The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2010/12/14 Item 9 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT '\,,1(-- :$' ~ CITY OF ~CHULA VISTA December 14, 2010, Item No,: ~ ITEM TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING: PCM-IO-07/DRC 10-08 Consideration of applications filed by Integral Partners XXVI, LLC lor Eastlake Property Owner, LLC ("Integral Partners") requested amendments to the Eastlake III Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan and associated Planned Community District Regulations and Land Use District Map to develop an 18A acre site with a 389-unit condominium project. Along with requesteu amenuments to the SPA Plan is request for design review approval of the project. The site is located at the southwest comer of Olympic Parkway and Wueste Road, RESOLUTION: of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista considering the addendum to FEIR-05-02; approving amendments to the Eastlake III Sectional Planning Area (SPA) plan, Public Facilities FinancePlan (PFFP) and associated regulatory documents for 18A acres at the southwest corner of Olympic Parkway and Wueste Road, ORDINANCE: of the City of Chula Vista approving amendments to the Eastlake III Planned Community District Regulations and Land Use Disticts Map for 18A acres at the southwest comer of Olympic Parkway and Wueste Road, REVIEWED BY: RESOLUTION: of the City Council of the City ofChula Vista granting a Design Review Permit for a proposed 389 unit condominium project for 18A acres at the southwest comer of Olympic Parkway and Wueste Road, Assistant City Managtl;:ctor of Development Serviccs Ci<y M~g" F 4/"", Vo'" Yco J No SUBMITTED BY: 9-1 Meeting Date: 012/14/10 Page 2 BACKGROUND Integral Partners XXVI, LLC, for EastLake Property Owner, LLC ("Integral Partners", the "applicant," or the "developer") is proposing to develop a condominium project, consisting of 389 units, on a 18.4 acre site (the "Olympic Pointe" project). The project site is located at the most easterly houndary of the EastLake III planned community (see Attachment 1- Locator Map). The applicant is requesting an amendment to the EastLake III SPA Plan in order to revise applicable sections of the SPA document to replace reference to the former approved Windstar Pointe Resort project with applicable references to Olympic Pointe. The parking standards will be updated with the proposed amendment to reflect the additional bedrooms and parking needs required by this project. In June 2006, an amendment to the General Plan, as well as the EastLake III General Development Plan (GDP) and SPA Plan was approved in order to change the Visitor Commercial land use designation to Residential High to accommodate a 494 unit active seniors condominium project. While the project received the necessary SPA Plan amendment, priur to going forward to the Design Review Committee for approval of the actual development project, the applicant withdrew the request for economic reasons. Following the previous applicant's (Puelte's) cancellation of the escrow, The EastLake Company sold the site to Windstar in January, 2007. In 2008, the Windstar project was approved as 494 unit residential units and was similar to that of the former Puelte project with the main difference being market rate rental units. With the downturn in the economy, the Windstar project was never constructed. In January, 2010, the applicant for the currently requested 3X9 unit Olympic Pointe project entered into a purchase agreement with Windstar. When the 2008 Amendment to the EastLake III SPA was approved, the existing Residential Multi-Family I (Rlvl-I) land use district was created as a "Project Specific Land Use District". It was designed to be used exclusively for the development of the former 494 unit Windstar project. The primary purpose of this amendment is to remove the "project specific" restriction of the R1\1-1 district. The proposal includes both a request fur a SPA Amendment and Design Review approval. The project would be subject to the new consolidated permit processing provisions pursuant to Chula Vista Municipal Code (CVMC) section J 9.14.050 (C). Under the new consolidated review process, the City Council will be considering and acting on the SPA Plan Amendment and the Design Review permit. The design of the project was presented at a community meeting on July 28, 2010 and also reviewed by a Design Review Board member. The project was found consistent with applicable design guidelines. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Development Services Director has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the project was covered in previously adopted Final Subsequent Envirorunental Impact Report, EastLake III Senior Housing Project, FEIR 05-02. The Development Services Director has determined that only minor technical changes or additions to this document are necessary and that none of the 9-2 Meeting Date: 012/14/10 Page 3 conditions described in Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines calling for the preparation of a subsequent document have occurred; therefore, the Develorment Service Director has prepared an addendum to this document, Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report, EastLake III Senior Housing Project, FEIR 05-02. RECOMMENDA nON That the City Council: (1) consider the Addendum to FE1R 05-02; (2) adopt the Resolution approving amendments to the EastLake III Sectional Planning Area Plan, Public Facilities Finance Plan and associated regulatory documents for 18.4 acres based upon the Endings and subject to the conditions contained therein; and (3) adopt the Ordinance approving amendments to the EastLake III Planned Community CPC") District Regulations and Land Use Districts Map for 18.4 acres snbject to the Endings contained therein, and (4) adopt the Resolution granting a Design Review Permit for a proposed 389 unit condominium project. BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: On November 10,2010, the Planning Commission voted (5-1-0-1) to recommend that the City Council consider the Addendum and adopt the Ordinance and Resolution approving this Project (see Attachment 2, meeting minutes). DISCUSSION Site Location and Surrounding Uses: The site is situated at the most easterly portion of the EastLake III planned community. The commnnity is fully developed, except for the subject property and a 12 acre commercial site to the north of the Olympic Training Center (OTC). The approximately 18.4 acre site is located on the south side of the Olympic Parkway terminus, bounded by the OTC to the west and south, a future retail commercial site to the north of and fronting on Olympic Parkway, and Lower Gtay Lake east ofWueste Road. The Mountain Hawk community park in the Vistas Neighhorhood is to the northeast (see Attachment 1- Locator Map). The site has been mass graded as part of the EastLake III planned community, resulting in an approximately 10 tol5-foot high manufactured slope at the top ofa 40-foot high natural slope at the eastern and sonthem edge of the site, A description of the surrounding land uses, General Plan, and Zoning designations is outlined on the following page: 9-3 Meeting Date: 012/14/10 Page 4 Summary of Surrounding Land Uses General Plan CV Municipal PC District Land Existing Land Use Code Zoning Use Designation Residential High; Planned Residential High; Vaeant Open Space Community (PC) Open Space Commercial Retail Planned Village Commercial Vacant Community (PC) Puhlicl Quasi Public Planned Community Public/ Quasi Public Olympic Training (PC) Center Open Space Open Space (OS) Not a part Lower Otay Reservoir Public/Quasi Public Planned Community PubliclQuasi Public Olympic Training (PC) Center Site North South East West Project Description: The project proposes to constmct 389 condominium units 011 an 18.4 acre parcel. The project will include the following types of product: I) two-story triplex units; 2) three-story row homes and; 3) three-story carriage row homes. Private streets within the project consist of a main entrance road, a loop road around the perimeter of the site, and alleys which provide access to the majority of the condominium units. Parking for the units will be providcd in garages, with surface parking for guests and visitors. A recreation center with pool will be located in the southeast corner of the project. The entrance to the project will be off Olympic Parkway. The project is proposing certain amendments to the EastLake III SPA Plan, more specifically described below: EastLake III SPA Plan - Text/Map The applicaJ,t has applied to amend the EastLake III SPA Plan, Dev,~lopment Standards, Design Guidelines, and PFFP in order to replace all reference to the fOffiler Windstar project with reference to the Olympic Pointe project. The proposed changes include the following: a) A new project description and development plans; b) Amend the Site Utilization Plan to reflect a reduction in units from 494 to 389 (see Attachment 5, SPA Tab); c) Amend the EastLake III SPA Plan, Development Standards and District Regulations to remove reference to the Windstar Pointe Resort apartment project and replace with the Olympic Pointe condominium project. This includes amending the existing RM-I development standards to reflect parking standards for four bedroom units. Design 9-4 Meeting, Date: (} 12/14/1 () Page 5 standards and exhibits would be amended to include design reference to the Olympic Pointe project (see Attachment 5, PC District Regs. Tab, Design Guidelines Tab); d) Public facilities Finance Plan Amendment to address the public facility needs associated with the proposed Olympic Pointe project (see Attachment 6); e) Affordable Housing Update to reflect project (see Attachment 5, Affordable Housing Tab); and f) Air Quality Improvement Plan and Water Conservation Plan Amendments to reflect change in project characteristics and implementation measures (see Attachment 5, AQIP Tab, WCP Tab). ANALYSIS: Analysis ofProjec! Data The following is a summary of the project's compliance with the EastLake III Development Standards: EastLake III SPA Designation: J-I I Residential High Current Zoning: PC (Planned Community) PC District Regulations Land Use District RMII Multi - family Lot Area: 18.4 Acres REQUJRED/ALLOWED: PROPOSED: SITE UTILlZA nON PLAN ALLOWANCE Units: 494 units 389 units Density: 26.8 dulacre 21.2 dulac PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: . Building setbacks determined by Site Plan (measured from propeliy line) Minimum: 15 feet Maximum: 56 feet . Maximum Building Height: 4-5 stories or 50 28 feetl two stories for triplex buildings feet. Architectural features up to 65 feet. and 37 feetl three stories for row and carriage row home products. . Reguired Parking (as amended) Proposed Spaces Garage (resident) ~ 778 Resident parking: Open (guest) - 117 2 bedroom un it '= 2 spaces Total ~ 895 spaces 3 bedroom un it ~ 2 spaces 4 bedroom unit ~ 2 spaces Guest parking = .3 spaces per unit Total Required rarkina~ 895 spaces 9-5 Meeting Date: 012/14/10 Page 6 As described in the table above, the proposed 389-unit condominium project is consistent with the existing Rc\Jl-I land use district designation and therefore the required amendments to both the EastLake SPA Plan and PC District Regulations are minor in nature. Other than a clarification as to the required parking standards, the remaining amendments associated with land use are primarily to replace text and exhibits specific to the Windstar project with those of Olympic Pointe project. EustLake /[1 SPA Plan Amendment und PC District Regulations The amendment to the SPA Plan defInes the development parameters, including implementation of the proposed GOP land use designation, urban design criteria, circulation, public facilities, Water Conservation Plan, Air Quality Improvement Plan and other necessary components to ensure the proper integration of the Olympic Pointe Resort project into the existing surrounding residential, commercial and public-quasi public uses. The EastLake III PC District Regulations function as the zoning regulations for the project. The PC District Regulations provide standards and regulations to guide the development of thc site and ongoing regulation of the use of the property. These regulations are applied in conjunction with the EastLake III Design Guidelines to ensure the uses within the project are compatible and well designed. The amendment to the EastLake III PC District Regulations consists primarily of modifying the parking standards due to the unique nature of the project (see discussion under "Parking"). Building Height Unlike the previous residential projects approved for this site (including Windstar and Senior Project), the proposed building height for Olympic Pointe project is lower and more typical of the three story multi-family projects allowed under the Residential (RM) Multi Family Designation. The maximum height would be three stories or 37 feet. The maximum height of the Senior Project was four stories (48 feet). For the Windstar project, buildings ranged between three and four stories (35-50 feet). As a result, the projects two and three story products would result in less visual impact than the former residential project. Parking Typically, the established multi-family parking standards are designed to include guest parking and the parking standard varies depending upon the number of bedrooms in the unit. This project proposes two covered spaces per unit regardless of the number of bedrooms. Open parking is provided primarily for use by guests of the residents. A total of 895 parking spaces would be provided included 778 spaces within two car garages (for residents) and 117 open parking spaces (for guests). Adequate parking would be provicled. 9-6 Meeting Date: 012/14/10 Page 7 Eastlake III SPA Plan-Design (illidefines: The EastLake III Design Guidelines stipulate design parameters that pertain to site planning, landscape architecture, architecture and signage for the 18.4-acre site. The Design Guidelines contain illustrations and written requirements to implement the design ideas presented therein. Some of the urban design guidelines also emphasize quality design, site development character and conceptual building/parking/open space relationships within the project. Because of the importance of unifying themes and designs over an extended period of time until hIll build-out, the Design Guidelines are utilized to ensure overall consistency while allowing for t1exibility at the detailed site plan level. For example, while the design guidelines would indicate that building facades should include relief to avoid a monotonous appearance, there is t1exibility as to how an individual project and provide the necessary building or fa<;ade offsets in order to achieve this. The EastLake III Design Guidelines have been updated to include the conceptual design for the Olympic Pointe Project, to ensure that the physical appearance will compliment the type of other developments within the EastLake III planned community. Architecture/Site Layout The Multi-Family Design Guidelines of Eastlake III SPA indicate that building architecture should incorporate a variety of units, building sizes and heights, and color accents. The projcct proposes a site layout whereby the variation in size of building products provides an even distribution of buildings throughout the entire site rather than the clustered design of the previously approved project. The previous Windstar project contained only 18 residential buildings. The proposed project contains three product types housed in a total of 92 residential buildings of various sizes. The two-story triplex buildings would Hank the project on the north, east and south, with the three-story row house products occurring in the interior and west side where visihility from surrounding areas would not be a concern. As alluded to above, under building height, this would be a visual change from the former project which had three-story structures along the north and eastern portion of the si te The varying sizes of the carriage row home buildings allows for relief from the monotonous appearance caused by long expanses of building fa<;ade as well as a curvilinear street pattern through the area. In addition, fa~ade plane offsets are provided on the building elevations thre,ugh the use of pop-out, recesses and staggered roof lines. All of these features are encouraged by the Multi-Family design guidelines. As discussed above, the project has been reviewed for design consistency with the Design Guidelines of the EastLake 1II SPA Plan (as proposed for amendment). Due to the limited scope of these guidelines, the multi-family section of the Chula Vista Design Manual was also referred to for items such as location of and adelluacy of open space and was found to be consistent. EaslLake Iff SPA Plan-Public Facililies Finance Plan: The amended Public Facilities Finance Plan (PFFP) has been prepared by third-party consultants. in order to analyze any changes resulting from the reduction from the former Windstar 494 luxury apartment units to the proposed 389 condominium units for Olympic Pointe. As required 9-7 Meeting Date: 012/14/10 Page 8 b'i the City's Growth Management Ordinance, the proposed amendment to the EastLake lTl PFFP analyzes the impact on public facilities and services and identi ties the required PLlblic facilities and services needed to serve the 18.4-acre site of the Olympic Pointe Project to maintain consistency with the City's QLlality of Life Threshold Standards. The PFFP describes in detail the cost. financing mechanism and timing for constructing pLlblic facilities. The public facilities needed to serve the project will be guaranteed by placing conditions of approval on the design review permit, payment of outstanding fees at the building permit stage, and/or continuing payment of bond payments under the approved Community Facilities Districts to finance or maintain public facilities. The PFFP consists of the analysis of transportation, drainage, water, sewer, tire, schools, libraries, parks, and fiscal impacts of the project, as described below: Transpo rtati 0 nl C i rcula ti on A traffic impact report was prepared by traftlc consultant, Linscott, Law and Greenspan (LLG) dated September 22, 20 I O. The analysis concluded that the proposed project, would not cause any impacts to the surrounding street network and intersections requiring mitigation beyond those identified within FETR 05-02. The traffic analysis for the proposed project analyzed changes in trip distribution within the project site and oft~site traffic volumes and levels of service and direct and cumulative traffic related impacts upon the General Plan Update Circulation Element roadways. Because the Addendum for the proposed project is based upon the Senior Housing Project FEIR, the comparisons regarding trip generation are made between that project rather than the more recently approved Windstar project. As identified within the traffic analysis, the proposed Project results in approximately 2,334 average daily trips (ADT) per SANDAG trip generation figures. This marks an increase of 358 ADTs from the previously approved Senior Housing Project. At the same time, it is approximately 624 ADTs lower than the former Windstar project (which would generate 2,964 ADT's). The prior installation and operation of the signal light at Wueste Road and Olympic Parkway and the opening in Fall 2007 of the SR 125, and required compliance with the mitigation measures identified within the EastLake ITT Senior Housing Project Final Subsequent Envirolllilental Impact Report FElR 05- 02, will ofTset any additional tramc volume associated with the project Olympic Parkway, a four-lane Major Arterial Road, will serve the Olympic Pointe project. Regioml access will be provided primarily by SR-l25, approximately two miles to the west. Interstate 805 is located approximately seven miles to the west and also provides links to regional transportation facilities. The timing for installation of required public improvements and financing mechanisms are discussed in the Olympic Pointe Supplemental Public Facilities Finance Plan (PFFP) (see Attachment 6). Street improvements required to serve the project are identified m the PFFP and EastLake Seniors ElR. These improvements include: . Westbound OZvmpic Parkway: One left-turn lane (with 100 feet of storage) and two through lanes; . Northbound Olympic Parkway (at project driveway). One left-turn lane and one right- turn lane (with a storage length of 75 feet in each) 9-8 . Meeting Date: 012/14/10 Page 9 Eastbound Olvmpic Parkway. One shared through/right lane and one through lane; Relocate the median opening on Olympic Parkway, further west from its cunent lucation to accommodate the proposed project driveway; A signal shall he installed and two outbound (northbound) lanes, one left-turn and one right-turn inbound (southbound) lanes to be provided at the project driveway; and Install a "No U Turn" sign for eastbound traftic on Olympic Parkway at the Olympic Parkway/Wueste Road intersection. . . . No signi ticant traffic impacts were identified in the tramc analysis, and the existing mitigation measures contained in EIR 05-02 have been determined to be equally applicable to the proposed project. The Olympic Pointe Project will be conditioned to implement previously identified mitigation measures. Drainage The 18.4-acre site lies within the Otay Lakes Drainage Basin. However, runoff from the site is diverted into the Salt Creek Basin to prevent impacts to the Lower Otay Reservoir. Presently, runoff from the site is discharged into a 42-inch pipe and into the City's storm water conveyance system in Olympic Parkway, which ultimately discharges into Salt Creek. The project will be conditioned to provide for the conveyance of storm water flows in accordance with City standards, policies and requirements. The Developer will design, install and maintain on-site erosion protection. All permanent or temporary erosion control will be designed to City st:mdards and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Further, the project shall comply with all Federal, State and Local storm water runoff and discharge regulations. Water The Otay Water District will provide water service for the Olympic Pointe Project. The Otay Water District has facilities in the vicinity of the project that can provide water service. It has been determined by the OWD that the project will not receive recycled water for landscaping since it is in an area that drains into the adjacent Lower Otay Reservoir. Land that drains into the Upper or Lower Otay Reservoir is restricted from using recycled water for landscape irrigation to avoid the potential tor contamination of drinking water. The projected average day potable water demand (ADD) for the Olympic Pointe Project is approximately 98 gpm (gallons per minute). This is less than the 173 gpm estimated for the former Windstar project. The fire tlow is 8,000 gallons per minute (gpm), for a duration of 4 hours which meets the City's requirements. This is the same fire flow requirement as the former Windstar project. There is adequate off-site storage capacity to meet both potable water and fire flow demands. Sewer Sewer service to the project site is provided by the City of Chula Vista. The Olympic Pointe Project is located in the Salt Creek drainage basin. The project will connect to the existing eight 9-9 Meeting Date: 012/14/10 Page 10 and 12-inch gravity sewer mains located north of Olympic Parkway in the approved Vistas Neighborhood C-I (commercial) site of the EastLake SPA Plan. This sewcr collects t10ws generated II'om the Vistas Neighborhood VR-9, VR-IO, VR-II (residential) and C-l (commercial) sites and conveys the nows to the IS-inch diameter main in Olympic Parkway. The IS-inch main connects to the 18-inch Salt Creek Interceptor. The capacity of these facilities to serve the proposed project has been assessed in the Final EastLake Peninsula off-site Sewer Capadty Analvsis Study dated November 8, 2005, by PBS&J. The 2005 study determined that the off-site sewer capacity for the EastLake Seniors was adequate. The Seniors project approved in 2006, was projected to generate an average t10w of 98,800 gpd (gallons per day) into the Salt Creek Interceptor. In 2007, the Windstar Pointe Resort was subsequently proposed for the same property. PBS&J prepared the Final Windstar Pointe Resort Off-Site Sewer Capacity Analysis Study. dated July 17. 2007. PBS&J reviewed the 2005 study and found it adequate and no changes were required, The 2007 study determined that the 494 unit Windstar Pointe project would generate an average t10w of 98,800 GPD. The study was again updated for the proposed project by PBS&J, Olympic Pointe Off-Site Sewer Capacity Analysis Stw(v dated April 2, 2010. This latest study by PBS&J determined that the project would generate 77,800 gpd ( a decrease of the average now by 21,000 gpd) and that there are no significant impacts to the existing oft~ site wastewater facilities. Projected wastewater flows from the Olympic Pointe Pointe Project will ultimately discharge into the Salt Creek Interceptor. Fire Development of the proposed Project is not anticipated to change the need for fire service in the area, The existing Fire Station N. 8, located at 1180 Woods Drive in the EastLake Woods neighborhood, would be the primary station to serve the project. Schools Although the proposed project would result in fewer units than the previously approved Windstar project, it will still generate an increase in dwelling units with school age population in the project area. At completion, it is anticipated the proposed Project could generate approximately 170 students. Area schools are of adequate size to accommodate the additional school children and, therefore, the development will not result in a need for new schools. It is anticipated that the project would need to house approximately 97 elementary school age children. A new elementary school is anticipated to be constmcted at 1650 Exploration Drive in Villag~ 11 of Otay Ranch, which would be the nearest school (at completion) to the project. Students would be bused to a nearby school should the construction of this school not be completed by the time the project becomes occupied. It is anticipated that the approximately 25 middle school students generated from the project will attend Eastlake Middle School located approximately 3 miles north of the project. It is anticipated that the approximately 48 high school students generated from the project will attend Eastlake High School located approximately 3 miles northeast of the project at EastLake Parkway and Clubhouse Drive. the property has been included in the Mello Roos Community Facilties district and bonded to cover its fair share cost of these new schools. 9-10 Meeting Date: 012/14/1 0 Page 11 Parks The project IS served by the newly constructed Mountain Hawk community park, located approximately \/4-quarter mile northeast. The developer will be required to pay in-lieu acquisition fees along with development PAD fees prior to issuance of building pennits. EastLake [[] SPA Pran-IVata Conservation Plan: The City's Growth Management Ordinance requires the preparation of a Water Conservation Plan (WCP) for all major projects in accordance with the City's Water Conservation Plan Guidelines. The average daily water demand (ADD) for the project is 98 gpm (gallons per minute). Numerous features have been included in the proposed project to minimize the use of water during the construction and operation of the project. The water conservation measures incorporated into the project as required by the City's WCP Guidelines include hot water pipe insulation, pressure reducing valves, watcr-efficient dishwashers, dual Hush toilets as well as water-efficient landscaping and the use of evapotranspiration controllers. The estimated potable water savings with these conservation measures is 0.009 MGD or 4% of the total ADD. The project WCP demonstrates the valuc of incorporating water conservation measures 111 buildings and irrigation systems for residential development. The implementation of these measures will contribute to preserving a valuable natural resource. A replacement Addendum has been prepared for the project to renect these new standards. Eastlake III SPA Plan-Air Quality Improvement Plan: An Air Quality Improvement Plan (AQIP) was prepared for the EastLakc III area in accordance with the City's Growth Management Ordinance and the Growth Management Program. AQIPs must be prepared for all residential projects containing 50 dwelling units or more. The project was previously evaluated under the 2002 AQIP Guidelines. An Addendum to the AQIP was adopted in 2008 exclusively for the former Windstar project, which indicated the applicant opted to comply with the GreenStar program. The City's AQIP guidelines were updated in 2009, which now require developers to comply with the Green Building and Energy Efticiency Ordinances, CYMC 15.12 and 15.26.030 respectively. These require developers/applicants to implement sustainable design features and improve building energy conservation 15% to 20% above 2008 State Energy Code requirements. A replacement Addendum has been prepared for the project to renect these new standards. Affurdable HOllsing Plan: The proposed Olympic Pointe Project would require the proVISIOn of twenty-five (25) Low Income units. Winds tar Pointe Master, LLC and the EastLake Development Company, entered into an Agreement to post security for an Affordable Housing Obligation and a subsequent Amendment with the City in 2008 and 2009 to satisfy this requirement. In compliance with the 9-11 Mecting Datc: 012/14/10 Page 12 terms of the Agreement to satisfy the affordable housing obligation, EastLake paid $2 million to the City for the ownership, transfer and use of twenty-five (25) low income housing credits resulting from the l43-unit Landings II affordable housing development in the Winding Walk neighborhood of Otay Ranch Village 11. The Landings 11 development is currently under construction, and is expected to be completed by November 2011. DECISION-MAKER CONFLICTS: Staff has reviewed the property holdings of the City Council and has found no property holdings within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property, which is subject to this action. CURRENT FISCAL YEAR IMPACT: The applicant has paid for all costs associated with the processmg of the proposed SPA amendment and Design Review request. ONGOING FISCAL YEAR IMPACT: The proposed Project was required to estimate the fiscal impact that the proposed amendment will have on the City of (hula Vista operation and maintenance budgets. The fiscal analysis presents future revenues and expenditures in current (2010) dollars. Also, revenues and expenditures are presented arll1ually, reflecting a conservatively projected development ahsorption schedule based on information provided by the Developer. This approach identifies annual project fiscal surpluses and deticits and represents a more realistic approach when compared to assumed instant build-out. The fiscal revenues to the City associated with the Olympic Pointe Project range from $54,800 annually and rise to $309,000 at build-out. Fiscal expenditures would be initially $49,500 and rise to $279,300 at build-out. The net fiscal impact from developing the Olympic Pointe project is positive through-out the development and results in annual net surplus of $29,700 at build- out. Attachments 1 Locator 2 Planning Commission Resolution and November 10, 2010 Minutes 3 Addendum to FEIR-05-02 4 Ownership Disclosure Form 5 Eastlake III SPA Plan Amendment-Binder 6 Public Facilities Financing Plan Amendment Prepared by: Jeff Steichen, Associate Planner, Development Services Department J:\plmming\casdlk\! O~ll IPCivl 1 0-07\Reports\CC 9-12 ATTACHMENT 1 LOCATOR MAP 9-13 PROJECT LOCATION LOCATOR MAP 9-14 ATTACHMENT 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION AND MEETING MINUTES 9-15 RESOLUTION NO. PCM-IO-07 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL CONSIDER THE ADDENDUM TO FEIR 05-02 AND APPROVE AMENDMENTS TO THE EASTLAKE III SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) PLAN, EASTLAKE III PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND LAND USE DISTRICTS MAP, PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCING PLAN (PFFP), AND ASSOCIATED REGULATORY DOCUMENTS FOR 18.4 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF OLYMPIC P ARKW A Y AND WUESTE ROAD WHEREAS, on April 12, 2010, a duly verified application was filed with the City ofChula Vista Development Services Department by Integral Partner XXVI, LLC for Eastlake Project Owner, LLC ("Developer"), requesting approval of amendments to the EastLake III SPA Plan and EastLake III Planned Community District Regulations and associated regulatory documents including Design Guidelines, PFFP, Air Quality Improvement Plan (AQlP) and Water Conservation Plan (WCP) for 18.4 acres located at the intersection of Olympic Parkway and Wuesle Road ("Project); and, WHEREAS, a Tentative Subdivision Map (Chula Vista Tract 06-11) to allow 389 condominium units on the project site was approved on June 20, 2006 based upon the previous Eastlake Seniors project; and WHEREAS, the Development Services Director has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with the California Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the project was covered in previously adopted Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report, Eastlake III Senior Housing Project, FEIR 05-02. The Development Services Director has determined that only minor technical changes or additions to this document are necessary and that none of the conditions described in Section 15162 ofthe State CEQA Guidelines calling for the preparation of a subsequent documents have occurred; therefore, the Development Services Director has prepared an addendum to this document, Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report, Eastlake III Senior Housing Project, FEIR 05-02; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that the Addendum to FEIR-05-02 has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of CEQA, and the Environmental Review Procedures ofthe City of Chula Vista; and WHEREAS, the Development Services Director set the time and place for a hearing on the Proj ect, and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and it mailing to property owners and within 500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property, at least 10 days prior to the hearing; and, 9-16 WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 6:00 p.m., November 10,20 I 0, in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Conunission and the hearing was thereafter closed. NOW THEREFORE, THE CHULA VISTA PLANNING COMMISSION MAKEs THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS: I. SPA FINDINGS THE SPA PLAN, AS AMENDED, IS IN CONFORMITY WITH THE EASTLAKE ill GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND THE CHULA VISTA GENERAL PLAN. The proposed amendments to the EastLake ill SPA Plan reflect land uses that are consistent with the EastLake ill General Development Plan and the City of Chula Vista General Plan. The residential nature of the proposed use would be consistent with the adopted high-density residential designation for the project site and compatible with the surrounding residential and open space land uses of the EastLake area. THE SPA PLAN, AS AMENDED, WILL PROMOTE THE ORDERLY SEQUENTIALIZED DEVELOPMENT OF THE INVOLVED SECTIONAL PLANNING AREAS. The requested amendments to the Eastlake ill SPA plan include a PFFP that outlines the required infrastructure to serve the Project, the timing of installation and the fmancing mechanisms to promote the orderly sequentialized development of the Project. The Project is one of the last areas of EastLake III to be developed. THE EASTLAKE ill SPA PLAN, AS AMENDED, WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT ADJACENT LAND USE, RESIDENTIAL ENJOYMENT, CIRCULATION OR ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY. The proposed modifications to land use and development standard provisions within the Project Site have been fully analyzed ane will not adversely affect the circulation system and overall land use as previously envisioned in the EastLake III General Development Plan. An Addendum to FEIR-05-02 has been prepared and the Development Services Director has determined that any impacts associated with the proposed amendments have been previously addressed by FEIR-05-02; and thus, the requested amendments to the SPA will not adversely affect the adjacent land uses, residential enjoyment, circulation or environmental quality of the surrounding uses. IN THE CASE OF PROPOSED INDUSTRIAL AND RESEARCH USES, THAT SUCH DEVELOPMENT WILL BE APPROPRIATE IN AREA, LOCATION, AND OVERALL DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ARE SUCH AS TO CREATE A RESEARCH OR INDUSTRIAL ENVIRONMENT OF SUSTAINED DESIRABILITY AND STABILITY; AND, THAT SUCH DEVELOPMENT WILL MEET 9-17 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS ESTABLISHED BY THIS TITLE. The proposed project is not an industrial or research project. THE STREETS AND THOROUGHFARES ARE SUITABLE AND ADEQUATE TO CARRY THE ANTICIPATED TRAFFIC THEREON. The potential impacts to traffic and circulation have been thoroughly analyzed based upon the proposed Project resulting in specific requirements that must be complied with at the time of development within the Project area. This includes payment of Transportation Development Impact fees (TDIF) and construction of project entrance improvements to Olympic Parkway and construction of a traffic signal at the Project entrance. ANY PROPOSED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT CAN BE JUSTIFIED ECONOMICALLY AT THE LOCATION(S) PROPOSED AND WILL PROVIDE ADEQUATE COMMERCIAL FACILITIES OF THE TYPES NEEDED AT SUCH PROPOSED LOCATION(S). The proposed project is not a commercial project. THE AREA SURROUNDING SAID DEVELOPMENT CAN BE PLANNED AND ZONED IN COORDINATION AND SUBSTANTIAL COMPATIBILITY WITH SAID DEVELOPMENT. The proposed amendments are consistent with the previously approved plans and regulations applicable to surrounding sites and therefore the proposed amendments can be planned and zoned in coordination and substantial compatibility with said development. II. PFFP FINDINGS THE AMENDMENT TO THE EXISITNG PFFP COMPLIES WITH SECTIONS 19.09.050 THROUGH 19.09.100, REQUIREMENTS FOR PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCE PLAN. The Eastlake III PFFP amendment for the Olympic Pointe project has been prepared according to the contents and details outlined in the Municipal Code. It has been submitted to and reviewed by the Director of Development Services who has determined that the proposed PFFP amendment complies with the provisions of Sections 19.050 through , 19.09.100 and is forwarding the document with corresponding development plan to the Planning Commission for consideration. Public facilities needed to serve the project were identified and will be guaranteed by conditions of approval, EIR-05-02, payment ofDIF fees at the building permit stage, and/or utilizing Community Facilities Districts to finance or maintain the public facilities. 