailability of water and sewage capacity; and (6) impact on plant life and endangered species. (Ayes - Myers, McNair, Hall, Johnson; no - Kracha); motion carried 4-1. . 3. With Mr. Kracha's arrival, Ed Batchelder highlighted the changes to the Negative Declaration and discussed the letter of February 8 from Latham & Watkins. Mr. Batchelder noted that the letter's allegations were synonymous to those previously presented by Latham & Watkins to'the Planning Commission and addressed in Attachment 1 to their Ianuary 13, 1993 staff report, a copy of which was provided to the RCC for this meeting. It was noted that as . , . . . 4E:20682 EXPRESS SECRETARIAL , , 540 P02 FEE 18 '93 12:11 Page 2 reflected in that attachment, it is the opinion of the city attorney's office that the allegations are without merit. These and other allegations regarding the subject amendments are currently in litigation. Further, it is staff's recommendation to approve the Negative Declaration. Kracha asked if APTEC was specifically notified of tonight's meeting. It wa.~ confirmed by staff that they were notified, and that all other parties involved were also notified that this matter was rescheduled for consideration by RCC. It was then moved and seconded (Hall/Johnson) to recommend approval of Negative Declaration IS-93-14; Ayes: Hall, Kracha, Johnson, McNair; no: Myers; motion carried 4-1. [Mr. Johnson left the meeting at 6:50 p.m.]. NEW BUSINESS 1. Kim Glasgow of Ogden and Kim Kilkenny of Baldwin were present for the discussion on the Otay Ranch Final Program EIR. Doug Reid displayed the maps depicting the Resource Sensitivity Analysis, Environmental Alternative and Phase I and II Progress Plan. Issues discussed and reviewed by the Otay Ranch representatives included: mass transit, environmental impact and sensitive areas, archeological surveys, the new village concept, Resource Management Plan, water master plan, schools and population estimation. Kim Kilkenny noted that neither the UC campus nor the Olympic Training Center (located in Salt Creek) are part of this project and not included in any of the studies. Kim Glasgow summarized that the Guy Ranch project was examined with a very programmatic approach, i.e., very general but not necessarily detailed. Regarding questions on the specific flora and fauna impacted, this is documented in the 12/18/92 staff report. Page 15 of that report summarizes the biological impacts with an appendix listed of the details. Myers stated her objection to the current alternative and questioned why the environmental alternative is not acceptable. Staff pointed out that the U.S. Fish & Wildlife made a presentation to the Planning Commission but did not fully support the environmental alternative because it contained too many unmitigable impacts. McNair concurred with the concerns expressed by Myers. Kracha received clarification of specific wording of the document relating to air pollution, the sewer district, greenbelt of Chula Vista and plans for the expansion of the landm.l. He also asked what would happen if 125 is never built. The City of Chula Vista would then monitor its thresholds annually to ensure Q1e circulation of element operated at a Level C. If it fell below that set threshold, an alternate' north/south corridor would still have to be built. . . . Page 3 The next meeting on Otay Ranch is scheduled for a special meeting on February 15, 1993. McNair requested that issues concerning the environmental impact and what is considered sensitive be reviewed at that time. Myers requested information on why the environmental alternative is not viable. She also stated that mass transit reports for the State of California show it is not feasible; additionally, the environment would be destroyed. STAFF REPORT: Workshop on CEQA is tentatively scheduled for March 1 for new members. CHAIRMAN'S COMMENTS: Kracha announced a workshop by the Save Our Heritage Organization on February 18th. Planning Commission Agenda - Rancho San Miguel: no further action by RCC. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned by Chairman Kracha at 9:28 p.m. Respectfully submitted, EXPRESS SECRETARIAL SERVICES ,7 :' ..' / .ijJ . / j tti---1. .~ - -j~~/ y '/ . /, Barbara Taylor