9-18 THE PROPOSED PFPP AMENDMENT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE OVERALL GOALS AND POLICIES OF THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN, GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM, THE EASTLAKE III GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND THE AMENDED EASTLAKE III SPA PLAN. The Eastlake III General Development Plan and Eastlake III SPA Plan outline the necessary public facilities required to meet its land use and circulation objectives of the General Plan. The PFFP Amendment outlines detailed plans for the provision of those public facilities as they relate to the proposed Proj ect. The PFFP identifies required TDIF fees which must be paid to help defray costs of facilities which will benefit the project. The estimated fees required by this project are $ 2,715,920.20 for transportation facilities (TDIF plus traffic signal) and $ 4,618,986.00 for other applicable Facilities (exclusive of Park Acquisition and Development (PAD) fees. The fiscal revenues to the City associated with the Olympic Pointe project range from $54,800 annually and rise to $309,000 at build-out. Fiscal expenditures would be initially $49,500 and rise to $279,300 at build-out. The net fiscal impact from developing the Olympic Pointe project is positive through-out the development and results in annual net surplus of $29,700 at build-out. THE PFFP AMENDMENT ENSURES THAT THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROJECT WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE CITY'S QUALITY OF LIFE STANDARDS. As required by the City's Growth Management Ordinance, the PFFP Amendment analyzes the impact of the project on public facilities and services and identifies the required public facilities and services needed to serve the project to maintain consistency with the City's Quality of Life Threshold Standards. The PFFP desc;:ibes in detail the cost, fmancing mechanisms and timing for constructing public facilities required to ensure that development occurs only when the necessary public facilities exist or are provided concurrent with the demands of the new development. Certain facility improvements have been ider:.,ified. These include the requirements for the constn:ction of a signal at the intersection of Olympic Parkway and the entrance to the project, other street improvements to Olympic Parkway and secondary access roadways for emergency access vehicles. In addtion, water conservation and air quality improvements and fire protection measures along with payment of required DIF fees will ensure the Project will maintain consistency with the City's Quality of Life Standards. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA recommends that the City Council adopt the attached Draft City Council Resolution and Ordinance approving the Project in accordance with the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. 9-19 'BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA THAT a copy of this Resolution and the draft City Council Resolution and Ordinance be transmitted to the City CounciL PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this 10th day of November, 2010, by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Michael Spethman, Chairperson ATTEST: Diana Vargas, Secretary 9-20 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA 6:00 p.m. November 10, 2010 Council Chambers 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, California CALL TO ORDER: ROLL CALL I MOTIONS TO EXCUSE: Members Present: Member Absent: Spethman, Liuag, Moctezuma, Vinson, Tripp, Felber Bringas MSC (Moctezuma/Felber) to excuse Cmr. Bringas. Motion carried. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS: Read into the record by Chair 6:04:50 PM ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: No public input. CONSENT AGENDA: None PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1. Public Hearing: PCM 10-07; Consideration of amendments to the Eastlake III Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan and associated Planned Community District Regulations and Land Use District Map for an 18.4 acre site at the southwest corner of Olympic Parkway and Wueste Road intersection. Background: Jeff Steichen reported that in June 2006 amendments to the General Plan and Eastlake III GDP and SPA Plan were approved to change the Visitor Commercial land use designation to Residential High to accommodate a 494 unit active seniors condominium project. Due to economic reasons, the applicant (Puelte) withdrew their application and sold the site to Windstar in January 2007. The Windstar project was approved as 494 residential units similar to the former Puelte project with the main difference being market rate rental units. Due to the economic downturn, the project was never constructed. In January 2010, the applicant for the currently requested 389 unit Olympic Pointe project entered into a purchase agreement with Windstar. Mr. Steichen presented the proposed Olympic Pointe project as described in the staff report. 9-21 Planning Commission Minutes - 2 - November 10,2010 Staff Recommendation: That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution PCM 10-07 recommending that the City Council: 1. Consider the Addendum to FEIR 05-02 2. Approve a resolution for the Eastlake III SPA Plan Amendment (PCM 10-07 and Ordinance for the amendment to the PC District Regulations based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained in the Council Resolution and Ordinance. Commission Comments: 6: \4:37 PM Cmr. Spethman stated this is a premier piece of real estate, with its proximity and views to the lake and mountains. He's also pleased that this will be a for-sale project instead of rental property as previously proposed. Cmr. Felber stated he supports the project, however, he's increasingly experiencing traffic congestion on Olympic Parkway with vehicles queuing to get onto 1-805; he's concerned that this project will exacerbate those conditions. Cmr. Vinson stated he's pleased that the building height has been reduced by one story and that they will be for-sale products; he fully supports the project. Cmr. Tripp stated he supports the project and inquired if there's a provision stating that 1- 805 cannot compete or install additional improvements that might take away traffic from using the toll road SR-125. Gary Halbert responded that there are contractual obligations that preclude 1-805 from adding general purpose lanes. He also indicated that there are improvements currently going on in that area close to 1-805 that might be contributing to the congestion and back- up on Olympic Parkway Cmr. Liuag stated this pristine piece of property is unlike any other in the City because of its proximity and views of the lake and mountains. The General Plan's land use designation as Visitor Commercial was a right one. Therefore, although he is pleased it will be a for-sale project, in principal and staying true to the original General Plan land use designation of Visitor Commercial, he cannot support the project. Cmr. Moctezuma stated SR-125 is a great road and could mitigate most traffic concerns this project could generate, but unfortunately many people, for whatever reason, most likely financial, don't use it. She indicated perhaps the developer would consider some kind of short-term subsidy to the home-owners as an incentive to use the toll road. Otherwise, she supports the project. (,:45.35 PM MSC (Vinson/Tripp)(5-1-0-1) that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution PCM 10-07 recommending that the City Council: 1) Consider the Addendum to FEIR 05-02 2) Approve a resolution for the Eastlake III SPA Plan Amendment (PCM 10-07 and Ordinance for the amendment to the PC District Regulations based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained in the Council Resolution and Ordinance. Motion carried with Cmr. Liuag voting against the project. 9-22 Planning Commission Minutes - 3 - November 10,2010 Director's Report: None Commission Comments: None. Adjournment: To a regular Planning Commission meeting on December 8, 2010. Respectfully submitted ~~ ~iana vargas' 0 Secretary to the Planning Commission 9-23 ATTACHMENT 3 ADDEDUM TO FEIR-OS-02 9-24 ADDENDUM TO FINAL SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL I1\1PACT REPORT EIR 05-02 PROJECT NAME: Olympic Pointe Project PROJECT LOCATION: The proposed project site is located in the east central portion of the EastLake III SPA area on approximately 30.5 acres, (18.4-acre of graded pad area). The project site is located immediately south of the intersection of Olympic Parkway and Wueste Road. Olympic Park-way borders the project site on the west and Wueste Road borders the site on the east. PROJECT APPLICANT: Integral Partners, LLC for Eastlake Project Owner, LLC CASE NO: FEIR 05-02 DATE: November 2, 2010 I. BACKGROUND/SCOPE OF ANALYSIS The purpose of this Addendum is to address the proposed project, Olympic Pointe Resort, in replacement of the previously approved EastLake III Senior Housing Project. As the lead agency for the project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, Public Resources Code, Sec. 21000 et seq.), the City of Chula Vista prepared and conducted an environmental analysis (Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Analysis FEIR 05-02) of the EastLake III Senior Housing Project. Subsequently, the Final Subsequent Environment:llImpact Report (FEIR 05-02) for the EastLake III Senior Housing Project was certified in June 2006. FEIR 05-02 addressed detailed amendments to the General Plan, EastLake III General Development Plan (GDP) and EastLake III Sectional Planning Area Plan (SPA) to allow for a land use change from visitor-serving commercial use to high density residential land use for the Senior Housing Project. The General Plan Amendment consisted of redesignating 18.4 acres to "Residential-High" and the 1.2 acres of designated Open Space remained unchanged. In addition, the EastLake III GDP was amended to redesignate 18.4 acres of CT-Commercial Tourist uses to RH-Residential High (18-27+ dwelling units/acre) and the 1.2 acres of designated Open Space remained unchanged. The EastLake III SPA was also amended to eliminate the Commercial Tourist uses east of the (Olympic Training Center) OTC and instead provided potential high-density residential development. Components of the SPA included the proposed change in land use within the Planned Community District Regulations, Design Guidelines and Public Facilities Finance Plan (PFFP). FEIR 05-02 addressed the discretionary actions required to incorporate the changes of land use and proj ect amendments within the EastLake III SPA. 9-25 The environmental impacts of developing the subject site, l8.4-acres, have been previously analyzed in the prior EIR (FEIR 05-02). Specifically, the physical impacts of developing the l8.4-acre site were evaluated in EastLake III Senior Housing ProjectlFinal Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (FEIR 05-02) and are hereby incorporated by reference. The General Plan and General Development Plan (GDP) land use designation for this portion of the site is high density residential, and the SPA identifies this portion of the site for high-density residential development use. Accordingly, the General Plan, EastLake III SPA including Planned Community District Regulations, Design Guidelines and Public Facilities Finance Plan (PFFP) were modified to reflect the high-density residential uses. The first addendum to FEIR 05-02 was prepared in December, 2007 to allow the former 496 unit Windstar Pointe Resort luxury apartment project which was approved but never constructed on the project site. The amendments to the Eastlake III SPA at that time, removed the Senior Housing project restrictions on how the project site could be developed and created a new RM -1 land use district to accommodate the former Windstar project. The proposed project, Olympic Pointe Condominium Project, considered in this addendum is a further amendment to the adopted SPA and related development design standards. These amendments will remove reference to the previously approved Windstar project and replace it with Olympic Pointe residential condominium project. The applicant has requested the proposed the proposed proj ect be reviewed for substantial conformance with the Puelete Homes/Senior Project for which an EIR was certificated, and which preceded the former Windstar project. The proposed amendments to the SPA plan are based upon a site plan that includes 92 residential buildings of various sizes. The proposed project contains 3 product types:l) 2- story triplex units; 2) 3-story row homes and; 3) 3-story carriage row homes. The two- story triplex buildings would flank the project on the north, east and south, with the three- story row house products occurring on the interior and west side where visibility from surrounding areas would not be a concern. Private streets within the project consist of a main entrance road, a loop road around the perimeter of the site, and alleys, which provide access to the majority of the condominium units. Parking for the units will be provided in garages, with surface parking for guests and visitors. A recreation center with pool will be located in the southeast comer of the proj ect. The entrance to the project will be off of Olympic Parkway. An emergency access road would be graded in the southwestern comer of the property to allow additional emergency vehicle access to the project site, exactly as the emergency access road within the Senior Housing Project. No offsite pedestrian trail nor construction road are included as part of the Olympic Pointe proj ect. The acreage for residential development would not increase and there would be a decrease in the currently allowed number of dwelling units for the site (494 dwelling units permitted) as seen below: 9-26 Approved Senior Housing Development Proposed Olympic Pointe Development 494 High density residential senior units 389 High density residential on 18 A-acres condominium units on 18A-acres 1.2 acres Open Space 1.2 acres Open Space The proposed amendment and related documents to reflect this new development concept have been submitted and reviewed. Mitigation measures from the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRPs) associated with FEIR 05-02 are still valid and applicable to this project. The physical development of the 18.4 acres and unchanged 1.2 acres of open space has been previously addressed in the certified EIR. Thus, this Addendum focuses on the proposed EastLake III SPA amendment and land use change for the 18.4-acre portion of the site from a senior housing project to a condominium development while maintaining the previously approved high-density residential use. Technical reports prepared for the FEIR 05-02 have been updated to reflect the new proposed project configuration and layout. The updated technical reports demonstrate and substantiate that the proposed SPA and Development Standards modifications do not result in any new significant impacts nor increase in severity of any previously identified significant impacts. The environmental analysis presented in this document addresses the modification of the previously approved SPA plan. Because the modifications to the SPA plan, PFFP and associated Development Standards would not result in any increase in allowable units nor an adverse expansion of the limits of grading, the proposed SPA amendment is considered to be adequately covered under FEIR 05-02 and no further analysis is warranted. n. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS The applicant has applied to amend the EastLake III SPA, Development Standards, Design Guidelines, PFFP in order to replace all reference to the former Windstar project with ref'::rence to the Olympic Pointe Project. The propo,~ed changes include the following: a) A new project description and development plans b) Amend the Site Development plan to reflect a reduction in units from 496-389 c) EastLake III SPA, Development Standards and District Regulations to remove the Winstar Pointe Resort apartment project and replace with the Olympic Pointe condominium project. This includes amending the existing RM-l development standards to reflect parking standards for 4 bedroom units. Design standards and exhibits would be amended to include design reference to the Olympic Pointe project. 9-27 d) Public Facilities Finance Plan Amendment to address the public facility needs associated with the proposed Olympic Pointe Condominium project. e) Affordable Housing Update f) Project-Specific Technical Studies and Analysis Updates 1. Entitlements applied for: SPA Plan Amendments . Amendments to the Eastlake III Sectional Plaiming Area (SPA) Plan to remove references to the Windstar project and add description ofthe proposed project. . Amendments to the Eastlake III Planned Community District Regulations to remove references to the Windstar proj ect and add description of the proposed proj ect. . Amendments to the Eastlake III Design Guidelines to remove references to the Windstar project and add description of the proposed project. III. CEQA REQUIREMENTS Sections 15162 through 15164 of the State CEQA Guidelines discuss a lead agency's responsibilities in handling new information that was not included in a project's certified environmental document. Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines provides: (a) When an EIR has been certified or a negative declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent ErR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, one or more of the following: (1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration d'le to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; (2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous ErR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or (3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable 9-28 diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the negative declaration was adopted, shows any of the following: a. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or Negative Declaration; b. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR; c. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or d. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. Section 15164 of the State CEQA Guidelines provides that: A. The lead agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. B. An addendum need not be circulated for public review but can be induded in or attached to the final EIR. c. The decision-making body shall consider the addendum with the final EIR prior to making a decision on the project. D. A brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a subsequent EIR pursuant to Section 15162 should be included in an addendum to an EIR, the lead agency's required fmdings on the project, or elsewhere in the record. The explanation must be supported by substantial evidence. This Addendum has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Sections 15162 and 15164 of the State CEQA Guidelines. The proposed changes to the project do not constitute a substantial change to the previously approved project. The modifications proposed would not result in any environmental effects that were not considered in the Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report FEIR 05-02, nor would the changes increase the severity of any of the impacts identified in this EIR. There has been no 9-29 significant material change in circumstances relative to the project, and no new information of substantial importance has become available after the preparation of the Senior Housing Project EIR. The mitigation measures identified in FEIR 05-02 would be equally applicable to the revised project. Therefore, in accordance with Sections 15162 and 15164 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City has prepared this addendum to Second Tier FEIR 05-02. IV. ANALYSIS Updates to technical studies previously prepared for the EastLake III Senior Housing Project, Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (EIR 05-02) have been prepared to address the proposed project, Olympic Pointe Condominium Project, and identify any potential impacts. An updated traffic study fully considers project specific and cumulative traffic impacts associated with the newly proposed project. A City approved traffic consultant has prepared the Traffic Impact Study. Additional technical study updates to air quality, water quality, hydrology/drainage, sewer, geology, noise and firewater service studies have been prepared. Also, since Greenhouse Gas was not addressed in EIR 05-02 a GHG analysis has been prepared. No new significant impacts were identified in the updated technical studies regarding the proposed project, Olympic Pointe Condominium Resort, beyond those identified in FEIR 05-02. Therefore, no new additional mitigation measures nor modifications to existing mitigation measures are required. Aesthetics The proposed 389 unit condominium project contains 92 buildings, which is a substantially larger number than the previous 13 buildings for the senior project. This large number of buildings allows for more variations and overall lower project height. The 40 triplex buildings proposed will be located primarily along the northern, eastern and southern perimeter of the site. 'P.1e proposed height of these triplex buildings will be two stories/28 feet in height as opposed to the 3-story, 38-foot height of the perimeter buildings for the previous senior project. No new sources of light and glare impacts have been identified. No additional significant impacts to aesthetics beyond those anticipated in the EIR 05-02 are anticipated with this projp.ct. The mitigation measures identified in the FEIR 05-02 have been determined to be equally applicable to the revised project. Air Quality An Air Quality Study, dated October 2010, was prepared by Dudek to access potential air quality impacts associated with the proposed project. The study analyzed short-term construction impacts, long term and cumulative impacts including project emissions. The air quality study update analyzed the specific project changes as a result of the trip generation and volume trips increased by the proposed project relative to the EL Seniors project. However, no additional significant air quality impacts were identified in the Air Quality Study, and the mitigation measures identified in FEIR 05-02 have been 9-30 determined to be equally applicable to the revised project and no new mitigation measures or modification to existing mitigation measures are required. The Air Quality Study, included a discussion of the projects effect on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. It included an analysis that evaluated the projected level of GHG emissions for the proposed project. The project's potential effect on global climate change was evaluated, and emission of greenhouse gases were estimated based on the use of construction equipment and vehicle trips associated with construction activities, as well as operation emissions once construction phases are complete. With implementation of GHG reduction measures the proposed project would reduce GHG emissions by as much as 28% by the year 2020. The proposed project would therefore exceed the target of 20% below business as usual that has been established for the purposes of assessing operational GHG emissions of projects in the City of Chula vista, and this reduction would be consistent with the goals of AB 32. Furthermore, the proposed project would be consistent with Section 15.26.030 of the City's Municipal Code by employing energy efficient measures beyond that required by the Energy Code, resulting in a 20% reduction in emissions generated by in-home energy use. Additionally, the proposed project would reduce the overall use of potable water by 20%, consistent with the City's Municipal Code. Lastly, it should be noted that the project is high-density development, which ultimately helps in reducing vehicle miles traveled. The project would therefore have a less-than-significant impact on global climate change. Land use The proposed amendments would not conflict with the surrounding land uses nor intent of the General Plan. The residential nature of the proposed use would be consistent with the adopted high-density residential designation for the project site and compatible with the surrounding residential and open space land uses of the EastLake area. The proposed amendment to the SPA Plan does not result in an increase in residential units, and the limits of grading remain the same as that originally addressed in the approved SPA plan and Senior Housing Project. No additional significant impacts to land use above those ant,sipated in FEIR 05-02 are anticipated with the prop.,sed project. No significant impacts were identified regarding land use, planning and zoning and, therefore, no mitigation measures were required with respect to the EastLake III Senior Housing Project FEIR 05-02 concerning land use. No mitigation measures are recommended for the proposed project, Olympic Pointe Project. Transportation, Circulation and Access An updated traffic impact report was prepared by traffic consultant, Linscott, Law and Greenspan (LLG), dated September 22, 2010. The analysis concluded that the proposed project, Olympic Pointe, would not cause any impacts to the surrounding street network and intersections requiring mitigation beyond that identified within FEIR 05-02. The 9-31 traffic analysis for the proposed project analyzed changes in trip distribution within the project site, traffic volumes, LOS levels, projections, regional systems, cumulative projects and traffic related impacts upon the General Plan Update Circulation Element and circulation system and roadways. As identified within the traffic analysis, the proposed project results in approximately 2,334 average daily trips (ADT) per SANDAG trip generation figures. This marks an increase of 358 ADTs from the previously approved Senior Housing Project. However, the prior installation and operation of the signal light at Wueste Road and Olympic Parkway, the opening in Fall 2007 of the SR 125, and required compliance with the mitigation measures identified within the EastLake III Senior Housing Project Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report FEIR 05-02, will offset any additional traffic volume associated with the project. No significant traffic impacts were identified in the traffic analysis, and the existing mitigation measures contained in EIR 05-02 have been determined to be equally applicable to the proposed project. Drainage and Water Quality Fuscoe Engineering prepared a drainage study addendum, dated May 2010, to evaluate any changes in drainage patterns and runoff rates created by the proposed project. The updated study indicates that the proposed changes to the site will not result in any previously unidentified significant hydrologic impacts nor identified any new hydrologic impacts. The mitigation measures contained in FEIR 05-02, for the approved Senior Housing Project, would be equally applicable to the proposed project, Olympic Pointe. A preliminary Water Quality Technical Report for the Olympic Pointe project, dated May, 2010, was prepared by Fuscoe Engineering to evaluate the change to the storm water quality as a result of the proposed project. The study concluded that the proposed changes to the site will not result in any previously unidentified significant or new water quality impacts. The mitigation measures contained in FEIR 05-02, for the approved Senior Housing Project, would still be applicable to the proposed project. Noise An updated Acoustical Assessment Report, dated May 24,2010, was prepared by Dudek to evaluate potential noise impacts created by the proposed Olympic Pointe project to surrounding areas and noise impacts to the proposed project area. The proposed project contains both fewer units and a different project design than the previous senior housing project. A five-foot high noise wall along the top of slope facing Olympic Parkway has been provided on the site plan to ensure that traffic noise levels onto the project site will be within the City's maximum 65 CNEL exterior noise level criterion. The acoustical report does not identify any significant noise impacts and the mitigation measures contained within FEIR.05-02 and FEIR 01-01 have been determined to be equally applicable to the proposed project. Public Services, Systems and Facilities 9-32 According to the On-Site Water Study prepared by PBSJ Company, dated April 2, 2010, the anticipated Maximum Day Demands (MDD) is 422,745 gpd and Average Day Demands (ADD) is 140,915 gpd. The Senior Housing Project estimated maximum day demand was 296,400 gpd. Although, there is an increase in demand and service units, adequate water supply will be provided to meet peak hour demand, minimum 40 psi pressure and continue to serve long term facilities. The existing 12" water main located on Olympic Parkway will continue to provide service to the project site, similar to the Senior Housing project, according to the Otay Lakes Water District Will Serve Letter for the Olympic Pointe Project dated January 6, 2010. The project will have no significant impacts to the existing regional water system and not require any additional off-site improvements to facilitate the proposed proj ect. Fuscoe Enginnering prepared an On-Site Sewer Study for Olympic Pointe, date April, 2010 and PBSJ prepared an Off-Site Sewer Capacity Analysis Study dated April 2, 2010 to address potential sewer system impacts. Based upon the sewer flow calculations, capacity information for the project design and connection to the existing system no additional service systems and facility impacts were identified. The analysis results are consistent with the projected peak design flows indicated in the approved Final EastLake Pensinsula Off-Site Sewer Capacity Analysis Study, prepared by PBS&J, dated November 8, 2005 and other technical studies contained within the Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report, FEIR 05-02. The updated technical studies confirm that there will not be any significant impacts or changes in the anticipated wastewater generation or potable water demand from what was previously considered in FEIR 05-02. Based upon the updated on-site and off-site sewer capacity analyses and the Otay Water District will-serve correspondence, no significant demands to public services and facilities, including water and sewer, are anticipated. No significant impacts beyond those previously identified in FEIR 05-02 are anticipated, and the mitigation measures contained within FEIR 05-02 will be equally applicable to the revised project. Geological Hazards An updated Geotechnical Investigation, dated September 30, 2010, was prepared by Alta California Geotechnical, Inc. to evaluate the project design and potential impacts. The report concluded that no geo',ogica1 significant conditions are apparent that would pn:vent development of the project site. No further impacts were identified, therefore, no new' mitigation measures required. Therefore, no new impacts with regard to geological hazards are anticipated and the mitigation measures identified in EIR 05-02 will be applicable to the revised project. V. CONCLUSION Pursuant to Section 15162 and 15164 of the State CEQA Guidelines, and based upon the above discussion and substantial evidence in the record supporting said discussion, I hereby find that the proposed project will result in only minor technical changes or additions which are necessary to make the Environmental Impact Reports adequate under CEQA. 9-33 ..~,.~ , . ~---~ tephen wer, A.I.e. . Principal Planner Attachments: 1. Project Site Plan(s) 2. Executive Summary to EIR 05-02 References: City of Chula Vista Environmental Review Procedures City of Chula Vista General Plan Update EastLake 111 SPA Plan and Final Map, Final Environmental Impact Report EIR (EIR 01-0 I) EastLake 111 Senior Housing Project Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report EIR (EIR 05 02), certified June 2006 EastLake 111 General Development Plan (GDP), adopted July 17,2001 EastLake 111 Sectional Planning Area Plan (SPA), adopted July 17, 200 I City of Chula Vista Housing Element City of Chula Vista, Affordable Housing Program Technical Studiesllnformation for Olvrnpic Pointe Proiect Acoustical Assessment Report prepared by Dudek, dated May 24, 20 I 0 Air Quality Impact Analysis prepared by Dudek, dated June, 20 I 0 Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared by LLG Engineers, dated September 22, 20 I 0 Geotechnical Investigation, prepared by Alta California Geotechnical, dated September 30, 2010 Off-Site Sewer Capacity Analysis, prepared by PBSJ, dated April, 2 20 I 0 On-Site Sewer Analysis prepared by PBSJ, dated April 20 I 0 Preliminary Drainage Study, prepared by Fuscoe Engineering, dated May2010 Preliminary Water Quality Study, prepared by Fuscoe Engineering, dated May, 20 I 0 On-Site Fire Service Study, prepared by PBSJ, dated July 12,2010 On-Site Water Study, prepared by PBSJ, dated April 2, 2010 OWD Comment Letter dated January 6, 2010 Fire Protection Plan, prepared by Dudek and Associates, dated July 2010 9-34 ~ --- \-- ---'.3, -'' I i C\l ~ co / -='~ -------- ----. I --- --- / / / / / / / ---------- 1~11\111 --- I IQ '". /0 :'lo ;' '", k '", !~ ,~ - '6i.nf/'<" ,. ~t\\>'1 " ft . !7~ " z,: ~ , ,11 ~~ h H ,h~i l ~~~~ '~ ~~~ II ''I-~~ H'<~i ! ~ ~~~~~ ~ _ ~&"nl ~ 1 Hml ,....-!-. w~ ..., z. z au 5"-;: ~ 0" ~-. UJ~5 ::i~ Ou ~ / /' " "J~ ""'^ , '!/" ",,",-, .~~" ""'e~ . '< ~ "'" .", ~'" "'''~'' :;:...'......'''''':11. . ,,"" \""-'- """-' '" '<"\l ="'\ \@ ..", . -""'-- ,~~" " :;jn"", '-. ~-:::S:;m1]1~\' !.:r'~] ,', ",'"";:;.J--' P: '] " .'~.:y\ ~ ",C ' 'w ,,' " --:F7L if u/.: . ___'~/"II' ~~ " ' --'" .:' ',\.'yJ . Ill.; :; ~;; . , I : >, ,:,~., ,':>Ak I~ II ,~ Ii; 11 )~. ~'~' ~ /~ i IIU'" .'f.iI, " ":':~i~:1 . ;;: ~;l :'ik [tJ ,it I/~ " / .M ,.\ /./ :; ,. !!-f ;; "';,11= ~~ ~,', .;:> _ " ("r%,.",,; "i~. ,.,...: ~. oJ. ,:,,~ " c, /A' t:<,' ~YI(~ ,,~ C.~,;li 'i, 71i,," ,:1 ,~ilr :11' V/~, '. ,"~i'l fj , ~c;.,,1 n I' ::::- ~IIUI, Jj,;; 1iI!iL.:AJ m;i '! ,,' "; ", '." ,,'t". Jf; " 1/ b ,11';2.' If 1 I' > if~>'"',, ~ [if! Ilf''''''''' ",,pr'_. ,",.J)flrTr"FYl';;:~'" "....GgJ .'. ~_ ' ' ,~- I'<~~'" !'- ""'~L/~"'ilf-"" :I~' J'\\~\i~..J ,I '!f1l;/~Piii .::c....'f::" "'" ~ f! ,..." \\-?,),.\\\"" .~ .~i . ~:' ' n '1'~ "-:" '''' I" --..... ~'k, .. ~c.. [!fi01i,.e ',"" ','0 " "..-:. I' :'l~~,~~ >,~ 1'1 rL.;)I. J r ''':'r. '-'" ~-..... L~ '1 -r'1' <.) \ ,[~ o ~- .''t~~~of!.- R/.JL::ll!L; .rl/O;;"~""'~ ;'':)1-7'; .' 1___ n ';' ',;,. , ;/ ",/o:,tll~'j "" Jr,~-,,:::~.~ :r,/,;--. . __ .1. . II'? ~.' ' " ,!,: '''*''i*"", >~, iii ,..r~c',J' L '.c '" . _ JIB \~ ,~iI l/i::;L:' -"'-.-S. liS"'!''"''.:;,,' ~~r '~I"_~' .., .. '7_ ~\\~", ,'/' vi,,' ''''''G>o=1:!'''''' ""'--1. ,,'it 'i,IA'" ~~~~..i" I~EJO'~..!L ._", '--=-...\ >,"- v,' o " .. '~!;t,,(.. ~ , '~7" __, ,~ . ,: I !.nl' ~ / I /'''1.'' I iff,; 1 ')~,.J;r "",' -',1. ~ _.._ {,.,,..,, t. ,,,' . ,I !' /I l.L-; r-I I -". I '5,' , , '/. ." ..... _ """ ill" ~'~ '".~ ' ;, "'01,*~L,_""" uTI''i<~, I'~ "-, ',> ':"",'"","," '<"v',"'~ ., I~t" J'f//p,F ,~! /~"'7r-,jII7I,~If!iit-I:c:''''Qy.ol"'Ji / /~.~/'//;/o~~ ~~~,g ",. \11Gx-,';.-\ i,I! n -"zj", iNI/" F, "",~~ ';R-" ," "'", /~ ~/Ii A':::'lr '-'"~ ~~~'~L/ ,"'::";"7'/:/!.1 ili,'j;lt'" ';;lllIij ~~ .lllf!it~:l;~ , .;yc 1/P', ;[~~~m ft., ~~~! -t.;:'i~ "" ';i~ :'l~ : .,,' Cllll" ." , I ~'lJl;;;;,,( I I I"':p ~ ~.~ "~' '.n., . il'ii 'O''i'.;', , ";,'"" ',.".11; I 7JjO('; }', r;~....J! ,'i'h ~" I~~""" ,/ J" 1 -I("'~"~;, . '<' ["".: ill oi ;,,: t:;11 ,imN/I.:: 1. ", < '--h,..._" .", "';' _. "',; '/ ., ,'/~N,:'~' '.;~'/.;._: ."y. j... '~~ ~" ,,~! ';)[1\'0" j, .IE!.J4 '<~~//,~ r ";$/ ~,~; 81 F' 1\Jf*,~ SfL~,.l . 'd~'/ ~'..f -t ,:1",1", r:;; - '?!,~ '>;:-: '~~/ ':~::) /,/~ hJ.' I .: iiJ] "ljj'ilill~ ___'_" ,~, ra-- ...,~ / h ,:ft ~ , '" I .." ~ ,,_ "'" '.' F ,. '. ,.~ ..- _ _ ,. " ~.-'dl">-.'~\ /.\f$J ,'iL "'~~ '~/"<'Tle-:,'J~-~-J':::=f::~~a'__." ~ 'I ''T~''''oo~ ,,<::~ ',.' ""~, -~'iii-~' ,., . ~" 0 .... ~~~' j',. "'" -"",': /""t;, /' '--~' 'M, ..,.,-:. . ~'r j i~ .~,. ,; /):~~; ~ '; ,~> ";,,., "'.. 'c<' f" l!1l.! . · " ~ 'IJl . ';' . lJl" ." ,:1' ;!-.. ",,' .v.<< "''' '"" F"' "'. 'I 9 . ....' .'" ,~_ .. "':; '.i' ~~;?''', ('~(';' ';'I';I"~", ".,i .1'1;;: "'.' ~~'.,...~ . . , ,". M0fC\ ,v, /~ '" ~.. " ~ -"!iJ .,.i 'i" ' " ii".: w' \,'.' .7W',"" I" ..0" ~.~ ~, ~,'1 .;." ' ~-lii' iJI-,.i (':'/~>"/ "'\'! ~' e ~ ,\ \,,~ii<.' ., CJ Il'!"~,, '" I il ",' '.i' .1 0 __ i!",,,,~ i .\/, '-" ':1:) 'ifu:'~f~ "~ 0\/\" f"- .G; .!!LiTh'~' '/i!,,;; I ',: '., II@~I': ~H, ;;"/ " ~_y ,". ' --' ,', >.'--c> I --, 'i, ,.,. ',."", tt;G " Il J....: ~/''._,;- ;r .. "~ ~.," '" . '" ., ,; . ",. ,",,' "~L"' ~~ '.' ~, '," ,;-f....- " l~~. ''''''1.[ .i'i'lL ~ "~." -.;~, / " ~.., ".,,, ,j. '" , ~ hA', k- , ". .,;, y "\L,"~ '" ,,' " ~~., "',7" f,. '" " ,/ ' .. ~,-! '" _>\~ '~ '<; ~";.. '~,:, -- , ;, 'J.<Z: . f'" 'a: <<<d-a ,~. -, ,'. ,.. " ..' {-f: " rJJll! /t. . .. c/ "i;t, "~ y ,; /'\./ ", , "'., .. ---. J ' ",' ''', ...." , / \ ',... ,,'r., ..(, (\ " ",' -,'H) (~'\ fi"lf!' . " -.J \ ,_ ' ""'. .."v \" ,.;'''' ,\ I;: / ~, . "", '6- ., c "\ '<~'\ \;V, ,,', _ ~ .. I \'..\\ ,,\\0 ,\ / ,", \, "\\:\ . \ ,\\ '-\" \\ .Jl..::.3..5.. '-,'\ '\\ \' \ '. _/ -~ -- /' ~'! /" ~- .--- , i . . " " '>/ .-...-- /' .,.- / ..., /.., / .' / /.. i / I , II I I .lj !/ i ;' I I '/L I id ,I 'I' , ~' I ~' . ~ ~{~~l iii =>-Jl i1i~Hr rID'.'.;', "\l.q " ;'. '\ .j,~ ~ .,,,, \ \~, ""\,""', "'. '--'- ". 'I .:\ L J SECTION 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.1 INTRODUCTION This Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared by the City of Chula Vista (City) as lead agency pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Public Resources Code 21000 et. seq., and the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Section 15000 et. seq.). This EIR has been prepared to evaluate the environmental effects of the proposed EastLake ill Senior Housing Project. 12 PURPOSE AND NEED AB discussed in the proposed EastLake ill SPA Amendment, the objectives for the SPA Plan are to: I :i " I 1 \ "I i ~ 1 .l i j J J '( ,J ! 1 j J . Assure a high quality of development, consistent with City and Community goals and objectives, the Chula Vista General Plan and EastLake ill General Development Plan. . Create an economically viable plan that can be realistically implemented within current and proj ected economic conditions. . Provide for orderly planning and long-range development of the proj ect to ensure co=unity compatibility. . Establish the necessary framework for ail identified financing mechanisms to facilitate' adequate co=unity facilities, such' as transportation, water, flood control, sewage disposal, schools and parks and provide adequate assurance that approved development will provide the necessary infrastructure, when needed, to serve the future residents of EastLake ill. . Preserve open space and natural amenities. . Establish a planning and development framework which will allow diverse land uses to exist in harmony within the co=unity. EastLake 1\1 Senior Housing EIR ATTACHMENT 2 June 2006 9-36 1 I 1.0 ExECUTIVE SUMMARY I I f 1.3 PROJECT LOCATION '.., : _1 As depicted on Figures 1-1, 1-2 and 1-3, the project is located within the eastern portion of the EastLake Community of the City of Chula Vista. The project area is situated adjacent to the Olympic Training Center and directly west of the Lower Otay Reservoir. .-1 I , ,'j , , ; 1.4 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project involves amendments to the General Plan, EastLake ill General Development Plan (GDP) and EastLake ill SPA Plan to allow for the proposed land use change from visitor-serving commercial to high density residential. The General Plan Amendment would consist of redesignating 18.4 acres to "Residential-High." The 1.2 acres of designated Open Space around the site would remain unchanged. The EastLake ill GDP would also be amended to redesignate 18.4 acres of "CT-Commercial-Tourist" uses to "H-Residential High (18-27+ dwelling units per acre). The remainingL2 acre "Open Space" designation would remain unchanged. Finally, the EastLake ill SPA would also be amended, specifically to eliminate the Commercial Tourist uses previously environed east of the OTC and instead provide for high density residential development. Components of the SPA, including the Planned Community District Regulations, Design Guidelines and Public Facilities Finance Plan (pFFP) would all be modified to reflect this proposed change in land use. The SPA also includes a specific Affordable Housing Program, Air Quality Improvement Plan and Water Conservation Plan for the proposed seniors project. 1 , , , J \ ] , , , , I .l The 494-unit senior housing project would consist of 13 courtyard style buildings, each four stories tall over a parking structure -Csee Figure 1-4). The project,would also ,include fitness facilities, recreational rooms; two view corridor/parks and a pedestrian paseo around the outer perimeter. An on- and off-site emergency access would also be constructed. This emergency access would be located in the southwestern portion of the site, and would allow emergency vehicles a second access to the site via the Olympic Training Center parking lot. This senior housing community would be gated, and housing units would be "for sale." The densities and unit numbers proposed would result in approximately 1,235 new residents. \' ! .l , \ ..j I I , ... \ ,J The project architecture will consist of southern Spanish designs, and be arranged to mirror Mediterranean hillside towns. Buildings will include deeply recessed balconies, attached roofs, canopies, trellises and courtyards to provide visual breaks in the building fac;:ade. The rotation of each building was an intentional effort to break-up the appearance of building mass. The single '1 I -j 4643-01 I .J EastLake III Senior Housing EIR 1-2 June 2006 9-37 1 \ , , i , , i \ , I) I 'I \ I .! I J , I ;, I I j J \ J Q - ~ ,.. .1 0 4 ) \ J t I .1 Orange County l'2 Riverside County Camp Pendleton FaObiock .!\ Endnitas DelMar J Alpine ~ San Diego k Imperial Beach USA Mexico ,Miles 8 Tijuana EastLake III Senior Housing Project - Environmental Impact Report I FIGURE I . Regional Map 1 -1 .9-38 , .. '\-, ~~ j /.1 : - '~~.: ...~. ~..::-ti~..,7-!7'i(-'~~r't":::<:'-.-~...:~;\.;>...~.; ........' "", ""'---,. L/. :~~-.~~ -~ ~~'(", . -1 ~. ~ll ~ l-.f l=\; '.~ T-' "", '. - '~~~f.~ -.:. \ \. / i.__~::1~,'_ ~ ?Jv~. ..;,\;:.~'q;lJ r-:i'~""""""";,~)"~' ...~-"-~....;l.:1 \ "r~ ( , .!-: \. ~ . j Q ,:. _ p:',! T~A .f'. --'5,F~(,~I......' --J I 'J: \.--'.. i . 'k,. . .; '\ . \. 0 " .:::~l'-' '. ..f;;:~ l' ~' / V )/ ( t. 'P\ _ .../_~1 ':~~'~ ~ ........tir:':(J _./ .\ f '--r"" . ....~~....~ ~ ,:!t-.-/.........:-5'1 '.' '--'~4~""-:'''''' r -~ . ',.-.<"'\' :. '-7';- 'i ') ...... - ~1f'; \, ,;;/7" I ';/ V'1 L ,-'~", .J, -. _~.;l.: ~i"!;O(, ~ ~_-"). ; ." _' :~_.~'" ~ 'l ....._~;/ I .~,;'. [, ~ :;.../;I,l_-r-~"_\ :--.:r. '''.....: ~..... '.", . _:..'/~.-:\.i't. ...,.'"", - Cl\ 'l (..';.-,,'~.',.:"/, ,,;\\':,':1;: ~':""'" <fOe' .-...../1 ";/.,-_1:""'loJ -,;.,-~,J-" i!'::- ."'-' .......~---....-:':~." ",,,J.'-i-:- ....._l~ ")0': .:0 ,'''^ ( ,J . '~. r."~'f '_- / J J ~ . "7..1. ,--r-f.. 1...-- ~ '- " ~~ ,f';'~ ." I..... '-" . ~ t'"___ 0:' :a . . ( --,. '.... .,,/ -'::" \. ~ ", '.. 13'.101..,..7 '0. -;'-'- r:A- ""UWA"'~ < ,!...... - I \ r.;fr:~~' ...... (~.~ ~""-:' _ .' 1 I \, :~,'~", r:~':' .~:',;.;:'~\ ,_..?-~~~~~. '.1' ~", . .'.-r~'d/;;/' '~'(. \ oJ ~~- ~s=:: .~~ ~ . I T'.sr!:l~~""" ._~::r:a:...""-'u.~~ I . \. V~,..-:. '-t3!,1' l'\ .-;.:.l..'= ... .:' .~~ I " '{7. ~ ~ ~r,_,-,t;.;7A~..~?'t i~t . ;~"" A~7: - ',~/:.~ ~'7 t~ ~~J:)~ ..... . ; ,r _ 1..-, ,'\." J--"",,"- .; . ~-':_' .]" 8M- ~~~ ,::-:::,-:f.~..'. '1_. >. . ~ ,\./-t-~;' .' .7~.~ \. +.' \,__.' - 1 .~irjlJt"af"'" r.an~:--'::I <;: '<r:::;:.';(' -500 ,\"'~ :.:~ '". - 1:':...,7:~~~';....A, ' {I - !', ~ . .<'._ '.' -<! ~\$', ... . '" Srr<:i.::?" r., "':~ "'. '" >\~. ~ ~ ~' ( ,,'- .. \", /\ ,,_ ~, \}~ E~~':'. ";"-:'./ ''':d~~....Jr::<J ::-:d) { }:>;:'\ ~~ ",_.:..~~'. .:..-\. - ~ _,,-~:tl. ( I:~) '/.." ';"'~'. .~/ '~~;,,'".~"::""i~-'It' (,~~ ,:.......,.._~_~.-.:: {,' I.;;. ":"'-.."" 'S--...- ','".:rir\_R""eh:;.~O, e,~?,,~ :,\" ,:','"',,.-".-' I' I'/. . ~ , . ~ ..:. \~. J .,/ /::'&' \~': __,_ _ ., ::,.."..,\ ,". \,,"'~'- I' ......, ~/!i" ~ " -..., . . ~ 1; -;- '.. /' J ~.d '.': r ;;f C.--t--;>">-""... -' J . . ~, ........ "-V, . '.':. "-' ..';, ",.\Q)j'.; ." '-o:'~ _,;;-.,''':{ l[,,~'.l.; \"<",'\; '", -:-~"""'----'~--'-rl-_':--:;"~---_'\:_~ ". ____ L~'" ~_''''''''7: 'I .~~"" \' , ,. , t, ",J, ~{)'M'I~' 12Z'''' '---1- ,~. ,---~--,..~/-------~ .:. --: ,.'. :' '\ 1"\, ,,: '_'~' :~;:. 1':If"" f .,;;...... r.' . ,.....' ( ~J.,t'. -.. ,....._... ,) I, ' ,: ..-".J"o' ,'-.".. ,';ofli< ' ....;p. .9~_' ',~ " I \. '3 .~"\ " ,"} ~~. -:"~/' :1,( .~;;",,~:-:!'.4~~' ~~m" ..'~~ ' -', " . r :;. i/~',; __ ' ..'_ . J. '. ..' .,'_". ~ r' ~'. ,/ ",. .._....,,,1 'Ii '" . '_. ! j .... - :~.~l..l'j,.,.,:' .,......" ,~.r>~~:..~j( ~ . f~t" '('<1'*"'':It,\' ""16: . - . ;' V.1"{t l......-.. .,)_~~::<'::S!.-;;'/ l;'<-_..-::'....~.l'S #. l~ 't."'-'.1;, ~ .r-. ' ,.....1".'.. -----7'" " '\ ' ,~~...,.",~" '. '---.....2\, -'.~'. ..,".-... ... '''-~ Hi' 14l<.o:,: jif' '. .....--/ \'.~..-.6-. i~.,;," 'J ""::-'.~'l~f:-.,.i.:_"'~"~-"':':'''''<':-::'::-'~'':\1. I'~~~' .!{"".-<. ~ "'5S;-.",--i...;~ __ . ';'-..'. < .: ,. ("st:~,'","'-:-:-"L -,-,,~ r;lI'll f' /17:',"" \,)S;>'l.t '''C'J'\'---'. >. ':<"\\),L-~'.,,,!,.C'-i'" r~J!.,,':'.i I .fl'i!",~ "'!i,l'~ ,...~~"'.~".~-.\ '1' '..";:""'-"':--'-d;<:'~'!:.~(~' : il#~~~"~~,?{::~:=--- .e~~.i, ',\,.' . ~ . "j:' ,c'" ::,<~;:;,;.;,~; ! i~\: - .~~~:;':~:iii~:' ,', , . ::', ';"".: .:.,:'.-; !'.~;?J" l!" ''1 ~" I \""- .,r~ ". I,', j. _ " ~""",'. "'~;'X."., ,'....'c; ,:,,1 ~~ J l~"b % :': "~ .'~~\. ',; ,..;. .' . .~!){ ,.J-l - :;-- ,- "' -, '\~ I :J.) ",,""r' 'j '.: ., . '. '->K '" " '" t. , ' ,~ 'f .'" . .' ,'" .>:~ '- \ I "('/"'.-" " ,',,, Ol)O' I'!' "' 0""" "". ""j' . ,...., .'_ ,,~'e"q,.l"'" ::_\( ~--:'\ ~ ,'{. I ~,\.t .J..)j./1< , '.' ~..p< .' . \ ... -:\.- f:' .1~ 11.-.. . ' \. -' -..... . ~ \i i ''l.\ "!:! ! ':'f:~- ~ . ""l ~,". '- l" ,'.-.;". I l"l~ "" : ",-,.,.1'" ..... .. . . "\'" I ~ ...~~ :'~' ::.. .~. ~ ''"l' f ':~,"l1~'j;.,! I .' ,'. ""0 " ...: " ; . .,\ \; " "", '. ''-', ~ " ."-~ I \..0/ :'i" ' ' ..~.L"'.Y"" I , ". .:p..'--;. -"\,' i~,>' ~ - ,,~,.,. ~ ''','''~ :i::- ..Q Tt'.F'~ I .' .rt"; , . ~ . ~, . .... " ".// .:;:. "_ ~'''-~ +" -;c. '1 V 1~"'""'- ' . " -);: -~;)i'~l.:.' 'It ' .oFt'. ~ .' ... ~-""~ :;y, ":S~_ . ..-' .:~<J '~;~\1~:~~~~<"_',~,,~ i,~"'?->:,~~~.,,"'_<;9~"-:.:"-t)': \, 1'7~~~~,,::,"o;~~ ~LJ:t ".~. 1.~/ ,,\\..' ,.!J'~} &"'p::,.' ".' ...y'- .r ;7-' -{ ,It!:,' - _.........,~.....-:..;;;-t '\. ...,...~, 1 ( . \- , .~. ~ jf. l"-i ,.i;t.' ",~ .... . ~-:. ~ 1 W1i \ I~ ~k '\"'\.~~~.--=-.X'- .~ -;'~~I!...;<i:/.~~>;;""'.':~;";'i0dtr. 'i -.-;; l ~ I '1~ \::",\~~:,~. '~,:~,:.i,\'.:,:V'~:.,'..?:".:';:;,!~~:.... '~1 Ii:: ' .".;~ ~" '\" _ ,~_,~, ' . ,'n -'".) ~'II . l,~ ;;.t ."I.t~ l~.' ~l';f.\,,-:. :'~~....'. ~(_. "'>':l:~ti\i.~,' .\ ;.' ~:. _~l ~~ ,-,&' p+)1,-'1' '''"., ,,', ,r y -' .~. -I' ." - '.:,': )'~L,.. >" ,~-.:. ..-..~~.. -: :~}(; :', '/ lG ~f j"',' . (i '''...-'.: 'I: >~) o\.;~- ~.",...~.....=:_.~y l!i. V. .f\ ~{. III/! ~, ,'. ~ 1'; .:...~ ._1: :_-:.--. ''''':~'~~~_..~ :{7:.... R1' ,."~ ~\l " l; -;t. ...~~~o;.~d 0 IT :A ~ '':'<;.T ."597' f:.Y';.~~ll '~.[.- t '~::~>:; ~':~~:~~{ A" \~:",~;':.~ :!tl\.:i;:,-" ~(b'^~"~u~~;~;~' ~;!;;"I/;It~l'~~:r~ . , " ','" _.\ ~f .--. -.'." un"~ ~"'=~" !o",Ko ,. ,-, ~ '. ,\...,:.~::_..:-:. .:' :-~;;~....~ ;l.~'" 'Il/. ':r~""'\ .f-':~, l\.j ~ S - - i\~..; ,.~> (j F'-4~..~g~ ';t ; ;!l~ '.' i:-~~ "~I .....'1';-~" :,.1.\ ~ I '.~'~~--:.- ......... -\1:cq!... ~'. . \..," I'~~'::;Z -l. \\ll''> -.:.\/. ~z:':\', \ij J '" ( .B~~~~-'-":~::;"''''; >~ :\0,. ',- ',n',: '. '. _:~. , ~_: ....'":':"....:~~;\.:~1,:\;?~;~~.\.~.'. i'. 0, i . ~;~"'~;.. '~':i" '.~) (': ,~>-:. . ,~.' ~._:".-/) '.'_ - "., '):, '''t'/I. / J -::'~';?1.\'. ;'::, \ -~ 1 _~~ -;":-.p-:.'(/~;f"'''"\.._\ ' j'.'-'-'jl . . . .~.......'_::- -:-" '.'-':;i _. ~ ~~~, _~-~':'i l.:,~\,," I I &:f'~'~,~,J.' 'i...~ :.'..',...::..:....~',(~:-,....,~.~_li , V .~\,~ .' ......~ ,-::'~:.., ,} .... :---.;;..__.:;:;".,.-;."')\,)l \ 1'# ,., '';''~' l.......~.r~~ '-.,r-' I~' \' \ '- ...." " . ...~ ',. "- ,'\ .,,;: y' '; ~... ...-~_'--.:-', "t,,,, \., ~ v- .,.~..~.... ..' . :"t.j-~'''' - ,~~ ...... \ '.. ~:--( 1,:, ,~' _ f I ,~""~~....~ -...." 111' ~ 1 t";,,J .-.' .......,. 1 '.'} ..... .' Ii __ \:.:,""..... ~""_ .".:::-.' ,":fT. '~',\,,,,,\ ->:: ," .r . / I'.",. ..~ ...z:.{~" .,_ _ . ,'>. . _'\ " , .,_.: ,..1, .'/,f._-::.~""..>:-,..... ' 'Qc If,,,.''''' ' I ~ ' .~.... 'I ' \'.... 'V"~' "'.~ ..:..:'!I..'.~~......_ '"''':~''''''' ~'\ l ~...kf . ,.\ \,.t.. -"J " ,;,. : \', N.... >'_'. t\~ '. 't", \ '}! 'T:.'f'- .;-} ::.-",:~ \~" ~ .~ t \:;FiP.,...' '" . '. .'-f1'1; :t....~: j :F .'1;4' l,\:-~~'.,'I "-r(""."''.v.~k,~;''~i.'':~~'''''' ~ tA /;~$'.~..~. ",~,lf:"'" ;~fl o:c.,"'~-: ,~. '~~,7J !'"'~'l~~~:f'~,~. '!I:/,,:' iq '".,~~,:~:".;-;r.~' ~"""'-"-'ie1 ~~.::,':~~' "~;.' ;:,:~-~~::'./:~~' ~ ....':.J..,~ ,_I . \":.~, !~~~,. .:"~~,\,, lJ:.}'i:r,:.:(;:_~;,~...j l &~'":':~~0.' ~~,.....:,"\~,l,.\" ~~i -:..' " \.,' '.,\<, ',\.'. ~'; ?~] '1 '\.'..~ _ry:{of/-: L::IPlt.-cwIoY:4li1tlr' ~~~~, i:2~~"::':'::1 ~~~, j \,"":'. ~1~ "'';'' ':-" if--;t:tl' '/'":,.:!r,', "!1,;1'.,-,.:'-'" l. C".\ ~~~''';'.''~: .,~.(...<~'.:!.:,\~('""~!! , ,~ "~ "," r" ~), " "~, _-"l , ~.- /' ~'AY""-'l," ~' '. '-- Y'~_:":,,,,, . -" ' .~ '.'- ..," "''' ~ ,'. .:...;:-")i . 'J -_l ~ ," ,., ~' 1\~ "'- ...+< ,~~~,,",,~-' - ~.~,,=,'" - -...... ,'.-1. \ '''{'''A ...) . ~\.~.:. /"l.)~'. r-:/ ' ;.,' ,0;,:( ~'f/' ..:. .~""~""'_' {;.O~~, ,~~'.':;~~'-~\.?~?rB~_~)\",:,(~...:\;j ../ ~" t':"'.'.~. ,; Il;,~";:' "\,,. .1'i,~ ':. ,,;,. .""",-'~~"v..~--;;,_~-,,'!:'..J';'J ""y.~. 'gj' '1":7: ", ~ :.:. ,\!. '~f '17';~':' 'J,\ _';> ':, ;-;"'1::';:;'t5---'i,,,,~~"'- \iWT.~J.S~~if~.'. ..~-O';;=--~.2l.:;:4":-".",:.1/ . '\..,. . '. \. '-\-: 'i >If '~ri:f!' . "tel';;:' , 1- l:I:t.:;<; :~-- ...~~ "~;;.. ~::.~~;;,tr,}~'- Feet BASE MAP ,SOU~CE: U~G~ ~:5 ~~n~teS,~esJam.ul.M~s:.Quad~g!!i' ., '';:'''''$''l'~~'; ", ~~~~?i::o '. '-. c.,," ,., __ 2,?;"'_ ' EastLake \II Senior Housing Project. Environmental Impact Report I AGURE I Vicinity Map 1-2 9-39 .~ , I I I J '1 ! I --1 ! -1 :'1 j I J , I \ 1 ,\ 1 i .1 I I " I I u) . , j J \' r EastLake III Senior Housing Project. Environmental Impact Report I FIGURE I Project location Map 1-3 J 1 1 '1 I -, \ -' ~\ \ 1 "I " 1 I. } " / 'I I I )\ 9-40 <D I "'" ..... ~ EARTHWORK CUT = 8,500 CY FILL = 173,500 CY SHORTAGE = 165,000 CY NOTE: SITE FILL TO BE GENERATED BY EXCAVATION OF BASEMENTS: 165,000 CY o APRIL 2006 EastLake III Senior Housing Project. Environmental Impact Report I FIGURE I Proposed Site Development Plan/Grading Plan 1-4 , .. " r ; -.:/ , 1-......--,~ ; , , ....., L'=:, , ...., 'il, ~..J '.:-J [~ L...i , __...1- l~---': L----,' _...-.J ! t \ 1.0 ExECUTIVE SUMMARY level recreational club will be located at the eastern edge of the property. The recreational club will serve as a focal point for the project. The site has been graded in accordance with approved grading permits. However, portions of the site will need to be raised four to five feet to create a gradual elevation change on the eastern portion of the site. This would result in a "stepped" effect away from the Lower Otay Reservoir and would maximize the views of all residential units. This will reqillre a total of 173,500 cubic yards of fill. Simultaneously, the underground parking garages will need to be excavated approximately 10 feet to establish a l2-foot underground garage space. The excavation will generate approximately 173,500 cubic yards of excess soil. The cut and fill reqillrements of the site will balance, thereby eliminating the need to export or import fill material. Finished first floor elevations will range from 560.5 to 578 feet. .\ A total of 963 spaces will be provided on the proj ect site, meeting the City's parking requirements for the intended land use. Discretionary actions for the EastLake ill Senior Housing project include: General Plan Amendment EastLake ill General Development Plan (GDP) Amendment EastLake ill Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Amendment Tentative Map for the EastLake ill Senior Housing Project. The following additional permits/approvals may be required of other Responsible Agencies: . San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board: CWA 401 Water Quality Certification (potential), Storm Water Discharge Permit and approval of the Storm Water pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) Optional Facilities I J The proposed buildings will be constructed in several phases. In order to avoid potential conflicts between proj ect residents and construction activities, the applicant is proposing a temporary, off-site construction.access road will be constructed south of the existing graded pad. The proposed road would be approximately 20 feet wide and approximately 600 feet long and would extend from Wueste Road to the edge of the project boundary. The roadway area will encompass approximately 15,000 square feet (0.50 acre) and will not exceed a 12 percent slope. I J 4643-01 EastLake 111 Senior Housing EIR 1-7 June 2006 \ ) 9-42 1 , 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY l I The graded roadway will be covered with stabilized decomposed granite to allow for drainage. Once construction has been completed, the road would be removed, regraded and revegetated to preexisting slope conditions. This temporary construction access road is not required for construction of the project and is therefore identified in this EIR as an "optional" project feature. "-1 " ! An off-site trail connecting the proposed project with the Olympic Training Center to the west, is also being analyzed in this EIR. This offsite trail would connect "the proposed project (via the southwest corner) with the OTC trail system. This trail would be approximately 5 feet in width and entail dedication of a 30 foot easement across OTC property. The trail would be constructed with a pervious surface, such as decomposed granite, to allow for unimpeded drainage. This trail is being considered by the applicant as an "optional" facility and iSallalyzed in this EIR. Impact characterizations are broken out for each optional facility in the impact sections of the EIR. 1.5 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION Initial scoping of the proj ect concluded that, the proposed proj ect would not significantly affect the following environmental categories: agricultural resources, cultural resources, hazards/risk of upset, mineral resources and housing and population. Based on the initial scoping, the City determined that an EIR was required to more fully investigate proj ect effects to landform alteration and aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, geology and soils, water quality and hydrology, land use and planning, noise, traffic and transportation, public services and utilities and paleontological resources. . i .1 . " The following table, Table 1-1, provides a summary of environmental impacts and mitigation measures related to the proposed proj ect: 1.6 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES In developing alternatives to be addressed in this EIR, consideration was given regarding their ability to: (1) meet the basic objectives of the project described in Section 3.0; and (2) eliminate significant environmental impacts as identified in Section 5.0 of this EIR. Based on the above parameters, three alternatives were identified. The Alternatives discussion in this EIR addresses the no development alternative; an alternative that would result in the continued development of the site under the Co=ercial-Tourist land use designation and reduced density alternative (single family residential similar to surrounding development). 4643-01 EastLake 1II Senior Housing EIR 1-8 June 2006 9-43 l..____ l__._~.... -_.~-_.......~ ---1 ARY 1.0 EXECUTIVE St., TABLE 1-1 Senior Housing Project - Summal-Y of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation The project would introduce a new source of light 5.2-a Prior to approval of the Tentative Parcel map, 'the Less than significant. and glare which would be potentially significant. applicant shall submit a lighting plan as a part of the Design Review application for the project. The lighting plan shall demonstrate that project lighting Is shielded from surrounding properties and that only the minimum amount of lighting required for safety purposes Is provided to avoid adverse effects on surround'lng areas. In general, lighting fixtures shati be shielded downward and away from adjacent residential land uses', MSCP Preserve areas and Lower Otay co Reservoir, I ./>0 ./>0 In FSEIR #01-01, significant unmitigable impacts to The mitigation for project impacts would be applicable for Significant(cumulatlve). visual quality were Identified as a result of landform cumulative impacts to landform alteration and visual alteration, This Impact must therefore be carried quality associated with the proposed project. forward. This project would have an Incremental contribution to the cumulative Impact Identified In FSEIR #01-01. Impacts associated with slope Inslebllity would 5,3-a potenllallybe significant. Prior to approval of grading plans, the following Less than significant. conditions are required to be on the plans. The proposed project's grading plans shall demonstrate compliance wilh remediation recommendations In the June 10, 2005 Geotechnical Investigation for fhe project prepared by Geotechnlcs Incorporated, Including but not limited to: a) Upper soil layers shall be removed to a depth of 'two to three feet during Inillal construction periods ,and re laced with com etent com acted fill. EasUake III Senior HousIng EIR 4643-01 June 2006 1-9 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUI. RY TABLE 1-1 Senior Housing Project - Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Replacement of native soils with compacted fill shall be required to eliminate the potential for tlquefaction. c) Any areas subjected to new fill or slructuralloads shatl be prepared with compacted fill. 5.3-b Prior to approval of grading plans, a storm Water Less than significant. Pollution Prevention Pian (SWPPP) shatl be prepared for the project that Identifies specific Best Management Practices (BMPs) to minimize erosion and control sedimentation. A copy of the SWPPP will be kept onsite,and issued to all supervisory staff working on the project. Project activities resuiting in excess erosion shall be halted and BMPs adjusted to ensure off-site sedimentation Is avoided. Erosion during construction, although short-term in nature, could be significant. without erosion control measures. Structures will be located over underground parking. See Mitigation Measure 5.3-a Potentially significant impacts to foundations and structures could occur If expansive soils are ancountered. Potantial Impects resulting from other geological See Mitigation Measure 5.3-a hazards such as seismic activity would be significant. Less than significant. Less than significant. B Water quality Impacts resulting from construction and operational activities would be significant. , Prior to approval of a grading permit the Applicant shall Less than significant. obtain coverage under the State Water Resources , Control Board (SWRCB) NPDES General Permit No. CAS000002, Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges of Storm Water Runoff Associated with , Construction Activity. In accordance with said Permit, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and a Monitoring Program Plan shall be developed and 1m lemented concurrent with the commencement of Easllake III Senior HousIng EIR June 2006 4643-01 1-10 " ..~ '-'-- - C--- '___---... "-h-' ~ _....-J _.----J' ---.J 1.0 EXECUTIVE sui' ",RY TABLE 1-1 Senior Housing Project - Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation ~:~'~"~: ~:'';.~4f;f!l~::~A~t~~.~~..!:".....f, '.~' ':\~ ~ 't:~~~'~ ~ ~. .' ~~;;:~.:'~~~;t:r,g~ ~~~;-." ~~ '~~l~(l ;F~:~\,:tl~~",~"~:-'~ii~~ft~} ,,~("~r~_tf~~"~ <~ . ~)"~ f<,;,,;:~a}Pf~';j"f":r~:';l~I':k:~, :-C ;. .-,'_~:'.~" ,'~ . IMPACT', \ ~. . '. .,".: ,,\'~~./': \.MITIGATIONMEASURES'::"rr,: ~ ~". .... ~ ,.' . LEVEI.iOFSIGNIFICANCEAFTERMITIGATION~~H"l." (l 1 c 5.4-b grading activities. The SWPPP shall specify both construction and post-construction structural and non- stru91ural pollution prevention measures. The SWPPP , shall also address operation and maintenance of post- construction pollution prevention measures, including short-term and long-term funding sources and the party, or parties that' will be responsibie for the impiementatlon of said measures. A complete and accurate Notlce-of-Intent (NOi) shall be filed with the SWRCB. A copy of the acknowledgement from the SWRCB that a NOI has been received for this project shall be filed with the City of Chuta Vista when received. Further, a copy of the' completed NOI from the SWRCB showing the Permil Number for this project shall be filed with the City of Chula Vista when received. Prior to approval of grading and construction plans, the Appilcant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City Engineer compliance with all of the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code end the City of Chula Vista SUSMP. The Applicant shall incorporate into the project planning and design an effective combination of site design, source control, and treatment control post. construction BMPs and provide all necessary studies and' reports demonstrating compliance with the applicabie regulations and standards. Post- construction BMPs shall be identified and impiemented as to abale Identified pollutants of concern to the maximum extent practlcabie standard described In the City of Chuia Vista SUSMP. Eastlake III SenIor HousIng EIR June 2006 4643-01 1-11 1.0 EXECUTIVE SU".u.ARY TABLE 1-1 Senior Housing Proje~t - Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation 5.4-c .Prlor to Issuance of e grading permit for any area of the project (including offsl!e areas) draining towards the Lower Otay Reservoir, the applicant shall: 1) Oblain the approval of the Cily of Chula Vista and all other applicable agencies for any' proposed structural drainage runoff detention and/or diversion facilities within the Otay Lakes Watershed. 2) Obtain the approval of the City of Chula Vista and 'all other applicable agencies of all operational and . maintenance agreements assocleted 'with any "proposed structural drainage runoff detention and/or diversion facilities within the Olay Lakes Watershed. 5.4-d Prior to approval of the grading plan, the Appiicant shall verify that surface drainage has been designed to collect and discharge runoff Into natural stream channels or drainage slructures. In order to avoid indirect impaots to Ihe Lower Otay Reservoir, fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides shall not be applied to the . manufactured slopes along the northern property of the pro'perty. Potable waler shall be used for Irrigation; All drainage systems shell be designed in accordance with Ihe City's Engineering Standards and to the Cily of San . . Diego's Source Water Protection Guidelines for New . Developments (2004). 5.4-e The applicant shall design surface and subsurface dratnage to preclude pan ding outside of designated areas, as well as flow down slopes or over disturbed . areas. Eastlake III Senior Housing EIR 4643-01 June 2006 1-12 '--- 1__.-.J L-- ~ L-._ '----' \......-...... .- 1-....--..: ~-,-, -.-- ~-' ~ - ....-..--~ 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUr,. IV TABLE 1-1 Senior Housing Project - Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation 5.4-f Prior to the approval of a grading permif, the Applicant shall verify that runoff diversion facililies (e.g., inlet pipes and brow ditches) have been be used to preclude runoff flow down graded siopes. Drainage terraces for siopes in excess of 40 feet in verticai height shail oniy be required for stabilizalion purposes. Slopes in excesS of 40 feet in height may not require terraces. provided that slope-specinc analysis demonstrates that such measures are not needed In order to achieve the intent of the Cily's grading ordinance. Energy- dissipating structures (e.g.. detention ponds, rlprap, or drop structures) shall be used at storm drain outlets, drainage crossings, and/or downstream of ell culverts, plpe.outiets, and brow dilches to reduce velocity and prevent erosion. The applicant shall demonstrate com.pllance in grading plans poor to issuance of a graq.ing permit. Prior to Issuance of the grading permit for any site In . the drainage area, the Applicant shall demonstrate that the proposed detention facilities would reduce 50-year post~development peak flows to equal to or less than pre-development condlllons. The proposed onslle detention facilities shall be designed to ensure thet there Is no increase In downstream (I.e., south of Olympic Parkway) velocities in Salt Creek. For areas with. the greatest potential for groundwater seepage, Impacts could be reduced to a less Ihan significant level Ihrough installation of subsurface drains as determined by the Soils Engineer and approved by the City Engineer. Implementation of these measures is the responSibility of the applicant. Prior to the start of grading acllvilles, the brow ditch located at the base of the slo e between the Lower 4643-01 Eastlake 111 Senior HousIng EIR June 2006 1-13 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUM, Y TABLE 1-1 Senior Housing Projeft - Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Otay Reservoir and the project site shall be inspected and 'sediment that could cause runoff to breach the ditch:,shall be removed, The brow ditch shall be inspected after each 0,5 inch, 5.4-g Prlor'to approval of the final map, andlor building permits (as determined by the City Engineer), the Applicant shall submit a maintenance program for the proposed post-construction BMPs and all private drainage facilities within common deveiopment areas to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The maintenance program shall include, but not be limited to: (1) a manual describing the maintenance activities of said faciiilies, (2) an estimate of the cost of such maintenance activities, and (3) a funding mechanism for financing the maintenance program, In addition, the Developer shall enter into a Maintenance Agreement with the City to ensure the maintenance and operation of said facilities, 5.4-h Reguiar maiillenance of the Greenbell and Community tralls,shall be the responsibiiily of the Eastlake III HOA, depending on designation, to minimize the potential for erosion into Lower Otay Reservoir, Prior to the approvai of the TM, the appilcant shall submit a Landscape Responsibiiily map to identify funding for all areas within the project 5.4-1 The following urban runoff control measures shall be shown as notes on the Tentative Map, These 'measures shall be made a condition of the Tentative Map and shall be impiemented on the finai grading and Improvement, pians, Implementation of these measures Is the responsibility of the applicant E_,lI_ke III Senior Housing EIR 4643-01 June 2006 1-14 '-- L,___ \_...... _L---..i I "~'-~ .-.-1 ,_ J.V C:Xt:C.;V/lVt: ;:'VMMAKY TABLE 1-1 Senior Housing Project - Summary of Environmental Impacts .and Mitigation co I (J1 o 5.4-) EasUake III Senior Housing EIR June 2006 1) . Per the Clean Water Act, BMPs to control pollutants and sediment from entering storm water . runoff are required for the project area. Source control BMPs via landscaping of all slopes and street rights-of-way shall be provided to prevent :, erosion. Any other applicable source control or :BMPs which may be Implemented on a city-wide basis In con)uncllon with the City's Municipal NPDES permit shall be Incorporated Into the 'speclfic plan. The size, capacity, and location of .any other poilu lion controi devices which would be usea to capture urban pollutants onslle will be determined as part of the project-specific drainage . studies prior to the approval of future subdivision maps. 2) . The City's Department of Planning and Building shail verify that the mitigailon measures are condillons for the approval of tile tentallve map and that they are impiemented on the grading . pians for the project. Prior. to the issuance of any building permit, the applicant shall demonstrate to the sallsfacllon of the Director of Planning and Building that hazardous materials shail not be stored along Ihe easlern edge of the ~ite. Ail hazardous materials shall be stored within secondary containment capable of hoidlng 150 percent of the largest container. Hazardous malerlals shall be stored in a secure area that can be locked during non- working hours. This wiil help prevent any unintended hazardous material spills which could impact quality of runoff water from the site. 4643-01 1-15 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TABLE 1-1 Senior Housing Project - Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Sill fence or a similar approved sediment barrier shall .be installed along the eastern perimeter of the project . site, or as directed by a qualified erosion control speCialist, to prevenl sedimennransport into the Lower Olay Reservoir. Spoil stockpiles shall be stored at least 20 feet from the perimeter of lhe site. A qualified monilor shall inspect all erosion and sedimenl control devie'es on site prior to anllcipated storm events, during extended storm events, and after each storm event to ensure that the structures are functioning properly. Inspection logs shall be kept onsile and submitted til the City upon request. Prior to approval of the grading plan, the applicant shall enter Into an agreement to design, construct, and secure a fully acluated traffic signal Including interconnect wiring, mast arms, signal heads and assoCiated equipment, underground improvements, standards and luminaires ;at the Olympic ParKway/Projecl Driveway inters'ection. The design of the'slgnal shall be to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and conform to City standards, The applicant shail provide the following Intersection geometry: The level of service at the project driveway and I Olympic Parkway will degrade to F as a result of the ~ project from vehicles entering and exiling the project, which would be a significant direct Impact of the proposed project. Westbound: One left-lurn lane (wilh 100 feet of storage) and two fhrough lanes Southbound: None Northbound: One left-turn lane and one right-turn lane (With a storage length of 75 feet in each) Eastbound: One shared through/right lane and one through lane. 4643-01 E_,U_ke III Senior Housing EIR June 2006 1-16 " L.__ r l_._~, ~.- ~,-,.....~.-' \-~_..__.. ;....--~- -~ ,~ ~ -~~ t...._ ~............' ..... -,...... '__,.....:.J 1.0 EXECUTIVE SW. 1Y . TABLE 1-1 Senior Housing Project - Summary of EnvironmJlntal Impacts and Mitigation A signal shall be installed at the project driveway and two outbound (northbound) lanes, one left-turn and one righHurn lane, and two inbound (southbound) lanes be provided. S,S-b Prior to approval of building permits, the median opening on Olympic Parkway further shall be relocated west from its current location 10. accommodate the proposed project driveway, 5,5-c Prior to approvai of building permits, a "No U Turn'; sign for eastbound traffic on Olympic Parkway at the Olympic Parkway/Wueste Road Intersection shall be Installed, The potenllal conflict between construction-related. S,S-d traffic and vehicular, pedestrian and bicycle traffic on Wueste Road and the adjacent trail would be a significant direct Impact of the optional construcllon access road, Prior to approval of the grading permit for the Less than significant. temporary construction access road, aTraffic Control Pian shall be prepared to the sallsfaction of the City Engineer for the Wueste Road/access road intersection, The Traffic Control Plan shall be implemented for the duration of the use of the temporary access road, The Traffic Control Plan shall address methods to avoid conflicts between vehicles on Wueste Road/pedestrians and bicyclists on the trail adjacent to Wueste Road and construction vehicles entering and exiting the site, In FSEIR #01-01, significant unmitigable impacts to Specific mitigallon measures were identified to reduce potential Significant (cumulative). traffic and circulation patterns were determined for significant Irnpacls, however cumulative impacts would be 200S, 2010, 201S, 2020 and build-out conditions. unmitigable. Impacls to freeway operations were also identified as significant. This Impacl from FSEIR #01-01 must Iherefore be carried forward. Because the proposed projeclls part of the buildout of the overall EastLake 111 comrnunll , a si nlficant cumulative unmlti able Eastlake 11\ Senior Housing EIR June 2006 4643-01 1-17 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUN.:" .t?Y TABLE 1-1 Senior Housing Project - Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation :~.~~~:~' _: ~:':'; ; ~r;~~A~i.';' ": ':::t1;t" ':'/:: .~~;::!<:" :.l; >';l~~i;~A~i&;~~~u~tif:.~'?';~f~,;~:i::;,/'r{:~;;~~vi~~f ~;G~'~i~:N~~~~~'~~tW,~~~j~~:j~:r"l~:'~i traffic Impact was Identified for bulldout of the community, and the proposed project would result In an Incremental contrlbulion to the traffic from bulldout of the communlly, therefore a significant cumulative unmlti atad traffic 1m act would occur. During construclion, ROC emissions would exceed 5,6-a the daily standard. This, Impact is considered significant. IIhough constructlon-reiated emissions would not 5.6-b surpass PMlo thresholds, the project will generate nuisance dust and fine partlculata mailer. Eastlaka III Senior Housing ErR June 2006 To the' maximum extent feasible, the project developer Less then significant. shall" use zero-Volalile Organic Compounds (VOC)- content architectural coatings during project construction/application ot paints and ,other archilectural coalings to reduce ozone precursors. If zero-VOC paint cannot be utilized, the developer shall avoid to. the maximum extent feasible, application of architectural coatings during the peak smog season: July, August, and September. Prior to approval of any grading permit, the following Less than significant. measures shall be placed as notes on all grading pians and implemenled during grading 10 reduce dust and exhaust emissions (PM1O) and ozone precursors (ROC and NOi<): a) Minimize slmullaneous operation of multiple construction equipment units b) :Use I?w pollutant-emitting equipment c) Use catalylic reduclion for gasoline-powered 'equipment d) Use injeclion liming retard for diesel-powered equipment ,e) Waler the grading areas a minimum of twice daily to minimize fugitive dust , . o 'Stabilize graded areas as quickly as possible ,to minimize fugitive dust 4643-01 I-Ie ,i -~ -:--' , ~ 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUo ,RY TABLE 1-1 Senior Housing Project - Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation In FSEIR #01-01, significant unmitigable impacts to None air quality were documented as a result of nonconformance with regional air quality plans and overall project (entire EastLake III development) Impacts on regional air quality. This Impact Identified In FSEIR #01-01 musllherefore be carried forward. While Ihe proposed project would generate less than half of the projected traffic for the site under the exlstin land use desl nation, It would still contribute Eastlake III Senior Housing EIR June 2006 g) ,Apply chemical stabilizer or pave Ihe last 1 00 feet of Internal travel path within the construction site prior 10 public road entry h) ,Install wheel washers adjacent to a paved apron 'prior to vehicle entry on public roads I) <Remove any visible track-out Into traveled public streets within 30 minutes of occurrence ' j) : Wet wash the construction access point at the end "of the workday if any vehicle travel on unpaved ,surfaces has occurred k) Provide sufficieht perimeter erosion control 10 'prevent washout of silty material onto public roads I) Cover haul trucks or maintain at least 12 inches of " freeboard to reduce blow-off during hauling m) ',Suspend all soli disturbance and travel on unpaved surfaces if winds exceed 25 mph n) ',Coverl water onsile stockpiles of excavated ',material; and 0) "Enforce a 20 mlle-per-hour speed limit on "unpaved surfaces. Significant (cumulative). 4643-01 1-19 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUfv..' IY TABLE 1-1 Senior Housing Project - Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation ~~ ~l"v.,. ,.;'"; e..' "~I'. ~f li''f.' i'1 ,~~ '. ':!'.. ') -.., }:~...I ~ ,~"l i r ,.', I .''''d'_'-;;, ./ ../_,<;;>: c l. '",\1",;<' = ,..''''.!;'>. ~';;; ....'" ,-'J.. "t! ."f,(_~J.;;.;'''''I ,~ti,\"~,':t.'..,,,. '-'. . ~ ~<lr"l' j1.- ": f~ ;T..'tI '1' . r~~,,<,.~' , 'r i ,_,' ji,"' ,: :!.:.~~-.~ 0 r". c'"' ," "'....." 'I.,. ~ . ^ ," ) "f ":'~', "Ift.l ... 4" I "'~"r'~]'.~' ',' ,- '\\'" ..... ].~~ ~:."I....<' :..~.."'\.:c ,,,;r: :.. " ~ ,- It ~. , ~ ~ " .... #,~', ...~'~~l[ ~ ~\l' ...~;~.' "...:..';,:, ..lMPACT. '. :'.~.,:: .:Y.;. .:. ': ,;'i; .? .'MITIGATIONMEAsURES .,~~:~::/: '~" "" -'nUt ,'.tEVEL OF. SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION 1'.\1", ':';" Incrementally to overall cumulative vehicular emissions generated by bulldout of the area. Potential exposure to Interior noise levels greater than the Clly's allowable limit of 45 dB CNEL would be considered significant. Potentiel exposure of future residents to exterior 5.7-b noise levels (from pallo and balcony areas) greater than the City's allowable IImll of 65 dB CNEL would be considered significant. Eastlake 111 SenIor HousIng EIR June 2006 Prior to issuance of building permits, where exterior Less than significant. noise. levels on Internal roadways exceed 60 CNEL, additional measures shall be required to attenuate Interior noise to the City's 45 CNEL standard, such.as inope'rable or double-paned windows. For those units that require the windows to be closed to echieve th.e Interior noise slandard, forced-air circulation or air conditioning shall be provided by the applicant. An acousllcal analysis shall be conducted for Buildings 1, 2 and 13 that are adjacent to Olympic Parkway concurrent with the submittal of construction drawings and shall be approved by the Director of Planning end Building and the Environmental Review Coordinator prior to approval of building permits. The acoustical analysis shall demonstrale Ihat Interior noise levels due to exterior noise sources would be below the 45 CNEL standard. Five .fool high noise barriers around lhe perimeter of Less than significant. the Individual private patio and balconies at some of the dwelling units In Buildings 1, 2 and 13 (adjacent to Olympic Parkway) would be required 10 mlllgate for traffic noise impacts. Sound walls may be constructed of any masonry material, or material such as tempered glass or Plexiglas with a surface density of at least three pounds per square foot. The sound wall should have.no openings or cracks. Table 5.7-7, Dwefffng Units Requiring Sound Wafis around Pallos or Balconies Included In Sacllon 5.7 Noise, of the EIR , 4643.01 1-20 L._.J '--"'-'-' '-' L__ .......,___~ ____~~ .....~.---l 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUi'....,,.lRY ___J TABLE 1-1 Senior Housing Project - Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation The proposed SPA Plan would result In an 5,8-a Incrementellncrease In public facilities if they are not provided commensurate with demand. The Incrementel contribution of solid waste. and demand on water and sewer service, parks. fire, pollee, emergency services, libraries and schools would be significant. Prior to approval the Final Map, the applicant shall Less than significant. demonstrate compliance with recycling policies In the City's General Plan and Municipal Code. Demonstration of compliance with these policies shall include construction of onsite recycling facilities, recycling program establishment, etc, 5.8-b PriOr to approval of the Final Map, a minimum of 3.86 , acr,es of parkland will be established within the project area in accordance with the City of Chula Vista Municipal Code Section 17.10.40, Any shortfali in parkland acreage dedication shall result In payment of . the park acquisition component of the Park AcquisiUon and Development (PAD Fee). Given the lack of available acreage that couid be acquired to serve the development, the acquisition componant of tha PAD Fee will be waived and a payment of $4.1 million (including the development portion of the fee and land acqUisition fee adjusted over dedication at Eastlake Vistas neighborhood park) will be made which can be utilized to fund construction of park and public facilities serving the EastLake Community. Any excess funds that remain once these facilities are complete can be utilized on other park or public facilities serving the Eastern Territories of Chula Vista. The Developer will pay the development component of the PAD Fee as required by the City (EastLake III SPA Plan, February 20, 2006 and personal communication with Jack Griffin, City of Chula Vista April 3, 2006). 5,8-c Prior to Issuance of building permits, the applicant shall be ie ulred to a the Public Facilities Develo ment Easllake 111 Senior Housing EIR 4643.01' June 2006 1-21 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMI Y TABLE 1-1 Senior Housing Project - Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Impact Fees (PFDIF) at the rate in effect atlhe time building permits are issued as determined by the City Engineer, to offset Impacts on City fire, police, emergency services and libraries. 5.8-d Prior'to approval of the Tentative Map, the applicant shall submit plans showing fire fiow and fire hydrant localions to Ihe City of Chula Vista Fire Prevention Division for review and approval. . CD I C11 -.J 5.8-e Prior to approval of building permits, the applicant shall pay all required school mitigation fees al the rate In effect at the lime building permits are Issued or enler Into an agreement to help finance the needed facilities and services for the Chula Vista Elementary School District and Sweetwater Union High School District. 5.8-f : Water and sewer facility Improvements shall be financed or installed on- and off.site In accordance wilh the fees and phasing In the approved Public Faciilties Financing Plan for the SPA Plan. 5.8-g The City of Chula Vista shall continue to monitor Pollee and Fire Department responses to emergency calls and report the results to the Growth Management Oversight Committee on an annual basis. Safety Issues for recreational trail users directly 5.8-h exposed 10 crossing conslrucllon traffic due to the oplional temporary construction access road are . considered slgnlflcant. Prior to approval of the grading permit for the oplional Less than significant. construction access [oad, a traffic control plan shall be prepared 10 the satisfaction of the City Engineer that addresses pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular safety during construction at the intersection of Wueste Road and the oplion consiruction access road. Eastlake III Senior Housing EIR June 2006 4643-01 1-22 , ~......,.,......... -----.- -.........---< ,~---... ---' ___,--1' _.........J __..J ._~ 1.0 EXECUTIVESU^" ",/Y TABLE 1-1 Senior Housing Project - Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Potential Indirect Impacts to lands Intended for 5.9-a conservation adjacent to the project slle (associated wllh Otay Vallay Regional Park) are considered significant. Eastlake III Senior HousIng EIR June 2006 In accordance with the adjacency guidelines contained Less than significant. in the Subarea Plan, mitigation to minimize Indirect Impacts to sensitive wildlife, species, sensllive plant communities and, functions of the .Preserve as envisioned in the City's Subarea Plan are as follows: Drainage and T oxic Substances . :Pollution reduction measures, such as oil and water separators, shall be Installed In all'dralnage systems at the property line to eliminate ,Introduction of contaminants Into the Preserve. 'Such measures shall be Indicated on grading plans and approved by the City prior to issuance of any land development permlt. Including clearing and grubbing and grading 'permits. The 'installation of these pollution 'reduction measures shall be verified by the City during project construction. . ' Addllional best management practices for reduction to Impacls 10 drainages Include: slopes and channels will be protected from erosion; storm drain stenciling and sign age witl be employed. and control of post-development peak storm waler runoff discharge rales and velocities will be ',enacted to maintain or reduce downstream erosion and to protect stream habitat. These 'measures shall be further outlined in the project SWPPP. 4643-01 1-23 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUN.' IY TABLE 1-1 Senior Housing Project - Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation ~.;J.;: '" ' ,," fl"' c ,~;;... -:::'.~ ,',.-. "It Ii... .'J' ':.. ~.. ,~,..... ---, __I.." .,~>'" ., - 1 , ......,' :J'.>Jj.\ 1;"'"I/t,A"'iI<.~;I"f[,.t- ""'->'~'~ .~' .~,~..t' ,.;;rJ;~~""~ ~'iiI:. l.t'". i"~.."~... 11'~ '<.....f,~.. "".. ,; ~p .."~ ~ fj, v: ~c "-' t' '<'.l.~^ .. .~ : ':'~ .:~~, '~IMPACT-:1"f',,:,~. '~!."'::- ",\ .'l ',' lMitIGATl9NiMEA~URES ;" . ~:.:,c ~". .' 'i7" . 'LEVEL'OF,:SIGNIFICANCEAFTERMITIGATION . ~i';,:~ 'f ~ Lighting . Light shielding to protect the Preserve from spili. over during construction activities shali be required. in addition, lighting proposed for the residentiai development shali be directed :away and shielded from the Preserve, Low sodium IIghting,shali also be utilized. Prior to issuance of a building permit, a lighting plan shali be submitted to the City's Environmental Review Coordinator for review and approval. The Iightihg plan shall Illustrate the location of Ihe proposed lighting standards and type of shielding measures. Low. pressure sodium lighting shall be used if feasible and shali be subject to the approval of Ihe City's Environmental Review Coordinator and City Engineer. Noise . Construction activities shall include noise reduction measures or be conducted outside the breeding season of sensitive liird species. In particular, grading restrictions shali be implemented during the breeding season (Februa'ry 15 through August 15) of the California 'gnatcatcher, and if construction Is proposed during the breeding season, noise levels shall not exceed 60 dB(A) L'q within 500 feet of an active gnatcatcher nest. . ,Noise impacts adjacent to the preserve shali be minimized through Instaliation of berms or walis adjacent to the ,residential areas and any other use that may introduce noises that could Impact or interfere with wildlife utilization of the Preserve. Eastlake III SenIor HousIng EIR 4643.01 June 2006 1-24 , ~_~...i "__'_ ~..-.-"'" ._-..1 '--:'- -~ ~_':""._.J -,~ 1.0 EXECUTIVE SU"', IY TABLE 1-1 Senior Housing Project - Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Potential direct Impacts to narrow endemic plant 5.9-b species that may occur wllhln the optional off-site trail and optional construction access road are considered significant. Eastlake \11 Senior HousIng EIR June 2006 Invasives . -Native vegetation shall be used for revegetating 'the, temporary access road, and shall be 'incorporated Into the landscape plan to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning and Building. Such measures shall be indicated on grading plans and approved by the City prior to 'Issuance of any land development permit, 'Including clearing and grubbing and grading 'permlls. Prior to Issuance of a grading permit, landscape plans shall be submitted to the City for .review and approval. Prior, to issuance of any land development permit, Less than significant. Including clearing and grubbing and grading permits, for the opllonaltrail and temporary construction access road, the applicant shall retain a City-approved biologist to conduct a Narrow Endemic species survey. Once surveys have been completed, an Impact analysis shall be prepared to determine the Impacts to any narrow endemic species found In those areas and Inciude mitigation measures in accordance with Section 5.2.3 of the City's Subarea Plan. Finally, the Impact analysis shall be submitted to the City's Environmental Review Coordinator for review and approvai prior to Initiating any construction activities. If a narrow 'endemic plant population Is discovered, impacis shall be limited to 20% of the population wllhin the project area, and appropriate mitigallon shall be provided to meet the requirements of biological equivalency in Section 5.2.3.6 of the Subarea Plan. The City shall prepare findings of equivalency to authorize "Take" of the ortion oftha lant 0 'ulalion. 4643-01 1-25 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMi Y TABLE 1-1 Senior Housing Project - Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation <D I 4't1e project could potentially ba Inconsistent with the HUT Ordinance which would constitute a significant Impact. If, after the comprehensive consideration of avoidance and minimization measures, impacts exceed 20% of the covered Narrow Endemic Species population within the project area, the City must make a determination of biologically superior preservation consistent with Section 5.2.3.7 of the Subarea Plan. This determination shall be based on appropriate mitigation sufficient to meet the requirements established for biologically superior preservation Identified In Section 5.2.3.7 of the Subarea Plan. The City shall process the appropriate findings in accordance with Section 5.2.3.3 of IheSubarea Plen. If such findings cannot be made for either or both of these optional project features, the feature(s) that are not consistent with the policies related to narrow endemic species shall not be Imple'mented. See Mitigation Measures 5.9-a and 5.9-b. Less than significant. Impacts to previously undisturbed soils as a result of 5.10-a column borings would be a significant Impact. Prior to Issuance of e grading permit, the applicant shall confirm in writing to the City of Chula Vista that a qualified paleontologist has been retained to carry out the .mitigation described herein. A qualified paleontologist Is defined as an individual with a M.S. or Ph. D. In paleontology or geology who is familiar with paleontological procedures and techniques.. A paleontological monitor may be retained to perform the on-site monitoring In place of the qualified paleontologist. A paleontological monitor is defined as an Individual who has experience in the collection and salvage of fossil materials and who 15 working under the su ervlslon of a ualified aleontolo ist. E_sU_ke III Senior Housing EIR June 2006 i____ i ~- L_~ "--..-... Less than significant. . ~'--~~" 4643-01 1-26 ....___,..,i -~j I --' ~-~ -,~j --_.~' '----- -~ -----' 1.0 EXECUTIVE SU,. .RY TABLE 1-1 Senior Housing Project - Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation 5.10-b The qualified paleonto]ogist or paleontological monitor shall altend preconstruclion meeting to consul! with the grading end excavation contractors. The paleontologist's duties shall include monitoring of grading, salvaging, preparation of collected materials for storage at a scientific Institution that houses paleontological collections, and preparation of a monitoring results report. For each step below, the paleontologist should present results to the City of Chula Vista for review. These duties are defined as follows: . The paleontologist or paleontological monitor shell be on-site during the original cutting of previously undisturbed sediments of the Otay Formation to 'Inspect cuts for fossils contained therein, The Sweetwater Formation should be monitored on an . as-needed basis as determined by the 'paleontologist or paleontological monitor. The frequency of inspections would depend upon the . rate of excavation. the malerials excavated, and the abundance of fossils. The paleonlologist would work with the contractor to determine the monitoring localions and amount of time . necessary to ensure adequate monitoring of Ihe project site. . In the event that fossils are encountered, the paleontologist (or paleontoioglcal monitor) shall . have the authority to divert or temporarily helt construction activities in the area of discovery to allow recovery of fossil remains In a timely . fashion. Because of the potential for recovery of small fossil remains, it may be necessary 10 set up " a screen-washin 0 eratlon on-site. Eastlake III SenIor HousIng E1R June 2006 4643-01 1-27 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUN. ~y TABLE 1-1 Senior Housing Project - Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Fossil remains shall be cleaned, sorted, repaired, ~alaloged, and then stored in a local scientific Institution thai houses paleontological collections, such as the San Diego Natural History Museum. A monitoring results report with appropriate graphics summarizing. the results (even if negative), analyses, and conclusions of the above program shall ba prepared and submilled to the City of Chula Vista within 90 days following the termination of the paleontological monitoring program. c.o I m W Eas'tlake III SenIor HousIng ErR June 2006 4643-01 1-28 ., , __.J ---...-j f ' ..___.., L~_..... ~-' ,..~_._~."J 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 i i No ProjectlNo Development Alternative The No Development Alternative assumes that the project site would not be developed and the entire project site would remain undeveloped. 'j Existing Land Use Designation (Commercial - Tourist) Alternative The existing land use designation for the project site is for Co=ercial- Tourist uses. The Existing Land Use Designation Alternative would result in the continued development of the site for Co=ercial-Tourist uses. No amendments to the General Plan or EastLake III GDP would be necessary. Since the FSEIR #01-01 addressed the development of the project site for co=ercial-tourist uses; the impact characterization is a summary of conclusions from the FSEIR #01-0 L In cases where FSEIR #01-01 did not differentiate the impacts related to the specific proj ect site and instead referred to impacts from development of the larger Woods and Vistas project, an independent analysis was provided. Reduced' Density Alternative (single family residential [Similar to surrounding development]) The Reduced Density Alternative would consist of single family residential uses that are typical of the surrounding environment In addition, the amount of units would be less, approximately 56 for the entire site. This was estimated by assuming that these single family residential units would be similar in size and style and be located on lots similar in size to surrounding developments. . \ Table 1-2, Comparison of Project Alternatives, gives a =ary ofall project alternatives. ., i \ ! J 1 I j I 4643-01 Eastlake 111 Senior Housing EIR 1-29 June 2006 9-64 1.0 EXECUTIVESUMh, .Y TABLE 1-2 COMPARISON OF PROJECT ALTERNATIVES Land Use, Planning and Significant and miligated to below No impact. No impact to the project site. Similar to Slmilarto the proposed project. Zoning significance. proposed project with regard to construction access road and trail. Landform Aileration and Significant and mitigated to below No impact. Similar'to the proposed project. Similar to the proposed project. Aesthetics significance. Agricuilural Resources No impact. No impact. No impact. No impact. Biological Resources Significant and mitigated to below No impact Similar to the proposed project. Similar to the proposed project. significance. <0 J;.ultural Resources No impact. No impact. Similar to the proposed project. Similar to the proposed project. en Geology and Soils Significant and mitigated to below No impact. significance. Similar to the proposed project. Similar to the proposed project. Paleontological Significant and mitigated to below ' No Impact. Similar to the proposed project. Similar to the proposed project. Resources significance. Water Quailty and Significant and mitigated to below" No impact. Similar to the proposed project. Similar to the proposed project. Hydrology significance. Transportation, Significant and mitigated to below No impact. More impacts than proposed project. Similar Less impactlhan proposed project. Clrcuiatlon and Access significance. design measures could be incorporated as the proposed project to mitigate below significance. Air Quaiily Significant and unmitigated. No impact. More Impacts than proposed project. Less Impact than proposed project. Noise Significant and mitigated to below No impact. More impacts than proposed project. Less Impact than proposed project. significance. Eastlake III Senior HousIng EIR 4643-01 June 2006 1-30 __1 _l __-1 1.0 EXECUTIVE SU.....IARY TABLE 1-2 COMPARISON OF PROJECT ALTERNATIVES Public Services and Utilities Significant and mlllgaled to below No impact significance. Less Impact than proposed project Hazards/Risk of Upset No Impact. No Impact. Similar to the proposed project. ., t CD I en en ,. Eastlake III Senior Housing E1R June 2006 less Impact than proposed project. Similar 10 tha proposed project. 4643-01 1-31 ATTACHMENT 4 OWNERSHIP DISCLOSURE FORM 9-67 ~\I?- ~ - .. p I a i1 n n g & Building Planning Division I Department Development Proces.sing CI1Y OF CHUIA VISTA Disclosure Statement Pursuant to Council Pelicy 101-01, prior to any action upon matters that will require discretionary action by the Council, Planning Commission and all other official bodies of the City, a statement of disclosure of certain ownership or financial interests, payments, or campaign contributions for a City of Chula Vista election must be filed. The following information must be disclosed: 1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the property that is the subject of the application or the contract. e.g., owner, applicant, contractor, subcontractor, material supplier. "'" t=1-lak.. f "yd- ({),,-,,,,,, u.c. 1""---4V<o-Q..f'~.f)O.::tJfLl..c. ~raJ= A-cfr'-'-'s~ IIh.{.,...rS,L;::' 2. If any person" identified pursuant 10 (1) above is a corporation or partnership. list the names of all Individuals with a $2000 investment in the business (corporation/partnership) entity. PI- 1L cN' "OGk..- fOI....H- ,...(~, I- lc.. 3. If any person* identified pursuant to (1) above is a non-profit organization or 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. Please identify every person. induding any agents, employees, consultants, or independent contractors you have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter. p ~ (Jac,{;~ b-.-/.,/t.......-tr ::;\~ l'..+tl~ ~~~\.... /tr~lcJ..S B.. 0 11f!' rOj 6 ~ _okvo ~e.~ tJl:'___/d"~ ~ . G M ' , t..., 4.. 5. Has any person" associated with this contract had any financial dealings with an official"'''' of the City of Chura -Vista as it relates to this contract within the past 12 months. Yes_ No~ If Yes, briefly describe the nature of the financial interest the official'" may have in this contract 6. Have you made a contribution of more than $250 within the past twelve (12) months to a current member of the Chula Vista City Council? No'L Yes _If yes, which Council member? 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista California 91910 (6191691-5101 9-68 City Of Chula Vista Disclosure Statement - Page 2 7. Have you provided more than $340 (or an item of equivalent value) to an official1\""" of the City of Chula Vista in the past twelve 'j'monthS? (This includes being a SQurce of income, money to retire a legal debt, gift, loan, etc.) Yes_ No If Yes, which official'" and what was the nature of item provided? Date: .4 ~~tor/APPIi;ant I", UC<? 1.Ja.-i,.. Print or type name of Contractor/Applicant ::G-JTI'=C.12k'-- .~~ XXV:r:, L.L<. Person is defined as: any indivIdual, firm, co-partnership, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal organization, corporation. estate, trust, receiver. syndicate, any other county, city, municipality, district, or other political subdivision, -or any other group or combination acting as a unit. t/-/Z--It:J - Official includes. but is not limited to: Mayor, Council member, Planning Commissioner, Member of a board, commission. or committee of the City. employee, or staff members. . 276 Fourth Avenue Chura Vlita. Californ ia 91910 16191691-5101 9-69 ATTACHMENT 5 EASTLAKE III SPA PLAN AMENDMENT (BINDER ATTACHED) 9-70 ATTACHMENT 6 PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCING PLAN AMENDMENT (ATTACHED) 9-71 RESOLUTION RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CONSIDERING THE ADDENDUM TO FEIR- 05-02; APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE EASTLAKE III SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA PLAN, PUBLlC FACILITlES FINANCE PLAN (PFFP) AND ASSOCIATED REGULATORY DOCUMENTS FOR 18.4 ACRES AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF OLYMPIC I' ARKW A Y AND WUESTE ROAD I. RECITALS A. Project Site WHEREAS, the area of land which is the subject of this Resolution is diagrammatically represented in Exhibit A attached to and incorporated into this Resolution, and commonly known as Olympic Pointe, and for the purpose of general description herein consists of 18.4 aeres ("Project Site"); and B. Project; Application for Discretionary Approvals WHEREAS, a duly verified application was filed with the City ofChula Vista Development Services Department on April 12, 2010 by Integral Partners XXIV, LLC for Eastlake Project Ovmer, LLC ("Applicant"), requesting amendments to the Eastlake III Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan, the Planned Community District Regulations and associated regulatory documents, including Design Guidelines, l'FFP, Air Quality Improvement Plan (AQIl') and Water Conservation Plan (WCP) for the Project Site ("Project); and C. Prior Discretionary Approvals WHEREAS, development of the Project Site has been the subject matter of various entitlements and agreements, including: I) a General Plan Amendment, Gcneral Development Plan and SPA Plan and associated Design Guidelines, PFFP, WCl' and AQIP and Comprehensive Affordable Housing Plan previously approved by City Council Resolution No. 2002-220 on July 17,2001; and amended on June 20, 2006 for the EastLake III Seniors Project; and 2) Planned Community District Regulations and Land Use Districts Map approved by City Council Ordinance No. 2839 on July 24,200 I, and amended by City Council Ordinance No. 2963 on May 18,2004; further amended on June 20, 2006 for the EastLake III Seniors Project; and further amended in April, 2008 for the Windstar Point Resort project; and 3) Tentative Subdivision Map approved by City Council Resolution 2006-191 on June 20, 2006; and D. Environmental Determination WHEREAS, the Development Services Director has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with the California Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that thc project 9-72 Resolution No. Page 2 was covered in previously adopted Final Subsequent Environmental lmpaet Report, Eastlake III Senior Housing Project, FEIR 05-02. The Development Services Director has determined that only minor technical changes or additions to this document are necessary and that none of the conditions described in Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines calling for the preparation of subsequent documents have occurred; therefore, the Development Services Director has prepared an addendum to this document, Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report, Eastlake 11I Senior Housing Project FEIR 05- 02. E. Planning Commission Record of Application WHEREAS; the Planning Commission set the time and place for a hearing on the Project, and notice of the hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City, and its mailing to property owners within 500 feet of the exterior boundary of the Project Site at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on the Project on November 10, 2010 and voted 5-1-0-1 to forward a recommendation to the City Council on the Project; and, WHEREAS, the proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning Commission at the publie hearing on the Project held on November 10, 2010 and the minutes and resolution resulting therefrom, are incorporated into the record of this proceedings; and, F. City Council Record of Application WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for the hearing on the Project application and notiees of said hearings, together with its purposes given by its publication in a newspaper of general eirculation in the city, and its mailing to property owners within 500 feet of the exterior boundaries ofthe Project Site at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing; and WHEREAS, the duly ealled and noticed public hearing on the Projeet was held before the City Couneil of the City of Chula Vista on December 14, 2010 in the Council Chambers in the City Hall, Chula Vista Civic Center, 276 Fourth Avenue, at 4;00 p.m. to receive the recommendations of the Planning Commission, and to hear public testimony with regard to the same. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista that it finds, determines, and resolves as follows: 9-73 Resolution No. Page 3 II. CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA The City Council finds that, in the exercise of their independent review and judgment, the addendum to FEIR-05-02 in the form presented, has been prepared in accordance with requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City ofChula Vista and adopts Addendum to FEIR-05-02 . III. SPA FINDINGS/ APl'ROVAL A. TI-IE SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) PLAN, AS AMENDED, IS fN CONFORMITY WITH TI-IE EASTLAKE III GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND THE CHULA VISTA GENERAL PLAN. The proposed amendments to the EastLake III SPA Plan reflect land uses that are consistent with the EastLake III General Development Plan and the City of Chula Vista General Plan. The residential nature of the proposed use would be consistent with the adopted high-density residential and open space land uses of the EastLake area. B. THE SPA PLAN, AS AMENDED, WILL PROMOTE THE ORDERLY SEQUENTIALIZED DEVELOPMENT OF THE INVOLVED SECTIONAL PLANNING AREAS. The requested amendments to the Eastlake III SPA Plan includes a PFFP that outlines the required infrastructure to serve the Project, the timing of installation and the financing mechanisms to promote the orderly sequentializcd development of the Project. The Project is one of the last areas of EastLake III to be developed. C. THE EASTLAKE III SPA PLAN, AS AMENDED, WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT ADJACENT LAND USE. RESIDENTIAL ENJOYMENT, CIRCULATION OR ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY. The proposed land use text and statistical amendments to the SPA Plan, amI development standards will not adversely affect the circulation system and overall land use pattern as previously envisioned in the EastLake !II General Development Plan. An addendum to FEIR-OS-02 has been prepared and any impacts associated with the proposed amendments have been previously addressed by FEIR-05-02. Thus, the requested amendments to tlle SPA Plan will not adversely affect the adjacent land uses, residential enjoyment, circulation or environmental quality of the surrounding uses. 9-74 Resolution No. Page 4 D. IN THE CASE OF PROPOSED INDUSTRIAL AND RESEARCH USES, THAT SUCH DEVELOPMENT WILL BE APPROPRIATE IN AREA, LOCATION, AND OVERALL DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ARE SUCH AS TO CREATE A RESEARCH OR INDUSTRIAL ENVIRONMENT OF SUSTAINED DESIRABILITY AND STABILITY; AND, THAT SUCH DEVELOPMENT WILL MEET PERFOR1\1ANCE STANDARDS ESTABLISHED BY THIS TITLE. The proposed project is not industrial or research land use. E. THE STREETS AND THOROUGHFARES ARE SUITABLE AND ADEQUATE TO CARRY THE ANTICIPATED TRAFFIC THEREON. The potential impacts to tramc and circulation have been thoroughly analyzcu based upon the proposed project resulting in specific requirements that must he complieu with at the time of development within the project area. This includes payment of any required in-lieu fees to pay fair share of cumulative impacts and the construction of a traffic signal at the project entrance and Olympic Parkway. F. ANY PROPOSED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT CAN BE JUSTIFIED ECONOMICALLY AT THE LOCA TION(S) PROPOSED AND WILL PROVIDE ADEQUATE COMMERCIAL FACILITIES OF THE TYPES NEEDED AT SUCH PROPOSED LOCA TION(S). The proposed project is not a commercial land use. G. THE AREA SURROUNDING SAID DEVELOPMENT CAN BE PLANNED AND ZONED IN COORDINATION AND SUBSTANTIAL COMPATIBILITY WITH SAID DEVELOPMENT. The proposed amenuments are consistent with the previously approveu plans and regulations applicable to surrounding sites and therefore the proposed amenuments can be planned and zoned in coordination and substantial compatibility with said development. IV. APPROVAL OF SPA AMENDMENTS Based on the findings above, the City Council approves the EastLake 1II SPA Plan as amended in the document entitled Eastlake 1II SPA Plan", dated October 22,21010 which document accompanies the staff report as Attachment 5 ("Attachment 5") subject to the conditions set forth below; 9-75 Resolution No. Page 5 I. The Project shall comply with all mitigation measures specified in FEIR-05-02. to the satisfaction of the Development Services Director. 2. The Applicant shall install all public facilities in accordance with the Eastlake 11I SPA Plan Public Facilities Financing Plan Amendment or as requircd to meet the Growth -Management Threshold standards adopted by the City. The City Engineer may modify the sequence of improvement construction should conditions change to warrant such a reVISIon. 3. The Applicant shall implement the Federal and State mandated conservation measures outlined in the Addendum to the WCP for Eastlakc lIT SPA Plan. 4. Prior to approval of building permits for each phase of the Project, the Applicant shall demonstrate that air quality control measures outlined in the EastLake III SPA Plan Addendum to the AQIP pertaining to the design, construction and operational phases of the project have been incorporated in the project design. 5. Prior to the 30th day after the Ordinance becomcs effective, the Applicant shall prepare a clean copy of the SPA Plan documcnt by deleting all strike out/underlines and shading. Where the document contains both an existing and proposed exhibit, the previous existing exhibit shall be removed and substituted. In addition, the strike-out underlined text, document format, maps and statistical changes within the EastLake lIT SPA, PC District Regulations, Design Guidelines, WCP Addendum and AQIP Addendmn for the Olympic Pointe project shall be incorporated into the final document and approved by the Director of Development Services for printing. 6. Prior to the 30th day after the Ordinance becomes effective, the Applicant shall submit to the Development Services Department lO copies and a CD ofthe approved amendment to the EastLake TIT SPA Plan, EastLake TIT Planned Community (PC District Regulations), Design Guidelines, Addendum to the AQIP, Addendum to the WCP and Eastlake TTI SPA PFFP. V. PFFP FINDINGS/APPROVAL A. THE PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCE PLAN AMENDMENT COMPLIES WITH SECTIONS 19.09.050 THROUGH 19.09.100, REQUIREMENTS FOR PUBLIC l<ACILlTIES FINANCE PLAN. The amendmert to the Eastlake TIT SPA Plan PFFP has been prepared according to the contents and details outlined in the Municipal Code. It has been submitted to and reviewed by the Director of Development Services. Public facilities needed to serve the project were identified and will be guaranteed by conditions of 9-76 Resolution No. Page 6 approval, payment of DIF fees at the building permit stage, and/or utilizing Community Facilities Districts to finance or maintain the public facility. Any impacts associated with the proposed amendments have been previously addressed by FEIR-OS-02. B. THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCE PLAN IS CONSISTENT WITH THE OVERALL GOALS AND POLICIES OF THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN, GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM, AND AMENDED ~=ASTLAKE III SPA PLAN. The Eastlake III SPA Plan PFFP outlines the necessary public facilities required to meet its land use and circulation objectives of the General Plan. The PFFP outlines detailed plans for the provision of these public facilities as they relate to the proposed Project. The PFFP identities any required Development Impact Fees (DIF) fees which must be paid to help defray costs of facilities which will benefit the project. The estimated facilities fees required by this project are $ 7,334,906.20. PAD fees are approximately $S;027,436.00 The fiscal revenues to the City associated with the Olympic Pointe project, range from $S4,800 annually and rise to $309,000 at build-out. Fiscal expenditures would be initially $49,SOO and rise to $279,000 at build-out The net fiscal impact to the City from developing the Olympic Pointe project is positive throughout the development and results in annual net surplus 01'$29,700 at build-out. c. THE PFFP AMENDMENT ENSURES THAT THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROJECT WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE CITY'S QUALITY OF LIFE STANDARDS. As required by the City's Growth Management Ordinance, the PFFP analyzes the impact of the project on public facilities and services and identities the required public facilities and services needed to serve the project to maintain consistency with the City's Quality of Life Threshold Standards. The PFFP describes in detail the cost, financing mechanisms and timing for constructing public facilities required to ensure that development occurs only when the necessary public facilities exist or are provided concurrent with the demands of the new development. Certain facility improvements include requirements for the construction of a signal at the intersection of Olympic Parkway and the project entrance. Other required measures are related to fire protection, water conservation, .water quality, air quality and traffic. Implementation of these measures along with payment of any required DIF fees will ensure the Project will maintain consistency with the City's Quality of Life Standards. 9-77 Resolution No. Page 7 Based on the tindings above, the City Council approves the docuement entitled "Eastlake III SPA Plan Public Facilities Finance Plan" dated October 28, 20 I 0, which document accompanies the staff report as Attachment 6. VI. APROV AL OF AMENDMENTS AND ADDENDUMS TO ASSOCIATED REGULATORY DOCUMENTS. The City Council approves the amendments to the associated regulatory documents including: the Design Guidelines and the Addendums to the AQIP and WCP for Eastlake III SPA Plan as shown in Attachment 5. VIII. CONSEQUENCE OF FAILURE OF CONDITIONS If any of the forgoing conditions fail to occur, or if they are, by their telms, to be implemented and maintained over time, and any of such conditions fail to be so implemented and maintained according to the their terms, the City shall have the right to revoke or modifY all approvals herein granted, deny or further condition issuance of future building permits, deny, revoke or further condition all certificates of occupancy issued under the authority of approvals herein granted, instituted and prosecute litigate or compel their compliance or seek damages for their violations. No vested rights are gained by Applicant or successor in interest by the City approval ofthis Resolution. IX. INVALIDITY; AUTOMATIC REVOCATION It is the intention of the City Council that its adoption of this Resolution is dependent upon enforceability of each and every tenn provision and condition herein stated; and that in the event that anyone or more tenns, provisions or conditions are determined by the Court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, if the city so determines in its sole discretion, this resolution shall be deemed to be revoked and no further in force or in effect ab initio. Presented by Gary Halbert, AICP, PE Assistant City Manager/Director of Development Services 9-78 PROJE~T lOCAtION EXHIBIT A 9-79 ORDINANCE NO. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE EASTLAKE III PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND LAND USE DISTRICTS MAP FOR 18.4 ACRES AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF OLYMPIC P ARKW A Y AND WUESTE ROAD I. RECIT ALS A. Project Site WHEREAS, the area of land which is the subject of this Ordinance is diagrammatically represented in "Exhibit A" attached to and incorporated into this Ordinance, and commonly known as Olympic Pointe, and for the general purpose of general description herein consists of 18.4 acres located at the southwest corner of Olympic Parkway and Wueste Road intersection within the EastLake III Planned Community ("Project Site"); and, B. Project; Application for Discretionary Approvals WHEREAS, a duly verified application was filed with the City ofChula Vista Development Services Department on April 12, 2010, by Integral Partners XXIV, LLC for Eastlake Project Owner LLC ("Developer"), requesting approval of amendments to the EastLake III Planned Community District Regulations and Land Use Districts Map; and, C. Prior Discretionary Approvals WHEREAS, development of the Project Site has been the subject matter of various entitlements and agreements, including: 1) a General Plan Amendment, General Development Plan and Sectional Planning Area Plan and associated Design Guidelines, Public Facilities Financing Plan, Water Conservation Plan and Air Quality Improvement Plan and Comprehensive Affordable Housing Plan previously approved by City Council Resolution No. 2002-220 on July 17,2001; and amended on June 20, 2006 fur the EastLake III Seniors Project and; 2) Planned Community District Regulations and Land Use Districts Map approved by City Council Ordinance No. 2839 on July 24, 2001, and amended by City Council Ordinance No. 2963 on May 18,2004; and further amended on June 20. 2006 for the EastLake III Seniurs Project; and further amended in April, 2008 for the Windstar Point Resort project, and; 3) Tentative Subdivison Map approved by City Council Resulution 2006-191 on June 20, 2006; and, D. Planning Commission Record of Application WHEREAS, the Planning Commission set the time and place for a hearing on the Project, and notice of the hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a 9-80 Ordinance No. Page 2 newspaper of general circulation in the City. and its mailing to property owners within 500 feet of the exterior boundary of the Project, at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on the Project on November 10, 2010, and voted 5-1-0-1 to forward a recommendation to the City Council on the Project; and WHEREAS, the proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning Commission at the public hearing on this project held on November 10, 2010, and the minutes and resolution resulting therefrom, are hereby incorporated into the record of this proceeding; and E. City Council Record of Application WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for the hearing on the Project application and notices of the hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city, and its mailing to property owners within 500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the Project at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing; and, WHEREAS, the duly called and noticed public hearing on the Project was held before the City Council of the City ofChula Vista on December 14,2010, in the Council Chambers in the City Hall, City ofChula Vista Civic Center, 276 Fourth Avenue, at 4:00 p.m. to receive the recommendations ofthe Planning Commission, and to hear public testimony with regard to the same; and F. Discretionary Approvals Resolution and Ordinance WHEREAS, at the same City Council hearing at which this Ordinance was introduced for first reading on December 14, 2010 the City Council of the City of ChuJa Vista approved Resolution , by which it approved amendments to the EastLake III Sectional Plmming Area Plan, Design Guidelines, the Public Facilities Financing Plan, the Air Quality Improvement Plan and the Water Conservation Plan; G. Environmental Determination WHEREAS, the Development Services Director has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with the California Quality Act ("CEQA") and has determined that the project was covered in previously adopted Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report, Eastlake ]]] Senior Housing Project, FEIR 05-02. The Development Services Director has determined that only minor technical changes or additions to this document are necessary and that none of the conditions described in Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines calling for the preparation of a subsequent documents have occurred; therefore, the Development Services Director has prepared ml ALldendum to this document, Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report, Eastlake ]]] Senior Housing Project, FEIR 05-02 . NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City ofChuJa Vista does hereby tlnd, detennine and ordain as follows: 9-81 Ordinance No. Page 3 A CONSISTENCY WITH GENERAL PLAN The City Council tinds that the proposed amendments to the EastLake III Planned Community District Regulations and Land Use District Map are consistent with the City ofChula Vista General Plan. The residential nature of the proposed use would be consistent with the adopted high-density residential designation for this project site and compatible with the surrounding residential and open space land uses of the EastLake area. B. APPROVAL OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS The City Council approves the amendments to the EastLake III Planned Community District Regulations and Land Use District Map as represented in Exhibit B. III. EFFECTIVE DATE This ordinance shall take effect and be in Il']] force on the thirtieth day from and after its adoption. Presented by Gary Halbert, AICP, PE Assistant City Manager/Director of Development Services 9-82 / -s PIlllOJ~CT lOCATION EXHIBIT A 9-83 EXHIBIT B RESIDENTL\L DISTRICTS Table F PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS - RC & RM RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS DEVELOPMENT STANDARD ZONING DISTRICT RC RM RM-I Lot Criteria: Average lot area (square feet) SF SF SF Min imum lot area (square feet) SF SP SF Maximum lot coverage (%) SF SF SF Minimum lot depth (feet) SF SP SF Minimum lot width (feet): -lneasured at exterior property line SF SF SF - flab lot street frontage SF SI' SP -knuckle or cui-de-sac street frontage SF SF SF Yards and setbacks:* Minimum front yard setback': 1 I -to direct entry garage 20 20 SF -to side entry garage (single story) 20 20 SF -to main residence 20 20 SF -to accessorr structures 20 20 SF Minimum side yard setback (feet) ': -to adiacent residential lot 20 20 SF -distance between detached units 20 20 SF -to adiacent rC5ident..:.31 street (COD1er lotI 20 20 SF Minimum rear yard setback (feet)' 20 20 SF Building height (stories/feet): 25/35 3135 4/50] Parking spaces: Single family dwelling unit (garage spaces) 22 22 NA Multiple dwellings: -per studio unit 1 1 +0: A -per I bedroom unit 1 .' 11/2 -l-L-0:,\ i;: -per 2 bedroom unit 2 2 2~ -per 3 bedroom unit 21/2 2 I/;>. 2 1,'-2~ -ner 4 hedw()m unit n "I I' Yard setbacks indicated arc to the exterior property line of the parceL Setbacks to interior property lines arc subject to Design Review Approval. Option: 1 car garage and 1 carport with Design Review approval. Architectural feature may be up to 65' in height in accordance with Section II.3.12.1. The mt.'asurement of neight as defined un CVJ\.JC Section 19.04.38. Plus (J.3 C~uest Space') per unit. AJditional Notes: *Refer to Section lI.3.3.4C fnr alJo\vable buiJding area for each Land Use District. cj<Refer to Section I1.3._1.4F for special setbacks fur Scenic Highways. (04115/08) PC DISTRICT REGUL\TIOr:--;S I L9~-~~ RESOLUTION RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CTTY OF CHULA VISTA GRANTING A DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT FOR A PROPOSED 389 UNIT CONDOMINUM PROJECT FOR 18.4 ACRES AT THE AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF OLYMPIC PARKWAY AND WUESTE ROAD I. RECITALS A. Project Site WHEREAS, the area of land which is the subject of this Resolution is diagrammatically represcnted in Exhibit A attached to and incorporated into this Resolution, and commonly known as Olympic Pointe, and for the purpose of general description herein consists of 18.4 acres ("Project Site"); and B. Project; Application for Discretionary Approvals WHEREAS, a duly verified application was filed with the City of Chula Vista Development Services Department on April 12, 2010 by Integral Partners X,'CIV, LLC for Eastlake Project Owner, LLC ("Applicant"), requesting approval of a new 389 unit condominium project for the Project Site ("Project"); and C. Environmental Determination WHEREAS, the Development Services Director has reviewed the proposed projcct for compliance with the California Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the project was covered in previously adopted Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report, Eastlake TIT Senior Housing Project, FEIR 05-02. The Development Services Director has determined that only minor technical changes or additions to this document are necessary and that none of the conditions described in Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines calling for the preparation of subsequent documents have occurred; therefore, the Development Services Director has prepared an addendum to this document, Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report, Eastlake III Senior Housing Project, FEIR 05- 02. D. City Council Record of Application WHEREAS, thc City Clerk set the time and place for the hearing on the Project application and notices of said hearings, together with its purposes given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city, and its mailing to property owners within 500 feet. of the exterior boundaries of the Project Site at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing; and 9-85 Resolution No. Page 2 WHEREAS, the duly called and noticed public hearing on the Project was held before the City Council of the City of Chub Vista on December 14, 20 lOin the Council Chambers in the City Hall, Chub Vista Civic Center, 276 Fourth Avenue, at 4:00 p.m. to receive the recommendations of the Planning Commission, and to hear public testimony with regard to the same. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista that it finds, determines, and resolves as follows: III. DESIGN REVIEW FINDINGS/ APPROVAL A. THAT THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT, AS CONDITIONED, IS CONSISTENT WITH TI-IE DEVELOPMENT REGLUATIONS OF THE PLANNED COMMUNITY, EASTLAKE VISTAS PLANNING AREA, MI-I ZONE. The proposed project will comply with all development standards of the RM-I development standards of the PC District Regulations as amended by the accompanying Ordinance regarding parking standards. B. THE DESIGN FEATURES OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ARE CONSISTENT WITH, AND ARE A COST EFFECTIVE METHOD OF SATISFYING, THE EASTALAKE III SPA DESIGN GUIDELINES AND THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DESIGN MANUAL AND LANDSCAPE MANUAL. The design features are consistent with the multi-family residential design standards contained in the City's Design Manual. Landscaping and open space have been provided as required by the multi-family open space requirements per Title 19 oflhe CVMC and the City's Landscape Manual. IV. APPROVAL OF DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT Based on the findings above, the City Council approves the Design Review Permit subject to the conditions set torth below: A. The following shall be accomplished to the satisfaction of the City, prior to issuance of building permits, unless otherwise specified. 9-86 Resolution No. Page 3 Phmninn ('nnc1itinns. G I. Prior to, or in conjunction with the submittal of plans for the building permit, pay all applicable fees, including any unpaid balances of permit processing fees for deposit account DQ-1627. 2. The colors and materials specified on the building plans must be consistent with the colors and materials shown on the site plan and materials board approved by the City Council on December 14, 2010, or as subsequently modified per their direction. 3. Concurrent with the building permit submittal, provide a detailed landscape plan prepared by a registered landscape architect for review and approval. Plans shall be prepared per Landscape Manual and CVMC requirements. Existing landscape that is to be reinstalled must utilize drought tolerant landscaping in compliance with Chapter 20.12 of the Municipal Code. No turf shall be used. The "Concept Design Statement, Design Objective" must include a reference to the Chula Vista Landscape Water Conservation Ordinance which states.. . and the Chula Vista Landscape Water Conservation Ordinance, Municipal Code Chapter 20.12". 4. All ground mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc., shall be located out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete or masonry walls, benning, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the City. 5. A graffiti resistant treatment shall be specitied for all wall and building surfaces. This shall be noted for any building and wall plans and shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Development Services prior to the issuance of building permits. Additionally, the project shall conforrn to Sections 9.20.055 of the CVMC regarding graffiti control. 6. The Applicant shall develop, submit and obtain approval of "Recycling and Solid Waste Management Plan" by the City's Conservation Coordinator. The synopsis of the plan shall be included in the notes on the Building Plans. The plan shall demonstrate those steps that the Applicant will take to comply with the Municipal Code, including but not limited to Sections 8.24 and 8.25, and meet the State mandate to reduce or divert 50 % of the waste generated by commercial, residential and industrial developments. The Applicant shall contract with the City's franchise hauler throughout the construction and occupancy phase of the project. The Plan shall include a statement of how the Applicant will implement and participate in the Recycling and Solid Waste Management Plan requirements and how yard waste will be diverted. The proposed trash enclosure shall be designed with appropriate screenIng. 9-87 Resolution No. Page 4 7. The Applicant shall implement to the satisfaction of the Development Services Director ami the City Engineer the mitigation measures identified in the Final Environmental Impact Report, EastLake III Senior Housing Project, FEIR 05-02 ami associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. T ;mrl T)pvp!opment Fne.:ll1pP:rine: 8. Applicant shall pay the following fees: a. Scwer Capacity Fees b. Tratnc Signal Fees c. Development Impact Fees per Master Fee Schedule 9. Prior to issuance of Building Permits or prior to beginning any earthwork activIties, development must obtain a Land Development Permit in accordance with Grading Ordinance No. 1797. 10. Prior to approval of grading and improvement plans, applicant shall indicate all sewer and drainage facilities will be private. 11. Applicant shall be required to obtain a construction permit from the Development Services Department to perform all work in the City's right-of-way, including: . Lateral connections to existing public utilities. . Installation of driveway 12. Prior to approval of the first building permit or as otherwise determined by the City Engineer, the Developer shall: 1. Design, construct, and secure a fully actuated trafllc signal including interconnect wiring, mast arms, signal heads and associated equipment, underground improvements, standards and luminaries at the Olympic Parkway/Project Driveway intersection. The design of the traffic signal shall be to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and conform to City standards. Developer shall provide the following intersection geometry: a. Westbound: One left-turn lane (with 100 feet of storage) and two through lanes b. Northbound: One left-turn lane and one right-turn lane (with a storage length of 75 feet in each lane) c. Eastbound: One shared through/right-turn lane and one' through lane d. Southbound: None 9-88 Resolution No. Page 5 A traffic signal shall be installed at the project driveway and two outbound (northbound) lanes, one left-turn and one right-turn lane and two inbound (southbound) lanes shall be provided. 11. Relocate the median opening on Olympic Parkway further west from its current location (0 accommodate the proposed project driveway. In addition, the applicant shall provide the pertinent landscape improvements to the satisfaction of the Director of the Development Services Department. 111. Provide pedestrian ramps along Olympic Parkway (within frontage of the project) to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. IV. Install a "No U Turn" sign for eastbound trat1ic on Olympic Parkway at the Olympic Parkway/Wueste Road intersection. The Developer shall fully design the aforementioned improvements in conjunction with the improvement plans for the related project to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 13. Prior to issuance of grading permits, developer shall enter into a Storm Water Facilities Maintenance Agreement with the City before approval of the grading plans for the site. The Developer shall agree to install, inspect, maintain, repair and replace all private storm water management facilities within the Developer's project. 14. Developer shall present verification to the City Engineer in the form of a letter from Otay Water District that the subdivision will be provided adequate water service and long-telm water storage facilities. The Developcr shall phase and install water system improvements as required by the Otay Water District. 15. Prior to issuance of grading permits, Developer shall obtain a letter of permission to grade from the US Olympic Committee for any work encroaching into the Olympic Training Center's property. 16. The Developer shall process a Final Map to divide the property into the proposed seven lots. The process of the Final Map shall be in compliance with the City's Municipal Code Chapter 18, the City's Subdivision Manual, and the Subdivision Map Act. 17. Prior to approval of the Final Map, the Developer shall submit and obtain the approval of the City of the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) for the project site. 18. Prior to issuance of grading permits, Developer shall design all grading work in accordance with Chula Vista Ordinance 1797, Chapter 15.04 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, and the City of Chula Vista Subdivision Manual. In addition, 9-89 Resolution No. Page 6 development of this project shall comply with all requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Municipal Permit, Order No. R9-2007-0001 (Municipal Permit), the City ofChula Vista Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP), the Chula Vista Municipal Code Chapter 14.20, and of the City of Chula Vista Development Storm Water Manual, as may be amended from time to time. 19. Developer shall provide evidence to the City Engineer that adequate sewer capacity does exist and that the City of San Diego Metropolitan Wastcrwater Depatment ("Metro") has adequate sewage treatment capacity. All development must comply with the Municipal Code, specifically CVMC Sections 19.09.010 (A) 6 and] 3.14.030. 20. Prior to approval of the Final Map, applicant shall obtain and dedicate to the City all the necessary easements for general utility and access purposes, as determined by the City Engineer. Rllilr1ine-' 21. Plans shall comply with Title 24 and 2007 California Building Code l CBe), California Mechanical Code (CMC), California Plumbing Code (CPC), California Electric Code (CEC) and 2008 California Energy Code. Eire.:. 22. Comply with all requirements of the Chula Vista Fire Department including the following: a) Ensure that the Fire Protection Plan specific to the wild land interface is in place; b) provide a breakdown of building square footage and building construction type for each building in order to determine the projects fire flow; c) provide an updated water supply analysis (technical report) for review and approval. Said report shall be a node-to-node analysis using the Hazen-Williams formula. The analysis shall show that the required fire flow is available at the hydrants and that simultaneously, the sprinkler demand is available at the most demanding sprinkler riser. B. The following on-going conditions shall apply to the property as long as it relies on this approval: 23. This permit shall become void and ineffective if not used or extended in accordance with Section 19.14.600 of the Municipal Code. 24. All landscape and hardscape improvements shall be installed and maintained Il1 accordance with the approved landscape plan. 9-90 Resolution No. Page 7 25. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of Title 19 of the Municipal Code, and other applicable City Ordinances in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 26. The Property Owner and Applicant shall and do agree to indemnify, protect, defend and hold harmless City, its City Council members, otlicers, employees and representatives, from and against any and all liabilities, losses, damages, demands, claims and costs, including court costs and attorney's fees (collectively, liabilities) incurred by the City arising, directly or indirectly, from (al City's approval and issuance of this Design Review Permit and (b) City's approval or issuance of any other permit or action, whether discretionary or non-discretionary, in connection with the use contemplated on the Project Site. The Property Owner and Applicant shall acknowledge their agreement to this provision by executing a copy of this Design Review Permit where indicated below. The Property Owner's and Applicant's compliance with this provision shall be binding on any and all of the Property Owner's and Applicant's successors and assigns. This condition may be modified by the Zoning Administrator subject to input from the City Attorney. Prior to the issuance of any permits required by the City of Chula Vista for the use of the' subject property in reliance upon this approval, the Applicant/Representative and property owner shall execute this document by making a true copy of this letter of conditional approval and signing both this original letter and the true copy on the I ines provided below, said execution indicating that the Applicant/Representative and Property Owner have each read, understood and agreed to the conditions contained herein, and will implement the same. Upon execution, the true copy with original signatures shall be returned to the Project Planner in the Development Services Department. Failure to return the signed copy of this document within thirty days of the effective date hereof shall indicate the Applicant's/Representative's or Property Owner's desire that the project, and the corresponding application for building permits and/or a business license, be held in abeyance without approval. Signature of Property Owner Date Signature of Applicant Date V. CONSEQUENCE OF JiAILURE OF CONDITIONS If any of the forgoing conditions fail to occur, or if they are, by their tenm, to be implemented and maintained over time, and any of such conditions fail to be so 9-91 Resolution No. Page 8 implemented and maintained according to the their tem1s, the City shall havc the right to revoke or modify all approvals herein granted. deny or further condition issuance of future building permits, deny, revoke or tll1iher condition all certificates of occupancy issued under the authority of approvals herein granted, instituted and prosecute litigate or compel their compliance or seek damages for their violations. No vested rights arc gained by Applicant or successor in interest by the City approval of this Resolution. VI. INVALIDITY; AUTOMATIC REVOCATION It is the intention of the City Council that its adoption of this Resolution is dependent upon enforceability of each and every term provision and condition herein stated; and that in the event that anyone or more terms, provisions or conditions are detennined by the Court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, if the city so detelmincs in its sole discretion, this resolution shall be deemed to be revoked and no fnrther in force or in effect ab initio. , , I as to 'I' rm; y/' 1/' ./ Presented by Gary Halbert, AICP, PE Assistant City Manager/Director of Development Services 9-92 >- " '" '" ~ '" " " " w w 0 w " Z " <i w " !< " <i PlimECY lOCATION EXHIBIT A 9-93 Edited pages for Olympic Pointe Project Eastlake III General Development Plan i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i ~ ~i i^~ii ~i ~ii ~o ~ ~u ~ ~ i i ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ Eastlake III SPA Plan Updated October 22, 2010 by: Fuscoe Engineering, Inc. 6390 Greenwich Drive, Suite 170 San Diego, CA 92122 858.554.1500 SPA Plan IxTxonuc~noN Prajcct. t.aeatinh Exhibit 5 ing Site Utilization Plan (04/08/08) SPA Plnw II.2.1-14 ~~~~ml ^~'~~ -.... Ia~l Piamir~9 ~~ AWBm¢OCPhlmuhHy hT Tht Essuas¢.G¢mpany 6a`rua6 Co~+ruu~Nrn' U sic, Co?ycr:ri Side Uttl'rzatc~n Plan -- ~~ . _, I N W9 t ~ -r. ': ~, Ptt.2 ~'-a ` - r - * Wit l 5 ~ \ YiR? fir- ',A, , t ~w~-~ ti .~.,. , I 1fRW W'A{f t j ~ V9 ~`. `+' NEnoEPl AI wooer ) I,odu... coo e,d> ou ^+i }~ ~' ~/ I °~1._ wN 1 ' Y ~ ~ ~ . ~ I e '.e ,. s / . YR31 j ~ y z 8.1 51 L , _ , -t ~ zsP iA '. ' tkent Zub-~aN Wanes 9.z S.fi ffil `` - „: ~ P $ i 1 E 5 lP 3; a~ 1 p 1 l5 i 44 Si ~ ; r..~.h ~ ~ i ~ s VRd 4v ~ r 3 E ~1 "-'~ A 1 } do 1 we q 1_) zaa ~-zws ~ s e . n~aoml sws sa aws NIX1'NfS1 IXNiW c < m i t n.: n r al P3 r~~ s `~i I <f • rol wl 'x ooi `~Ime sl o Ele y +1 L... @Fl Cn~ ~f:c7btekn[. OS 1)7 os uu<. Ine ri u<e osa ostim¢o~,nN; ar I ~. N.~urteu~iabo~i a zl s av ocmumo.ae.~urna VNDI(RIOiAI IM:I 14 -N.fh :.-.- IR.ptdttn9itG4/mtu pity try 7tt? EAStl.dk0 ComRany ,,,, ~~ ~',J.j I~ u ._ Rux .h . _i„. 1' ~~ } 4R~t ~, t ... 1 Y VR8 ti ~ f f f RS 1 c.,,.w..or4y YRJ p i (-~ RlN4Mw<r t t I t -~{~V3t it i ~ Y8 i0 ~», t .._ ~ ; /` C4 a i~ r ~k ~~~ 1 VR-tA [ ! ~ ,~ ~ ... '~ Vrl __ PTO,~t7Ct IatICtYCtoUO "° '. ~C] ~~~i~lGr^' w ~... Exhibit 3.1 (04[OA/OK) D[Slcv OUIDGLL'VCS IL2 (-t4.5 II.2.3 Project Circulation Network 11.2.3) Introduction The Eastlake ^I Circulation Plan is primarily an extension of the existing circulation routes and includes vehicular and non-vehicular circulation networks. The plan arranges the roads into a hierarchy to provide a system of roadways organized by function and traffic volumes. The circulation plan will implement access to the community as established by the Eastlake IH General Development Plan and in accordance with the City of Chula Vista General Plan. The SPA Plan Public Facilities Financing Plan (see Section ^.5 Public Facilities Financing Plan) establishes a transportation phasing plan with specific improvements and timing of circulation improvements to maintain the levels of service established in the City's Threshold Standards in the City's Growth Management Element of the General Plan. Specific project access points, and internal circulation, including bicycle, pedestrian, hiking and road crossings will be determined by the City Engineer during the tentative tract map process. Variations to the circulation concepts described in this section may occur where safety or efficiency can be enhanced. The Eastlake Ill plan also considers non-vehicular circulation systems by making provisions to connect to local and regional trails systems, such as the Chula Vista Greenbelt, to create a comprehensive system of vehicular and non-vehicular routes. IL2.3.2 Project Access Primary access to the project will be provided from Otay Lakes Road (6-lane prime arterial), Olympic Parkway (6-lane prime arterial), and Proctor Valley Road (6-lane prime arterial). Regional access is provided by 1-805, located west of the site:_i i i ~= k.t ~.a-:.~t~=tr~ t+~~+~ .~f-SR-125 immediately west of the Eastlake Greens SPA ~.r~??-= . ~. kb r«;=t,ev-tt s~a,w.~ t ;_:-~; } .rh k .~r~t,r+:~. Secondary access to Eastlake Vistas is provided by Wueste Road (2-lane collector), which parallels the western shore of Lower Otay Reservoir and intersects with Olympic Parkway near the Activity Center. Hunte Parkway (4-lane major street) extends north-south through the Eastlake Woods neighborhood. Currently, Otay Lakes Road and Olympic Parkway exist, although Otay Lakes Road has not yet been constructed to its ultimate improvement width or alignment beyond Hunte Parkway. Otay Lakes Road extends beyond the project area to the east, beyond the Otay Lakes, as a two lane road. Olympic Parkway has been constructed from Hunte Parkway, east to the OTC entrance and connecting to Wueste Road. Construction of Olympic Parkway westward from Hunte Parkway to connect to I-805 has been completed. boa/oa/os~ sP,~ P1~~N 11.2.3-1 PUBLIC FACILITIES 11.2.7.6 Storm Drain System Review and approval of storm drain system design and implementation is the responsibility of the City. Conceptually, the on-site run-off from developed areas in the Eastlake III SPA will be collected by an on-site system and discharged into the Salt Creek drainage. The drainage system will be required to control post-development run-off so that is does not exceed pre-development conditions. Prior master planning and conceptual design efforts for Eastlake III envisioned that stonn water improvements would be required. A detention basin al Olympic Parkway and enhanced wetlands in Salt Creek, between Olympic Parkway and Otay Lakes Road, have been constructed to enhance water quality and attenuate storm water run-off. These facilities were designed to serve the Eastlake Vistas planning area, as well as the Eastlake Trails SPA. However, the design reports for these facilities did not mitigate for the potential impacts from the Eastlake Woods area or the panhandle parcel. Upstream within Salt Creek, the Rolling Hills Ranch project (formerly Salt Creek Ranch) built detention basins at two locations. The basins significantly reduce the peak 100 year run-off. Plans for Eastlake [II incorporate these reductions. Detention volumes are based on the need to control run-off volume to pre-development levels and water quality mitigation which requires a drain time of 24 to 72 hours to allow time for sediments to settle, etc. Anticipated flows have been calculated in a Preliminary Drainage & Detention Study prepared by SB&O, dated February 27, 2001 and the supplement by Rick Engineering, dated August 5, 2005. The drainage master plan for the area identifies two locations for detention basins in the vicinity of Salt Creek. These are the major road crossings at Otay Lakes Road and Olympic Parkway. A 12 foot by IO foot box culvert with detention basin and spillway has already been constructed at the Olympic Parkway crossing. A 12 foot by 12 foot reinforced concrete box culvert has also been constructed across Otay Lakes Road. Given the current configuration, this facility provides negligible attenuation of the storm water run-off. The most significant new drainage facility is a new detention basin at Otay Lakes Road to serve the Eastlake Woods project area as identified in the technical report and approved by the City Engineer. Rick Engineering prepared a letter report, dated April 23, 2007, which analyzed the impact of converting the Seniors Housing (VIZ-13) to high density multi-family rentals. This analysis concluded that the land use conversion would have no negative impact to the storm drain system. k ~ i ~ !.:.3ai a i~:~l ~ i -fe s= ~ .n~~ ~ 5i ~> > _~;t~r t n ''i °"i, 5 z : ~,~ n~ o ~ r i •,7 ~-i , ~ct i `w K= Ii} :~i _ .~~.~..'~~ sin; .. ~ii,.~~.n._ Due to site planning, topographic and access constraints, the detention facility consists of two successive detention basins. The upper basin provides 29.0 aFft of total storage (water quality and detention). Outflow will be constrained by two rectangular control structures with four weir openings. Twin 78-inch pipes will convey the storm water under the school access road to the lower facility. The lower basin provides 16.2 ac-ft of total storage. Outflow will be controlled by a similar structure. In order to capture the maximum amount of run-off, the lower control structure will be connected to the existing box culvert. No significant conflicts between storm drain facilities and recreation use of the Salt Creek corridor are anticipated. toa/an/os1 srn vi.nN IL2.7-8 PunLIC F.4CILrrIPS profit organizations serving the local community, subject to the requirements outlined in 19.48.044(B)(6)(d). Howeeer, where recreational ball fields arc desired as a conditional use in Community Purpose Facilities land use districts, a "CPF A4aster Plan", showing the specific boundaries of the master plan and existing and proposed distribution otCPF uses within a SPA, CiDP of overall Plam~ed Community shall be considered and approved by the Director of Planning and incorporated as part ofthe Planned Community's General Development Plan(s). In addition, recreational ball fields shall not utilize more than 35`;% of the overal l SPA, GDP or Planned Community CPF acreage required, and no park credit maybe granted for community purpose ball flelds.~ The total acreage required maybe reduced by the City council in certain circumstances such as when shared parking facilities are available with other facilities. 11.2.7.13.2 CPF Master Plan The CPF !Master Plan boundaries encompass Eastlake Greens (inchuiing the "Land Swap" Parcels), P,astL ake Trails, Eastlake Business Center 11, Eastlake Vistas and Eastlake W Dods (see Exhibit 24). Four sites are distributed throughout the remaining SPAS insuring that each future CPF site wilt serve a different neighborhood. fn addition, the sites are located along major road to enhance accessibly to the facility by community residents. Based upon the anticipated dcvdopmeni statistics for the CPF Master Plan area, the overall combined CPF acreage required and proposed is as follows: Tahle F R 'red Community Pur ose Facility Acres for Eastlake e m. Eastlake 11* Greens SPA** Eastlake II' Trails SPA Eastlake III (GDP) Total Dwelling Units 3,443 1,143 - , ~.~~~ ~ 1° 7,03 CPFac/du 0.004003 0.004003 0.004003 -- Total CPF acres required 13.8 4.6 10.2 28.6 Total CPF acres provided 11.4 4.6 12.9 28.9 * Eastlake I (North of Otay Lakes Road) is excluded from this table. *' Includes proposed Land Swap amendment. (04i0$r'OR) SPA PL,t~ IL2.7-i 7 Pursue' Fncarnrs IL2.7.13.3 Proposed CPF Sites The CPF Master Plan provide a total of 28.9 acres in three different sites. Exhibit 24 identifies the proposed CPF sites which are described in more detail below. Site l (Existing): Located in Eastlake Greens, a portion of this 11.4 acre site (12.2 acres) has been conveyed to a religious institution for use as a place of worship. Site 2: This CPF site is located within the Eastlake Traiis neighborhood and is proposed to conditionally permit little league ball fields for non-profiC organizations serving the local community. The development of the site (4.6 acres) would be subject to the requirements outlined in the Eastlake t[ Planned Community District Regulations and Section 19.48.040(B)(6)(d) of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. Site 3: This site is located in the Eastlake Vistas neighborhood of Eastlake iII GDP and consists of two parcels totaling 12.9 acres. The Eastlake 111 SPA Plan will refine the exact location and acreage this site. The sites identified on this Master Plan are, or will be, designated in the Planned Community District Regulations as "CPF" to insure their continued availability pursuant to city requirements. With the exception of CPF site Nos. 2 and 3, which will include little league ball fields as a conditional use permit, the above mentioned CPF sites could accommodate by conditional use permit the following land uses: • Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, and other similar organizations; • Senior care and recreation; • Worship, spiritual growth and development, and teaching of traditional family values; • For prott and non-profit day care facilities that arc ancillary to any of the above; • Private schools that are ancillary to any of the above; • Interim uses, subject to the findings outlined in Section 19.48.025(E) of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. • Recreational ball fields not to exceed 35% of the overall CPF acreage requirement for the CPF Master Plan. (pq/pg/pgl SPA PLAN II.2.7-18 l U~iI J<'~~nCILllll-S Master Plan c-f Community Purpc-se Facilities [aatLake 93t -'JJflad4 C:SSllake 7 f `+.'~ ~.astlaku Yr:iils ?nrn 5rvrluded;=°! _ _, .- --.~ ~aaL ake 111 -Vksxas ~asl4ake.4reens ..'l' IC?(Nf9 ~ki'N~'Yl. { .~ ~ , 4 W.n~+ers cummuniry ey the [+ww>.e ewnpany ~Of14P05 Exhibit 24 (04/OSiD$) SPA PLAN IL2.7-7 9 PC District Regulations ititsiui;N'n:v. uis'ntic'rs Table t~ PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS - RC & RM RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS DEVELOPMENT STANDARD ZONING DISTRICT RC RM RM-1 Lot Criteria: Average lot area (square feet) SP SP SP Minimum lot area (square feet) SP SP SP Maximum lot coverage (%) SP SP SP Minimum lot depth (feet) SP SP SP Minimum lot width (feet): -measured at exterior property line SP SP SP -flab lot street frontage SP SP SP -knuckle or cul-de-sac street fronta e SP SP SP Yards and setbacks:* Minimum front yard setback: i I -to direct entry garage 30 20 SP -to side entry garage (single story) 20 20 SP -to main residence 20 20 SP -to accesson structures 20 20 SP Minimum side vard setback (feet) ~: -to adjacent residential lot 20 20 SP -distance between detached units 20 20 SP -to ad'acent residential street corner lot 20 20 SP Minimum rear yard setback (feet) ~ 20 20 SP Building height (stories/feet): 2.5/35 3/35 4/503 Parking spaces: Single family dwelling unit (garage spaces) ?'- 2- N Multiple dwellings: -pex studio unit 1 1 +V '; -pex I bedroom unit 1 '/z 1'/z - . - -per 2 bedroom unit 2 2 2' -per 3 bedroom unit 2 '/z 2 '/z ._ .... ' Yazd setbacks indica[ed are to the exterior property line of the parcel. Setbacks to mtenor pxoperry tines are subject to Design Review approval. - Option: 1 car garage and 1 carport with Design Review approval. s axchitecmral feature may be up to 6Y in height in accordance with Section IL3.12.1. The measurement of height as defined un C~'MC Section 1204.35. Additional Notes: 'Refer to Section II.3.3.4C fox allowable building area fox each Land Use District. *Refex to Section IL3.3.4F for special setbacks for Scenic Highways. (04/15/08) PC llltinacr la::cul.n'noNs 11.3.3-10 Design Guidelines CO_YIMf'M7y UI:SIGN CIJ~~IC'LI`I bite Utliza#on Plan ~~,,._._ ~_:_.._ PFpOEMIAt Y wava, I ~e u.. coo A / r nu --~ w I „ ~ ~ /PS Sn;- y l e o t: e . ss ..0 1 a E a: rn ssv 0.1 B vX 3 ] vwa a a s a s ~a a: ni~1 0. M J ~ 1' N. ,Rti~, M4 r w .a 1 eq hma 5 M 'tl t SW.6 SP N.WiS - p 0.E I OFM Pt Cl ( , I M1,il IN ' e, ue P3 tl ~'+~ I Pp-1 l e k ,aol ft] 4f i03 l _I le k VU lJB W3 P, Y Gil Cia UfP lx (S 139 5 )Ven Ir e A lI4.L M~I ULYIgoi Porker, ~r ll ln~pi (bcu:~~ien ESf wEIdA nm Pesllrlill E41.1 VPOI[RtOtdL )4:l 14 }.55y:... 4~ R.9 -~; , , :"*PI ~• Wi•t wa:a J.'T '~~Ur; erLs_ l G=c:J.. 2vvfr.^: L~ ~~' ~ `'i G` 1fA ~ \. ) .~ - ~ . ~t f `4VR$ Y C ,tI ^~~~f`~~Yi 1 W.,_ .,~"!R iDy.. °•~ T . n ~ r 4' ),i •'.; ItKQr I / ~ r" ~Ka ~. ~ 4- ~ ~. ~.....: L~.. L .w ~ylwq Yk-0 p,j r Fmmisc<! YR it Y ! t5 •'-` C.~ ' 1.~~ f~ ~~i YR-53 z v. Project [.ocatiao .--^--'- A.ptr~43n4t5 g6/iltnUntty by 7h! ~36tL1p.0 Company _ lCF P'iil'Y.lu'.lF :A; ~ n~ a..,,_ Exhibit 3.1 (04;6XIOR) D[s)cN Gui~n.wes IL43-3 INTRODUCTION Existing Site Utilization Plan ,._ - - , ^,~~ k.., ~ ~. -:; -{ , ,_ .~ ~-~_ s ._ ~~ ~ ~t~~'.. w~.o `, ' ,~ ~`R"" f \ ~" ~ r' r \ „-, ` ~-. ~L1~~~ ~~'~wxs ~i~~ ~; t l /.,~ \ W64 t / 1~ 8RJ ~ ~ ~ R+ne+Ni .~, .: Ig 'laa 1 y~'~ 6 ^ ~ ~ , ,, p"~ . IV N IA1 I ppy ~.5+' .~~ r,, "~~- f' ~ } WP3 F I T 6 l S ~ Y '-~,~~r ~ 11 LVAA 5 tl i- L 6e 30 --4 • i rt e rhls of I w ,r..,, ~ t _ ~,~ ~~ ~~VR.i ~ tom„ NR~~ 1~ ~.- c z ~ n i i \ \ G } ms 41 J t VP-1, `' I Iv l $"J S SF (~ t I~ rt _ `~, /l -A i f VRt 5 QI I- l i 3.l '6 1 - \`~ •` s el n' - L ~ ~vRB ~ 1~ ,, co.iw woy. f E a s ~ ~ r.j. YIW ~ y-1 ~ floassa~r o-e 'z Vft 3 E -- ). J 3 ~( va-to nt u I ,~ v da a, o ~ F ~ Yn.4 z~ YFt 71~ I vnv rnu rv IV z sso x3 SVR.D nn I 'I r t..i ~ 11¢i ~~ ` I . 1 `Gy C-1 ~ ~ ~.~ u tl Qk W0.-13 { to : P, nel t j 4 -~ 1 F 1!3 ~ ' tr.iv i 1!~ •} F J ~ : 1 ,~A5T1KE lil Aplametl CGaximuNiy by The EastLaB¢ Gomyeny fpv '~ (~~-/ Prnj¢ci Ltlcatian L.+ ~~ ~~ E Exhibit 5 (04/U8/08) SPA PLAN 1.1.4:1-3.5 CUYIMUNITV Dr9iGN CONCEPT mayor entry Minor Entries Exhibit 3.30 Minor entries are those to individual development projects. They are to be designed as an enhanced extension of the community fencing detail. These will be limited to the major entry points of the project and may include the name of the project or simplyprovide an entry portal. Exhibit 3.31 Gated Entries Gated entries are proposed within three development parcels as illusn~ated iu Exhibit ~-,4. A gaud ueiohhorhood entry is proposed for parcel VK-1 in Eastlake Vistas and VR-l3 iu 14 ;t=~+aw~e-t',7~ i +~ t'rn.;to. The neighborhood i comprised of a single resideutiaf strzzt with direct access lots alone one side and a szries of conuuon drivewnvs alone the other. Gates are proposed at each end to the strzet serving the developntzut aria. These entries should be consistent in dzsi~n with other project entries and community design standards and adequate space 1'or vehicle queuing and tum-around should he provided. (~4/t)$/~$~ DESIGN (iUIDF.LINP.S IL43-47 rvtrr;rrnvrc>yvvu tnr r n r COMMERCIAL Site Utilization Plan ,_ ~^ .:. .. ~Gk171tt'1~'P431 P~r~:el5 FIIg11El~hte'!~ ~p ^ ,vf; . - :.~ E ''~ 't,~ .e. .... ~} ,aa. ~. ::,~ >, ;,~ ` j .iK:+ w-.a.. fc ! ~.: ^'~; . ea '~., za ' wn z ¢I ! u ; S ^a r ..- - WPd I - Ilv ^6 1. ~) ~ d WPL {I 6 lV .66 30 ~ `Y , J~+1 Peiitle!1p f [.... I5uPiotal:4' ^ -... 1::.: 19 5.J _ ' r + .. t. [ <v.0 6.0 SSl t` ~ s~pao!e 13~oam1 5.. .e a ~ ' VP L ~. I_'anil; dP 2: 56 1. ~1' J R ali!amll: .~ 90 EF ~A '+y' ^r ` Vh-i .In{1eFamlN 359 3L VP3 a'.aEle!anllr L'1. 2:.5 3.: °: ~E(: ~J v Lv+a~f+wy h _.. .. . j VR9 Str{le/M •r~anN 4' J., 'OG 73 F .` ' VA IO bPl ida. Y. hN ]' 350 C6 NYi{. r'4 ~} VM1I3 MoluSamiN' MY 8] 360 1'3 ± _ ~R. tp 13 M I rh:niN ~ 123 .Ji r IBO .6d ___ _ .. A pl~nrard cOnmuNYy >YY 7ttt Easllale Gdmpany ~f" ~J°Y J v d`}J = t t !, 1 .+ ~~_Tr E"r t k4 wJIJ~ .+~ /~1 ,: ~,_ DESIGN GUIDELINES 11.4.7-5 MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL EASTLAKE VISTAS Parcel VR-13 Design Issues Summary Description: Parcel VR-13 is located south of Olympic Parkway, east of the OTC entry and overlooks Lower Otay Reservoir. It is designated for multi-family housing st ~..~;~ t ~~ , ~ ... , .. L§4b: ~:. .. :x, a v( _<< ,,.. ,: ,..E y, +.=t ~ ~=R+i i` 'i','+.. ~~ii,~ r~9i}}-rir trt.,_.,..i ~vc ~., .. .:~ ii ~4C k ;;i' - I -c 4~cii.? ,,, a ;;tef"'e <Pt .(. ,, Irc Vii' :__( c, ..~. _ ,¢ ~,,;~}~.; Expansive views to the east are available across the lake and should be incorporated into "common" spaces within the facility. The project entry needs to be coordinated with any parcel other entries in close proximity on the north side of Olympic Parkway. A strong pedestrian/bicycle connection to the retail commercial site and the Greenbelt trail along the lake should be provided. Land Use District: RM-1 Concept: Multi-Family Residential Views: Expansive off-site to the east across the lake Entry: Parcel entry on Olympic Parkway coordinated with any nearby entries Fencing: Off-site views; coordinate with OTC fencing Edges: Greenbelt edge; possible internal use boundary Landscaping: Arterial road edge (consistent with Olympic Parkway design) and at perimeter adjoining Greenbelt Trail along Wueste Road; unify with OTC and VC parcel Building Detailing: All Design Review: Required DESIGN GUIDELINES IL4.6-11 MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL Parc~i VR~`13 .~~s~nf~~, ~ werr. ry„~~u:~:n -, ,• x P1~'4 ~t3"A PCar+ dill iNlt~ f!,uvrxd Ewwa>m i:7{µ . ix i'ti!~ EM~u + a ~Sre E.i~r ~" ~ ~~(j~lrl f/ ~~ ~~~ ~~ ~~ fly I~ ~ *~w f1(J59flE'IkE1 Gx~t(^JtNT1 tSY ing ~45Z49M$~S~~r$NU~F{ ... ~ X04/08/(;; ~'~) H.Yhlhi[ ~.~ DESIGN GUIDELINES II.4.6-12 MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL Parcel VR-13 Architectural Character - - . - - i IYfY t;fiR~'% - -'-~ - VSII TIFII p vi 1LU~~VUr A~ U( ~r ~ ~ -S '.. ~~ i I ~~ r ~, ~_! °° ~~r ~ dig °~ :~ D .. r; F{Z6NT ELEVAtION - A The architectural character and building massing for Parcel VR-13 should include a variety of visual elements as depicted in these design examples. The elements should be within a unified architectural style as shown. Exhibit 6.9 flA gH H HRH as ~ _} _ Il° RB gg °° ..~~~ ;y t. ~RO\' ELEVA'ICN - A re,aR sLevarian~ - A DESIGN GUIDELINES ll.4.6-] 3 MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL Project Features k:. ~, .,~,~ ~1 `; ~ ~~ / ^:r N( s 7r e H /"~ N y i>' ) u i i `~h ~ 1~ K` ~ ~ 1 ~-~~ t ~~' Ql~j~i ~; ~~ ~7'~~1~~q~j'~ n~ , f~ t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~` f' A r, m 1 „y{P. cpp fr ,x F h`R~ ~~~~ ~ A .,.,.„ ~ . . _i~.aw.o !g ~~ {-}Y~~ _ ,a Y,~, ~ :......ti. ee,es Exhibit 6.10 (04/08/5;x;}±}~ DESIGN GUIDELINES 11.4.6-14 MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL Conceptual Landscape Plan Exhibit 6.1 1 (04/OS/€I~+!')) DESIGN GUIDELINES IL4.6-15 MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL Exhibit ~~l... Exhibit 6.12 (04/08/€?~,(~) DESIGN GUIDELINES IL4.6-16 11.4.7 Commercial Design Guidelines The EasCLake 111 SPA identifies a parcel in Eastlake Vistas for commercial development, in the vicinity of the OTC entry. The OTC, considered as a unique land use and its physical design and appearance along Olympic Parkway, is to establish the theme and character of the commercial sites. The OTC components most visible from Olympic Parkway and the retail commercial site are the entry drive with landscaped median, entry signage and monumentation, and streetscape including fencing and landscaping. Architecture and building design are not readily apparent at the entry. Rather, it is the activity of "world class athletics" in a campus setting that is the character impression at the entry. The most important issue will be the integration of commercial uses with the OTC and higher density residential sites into the "Activity Center" concept described in the Eastern Territories Area Plan of the General Plan, the Eastlake III GDP and SPA Plans. Careful consideration should be given to the details of the commercial uses, north of Olympic Parkway. Since this type of development is addressed in the City's Design Manual, detailed design guidance is not provided in these guidelines. 11.4.7.1 Design Review Requirements Each of the commercial sites will be subject to Design Review approval. The Design Review requirement may be met through use of a Master Design Review (with Guidelines) with phased approval of implementing Design Review for individual development phases, as has been utilized for the Eastlake Village Center "activity center" area. The purpose of the Design Review requirements is to allow diversification in spatial relationships, density, buildings, parking, landscaping, and open space through detailed site plan review, along with architecture and signs. This level of review allows the City to tailor approvals to the specific requirements of the project, recognizing unique site conditions or project objectives. Each Design Review (or Master Design Review) will establish the detailed design solution for the site. 11.4.7.2 Architecture, Color & Materials Architectural design, including colors and materials, will be formulated in design "precedents" with the approval of the initial Design Review(s). Since the OTC does not contribute significantly in these areas of design, no prescribed architectural style is required. Design should reflect the OTC character, as noted above, as well as unique site conditions such as the tourist commercial setting overlooking the lake. The selected overall architectural character and vocabulary for both sites should create a distinctive sense of place. The selected theme should be reinforced through the selected use of appropriate building materials, plant palette, street furniture, colors, etc. Architectural design within each Design Review area should represent a unified style which is responsive to adjacent structures and the Activity Center setting. Architectural detailing and material selection is essential to good character definition. Accents in color, texture or pattern changes should be used to provide interest and provide scale. (04/08/-?t.[y?) DESIGN GUIDELINES 11.4.7-1 COMMERCIAL All structures should exhibit articulated building planes, as well as, the use of appropriate textures and materials. Each structure should be evaluated using the criteria of athree-tiered hierarchy of articulation, materials and colors as described below: • Ground Level -Scale and texture should be sensitive to pedestrian interaction. Elements such as landscape pockets, trellis, pergolas, and canopies as well as recessed windows to produce deep shadow lines should be provided. Textured materials are most effective if incorporated into the building design at this level so that the apparent mass of the structure is reduced. Mid-Level -The mid-level, generally the most dominant portion of the facade, should be designed with a sensitivity to rhythm and proportion so that a harmonious composition can be perceived from the major viewing angles. • Top Level -Buildings should be designed with a definite termination at the top. The intent is to provide a "cap" so that the exterior walls do not "disappear" as they meet the sky. The structural form of the Activity Center should exhibit a variety of building masses and heights. Landmarks and other special features may exceed typical building heights. If large or tall buildings are proposed, special consideration should be given to massing and proportion with respect to adjacent buildings. Buildings which are more than 3 stories tall should incorporate steps in the vertical plane. Building complexes should be designed to create opportunities for pedestrian spaces such as plazas, courtyards, patios and decks. Landscaping may be used to reinforce this concept through the use of pergolas, trellises, etc. Buildings within a Design Review area should appear as an assemblage of integrated smaller forms, not as one large mass. Building masses should have an ordered "randomness" with focus, articulation and emphasis where appropriate such as entryways, major plazas, etc. Buildings located in "gatepost" locations (adjacent to major streets and/or entries), should be designed with a more distinct or "landmark" character. A light colored stucco should be the predominate wall material used throughout the Activity Center. A single, unifying accent color should be used in such items as site furniture, landmarks, entry monuments and signs. Sloped roof areas should be of natural materials such as slate or concrete tile. Metal roofs may be acceptable, if approved by Design Review. Wood shake or shingle roofs are discouraged. 11.4.7.3 Screening A critical design issue is screening of unattractive utility and mechanical equipment, trash receptacles and storage areas, loading and service areas. Certain restrictions can reduce some of these potential design issues, others must receive attention from the site designer. The Eastlake Ill PC District regulations restrict or prohibit outdoor storage and require screening of ground and/or roof mounted equipment/utility connections. Loading or unloading should occur in the rear or on the side of buildings away from public streets or be screened. (04/08/=??ii!) DESIGN GUIDELINES 11.4.7-2 COMMERCIAL Fences and walls which provide screening should be designed as an integral part of the building design concept and be constructed of materials, textures and colors that are complementary to the adjacent building. Outdoor refuse collection areas should be completely enclosed and screened from view by a wall or fence constructed of materials which are complementary in color, finish and texture to adjacent buildings. All such areas should have concrete floors and loading pads and be of sufficient size to accommodate all business related refuse. Refuse collection areas should not be located adjacent to public streets. 11.4.7.4 Site Furnishings Site furnishings, such as the following, should introduce a consistent system of architectural, color and material character unique to the Activity Center: • Benches: A bench should be designed/selected for use in all the pedestrian areas within the Activity Center complementing the design elements described in the other site furnishings. • Bollards: A concrete bollard should be used at the intersections of trail systems and vehicular crossings. They should contain internal light sources for safety at night. • Lighting Fixtures: A designated "Activity Center" light standard base should be used for illumination of public areas. • Trash receptacles: Pre-cast concrete trash receptacles should be used. Site furnishings, transit shelters and other streetscape furniture should be placed in "pockets" so as to not obstruct pedestrian or bicycle circulation. 11.4.7.5 Lighting &Signage Lighting and Signage, when implemented in a consistent manner, play a large role in the unification of a development district. The purpose of these guidelines is to identify principles of lighting for streets, paths, open spaces and buildings. The Signage component is intended to specify sign and monumentation criteria to insure that all individual graphics and signs are coordinated with each other and contribute to the overall theme of the Activity Center. The final design and selection of on-site lighting standards and supports is to be developed as part of the Design Review submittal and in conformance with City Performance Standards. Walkway/trail illumination should be provided by the use of low intensity fixtures for safety and comfort. The lighting pattern and intensity should become more intense at path intersections and vehicular crossings. (04/08/'+ ~ ii) DESIGN GUIDELINES 11.4.7-3 COMMERCIAL Within building groups, architectural and accent lighting should be indirect and subtle. ]ncreased lighting levels should highlight pedestrian areas to clearly define the pedestrian path. Service area lighting should be contained within the service area boundaries/enclosure. The actual light bulb for service area lighting should not be visible from adjacent properties. A complete signage program is to be developed as part of the Design Review submittal. All individual project/use identification signs should be designed to fit on a monument system that is compatible and part of the architectural style for the Activity Center. Signs associated with the identification of the community trail system and ancillary pathways should be designed as part of the overall streetscape vocabulary of site furnishings, lighting standards and special hardscape materials. The signage program for each project should provide the means for adequate identification while regulating and controlling design, location and maintenance. The signage program should establish specific standards for all exterior signage to ensure aesthetic continuity and consistency. Sign programs for areas fronting on Olympic Parkway, a scenic corridor, should incorporate features consistent with the streetscape design program 11.4.7.6 Individual Parcel Design Criteria The development descriptions and parcel plan features described in this section are those envisioned at the time of SPA Plan preparation. These designs and specifications are subject to change and refinement in conjunction with the tentative tract map approval, and are subject to such approval. All parcel plans which are prepared should respond to the listed planning and design criteria, implementing the techniques and solutions described in the previous sections of this text. All parcel plans shall conform to the development standards and other provisions of the Eastlake III PC District regulations adopted by the City of Chula Vista. Each parcel description also includes a lotting concept exhibit which identifies the location of special design issues/responses. The following are guidelines for site planning each of the parcels designated for commercial development within Eastlake III (refer to the Site Utilization Plan, Exhibit 7.1, for the location of each parcel). (04/08A?~t) DESIGN GUIDELINES 11.4.7-4 COMMERCIAL ',,. f1 ~,I~irraoacgaawruNty tx}''t7'a 1'<a1ti.~he t+tmRany z ~~~' Y~' r : `~ °~,.;~,~ ~A l i '~ YF.ib ... ~M. ^.. ¢ yu• .5 ~1 _ ^^^^tt t t Y ~ } ..- t`a'r • ' ,{ .. tii,'~"' O~d 1 %fK', + r~Z .!""~ -. / (04/08/;~~(±l) DESIGN GUIDELINES 11.4.7-5 COMMERCIAL EASTLAKE VISTAS Parcel C-1 Design Issues Summary Description: Parcel C-I is located north of Olympic Parkway immediately across from the OTC entry. [t is designated for retail commercial uses which provide neighborhood level services and goods to Eastlake and OTC residents as well as retail uses complementary to the OTC. All parcel edges are important. Residential uses are located along the northern edge at a slightly higher elevation. Olympic Parkway forms the parcel edge on the south while slopes to Olympic Parkway are at the eastern edge. Signs, entries and buildings close to the road should respect the scenic corridor. Loading and service areas typically found in the rear, adjacent to the residential parcels, should be carefully considered to minimize impacts to homes. This central commercial center should include a building or structure with "landmark" qualities to establish an identity for the overall Activity Center. Strong pedestrian bicycle connections to other components of the Activity Center should also be provided. Land Use District: VC Concept: Neighborhood and OTC related retail/service commercial Views: None Entry: One aligned with OTC entry; parcel entries on Olympic Parkway Fencing: Complementary to OTC fencing, if used Edges: Scenic corridor and residential parcels Landscaping: Scenic corridor (consistent with Olympic Parkway design) and unified with OTC and TC parcel. Greenbelt Trail fronts parcel along Olympic Parkway. Building Detailing: Landmark and at pedestrian level Design Review: Required DESIGN GUIDELINES 11.4.7-6 COMMERCIAL '~R-1 G arrd~ .a5t~ ~' ~~~~ Mrr~ta'N:roi~rrar«1'r r§a-~7y:= *, s k c: w:'* t rri~xr~7 <ru.p E~'.ka - ~.: fI9 A,.~:1AiintSG S'zAY'-'r~rd ;y »~ .,~.~ (04/08/t?N, ~,_~) DESIGN GUIDELINES I L4.7-7 Affordable Housing Plan Existing Language F..ASTLAKF. AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAM Low Income Housing Eastlake Comprehensive Affordable Housing Program PHASE IV Timing Items to be Completed Prior to approval oftbe 3,954st building permit Confirm location of low income housing site fur Phase N. Priur to issuance of the 3,992nd building permit Confirm intended subsidies, incentives, and financing mechanisms for all phases. Prior to issuance of the 4,068,th building permit Submit and obtain approval for a marketing plan from the Community Development Department. Prior [o issuance of the 4, l44 th building permit Submit a design development plan to the Planning Department for the construction ofPhase IV low income housing units (25 units). Prior to issuance of [he 4,220 th building permit Obtain Design Review approval for [he construction of the Phase IV low income housing units (25 units). Prior to issuance of the 4,334 th building Obtain building permits for the construction of the Phase IV low income units and identify specific location of low income units within project. Priur to the issuance of the 4,448 th building permit or one Obtain City's final inspection and utilities release for low year from the date of the building permit issuance, whichever income units or obtain Director of Community Development occurs firs[. approval of up to a maximum of siz month extension based upon pre-sales rate of low income units. Total Low Income, Phase IV 25 Contingency Plan Developer shall diligently pursue completion of the construction of the low-income housing units as per the above implementation schedule. However, if the performance obligations are not achieved as per the implementation schedule, in addition to any and all other rights and remedies the City may have to enforce Developer's affordable housing obligations, the City shall have the right to require that the Eastlake Greens surplus low-income units be automatically used to satisfy the low-income housing obligation of Eastlake II and III. (04/08/08) AFFORDABLE HOUSNG PROGRAM II.6.4-7 ~} J EASTLAKE AP'POR DABLIS HOUSING PROGRAM Lo11- Income Housing EasfLttke C'olnprehensi~e Affordahle Housing Program PHASE IV Ti~niu Items to be Com Meted Prior to approval of the 395~st building penlut Post securiiti~ for the benefit of the City of C9nila t'ista in au anlotmt to be based upon the cost of the subsidy necessary to brine the trtarket r-ate cost of hausitla to the required affardabilit~~ level for loin incorue households. ~%ithin twuo years of potting of the seclu-itl,~ Enter into a regulatory aaeement with the City OfC'lnlla t 15th hlaVlding OCCI1pa11Cy allCl affordability restricrious for the Phase I~' loty income housing units. The agreement shall be recorded against the property and shall bind all fitnu•e owners and successors ul interest for the teen of yeas specified therein. Pajnnent oful iu-lieu, as an alternative to the provision of the Phase ~"law income housing units. as play be approved by the City. All agreement ~m~ill not be requiis:d for these units of the Pl-oject 1~=high will be satisfying their inchl5ianary housing requirement tlnnut;h awleut to Cite of an in-lieu fee. ~Vithiu thl-ee years of posting of the seatrity c~Utaul the first certificate of occupancy for Thole Phase I'v' low illcame housing units. Contutt*ellcv plan Developer shall di ligantly~ p ttrsue comp I eti mI of the construction of th e log+=-incom ~ ktausintZ units us per the above implcmentatiGtt sch~htle_ Nowewer, if the peribmxmee ohligutions are trot Etcbievcd ac per the implementation schedule, in addnion to an~~ and all other tights and rentadies the C;'ity may° have. to enforce peveloper's atl`ardable ltousutg oblis~ations, the City shall have the right to require that the LastLake Greens surplus lovv-inc(nne attics be automatieafly~ used tc~ satisfy the low-income housing nbiigatimi oi' GaslL:tke 11 and III. (OA/O$/O$J AFFORDABLF. HOUSING PROGRAM IL 6.4-7 SECTION IL6 EASTLAKE COMPREHENSIVE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAM Supplemental to Incorporate the 1~~~~~ ~I-~~s.l~_az,~ie. Pointe ~~~~e~~-Project ,~:. ~-'~~, _ _ AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAM II6.5-31 This information is to supplement the EASTLAKE COMPREHENSIV E AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAM as Approved by the Chula Vista City Council Resolution No. 2001-220 July 17, 2001 and further amended by Resolution No. 2006-190 June 26, 2006 11.6.4.ILOW INCOME HOUSING (additional information) The +~ ~ is Pointe #~es~t Project (494336 units) will trigger the requirement for X520 low income units, based upon a minimum of t7ve percent {5°0) of the units. This requirement shall be satisfied prior to the issuance of any building permit(s) for the-'-.~.1k> + 1~, .~u i~ Pointe ~! Project. • Low Income Housing Sites Site 5. This site is located in the Olympic Training Center (OTC) parcel which is designated Public/Quasi-public. Resident housing for athletes is permitted within the mix of uses allowed by the OTC SPA Plan. The low income housing units will be integrated into the overall development ofthe training facility. Site Sa. This represents an alternative location for affordable housing that is not located within Eastlake II and HI ("off-site") that has yet to be determined. In determining an appropriate off-site location, site selection criteria as specified within this Program and the number of units remaining to satisfy the affordable housing requirement shall be considered. • Alternative Methods of Compliance As of February 1, 2006, entitlements have been received on all properties within Eastlake and III, with the exception of the =~ ~++~,~~ ,r Oi r i~qc Pointe l>rt site. Additionally, building permits have been issued and/or finalized for approximately 84% of the total housing units. Based upon the timing of development, the remaining obligation of?320 low income housing units (Phase IV), difficulty in integrating the affordable housing within the remaining development opportunities, the new construction of units may present an "unreasonable hardship" and alternative methods of compliance may be required. Consistent with Policy 3.l of the City's Housing Element of the General Plan, Phase N of the low income housing obligation may be produced at an alternative off-site location. The proposed offsite location within the Eastlake Community is proposed to be located on the Olympic Training Center (OTC). Approximately 80 percent of the athletes in training at the OTC are considered to be of very low income and a significant number of the employees are at an income level which would qualify them as low income. The OTC has only developed a portion of the Center's housing units for its athletes, requiring the majority of them to seek housing elsewhere within the Chula Vista area. Affordable housing, public transportation and neighborhood services are not ,:,¢ ~ f , "_ _ , AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAM 116.5-32 within close proximity to the OTC. Athletes must therefore seek housing opportunities in more affordable areas of the community and take on the costs of residing far from their place of training/work. By providing affordable housing within the OTC, athletes and employees will have greater opportunities to reside onsite and therefore, will result in less impact on the affordable housing stock within Chula Vista and costs to the athlete. If it is determined that the inclusion of affordable housing for athletes and employees of the OTC within Site 5 is not feasible, the affordable housing obligation maybe satisfied through the production or operation of affordable housing at another off site location yet to be determined if the City determines, at its sole discretion, that the public interest would be better served by allowing such off-site alternative. In considering an appropriate off-site location the following factors should be addressed: • Preferred product type to meet the most pressing needs of low income residents: Affordability in excess of the requirements of the City s Affordable Housing Program; • Balance of housing opportunities for lower income households throughout the community to avoid concentrations of low income housing: and, • Location advantages such as proximity tojobs, schools, transportation and services, °_.' , i.iti ~::?•• yiCt (~.~:;+t i ~' i'~` Ciii . ~;; il7i'[I i~, . 4' III ~,:[' t C "ii :f=l 1. ,{i<C,i `i, a r~~_t'~.t C t'._ ;L' (j(t: lu)D`l <<c' t.° {~73 .:ai` (41 t ~~ r-'S '-f t ii!. t=t( .__,__._'_7 Ic~`7CV_ i~I !, i},._1 V ~! i~'ItUt~S_ ;• - . i,i t, tip v rte( ~ Er31~ 07.:^111 }i)l( U7 €:i~ ru:,tiC tti ..,. 3 l'9c` ,'~ ILTI„Ci 5 'U i~7 ggo.I I, '~ ~.. ,~c n irlx~l L1. `II _'. It ~ i<.i i ~Ii~L f3 dl Tyll.I i't yttt Ici lilt ~a c~i;.t 7 't I~~''.lilt nj fl i r •ftc:.' iti 1='~~ ,: ILI i~ s,' i(Ili1, ...ia43:.iiS :?7 [(.,~:-~., g17L~i ttv H~ 1 t}'"8'"h. ',kl~: fU:iit~. the _._._ ____ .. r.__ .. _.___. __ .. ~^..___ ...__=__.._ ___.:.:_ _ toicet was ott~rmally proposed as Windstar Pointe RESOrt. a 494 unit development ~~Ith a 2~ low income unit ohli{ition. It is anticipated that revisiorx tq thi_X~ro[ect will decrease the total numher of amts to 3A6 units with a 20 low income unit oblivion. Therefore, five {5) Affordable Housing Crcdns are anticipated based anon this decrease in unrt,. ~n~ is i te,~,t,_il, t_ he tiriitr~~s .~~ iit ~,la'c~ t) 4 (1..J: ~ { ~ i>>l,`i[ t n. C.4('eiA'~O t~3 1 ti ..4P ("4~ c U ~i' fiti t 'U ~~ tbCil <t 3 yC ~ ,'ilat ,.,_ _ -- f...__. _.. __ -- _ ----- ---.._. ---- ----- ----- ---- f'l.~l. i11t ?r 20 i 'i )'s tilC (F.' ,.I':PO trS.d €Y:t[C 1(1C~ ~iEi~; i3J ,11-~ ;i„ i4 ill tl'fi { `i~ 4~ ~ it tl ~~' L (SL: { iPC 1 `i. ~ .C i .3.~ t ~,i~l t~i i :lt~i ltiitSy ~ t, ~I ltj 4 i ,CIIS .i ! (t s .3 C.k_. 11 . ~ ~ ` SIG' - ., v T} ( viE _ )i~ ,'" t ~, ! c ~ ~.>rt}t t.''Lk~ I ~~ iClil t,c t .,Ci ~) .?UI'. . clc is it i { fi 1 1. tIi ~7 _____ ._ _..._ ___ i ,lS r l t. __"_ __ cs} aw ,a ~''' Iill AFFORDADLE FlOUSING PROGRAM 116.5-33 Air Quality Improvements ADDENDUM TO AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMGN"t PLAN AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PLANS SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) PLAN EASTLAKE III - ~t-rS~i~~-~-~-=-'~~--~ 3 ~_, "~ ~ ~' [C:' POINTE ADDENDUM APRIL 2008 Adopted April 8, 2008 by Resolution No. 2008-095 f --'yE--.n< t t 3 .Rf."i 1 t t`+ --,. ~.. ~_ ..Ir3 i- (l =.=.1-?^n,1'c .5:?b' I r Ja i!it3-` ~~.-; !'repured by.' Bud Gray & Associates 2452 Arrowhead Court Chula Vista, CA 91915 Contact: Bud Gray (619) 656-801 1 '. _ 1 i. c~ L~" i" -Ft I t PJS ~_I~ 1 ~ l ~ ~ it ~` Ei f.~l Edited by: KTGY Group, Inc. 17992 Mitchell South Irvine, CA 92614 Contact: Damian Taitano (949) 851-2133 L 6l t?e:~~ P}-: ~`€p5tF9C tln;;illfCt`I n.*yl, Ins, 'f. C;,t:ea~ tali ~i ~u 5 i i3t~~;~s. ` 1 9 _~. ~`s~C fiob t `. C .ia .'. E'.1 EASTLAKE III ~~=="'+1. f :~'~ (~ t) , r 1 ~ ' I t_; POINTE SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) PLAN Project Description The project site is located at the eastern terminus of " < 3 ,r " _• ~_ Parkway and is indicated as parcel VR- 13 on the Eastlake III Site Utilization Plan (Exhibit AQ-I). It is located on approximately 18.4 acres overlooking the Lower Otay Reservoir. Southwest of the site is the Olympic Training Center To the north and west are multi-family residential and commercial uses. Immediately [o the east is, along Weuste Road is the Chula Vista Greenbelt Regional Trail and the reservoir. A short walk to the north is the Eastlake III neighborhood park. The project is intended to be amulti-family residential project featuring outstanding quality and design amenities. It will consist of a series of two and three story ci~ ._~ ~ ~~~ +t; ~.,~ , .Fr,=~ -~_„ • sc~, ;= ti --,a3-building . I'<< ~irv, ' ~ ..tai i~r~.a=+. .,~ 1~,~~-i t r~ , r~c a trt . e~, ;nc#j ~ re t3 ~ ~s;; t,;, . o- = _rr t, ~ , ..,,. ,..re x~r ,i <:ri :.. I<:,r~,}. l.,.F ,rE« ii, . ~ ... w,.a {~. rz ~a~~i=iai. ~~ ~_, .~t.~ „i~ ~•~.~.-In addition to the residential buildings, a a:• t-~~~ . -~3?.:x ar,e{--community u. +i ~:!-building (approx .-a-=1!' ! ;square feet) will be provided. _„ __, AntQUeAId9Y IMPROVC~[i:N'1'P1.AN 11.7-1 ADDENDUM TO AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN Site Utilization Plan l / L "' .. ~ ti4~ a. ~ t ~'. n ~ WWJ ' 44^ . "'1'""" E""+t ~, r ~ r {r s . r t~' ~ PA4 ~5~ !-'..~ tRR f ilr f. i :A~. ~ ~ V1Ri Y" ~. i ~ n 11FR8 R 66,p[N5 mod, al Eaoe u:< con are: m/>< ou n w < . WRS S AI I. I 1 9 IC La WRE AI R 1-- J9 WR3 4 I'i ' R ar w s r .ml ~ I~ n R a Is bP I ur. .+ .~a WPfi S K 6 I I J 5! 131 WP 'n i Bt fi.' P d IS k I -.VC~r) i 6o S1 I' d I b I~ ,.rd.b IS } 15 fi6l N V n W P t5 5h VRl 5 :n IY 6J l.. 114 M4 p 4amN 1 li Jh cZ VRS i y 1 i.~ 4> YPfi l 41 -nN ~ 3 i 3R0 llG Rl PNmI~ l 1 °' P P ~ 4 u'r ofl P9 4(MUl in HIV M ) ~3 YP I M I k ly tlJ I50 IJl VP I " r 1 + IR VPll K I i 'I 1R ~~ iW4 +5i- J P G I IS 4i IVtt>sl l >.6 IaPQB+ L S bl IP lal 506.6 S.O Sbrb .A. NON PES~ M iA C (-. K Ilic:dA GN lIZ V 1 (: 41 ~drk l1K 3 I w I P(15 [ ~Y ~ M ~ RU3 11,6 [ 'I O S'fl Rq3 s r'o v i.: ve i r.a. t a U5 Op.S~x 1 O51 QYSCM1OO Vor\ r~ d 1.1 M..Mr Cn. .. [.lun )SS 5uPTOlal n orrPesidenlral Gill PROI E(I AOiAI ]iR.i 3R LI6Nn~I.ISC '' \ 1 ~' Wit' / `~-A~ ~ i ~ yyg~. - ~ J 2iser.C:M 'x ~ _ p~ _ d.. fl / :r ~~~' ~'«... .lt ~ "~~. 1 r L 5, 1~ i ~~ ~ ~ ~ 4 f'"' ~` ~ ~ ! ~+ J ~{/ l!~ S ' ~c ~ i't~ l . ( Ytt$ toww GaY --1~ YHw1 ~ y_f I Rgyrv:4a 'r1 ~t ~- _ ~~,~ vR.a '%_ vx fr 'tl, Q ~h jY} `NR u r~Q ~~" ~~ YR-13~ \1 4oQ G ;. !`~~ r: 1'l t ~ tr ~. fJ ~~~ ProjefKLacatiun ~, ~~ISTL~I~E III Aptann¢d countty AY Tife EaattaN¢ G¢mpany knr~~ F'~nnni~ :~ .I r~~ .~• r! L J 6.2o;x Exhibit AQ-1 ^.7-2 ;gut ~unt.riv ihu~aovE~u~,u r ri.,w AUUENDUM T'O AIR QUALEfY IMPROVEMENT PLAN Impact Reduction Measures: This section of the AQ] P amendment demonstrates how the < ~- rr ~,c Pointe ', ~ _.~. ~ ~ ~~~= addresses key design issues, at the SPA Plan level, which are directed toward reducing air pollution impacts. The design issues addressed below would be incorporated as conditions of approval for the Project: a. Street/Circulation Design with Pedestrian/Bicycle Orientation The Project does not alter the original air quality improvement plan implementation measures, such as: trail system, pedestrian connection among centers, bicycle lanes and other components to promote non-vehicular transportation. Instead, the Project would be required to incorporate pedestrian connections to the existing pedestrian/bicycle route connections ro promote the use of non-motorized modes of transportations. b. Housing Density Near Transit The project provides and allows for additional housing within close proximity of area bus routes, allowing for a reduction of vehicle miles traveled for those able to work and live in the East Lake community. c. Land Use Mix/Proximity The Project introduces a full range of amenities to serve the needs of project residents. This approach will result in less trips traveling, west ro seek recreational opportunities. d. Site Design with Transit Orientation The proposed and permitted future buildings will increase the concentration of housing in the immediate area which may encourage and support the use of transit services, thereby reducing total vehicle miles traveled. e. Bicycle Route Integration with Transit & Employment Bike lanes are designated on Olympic Parkway within the project area. On other internal streets, bicyclists will be readily able to share the road with motor vehicles due to the low volumes and limited speeds allowed. Project bicycle routes connect to regional systems as indicated in the Circulation Element of the General Plan and provide access to all regional destinations including the park-and-ride facility, and nearby commercial centers and residential areas. The project will include connecting sidewalks to the established walks, and paths and transit facilities. f Energy Efficient Landscaping The project will include landscaping of the parking lots, perimeter grounds, as well as near the proposed buildings to provide shade and reduce heat gain and energy usage for both vehicles and buildings. AIH QUALrrY IMPROVP:MP:NT PLAN 11.7-3 ADDENDUM TO AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN g. Alternative Fuels/Telecenter The project is provided with high-speed telecommunications services to facilitate both on-site and off-site communications allowing for reduced commutation. The project is proposed to include Internet cable service. These facilities will be maintained with the latest industry standards for communications. h. Overall Sustainability of Project The project fits into the overall community plan and achieves the objectives of providing ajob- housing balance whereby the high-quality rental apartments will enable employees to live and work within the Eastlake community, thereby improving overall efficiency, community, quality of life and sustainability. n ~ .:-~91 4 r t .: _... -P-~-:--4=it --~ N e,e'rzdi t -. s f:--r ..... .. ...a 1 ~ Cc .I s 'sa`,..~t}. tee x,.a y _..yz;, "~i~'i .I,d_ ..iD,. ~? n -FH t1 ~~; it-14.. r, R'tll02 ~+~^ '?c°- ~ i; ~ xrri+ .. z _. t t i t. z. -vt :! t, . ~~~. U b1 ~t~~Y7"" ~`t'Gti .. -t-.- ro i'i.. .'t +u. :,) ,..i .a,> 1t^~ tiC r.i ~t.y i~t (:1.11 "tti ~ i.... ~a.-,a, i _~_t „i, ~i sty-li^~k 53z t .1r~..i ie MVr (... a i} r. ~ ..-,n {.P, ~ -.>-i f :R ~..., y . ; t., a.. i:'r o.r{~ ,9- t r~! r~ r. tt,FtiE tr ifl * ~ ur t, ' ! ,:P asa , ri- i 6vWhr q~v tt* H. ~ ;li o^=,fb~ :r x°i.xs`r....di ,°7 tD -x4kFl- ~t9itil-8c-3 f*k>- ~ +9_ iRi tai .. ,.^x?.iie ;,~+? n 3 ii?i ,~.(H3b-~'o ,•'. `f x. r dtrPC'__ ~r c'bt-ii t 1}~.r' ~ C'{y`.'t- ..t 1. ^.t litsN}a {4i .t~ •i•r:- a -H e9 rtli hibU. ~, .r~ i.iv ~ti.~. , , ,i I~-, ~ ,.~, uyxx. ~. ~ I_t i,i;.h: H,i}; -~. t ~.S-, .I : i i.c li.- ! ~ tti r Il ~ c ( .`i '~ i{nt_ i'C, t)i, Sd ~.<;, ;,^-e'- t, ~`~z~5p=~ .~~~~t ..=nlun .x .'.r ,e iUl,' }(~l( fn ~.~mc i ,,,t r.~t ioi t~ those ¢: i'ti. ~ht , ~ ._' •~f7 R'' a'< ~ ~, 'T ( ii ~._ I i.. , i. ~.'.ii ~ i it ~.J a. ..r_,_ -ii-~-' t -=_i i~lri,~_;_ ~( i ._.i. I ii anc7 c~ a .._i_ i l i1{ ' ~ ~---`~i:~i. _J_~ S~ t Li:(~ t3 U.,, 7~:~ tyi...i~{;~ t?. ?pt L~ 7(9 _ l ,lli l tom. :,,'_l ~. u _ ~ ~ c._?1: a ~ > ~ I:.ei ~ ~ i_~ti c ti-c -~r ~u i _ i r~ n ~r8_ ~a _r!s "9 1~ u711Ct ~. :AIR QUi11 d'IY IMPROVI?MI?N'I' PLAAN IL7-4 Water Conservation Plan WATER CONSERVATION PLAN SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) PLAN EASTLAKE III GDP EASTLAKE III - '~~= ~ ~•. ~:~~bf ~ '~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ '~ e ~ ; °` ~ ' POINTE ,. , ADDENDUM APRIL 2008 !.~ it ~"~i S.~ F='v ~ ',~f~;~i Amendment Adopted April 8, 2008 by Resolution No. 2008-095 Sl =nn3^.a ~•a~--t'aaeEtart errs Faes~ • i w,r ;, . ,.-t,•3 kit r~e~~< -_ . ~e " ,.. Y ~ . 1.-tat ~ .:t ~' ~*'Y{j~.x. Prepared by: Bud Gray & Associates 2452 Arrowhead Court Chula Vista, CA 91915 Contact: Bud Gray (619)656-801 Edited by: PBS&J 9275 Sky Park Court San Diego, CA 92123 Contact: Jennifer Duffy (858)874-1810 '~r `r FLLg~EC+„~~ 9~,rxJ•%nf~eri=E:~, Irac. i~~ tt t trewir i 1'.'Y.S'. f;tlil ~ '(. (l tl4i 1( ~} t t'.i`~t%, E.... _.:._._. 5~}~: SECTION II.8 WATER CONSERVATION PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE 11.8.1 Executive Summary ............................................. ......................................................I 1.8-I II.8.2 Introduction ............................................................. .......................................................II.8-2 II.8.3 Purpose ....................................................................... ......................................................11.8-3 II.8.4 Project Description ..................................................... ......................................................11.8-4 11.8.5 Water Service & Supply ...................................................................... ............................I 1.8-<-~-' 11.8.6 Projected Water Use ...................................................................... ............................11.8-"~'; IL8.7 State and Federa] Water Conservation Requirements ....................... ...............................IL8-~;' IL8.8 Local Water Conservation Requirements .......................................... .............................I L8- ~t' 11.8.9 Water Conservation Estimated Savings ............................................. ..........................I 1.8--:~:-!+'-~. 11.8.10 Implementation Measures .................................................................. ...........................I 1.8-;..=..L'. IL8.1 I Monitoring ......................................................................................... ...........................ILB_._...':.. €P~ ~+ ~, __'i~~ WATER CONSERVATION PLAN IL8.2-i LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE Table 1 Water Conservation Measures ...................................... ....................................II.8-I Table 2 Potable Water Demand ................................................. ....................................11.8-7 Table 3 Irrigation Demand ......................................................... ....................................11.8-7 Table 4 Total Water Conservation Estimate .............................. ..................................I1.8-1 I LIST OF EXHIBITS EXHIBIT PAGE WC-1 Site Utilization Plan ..........................................................................................11.8-5 i.t~~~.,a '- "' .4! WATER CONSERVATION PLAN ~~ _ 11.8.2-ii II.8.1 Executive Summary When the Eastlake 111 SPA was originally adopted, the entire project was included in a water conservation pilot program to determine which conservation measures were practical and efficient. Based on the results from that program, the City of Chula Vista has est blished a formal program of water conservation measures to be included in new SPAS or SPA amendments such as the proposed Eastlake III ^•i <«i.~ s , r y; Pointe ~, ,,_ . r_E un , ~..v,~. This Water Conservation Plan implements those requirements for the SPA Amendment project area. As detailed in this plan, numerous features have been included in the project and commitments made by the developer to minimize the use of water during the construction and use of development within the Eastlake Ill L~ x==,F, ~_~~;~ Pointe 4~, .+ Fk{'~~rrcl .a ,~a. ~~_ These measures are expected to result in an average water savings of 0.009 million gallons per day (MGD). The following water conservation measures will be implemented in the project: Table I Water Conservation Measures • Hot Water Pipe Insulation • Pressure Reducing Valves • Water Efficient Dishwashers • Evapotranspiration Controllers Water Efficient Landscaping ti,. ~ ;;^ rr, WATER CONSERVATION PLAN _ _ IL8.2-1 IL8.2 Introduction The Eastlake III =t;~m. ~~~ ` r~, ,,=c Pointe+ , ~.~~E. ~ ,. ;~~~ ~,~, is a development component of the Eastlake Planned Community located in the eastern portion of the City of Chula Vista (City). The Eastlake III SPA includes two separate residential neighborhoods, Eastlake Woods and Eastlake Vistas, and amixed-use "Activity Core" at the southern end of the SPA, adjacent to the Olympic Training Center (OTC) entrance. The predominate land use in the Eastlake III SPA is single family residential with a large complement of public school sites, a commercial site and a CPF site in the Activity Core, and a greenbelt along Salt Creek. The proposed ',' + ~ ~~ ~ >ic Pointe +~. ~ ~=~ ^ ~ ~r ~:~ will be located in the Activity Core, at the southern end of the Eastlake Vistas neighborhood on a parcel that was originally designated visitor commercial uses but was never developed. The approach to water conservation outlined in this plan is intended to be comprehensive and implemented throughout the life of the development project. Water conservation during construction and after occupancy is addressed, as well as the installation of water conserving landscaping, appliances and fixtures. The following are goals of the Eastlake 111 ' : _- a ~~~- ~~ - >_ Pointe h,r ~ 'c.r, n ~ >> Water Conservation Plan (WCP): To conserve water during and after construction of the project. 2. To comply with the water conservation standards and policies of the City of Chula Vista and Otay Water District. . To create a comprehensive framework for the design, implementation and maintenance of water conserving measures, both indoor and outdoor. 4. To be economically efficient and cost effective. ,; r ,, •.~ ~'_' WATER CONSERVATION PLAN 11.8.2-I IL8.3 Purpose The purpose of this Water Conservation Plan (WCP) is to respond to the Growth Management Policies of the City of Chula Vista which require larger development projects to prepare a WCP. The water conservation measures presented in this plan are intended to respond to the long term need to conserve water in new development. The City has adopted formal guidelines for the preparation and implementation of the required WCPs. This WCP incorporates the requirements of the adopted guidelines by following the mandated format for WCPs and incorporating the required water conservation measures into the Eastlake III ~~'tn~~-E~..~;~=r:r=;:: Pointe ~„~+es <,r;;snuuns. The ._ guidelines require the following water conservation measures in all large residential projects subject to WCP requirements: • Hot water pipe insulation • Pressure reducing valves • Water efficient dishwashers • At least one water conservation measure from the outdoor category identified on the Residential Water Conservation Measures list. At least one additional water conservation measure from either the indoor or outdoor categories identified on the Residential Water Conservation Measures list. ~_" ~ ~ i, t;a,k 3~~: WATER CONSERVATION PLAN I1.8.3-1 [L8.4 Project Description The Eastlake llI `=~_~~,.? ~~~~~?;~~~„F Pointe i;t .t=~~r ~ ;i~~i~~~~a. is ~~~~ ~~ ~~~<i amendment to the adopted Eastlake SPA Plan = • ~: ,+~=zr~`~~r a parcel ~~, t ~~; ~,~~_ designated for tourist commercial development ts'ti. ~ti-:~ >uI _~ ~:i ti .. ~,~qi~_ i to multi-family residential development. The 18.4 acre parcel is located within the Activity Core of Eastlake Ill, just east of the entrance to the OTC. The site is accessed via Olympic Parkway and overlooks Lower Otay Reservoir (see Site Utilization Plan Exhibit WC-1). The parcel is proposed to be developed with ~_'~=-">;~9 dwelling units in multi-story buildings at an average density of -`~.' 'dwelling units/acre. s= ' ~ w ~ ____ WATER CONSERVATION PLAN IL8.4-1 Peoiecl~ Desc2irTioN IrSID[MI4 y wWa, i., au loo> r ~ p~}M-' cv ~n .. ..~ ... r m ~ m~e~mgwooah . )sa.z zc rcl ~ ... ,m=I,~mq ~i i ~mi. i n v.. x ~} 3 > n .. M> aM` caNpen a~ lVma) }u)u ).6 'I~C~"-'- eOpmpN m SC6.6 SO hY5 -. ~~~. Norvu onnwr ca ~~.,n n.} rv~ ~ r-} ~, Rans~r. 1.1 poa a.~i~rzp~aw s~~~ ~o i -dl Ir. riNh k~U01 1 8 PQ.1 CV F.1 ~ .~i~ur lx RS os ow,~w.= nz .. ost os,x;w~luw~; ~~ ~ ~ a p~ ," u,riwN ..«. ~ ~ mna Tav VNOI(Cl iOtµ 1G0.1 1< YriS->.'.-.~ SEASTLAKE IL1 A piannaUCOglfnnttlty txy Ttu En9tW NB GOVj'F{f9ny Site Utilization Plan ProieMl,ocation ^ LOrd PEpnnlrlg ^ ('11 Y~612a0b Exhibit WC-1 (04/08/08) IL 8.4-2 W n rFR CoNSexvnTtoN PcnN IL8.5 Water Service & Supply Most of the potable water used in San Diego County is imported from the Colorado River and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Rivers Delta. A small portion is from local surface water storage reservoirs and groundwater. The Otay Water District (OWD) provides water service to the Eastlake ^t SPA project area. The OWD is a member of the San Diego County Water Authority (CWA) which purchases the imported water from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD). The OWD obtains filtered water from CWA and delivers it local customers. The Eastlake III SPA is located within the OWD's Central Service Area. The project will receive its water supply from the District's Central Area System. Potable water is provided to the Central Service Area of the Otay Water District via the Second San Diego Aqueduct. Water is delivered at aqueduct connections No. 10 and No. 12 and is conveyed by gravity to the Central Service Area emergency/operating reservoirs at a grade of 624 feet. Water is then pumped to the existing 711 and 980 service zones. The proposed Eastlake Ill , t .~,~_--=C ~ ~ ~ .-.. Pointe ~~~• ra,.. ;~~ •~i=; will be served from the 980 service zone. The OWD also provides recycled water to the project area. The District owns and operates the Ralph W. Chapman Water Recycling Facility located near the intersection of Singer Lane and Highway 94. This plant has a stated capacity of 1.3 million gallons of recycled water per day for non-potable water uses such as irrigation of golf courses, school playing fields, public parks, and public landscaping. An additional recycled water supply will be available from the City of San Diego's I5.0 million gallons per day (MGD) capacity South Bay Water Reclamation Plant, which is located in the Tijuana River Valley at Monument and Dairy Mart Roads near the Mexican border. The initial phase of this plant was recently completed. Recycled water requirements for the project will be coordinated by the Otay Water District and the City of Chula Vista. The phased construction of potable and recycled water facilities, based on the District-approved master plans, will be incorporated into the Eastlake III SPA Public Facilities Financing Plan and/or subdivision map conditions for the project to assure timely provision of required facilities. The current tentative map conditions do not require recycled water use to this project because of its proximity to the Otay Lakes and the potential for recycled water runoff to the lakes. [? i < <~3 `_ !i WATER CONSERVATION PLAN IL8.5-1 IL8.6 Projected Water Use This section presents information on the anticipated water demand of the Eastlake III ~+ an!<•~=.+~' ,I^IC Pomte Eta-e a r.. ; ~n~I~w ~~~ only. As noted previously, the remainder of the Eastlake III SPA development was included in the City of Chula Vista's Water Conservation Pilot Program and the adopted Water Conservation Plan remains in effect for thatarea outside of the Eastlake III ',1~~~~1 t rl~~ ;:~'_ Pointe 3 , „~; `or t n ~iu~n~>. Table 2 shows projected water use in the Eastlake III "i!-is; „ „ter ~I •.,~p Pointe t' ~ ~ yn_~, ,II .< a, based on average use rates from the Otay Water District's 2002 Water Resources Master Plan, which do not reflect significant conservation measures, and the proposed land use statistics. Table 2 Potable Water Demand Land Use Net Area ac Dwelling Units Unit Demand Average Annual Day Demand (gpd)* MFResidential 18.4 „t.,=~dh 300 d/du ,..I °; TOTAL ft, 1=3.S0.t Y" m d * = allons per day; mgd=million gallons per day The projected demand for landscape irrigation in the Eastlake III'?'=;,r>st xf) G?~«ic Pointe J~t~:~ f o~.c's_m n .__ is ~ €,4 r rt {,y~gtj MGD, as shown in Table 3 below. Table 3 Irrigation Demand Land Use Net Area ac Percent Irri ated Irrigated Area ac Irrigation Rate d/ac Average Day Demand d MFResidential 18.4 15"~° ' x; =i 2,152 = U-t~;;;. i~p. TOTAL #?:#+tii-@!.t){rt=i m d = allons er da 'm d=million allons er cla WATER CONSERVATION PLAN IL8.6-1 1L8.7 State & Federal Water Conservation Requirements Some water conservation measures are mandated by state or federal law. The federal water efficiency plumbing standards were included in the Energy Policy Act enacted in 1992, and effective January 1, 1994. Passage of the Act provided a uniform standard for manufacturers of water-using fixtures including ultra-low-flow toilets, low-flow showerheads and faucets, aerators, washing machines and other appliances and fixtures. State regulation of water efficiency is based on the California Constitution and Water Code. The Constitution provides the basis for efficient water use and is the foundation for the state's subsequent policies and mandates regarding water conservation and reuse. Additionally, the Urban Water Management Planning Act which was adopted by the California Legislature in 1983 and amended serially through 1995. The Act requires advance planning for water supplies to meet projected demands in the short term and long term with emphasis on water conservation, water recycling, emergency planning for drought restrictions on water use, among other provisions. In California, regulation of manufacturing and installation of hot-water-related plumbing fittings is under the jurisdiction of the California Energy Commission. The efficiency requirements and regulations are incorporated in the California Code of Regulations Title 20, Appliance Efficiency Regulations. These regulations establish the maximum flow rate for all new showerheads, lavatory faucets, sink faucets, and tub spout diverters manufactured, sold or offered for sale in California. In effect, current federal and state legislation require the use of certain plumbing devices that meet specified maximum flow rates. These devices include: • showerheads • Lavatory Faucets • Sink Faucets • Metering Faucets in Public Restrooms • Tub Spout Diverters • Residential Water Closets • Flushometer Valves • Commercial Water Closets Urinals Water savings in a typical single family home in Southern California through use of mandated fixtures has been calculated to be approximately 25% of the pre-conservation total. :i~ ~ .'"' "'.~? WATER CONSERVATION PLAN 11.8.7-1 II.8.8 Local Water Conservation Requirements In addition to the State and Federal requirements identified above, the City of Chula Vista and the Otay Water District have also adopted water conservation requirements. The City of Chula Vista Growth Management Ordinance, Municipal Code Section 19.09.050C, requires a Water Conservation Plan (WCP) to be submitted with all Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plans. The WCP is to provide an analysis of water usage requirements of the proposed project, as well as a detailed plan of proposed measures for water conservation, use of reclaimed water, and other means of reducing per capita water consumption from the proposed project, as well as defining a program to monitor compliance. As noted in Section ^.83 Purpose, all projects subject to a WCP are required to include a specific set of water conservation measures from a menu provided by the City. Per that requirement, the following water conservation measures will be incorporated in the Eastlake Ill ty ~!ra!<;t>ft ~~~ magic Pointe lZ+z< ~ t = ;7~i~?3~~~n um_, which is entirely residential: -Hot water pipe insulation -Pressure reducing valves -Water efficient dishwashers -Evapotranspiration Controllers -Water-efficient landscaping for all developer and builder installed landscaping These measures are detailed along with estimates of water savings due to conservation in the following chapter. Landscape irrigation is another significant opportunity for water conservation and local agencies have established their own mandates. The City of Chula Vista Landscape Manual requires the use of recycled water, if available, for landscape irrigation within all designated areas as allowed by state and local health codes. Further, Section 26 of the OWD ordinances state that it is the District's policy that reclaimed water shall be used "...whenever its use is financially and technically feasible, and consistent with legal requirements, preservation of public health, safety and welfare, and the environment." The use of recycled water in the Eastlake III 41'FExl~: sCrl=nrnic_ Pointe (ktu.E~K rn~I~~tt it:~trn3s is not a condition of the current tentative map because of the project's proximity to Otay Lakes and the potential for excess recycled water to runoff to the lakes. 4.rk+__ _~!1 WATER CONSERVATION PLAN II.8.8-I IL8.9 Water Conservation Estimated Savings Each of the selected water conservation measures included in the project is detailed below along with an estimate of the water savings associated with each. Indoor Measures Hot Water Pipe Insulation Insulation of hot water pipes and separation of the hot and cold pipes to reduce heat exchange can reduce the amount of time a faucet will need to flow to produce hot water. The estimated water savings is 2,400 gallons per residential unit per year. Pressure Reducing Valves Installation of apressure-reducing valve at the water service connection can maintain the pressure below 60 psi, reducing the volume of leakage that may be present and prevent excessive flow of water from all appliances and fixtures. The estimated water savings is 1,800 gallons per residential unit per year. Water-Efficient Dishwashers Dishwashers with water saving features such as water level sensors instead of timed fillers. The estimated water savings is 650 gallons per unit per year. Outdoor Measures Evapotranspiration Controllers Timed, fixed irrigation scheduling based on estimates of actual plant evapotranspiration rates. Radio signal from a central control station or satellite transmits information to the controllers to operate the sprinklers for the appropriate length of time. The estimated water savings with evapotranspiration controllers is 20,000 gallons per year per single family residential unit. This projected water savings is excessive for a.7~.I-.>~~t unit ahart«aef3t-~il.~([~ ( ~.i?=complex which is estimated to only use an average of ~~ t r` s?3 gallons per day (?.~ z3s)6 million gallons per year) for irrigation. For this analysis, it is assumed that 10 percent of the irrigated water use or A= }-r~}_3t?€~ million gallons per year can be conserved through use of evapotranspiration controllers. Water-Efficient Landscaping Guidelines for water-efficient landscaping are included in the City's Landscape Design Manual. Water efficient landscaping will be utilized on all developer and builder installed landscaping. The estimated water savings by using water efficient landscaping is up to 50 percent of non-efficient landscaping. Fora 2,100 square foot (0.048 acre) landscaped area, a water savings of 12,000 gallons per year is estimated. This is equivalent to 250,000 gallons per acre. If ~'? 5 9 acres is projected to be irrigated, then the water savings would be ~a~~i~i~ +t~ t=(~i= gallons per year. WATER CONSERVATION PLAN IL8.9-1 Based on the savings estimates associated with each of the water conservation measures detailed above, the total water conservation estimate for the Eastlake 111 ~.~-;"' ~:.~+ t tar,nc Pointe +<,~5„_~t., < <,~ ~ ,tLUn~ is 0.009 million gallons per day, per Table 4 below. Table 4 Total Water Conservation Estimate Conservation Measure Estimated Savings (gallons per year) Units/Acres Conservation Estimate (gallons/year) Ho[ Wa[er Pi a Insulation 2,400 er MF Unit ..~za„q - bxal .~s =d million Pressure Reducin Valve 1,800 er MF Unit ~'- ~~ ~~ million Water Efficient Dishwasher 650 er MF Unit -`:= million Eva otrans iration Controllers 6 77,500 er acre Gt ,' i - ~+~ million Water Efficient Landsca in 250.000 er acre ~ t; -- '`~' `- "=' million TOTAL ~:.`s#~43.iGfi million Avera a Dail Savin s - - 0.009 MGD {.{;[ 'g .,fir _.. ~it! WATER CONSERVATION PLAN 11.8.9-2 II.8.10 Implementation Measures ]mplementation Measures In addition to the implementation measures outlined in the previously adopted Eastlake III SPA, the Applicant of the subject Project has committed to following the water conservation measures: • Indoor water conservation measures: o Hot-Water Pipe Insulation: Install insulation on all hot water pipes in all common areas and all tenant-developed areas. o Pressure Reducing Valves: Provide pressure reducing valves at all meters, set to deliver water at no higher than 60 psi. • At least one outdoor water conservation measure and at least one additional water conservation measure from either the indoor or outdoor categories. Outdoor Water Conservation Measures • Water Efficient Irrigation System Use of rain sensors and soil moisture measuring devices for scheduling and controlling all landscape irrigation programs in commercial, industrial and business centers including tenant areas. • Evapotranspiration (ET) Controllers -Timed, fixed irrigation scheduling based on estimates of actual plant evapotranspiration rates. Radio signal from a central control station or satellite transmits information to the controllers to operate the sprinklers for the appropriate length of time. • Water-Efficient Landscaping -Use of native vegetation and drought tolerant plant materials, avoiding grass and turf to the extent practical and use of irrigation systems and controllers as required by the Chula Vista Landscape Manual Use. In addition, the use of drip irrigation where possible and restriction of sprinkler irrigation as recommended by the water purveyors. Recycled Water -Expand use of recycled water beyond areas mandated by the water purveyor to those areas where landscaping is within a reasonable reach of recycled water pipelines, to the extent that such use is acceptable to regulatory authorities. Outdoor Garden Sales -All tenants with outdoor garden sales areas to install micro-irrigation systems (trickle or drip irrigation) and provide water conservation educational materials for consumers. :ax 1 ~'a -- _. WATER CONSERVATION PLAN IL8.10-1 f_s ~ __. .. ~ i,.. ~a-. I,z trtlti-- -v.._bl-ttr 1.k,t '--ri ° r }>~- ,. _ i it ~ tf ~ r ;ci. t ..1 t =. fE 3 w ., .._ f_..s. ~ ___' f <.+ An et.4..4y 'a PIS'- -- r tl 3•~{ .. <If ~~u'-i f, d ;}t~ h,fY,.. f. f=f ,.. } iii e'}:-f Ft ,=H7}t ,a :{Ir , z ~f .t t~ ,ii ,'C~ ~, ~,. )d(3 ~)~7{`.: n __a I i . +i-i,Ii.}s fc 17.;+ ~ tic. x r.,'sy. I-y-4=41'++-~tih'fs C.d K'i t 1 „+5 `r ;.Ct= 9{} rt r .., r~ i:}- la .._ - m ..__._..A it :~ :?~fi ..S tJ.. '~Jhiv6h3c,~ ~~'-~. x€ ..=-^~f .'tt-h'c.; ii P ~~,:;., f u,..j-, i~~-t4,.t;<bi:_, ~ ' ki:.=f <+ t:~ `K-H ~itJ;i: S- ~#r, t.s ~.{.{ ).:{}Yzt ~4Y-F, e °': {t f~~~~{ 4~ :..~'~3t3 ` Ic ..~ t~H-r rt.i:i~E: ,.~{,Ire i~f aiq=~ L ~tii 42~;}i .,. ftlr nr rn.~ .~ ~. Optional Water Conservation Measures • Sub-meter all individualt~~>faf~+~-i.r~~t+rl~; i-:~;~E,~it:,. Provide educational materials and guidance to v~_ I ~ +r;;:~~;. Implementation Timing The implementation measures shall be incorporated in the building plans and installed prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy. WATER CONSERVATION PLAN IL8.10-2 II.8.11 Monitoring In order to ensure that all provisions of this plan are met, the standard review of landscape and construction documents performed by the City will include an evaluation of compliance with the provisions of this Water Conservation Plan. This approach will allow for a formal determination by the City that each of the required measures is implemented. Future discretionary or administrative actions with regard to development within the Eastlake 111 '~, r ~i~ .,.E ;~ ~ ~~~,:. Pointe ~'.=.~-<r t . ~ ~3 ~, (e.g., tentative map, building or grading permit, etc.) may be utilized to address or ensure compliance with the prescribed water conservation measures. `-~ ~ °~`~ ~: .'? WATER CONSERVATION PLAN IL8.11-I EASTLAKE III SPA PLAN PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCE PLAN OLYMPIC POINTE DRAFT -OCTOBER 28, 2010 Approved by: Chula Vista City Council Date: July 17, 2001, Resolution 2001-220 Eastlake Seniors Amendment: Approved by: Chula Vista City Council Date: June 20, 2006, Resolution 2006-190 Windstar Pointe Resort Amendment: Approved by: Chula Vista City Council Date: April 8, 2008, Resolution 2008-095 Olympic Pointe Condominium Amendment Approved by: Chula Vista City Council Date: Prepared by: buekel! i wong enyineeei TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................... .............. II.S-5 GENERAL CONDITIONS ............................................................................... ..............II.S-8 II.5.1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................. ............ I I.5-12 II.5.1.1. Background ...................................................................................... ...............11.5-12 II.5.1.2. Purpose ............................................................................................. ...............[I.5-13 11.5.1.3. Assumptions ..................................................................................... ...............1[.5-14 [I.5.1.4. Threshold Standards ......................................................................... ...............II.S-l4 II.S.l.S. PFFP Boundaries .............................................................................. ...............II.S-l6 II.5.2 DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY ........................................................... .............II.S-19 II.5.2.1. Development Phasing ....................................................................... ...............II.S-21 11.5.2.2. Development Impact Fees ................................................................ ...............II.S-22 II.5.4 FACILITY ANALYSIS ........................................................................ .............II.S-24 IL5.4 PUBLIC FACILITIES THRESHOLD STANDARDS AND INFRASTRUCTURE ........................................................................... ............. II.S-25 II.5.4.1. Traffic .............................................................................................. ................II.S-25 II.5.4.2. Police ............................................................................................... ................11.5-53 11.5.4.3. Fire and Emergency Medical Services ............................................ ................II.S-57 II.5.4.4. Schools ............................................................................................ ................II.S-60 II.5.4.5. Libraries .......................................................................................... ................ [I.5-68 II.5.4.6. Parks, Trails and Open Space .......................................................... ................II.S-72 [[.5.4.7. Water ............................................................................................... ................11.5-80 I[.5.4.8. Sewer ............................................................................................... ................II.S-86 t[.5.4.9. Drainage .......................................................................................... ................II.S-92 II.5.4.10. Air Quality ....................................................................................... ..............I[.5-105 II.5.4.I 1. Civic Center ..................................................................................... ..............II.5-108 II.5.4.12 Corporation Yard ............................................................................. ..............II.5-110 II.5.4.13. Other Public Facilities ..................................................................... ..............II.S-I 12 II.5.4.14. Fiscal ............................................................................................... ..............II.S-1 l4 II.5.4.15. Public Facilities Finance ................................................................. ..............II.5-117 APPENDIX A -FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS ....................................................... II.5-121 LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit i Vicinity Map ................................................................... ..............................[I.5-10 Exhibit 2 PFFP Boundazies ............................................................. ..............................II.S-11 Exhibit 3 General Development Plan Adopted ............................... ..............................II.S-17 Exhibit 4 Site Utilization Plan Adopted .......................................... ..............................II.S-18 Exhibit 5 Transit Plan ..................................................................... ..............................11.5-38 Exhibit 6 Near-Term Traffic Volumes ADTs ................................ ..............................II.S-42 Exhibit 7 Long-Term Traffic Volumes ADTs ................................ ..............................I1.5-43 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP Amendment Exhibit 8 Circulation ............................................................. ........................................II.S-51 Exhibit 9 Circulation Improvements ..................................... ........................................II.S-52 Exhibit 10 Potable Water System ........................................... .......................................11.5- 9l Exhibit 11 Recycled Water Plan ............................................. .......................................II.S- 92 Exhibit 12 Adopted Sewer Plan .............................................. ........................................II.S-99 Exhibit 13 Adopted Storm Drainage ....................................... ......................................II.5-113 Exhibit 14 WQTR Exhibit ...................................................... .....................................II.S- l l4 LIST OF TABLES Table A. l Summary of Facilities ............................................................................ .........II.S-9 Table A.2 Chula Vista Threshold Standards ........................................................... .......[L5-15 Table A.3 GDP and SPA Plan Statistical Data ....................................................... .......II.S-l9 Table A.4 Public Facility Timing ............................................................................ ....... [I.5-21 Table A.5 TDIF Schedule ....................................................................................... .......II.S-22 Table A.6 Public Facilities Estimated DIF Components ....................................... ........ fI.S-23 Table A.7 Level of Analysis .................................................................................. ........ [I.5-24 Table B.l GMOC LOS Definition ......................................................................... ........ILS-25 Table B.2 Freeway Segment LOS Threshold Descriptions ................................... ........11.5-26 Table B.3 Chula Vista Segment Capacity & LOS Standards ADT Volumes ........ ........II.S-27 Table B.4 Arterial LOS Threshold Descriptions ................................................... ........II.S-27 Table B.5 Average Daily Traffic Volumes ............................................................ ........1[.5-28 Table B.6 Intersection LOS Threshold Descriptions ............................................. ........II.S-28 Table B.7 LOS Thresholds for Signalized Intersections ........................................ ........ [[.5-29 Table B.8 Intersection LOS Threshold Descriptions ............................................. ........II.S-30 Table B.9 LOS Thresholds for Unsignalized Intersections ................................... ........II.S-30 Table B.10 Existing Street Segment Operations ...................................................... ........11.5-35 Table B.11 Existing Intersection Operations ........................................................... ........II.S-36 Table B.12 Project Trip Generation Summary Comparison .................................... ........II.S-39 Table B.13 Near-Term Intersection Operations ....................................................... ........II.S-40 Table B.14 Near-Term Street Segment Operations ................................................. ........ II.S-40 Table B.15 Existing Daily Traffic Volumes ............................................................ ........II.S-4l Table B.16 Long-term (Yea12030) Daily Traffic Volumes ......................................... ........ILS-44 Table B. 17 Olympic Pointe Condominiums TDIF Fees ............................................ ........ILS-49 Table B. 18 Olympic Pointe Condominiums Traffic Signal Fees ................................ ........I1.5-49 Table C.1 Historic Response Times Priority I ....................................................... ........ f[.5-54 Table C.2 Historic Response Times Priority II ...................................................... ........11.5-55 Table C.3 Police Fees ............................................................................................ ........ [[.5-56 Table D.1 Current & Planned Fire Station Facilities ............................................. ........II.S-57 Table D.2 Fire/EMS Emergency Response Times since 1999 ............................. ........ [I.5-58 Table D.3 Fire/EMS Fee ........................................................................................ ........[I.5-59 Table E.1 Chula Vista Elementary School District Enrollment vs. Capacity ........ ........ILS-62 Table E.2 Sweetwater Union High School District Enrollment vs. CapaciTy ....... ........ILS-63 Table E.3 Single-Family Attached Student Generation Rates ............................... ........II.S-64 Table E.4 Student Generation ................................................................................ ........II.S-65 Table F.1 Existing Library Facilities ..................................................................... ........11.5-68 Table F.2 Future Library Facilities ........................................................................ ........II.S-69 Table F.3 Library Space Demand vs. Supply ........................................................ ........II.S-70 1L5-3 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP Amendment Table F.4 Library Fee ............................................................................................... .....II.S-70 Table G.1 Quimby Act Parkland Requirements ........................................................ .....II.S-73 Table G.2 Parkland Dedication Ordinance Standards ............................................... .....II.S-73 Table G.3 Parkland Dedication Requirements per City Ordinance .......................... .....II.S-73 Table G.4 SPA Amendment Plan Park Acres and Eligible Credits .......................... .....II.S-74 Table G.5 Estimated Park Acreage Demand Compared to Supply East of I-805..... .....II.S-75 Table G.6 SPA Amendment Park Land Dedication Required .................................. .....II.S-75 Table G.7 Pazk Acquisition and Development (PAD) Fees Development Component... .....I1.5-77 Table G.8 Public Facilities Fees For Recreation ....................................................... .....11.5-79 Table H.1 Water Pressure Criteria ............................................................................ .....II.S-81 Table H.2 Projected On-Site Water Demands .......................................................... .....II.S-82 Table [.1 Projected Average Flow to Off-site Sewer ............................................. .....II.S-87 Table I.2 Estimated Sewage Flow and Treatment Capacity .................................... .....II.S-88 Table I. 3 Critical Reach Calculation ....................................................................... .....II.S-89 Table I. 4 Estimated Sewer Fees .............................................................................. ..... [[.5-90 Table J.l Existing Drainage Flows .......................................................................... .....I1.5-94 Table J.2 Proposed Drainage Flows ........................................................................ ..... [[.5-94 Table J.3 Anticipated and Potential Pollutants ........................................................ .....II.S-95 Table J.4 Grouping of Pollutants ............................................................................. .....ILS-96 Table J.5 Pollutants of Concern ............................................................................... ..... II.S-96 Table J.6 Treatment Control BMP Categories ......................................................... .....ILS-99 Table K.l Civic Fee for Olympic Pointe Condominium .......................................... ...I[.5-109 Table L.1 Corporation Yard Fee for Olympic Pointe Condominium ....................... ... [I.5-111 Table M.l Public Facilities Fees for Administration Facilities ................................. ...II.5-112 Table N.1 Net Fiscal Impact on the City of Chula Vista .......................................... ... [I.5-I 15 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP Amendment EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This supplemental Public Facilities Finance Plan (PFFP) Amendment addresses the public facility needs associated with the proposed Olympic Pointe project. An amendment to the Eastlake III SPA Plan is required to remove the references to the previously-approved Windstar Pointe project and to address the "Olympic Pointe" project. The proposed project consists of 389 multi-family attached residential units. The Eastlake Seniors supplemental PFFP, dated June 20, 2006, addresses the public facility needs associated with an 18.4 acre multi-family seniors project. The Eastlake III SPA Plan Amendment was approved by the Chula Vista City Council on June 20, 2006 (Resolution Number 2006-190). This amendment converted the aforementioned 18.4 acre site from the C-2, Tourist Commercial, to the VR-l3, Multi-Family Seniors, designation. The amendment also reconfigured the CPF-1 and VR- 12 sites without changing the size or density of the VR-12 site but increased the CPF-1 site from 10.8-acres to 12.9-acres. [n addition, the amendment reduced the Open Space (OS) from 136.7-acres to 134.6-acres. The PFFP supplement was prepared under the requirements of the City of Chula Vista's Growth Management Program and Implementation Ordinance Number 2448. The project site is designated as High Density Residential in the City General Plan, and Eastlake III GDP and SPA. The site is designated VR-13 Multi-Family on the approved SPA Site Utilization Plan. The Windstar Pointe Resort SPA Plan Amendment (approved on April 8, 2008 by the City Council) removed the "Seniors" designation. The site was rough graded in 2002. The preparation of a supplemental PFFP amendment is required in conjunction with the preparation of the Eastlake III Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan Amendment. This supplemental PFFP amendment ensures that the future development of the Olympic Pointe Condominium project is consistent with the overall goals and policies of the City's General Plan, Growth Management Program, and the Amended Eastlake fII SPA Plan. Further, the PFFP ensures that the development of the project will not adversely impact the City's Quality of Life Standards. The Olympic Pointe Condominium planning area encompasses approximately 18.4 gross acres within the City of Chula V ista. The site is located between the Olympic Training Center (OTC) on the South and Eastlake Vistas to the North. The site is a peninsula shape fronting on Olympic Parkway extending eastward towards the Lower Otay Reservoir. The site is approximately 9 miles east of the Chula Vista Civic Center. Exhibit 1 and 2 both illustrate the location of the Olympic Pointe Condominium site and its proximity to the existing development within the Eastlake community. The OTC is located to the south and west as well as bordering the Olympic Pointe Condominium Project. The SPA Plan Amendment will reduce the existing density of 494 units to 389 units. The proposed change is consistent with the approved GDP, the project site would continue to accommodate the High Density Residential component of the GDP. The project will consist of one primary development phase. Actual construction on individual building sites may occur over a several year period, which is similar to The Eastlake Company's experience with Eastlake I and II projects. A. Public Facility Cost and Fee Summary The following discussion identifies and summazizes the various facility costs associated with development of the 18.4-acre Olympic Pointe Condominium project. The facilities and their cost are identified in detail in this supplemental PFFP. Each subsection indicates a recommended Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP Amendment financing alternative for threshold facilities based upon current City practices and policies. However, where another financing mechanism may be shown at a later date to be more effective, the City may implement such other mechanisms in accordance with City policies. In addition, Table A.l summarizes the public facility phasing and associated costs within a table format. Transportation Development Impact Fees (TDIF) generated by the Olympic Pointe Condominium project total approximately $2,641,699. Traffic Signal Fees generated by the project are approximately $74,221. These fees do not include any credits the developer may have or may receive through a Development Agreement. Backbone sewer and water improvements will be funded, in part, through the payment of D[F fees and capacity fees established for these purposes. The Developer will fund on-site facilities. The total costs for the Olympic Pointe Condominium project Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Potable Water and Recycled Water Facilities will be determined by the Otay Water District (OWD). According to the OWD policy No. 26, OWD will provide reimbursement for construction and design costs associated with development of these improvements or pursuant to any agreement or provision in effect at the time. The estimated fee cost for Wastewater for the Olympic Pointe Condominium project is approximately $1,411,629 (does not include the Administration Fee for sewer connection permit). The entire project site is within the Salt Creek Sewer Basin DIF. The Olympic Pointe Condominium project will trigger development impact fees for schools. Police, fire and emergency medical services, parks (acquisition and development fees), recreation and libraries, civic center, corporation yard, and other public facilities will be funded from revenues generated from the payment of Public Facilities Development Impact Fees at building permit issuance. These fee revenues total approximately $7,273,242. B. Public Facility Thresholds City Council Resolution Number 13346 identified eleven different public facilities and services with related threshold standards and implementation measures. The following is a summary of the threshold compliance by the Olympic Pointe Condominium project: 1. Traffic: Based upon the Olympic Pointe - Traj~c Study Addendum September 22, 2010, by Ltnscott, Law & Greenspan the threshold compliance is projected to be maintained with implementation of the improvements identified in Section IL5.4.1.16 of this PFFP amendment and the payment of TDIF fees. The Olympic Pointe Condominium project shall be conditioned to install a traffic signal at the project driveway (two northbound lanes, one left-turn and one right-turn lane and two southbound lanes shall be provided) per the detailed discussion in Section IL5.4.1.16. In addition, the project shall be conditioned to pay TDIF Fees and Traffic Signal Fees at the rate in effect at the time building permits are issued. 2. Police: Threshold compliance will be met with the payment of public facility fees; the fees shall be paid prior to the issuance of building permits, at the rate in effect at the time payment is made. The City will continue to monitor police responses to calls for service in both the Emergency (priority one) and Urgent (priority two) categories and report the results to the GMOC on an annual basis. II.S-6 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP Amendment Fire and Emergency Medical Response: Threshold compliance will be met with the payment of public facility fees; the fees shall be paid prior to the issuance of building permits, at the rate in effect at the time payment is made. The City will continue to monitor Fire Department responses to emergency fire and medical calls and report the results to the Growth Management Oversight Commission (GMOC) on an annual basis. 4. Water: Threshold compliance will be met by the following: a) The Developer shall request and deliver to the City a service availability letter from the OWD prior to the issuance of building permits. b) The Developer shall provide potable water improvements according to OWD's Water Resource Master Plan and approved Sub-Area Master Plan (SAMP). c) The Developer shall provide recycled water improvements according to the SAMP. The OWD and the City of Chula Vista will coordinate recycled water requirements for the project. The phased construction of recycled water facilities, based on the SAMP, will be incorporated into the conditions of approval for the project. 5. Sewer: Threshold compliance will be met through the payment of sewer fees and the Salt Creek DlF by the developer, the construction of the city required facilities as identified in this PFFP and conditions of approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 6. Drainage: Threshold compliance will be met by the construction of city-required drainage facilities by the developer. Drainage facilities include but are not limited to graded swales, concrete swales, drainage inlets, pipes, headwalls, sedimentation basins, storm-water treatment devices, etc. In addition, the developer shall comply with all Federal, State, City of San Diego and City of Chula Vista water quality regulations and requirements. 7. Air Quality: The City continues to provide a development forecast to the APCD in conformance with the threshold standard. Prior to approval of building permits for each phase of the project, the applicant shall demonstrate that air quality control measures outlined in the Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Condominiums Air Quality Improvement Plan Addendum dated April, 2010, pertaining to the design, construction and operational phases of the project have been implemented. 8. Fiscal: The net fiscal impact from developing the Olympic Pointe Condominium project is positive through-out the development and at build-out results in an annual surplus of $29,700. 9. Civic Center and Corporate Yard and other facilities: Threshold compliance will be met through the collection of the public facilities fees at the rate in effect at the time building permits are issued. Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP Amendment GENERAL CONDITIONS FoR EASTLAKE III -OLYMPIC POINTE CONDOMINIUMS SUPPLEMENTAL PFFP AMENDMENT A. All development within the boundaries of the Supplemental PFFP, as amended, for the Olympic Pointe Condominium Project shall conform to the provisions of Section 19.09 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code (Growth Management Ordinance) and to the provisions and conditions of this Supplemental PFFP. B. All development within the boundaries of the Supplemental PFFP, as amended, for the Olympic Pointe Condominium Project shall be required to pay development impact fees for public facilities, transportation and other applicable fees pursuant to the most recently adopted program by the City Council, and as amended from time to time. Development within the boundaries of the Olympic Pointe Condominium project shall also be responsible for fair share proportionate fees that are necessary to meet the adopted facility performance standards as they relate to the SPA Plan. C. The Supplemental PFFP, as amended, shall be implemented in accordance with Chula Vista Municipal Code 19.09.090. Future amendments shall be in accordance with CVMC 19.09.100 and shall incorporate newly acquired data, to add conditions and update standards as determined necessary by the City through the required monitoring program. Amendment to this Plan may be initiated by action of the Planning Commission, City Council or property owners at any time. Any such amendments must be approved by the City Council. D. Approval of this Supplemental PFFP, as amended, does not constitute prior environmental review for projects within the boundaries of this Plan. All future projects within the boundaries of this Supplemental PFFP shall undergo environmental review as determined appropriate by the City of Chula Vista. E. Approval of this Supplemental PFFP, as amended, does not constitute prior discretionary review or approval for projects within the boundaries of the Plan. All future projects within the boundaries of the Olympic Pointe Condominium project area shall undergo review in accordance with the Chula Vista Municipal Code. This Supplemental PFFP analyzes the maximum allowable development potential for planning purposes only. The approval of this plan does not guarantee specific development densities. F. The facilities and phasing requirements identified in this Supplemental PFFP, as amended, are based on the SPA Plan, which assumes that 18.4 acres with 389 Multi-Family Dwelling Units will be constructed. [f there are changes, the total number of Dwelling Units calculated may change and facility requirements shall be adjusted proportionately. G. The plan analysis is based upon one single phase of development as presented in this document. Any changes to phasing shall require an amendment to the Supplemental PFFP, as amended. Eastlake II[ Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP Amendment Table A.1 Olympic Pointe Condominium Summary of Facilities' Facility Facility Description Fee Estimate DIF Program Timing Funding Source Financing Transportation Transportation Facilities $2,641,699 Transportation Facilities in Eastern Territories Pay prior to issuance of B ildi P it DIF const./ exaction Fee Progam Traffic Si na] $74,221 Traffic Si nal Fee ng erm u DIF exaction Fee Pro am Subtotal $2,715,920 Potable Water 980 Zone To be Determined by OWD City DIF fees do not apply to the OWD Provide City Engineer OWD water availability letter and OWD CIP Fees Capacity Fees and Exactions Recycled Water (If Required) 950 Zone To be Determined by OWD City DIF fees do not apply to the OWD required improvements prior to issuance of Buildin g permit OWD CIP Fees Capacity Fees and Exactions Connect to exist $390,488 Salt Creek Sewer DIF pay prior to issuance of DIF exaction Fee Pro am Sewer sewer $1,021,141 Sewer Participation Fee Building Permit CIP/Development Fee Program Drainage Connect to exist SD N/A DIF not required for Salt Creek N/A Developer funded Exaction Schools No specific facility N/A School Fees Provide documentation that school fees have been paid prior to issuance of Buildin Pertni[ Mello-Roos CFD CFD Pazks PAD FeesZ $4,033,984 PAD Fees pay prior [o issuance of Building Pertni[ pAD Fees Fee Program Recreation Pay PFDIF Fee $417,008 Public Facilities DIF pay prior [o issuance of Building Permit $1,072/MF DU. Fee Program Library Pay PFDIF Fee $549,657 Public Facilities DIF Pay prior to issuance of Building Permit $1 413/MF DU. Fee Program Fire & EMS Pay PFDIF Fee $347,766 Public Facilities DIF pay prior [o issuance of Building Pertni[ gg94/MF DU. Fee Program Police Pay PFDIF Fee $657,799 Public Facilities DIF Pay prior to issuance ofBailaing Permit . $1,691/MF DU. Fee Program Civic Pay PFDIF Fee $928,598 Public Facilities DIF pay prior [o issuance of Building Pertni[ g2 328/MF DU. Fee Program Corporate Yard Pay PFDIF Fee $131,482 Public Facilities DIF pay prior [o isps~i[eofBuilding $338/MF DU. Fee Program Administrative Pay PFDIF Fee $206,948 Public Facilities DIF pay prior [o issuance of Building Pertni[ $532/MF DU. Fee Program Subtotal $8,684,871 Total $11,400,791 " Fees presented in this table aze estimates only. The actual fee will be calculated prior to building permit issuance. z See section 11.5.4.6.8.1 for the details of the m-lieu agreement fir Acquisition Fee and the requvement for the Development fee. IL5-9 Eastlake III Olmpic Pointe Supplemental PFFP e Exhibit 1 ^.5-10 Eastlake III Olmpic Pointe Supplemental PFFP Vicinity Map Project Location -,~ EastLake III ~ ~ "°'~°'° ~ EastLake III SPA '. ' ~ - Center 11 ~ SPAt ',~ (Woods) ~ Rn _aw ~a r:n EastLake '°~'~ ~~ `~~:~^ Gnrens SPA .. ;v EastLake 'c Trails SPA ~~ EastLake III ~~~~- SPA (Vistas) ~.i wr Rrrvm \~ PanhandN~ ~ SPA ~ EastLake Planned Community ~ * = rrv~eci ~ocai~on OTC SPA Exhibit 2 EastLake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP ILS.I. INTRODUCTION: This document amends the Eastlake III -Seniors Project Supplemental PFFP. This Supplemental PFFP amendment identifies each improvement needed to service the Olympic Pointe Condominium project, with the appropriate funding sources. The implementing actions covered by the PFFP are: • Use of Public Financing Mechanisms where applicable. • Construction of major streets, sewer, water and drainage facilities. • Internal subdivision improvements pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act. • Provision of other public facilities. • Maintenance of certain facilities such as open space areas and street medians. IL5.1.1 BACKGROUND: A Master Environmental Impact Report was completed for the 3,073-acre Eastlake community in February, 1982, which considered the impacts associated with the annexation of the project site from the County of San Diego to the City of Chula Vista, as well as the potential impacts associated with the implementation of a General Plan amendment, prezoning, and General Development Plan for the future Eastlake development. The discretionary actions associated with the Eastlake proposal, including the zoning of the project area to Planned Community (PC) and adoption of the Eastlake Policy Plan, were approved by the City of Chula Vista in August, 1982. As its name suggests, the Eastlake III General Development Plan (GDP) is the third in a series of approvals addressing development of the Eastlake Planned Community. The first Eastlake GDP, identified as Eastlake 1, included approximately forty percent of the property and was adopted in 1982. The Eastlake I SPA included three residential neighborhoods, Eastlake Hills, Eastlake Shores, and Salt Creek I, along with the Eastlake Business Center [employment center and Eastlake Village Center commercial area. The second major increment to the Eastlake Planned Community was the planning of the Eastlake Greens and Eastlake Trails residential neighborhoods, located east of the proposed alignment of SR- 125, between Otay Lakes Road, and Olympic Parkway. These two neighborhoods were planned as separate SPAS within the Eastlake II GDP. At the time of approval, the Eastlake II GDP was merged with the Eastlake [GDP and the two areas combined are now known as the Eastlake II GDP (see Exhibit 2). Concurrent with the planning of Eastlake II, the opportunity to develop the Olympic Training Center (OTC) was recognized. [n order to allow for the preparation of a SPA Plan for the OTC, the original Eastlake III GDP was adopted in 1990. An OTC SPA plan was subsequently approved and the training facility built. In 1999, the_EastLake Business Center II was removed from the Eastlake III GDP and added to the Eastlake II GDP to allow its accelerated development in response to economic development opportunities. Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP The project site is designated as High Density Residential in the City General Plan, and Eastlake [[[ GDP. The site is designated "VR-13" on the approved SPA Site Utilization Plan. As envisioned in the approved GDP, the project site would accommodate the High Density Residential component of the GDP. The Eastlake III SPA Plan Amendment, approved in 2006, converted the site from the C-2 (Commercial Tourist) to the "VR-13" Multi-Family Seniors designation. The amendment also reconfigured the CPF-1 and VR-12 sites without changing the size or density of the VR-12 site but increasing [he CPF-I site from 10.8-acres to 12.9-acres. In addition, the amendment reduced the Open Space (OS) from 136.7-acres to 134.6-acres. In 2007, an amendment to the Eastlake III SPA Plan was submitted to the City of Chula Vista to remove the references to the active seniors project (aka The Eastlake III -Seniors Project) and replace it with the Windstar Pointe Resort Luxury Apartment Project. The Windstar project had the same number of 494 multi-family residential units. This project was abandoned by the developer. In 2010, an amendment to the Eastlake 111 SPA Plan was submitted to the City of Chula for the Olympic Pointe Condominium project. This project proposes to construct 389 condominium units on the subject site. This supplemental PFFP Amendment addresses the public facility needs associated with the proposed Olympic Pointe Condominium project. II.5.1.2 PURPOSE: The purpose of this document is to amend the 2006 Eastlake III -Seniors Project Supplemental PFFP Amendment. That supplemental PFFP was prepared to supplement the original 2001 Eastlake III PFFP and applied to the SPA Plan Amendments to the activity core south of the Vistas portion of the Eastlake III GDP and SPA Plan. The project area remains vacant and the property now is proposed to be developed. Regarding the required public facilities needs, the supplemental PFFP, as amended, identifies a preliminary cost estimate for each improvement installation, phasing and appropriate funding sources. The purpose of all PFFP's in the City of Chula Vista is to implement the City's Growth Management Program and to meet the General Plan goals and objectives, specifically those of the Growth Management Element. The Growth Management Program ensures that development occurs only when the necessary public facilities and services exist or are provided concurrent with the demands of new development. The Growth Management Program requires that a PFFP be prepared for every new development project, which requires either SPA Plan or tentative map approval. Similarly, amendments to a SPA Plan require an amendment or a supplement to the PFFP. The PFFP is intended to be a dynamic and flexible document. The goal of the Financing Plan is to assure adequate levels of service are achieved for all public facilities impacted by the project. It is understood that assumed growth projections and related public facility needs are subject to a number of external factors, such as the state of the economy, the City's future land use approval decisions, etc. It is also understood that the funding sources specified herein may change due to financing programs available in the future or requirements of either state or federal law. [t is intended that revisions to cost estimates and funding programs be handled as administrative revisions, whereas revisions to the facilities-driven growth phases are to be accomplished through an update process via an amendment to or a supplement to the PFFP. IL5-13 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP IL5.1.3 ASSUMPTIONS There are a number of key assumptions implicit to this supplemental PFFP Amendment. The assumptions play a major part in determining public facility needs, the timing of those needs and the staging of growth corresponding to the various facilities. Key land use and phasing assumptions can be summarized as follows: A. The SPA Amendment for the Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Condominium affects one areas within the Eastlake Vistas portion of Eastlake [II (see adopted Site Utilization Plan (SUP) (see Exhibit 4) that is located south of Olympic Parkway adjacent to the OTC. B. This document amends the Eastlake III SPA Plan Supplemental PFFP that was adopted on April 8, 2008. C. The Eastlake III (GDP), PC District Regulations, and the SPA Plan Amendment will regulate land use allocation and intensity of development for the VR-13 Multi-Family site. D. The proposed project consists of developing approximately 18.4 acres of High Density Multi- Family Residential designated land into 389 condominiums. E. One primary phase of development is envisioned to complete all the infrastructure improvements in a single increment. Build-out of all building sites may occur over a several year period. II.5.1.4. THRESHOLD STANDARDS: Chapter 19.09 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code provides the requirements for the Chula Vista Growth Management Plan. Subsection 19.09.040 provides the Quality of Life Threshold Standards for each public facility and improvement. There are eleven (1l) standards that address a variety of different public services and environmental issues. Several topics are related to services provided by city departments, such as police, fire, libraries, pazks and recreation, traffic, and drainage facilities. Each of the 11 threshold standards is stated in terms of a goal, objectives, and one or more standards. Table A.k 2 provides a summary of the eleven "Threshold Standards." A. The Threshold Standards fall into three general categories: 1. A performance standard measuring overall level of service is established for police, fire and emergency medical services, sewers, drainage facilities, and traffic; 2. A ratio of facilities to population is established for park and recreation facilities, and libraries; and 3. A qualitative standard is established for schools, water, air quality, and fiscal impacts. The qualitative standard pertains to some services that are provided by agencies outside of the city -- schools are provided by the Chula Vista Elementary School District and the Sweetwater High School District; water service is provided by two independent water districts (Otay Water District and Sweetwater Authority); and sewer service is provided by the City of Chula Vista and has an agreement with the City of San Diego to treat the waste water. Finally, the air-quality and fiscal threshold standards do not relate to specific public services but are intended to determine whether growth is having an adverse impact on two other measures of quality of life: the air quality within the region and the city's overall fiscal health. II.S-14 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP Table A.2 Chula Vista's Threshold Standards Annual report required from Air Pollution Control District on impact of growth on air Air Quality uali Annual report required evaluating impacts on growth on city operations, capital Fiscal im rovements, and develo men[ im act fee revenues and ex enditures. Respond to 84% of the Priority I emergency calls within 7 minutes and maintain average Police response time of 4.5 minutes. Respond to 62% of Priority II urgency calls within 7 minutes and maintain avera a res onse time of 7 minutes. Fire/EMS Res and to calls within 7 minutes in 85% of all cases. An annual report is required to evaluate the school district's ability to accommodate new Schools owth. Provide 500 square feet of library space adequately equipped and staffed per 1,000 Library o ulation. Parks & Maintain 3 acres of neighborhood and community parkland with appropriate facilities per Recreation 1,000 residents east of Interstate 805. Annual report from water service agencies on impact of growth and future water Water availabilit . Sewage flows and volumes shall not exceed City Engineering Standards. Annual report from Sewer Metro olitan Sewer Authorit on im act of rowth on sewer ca aci Storm flows and volume shall not exceed City Engineering Standards. Annual report Drainage reviewin erformance of ci 's storm drains stem. Maintain Level of Service (LOS) "C" or better as measured by observed average travel speed on all signalized arterial streets, except, that during peak hours, an LOS "D" can occur Traffic for no more than any 2 hours of the day. Those signalized intersections west of Interstate 805 that do not meet the above standazd ma continue too erate at their 1991 LOS but shall not worsen. B. The Threshold Standards are aoolied in three wavs: 1. Many of the standards were used in the development and evaluation of the city's General Plan to ensure that quality-of--life objectives are met at the time of General Plan build-out during a 20-to-25 year period; 2. Certain standards are used in the evaluation of individual development projects to determine the possible impacts of the project and to apply appropriate conditions and requirements in order to mitigate those impacts; and 3. All of the standards are monitored by the Growth Management Oversight Commission (GMOC) on an annual basis to ensure that the cumulative impacts of new growth do not result in a deterioration of quality of life, as measured by these standards. Threshold standards are used to identify when new or upgraded public facilities are needed to mitigate the impacts of new development. Building permits will not be issued unless compliance with these standards can be met. These threshold standards have been prepared to guarantee that public facilities or infrastructure improvements will keep pace with the demands of growth. IL5-15 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP II.S.J<.S. PFFP BOONDARIES: The Growth Management Implementation Ordinance requires that the City shall establish the boundaries of the PFFP at the time a SPA Plan or Tentative Map is submitted by the applicant. The boundaries shall be based upon the impact created by the Project on existing and future need for facilities. The project boundaries will correlate the proposed development project with existing and future development proposed for the area of impact to provide for the economically efficient and timely installation of both onsite and offsite facilities and improvements required by the development. [n establishing the boundaries for the PFFP, the City shall be guided by the following considerations: A. Service areas, drainage, sewer basins, and pressure zones that serve the Project; B. Extent to which facilities or improvements are in place or available; C. Ownership of property; D. Project impact on public facilities relationships, especially the impact on the City's planned major circulation network; E. Special district service territories; F. Approved fire, drainage, sewer, or other facilities or improvement master plans. The boundary of the Olympic Pointe Condominium Project was established using the above criterion. The Supplemental PFFP Amendment boundaries are congruent with the Adopted GDP (see Exhibit 3) Area and the Eastlake III SPA Plan Area (See Site Utilization Plan, Exhibit 4). Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP •croa Ta1aM TugN LrM Uae NWx DUe RESIDENTIAL L Low (0.3 tlWac) 296.2 21 650 LM Low Matlium (36 Ou/ec) 154.5 5.2 T99 M McGium (&1l tlulac) ].3 t0.0 T3 MM Mee-High (1 t-1B dJac) 15.9 t5.0 239 N High (18-2]~tlWac) 30.T 25.9 T9l soo-mrNR.aaw1NN soae sa z,sss NON-RESIDENTIAL CR Comm. Relatl 12.2 P Park t5.2 p0 Pu~lic/Oueai-PUWk 2a].1 OS Open Space 135.7 CircWa4on 25.5 3ueroW NanM>tM~nNN qb.l fU = umxryinq Low o.mh an.mnw• am u.e RNN la Mtl bi ~tlNnMwa Ivtl w peV~un{ Lave, aer aeservov rr i ~-~ Exhibit 3 General Development Plan Adopted ~ Project Location Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP C a N ._ ~~ J ''f~ v/ ~ axcx-ex~„= Qome~+H... ~'J ~~..~~ry33 ~~~ ~~~ii ~~ ~ C 0 Y R V Q J V m O a` xa°z-~s3~e~gA_~ r,Rw~ R rm..mn. no___rF .+~ n4-wm-n.. p1771A~~ep~'.o~9S~ __ 3,L'^3'Rl~tl -~33333~§3== 6~~8888~3a i¢ ~~ €$~~Sif"~~~~:s'$$6ae S ~~~ R ~J ~e 7~ s iS W d ~. e d d a a II.5.2. DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY The Olympic Pointe Condominium Project is proposed on a site east of the OTC and south of Olympic Parkway. The site is designated VR-13 on the approved Site Utilization Plan in the Eastlake 11[ SPA Plan. The property is located south of the intersection between Olympic Parkway and Wueste Road in the City of Chula Vista, California. The site is currently accessed from an unpaved driveway along Olympic Parkway near the northwest comer of the property. Olympic Parkway bounds the northwest portions of the site, and Wueste Road Forms the irregular property boundary on the northeast, east and southeast portions of the property. The Lower Otay, Reservoir is located just east of Wueste Road. The OTC is located to the west of the site. The approximate location and extent of the site is shown on the Site Location Map (Exhibit 2). The proposed project consists of developing the approximately 18.4 acres of High Density Multi- Family Residential land into a condominium project. The approved Windstar Pointe Resort project removed the seniors designation from the 18.4 acres of High Density Multi-Family Residential land. The Olympic Pointe Condominium project, if approved, would decrease the total of residential units in Eastlake III from 2,555 dwelling units to 2,450 dwelling units. Table A.3 provides a comparison of the GDP and proposed SPA amendment. Table A.3 GDP and SPA Plan Statistical Com arison RESIDENTIAL GDP Designation SPA Designation GDP Statistics Acres DU SPA Plan Acres DU Average Density Eastlake Woods Low WR-1 -WR-S 216.2 410 216.2 410 1.9 du/ac Low-Medium WR-6 - WR-7 43.0 257 43.0 257 6.0 du/ac Subtotal 259.2 667 259.2 667 Eastlake Woods Avg. Density SPA =Low Density, 2.6 du/ac Eastlake Vistas Low VR-l 22.0 56 82.0 56 2.5 du/ac Low-Medium VR-3 - VR-8 170.7 658 I I L I 658 4.3 du/ac Medium VR-9 7.3 73 7.3 73 l0 du/ac Medium-High VR-10-VR-II 15.0 239 15.0 239 ISdu/ac High VR-12-VR-13 30.7 794 30.7 689 21.2 du/ac Subtotal 247.4 1,888 247.4 1,783 Eastlake Vistas Av .Densit SPA =Medium Densit , 6.1 du/ac Residential Subtotal 506.6 2,555 506.6 2 450 4.84 du/ac Eastlake III Density GDP =Low Medium 5.0 du/ac SPA =Low Medium 4.84 du/ac Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP Table A.3 (cont'd.) GDP and SPA Plan Statistical Com arison NON-RESIDENTIAL Eastlake Vistas Retail Comm. C-1 12.2 12.2 Open Space OS 137.8 -- 134.6* Public/PQ PQ-1 - PQ-3 40.2 -- 40.2 -- -- CPF CPF-1 10.8 12.9* -- -- Parks & Rec. P-I - P-2 15.2 I5.2 -- -- Circulation 25.5 25.5 -- -- Subtotal 241.7 241.7 OI m is Trainin Center SPA Public/PQ PQ I50 -- N/A -- -- Panhandle Parcel (future SPA) Public/PQ N/A 45 -- N/A -- Nonresidential Subtotal 436.7 -- 241.7 -- TOTALS 946.7 2 555 748.3 2 450 3.3 du/ac ' Note: These statistics were adjusted based on adopted subdivision statstics. Actions that need to be approved by the City Council include, but not limited to: a SPA Plan Amendment; and a revision to the Eastlake II[ Affordable Housing Program Project CEQA documents have been prepared concurrently to document potential environmental impacts and identify mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts to below significance or eliminate potential impacts. Further, no new CEQA mitigation measures are required for the Olympic Pointe Condominium project. Subsequent to the approval of all the SPA level documents, grading and improvement plans will be prepared. These will provide the necessary details to actually construct the project described by the SPA level documents. These plans, the construction process and ultimate uses/activities within the SPA are required to be consistent with the applicable provisions of this Supplemental PFFP Amendment. II.S-20 Eastlake 111 Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP II.5.2.1. DEVELOPMENT PHASING: One primary phase of development is envisioned due to the need of the project to complete the infrastmcture improvements in a single increment. However, actual construction on individual building sites may occur over a several year period, as has been experienced within the existing Village CenterBusiness Center. This project will not be phased. A summary of the infrastructure public facility timing is provided in the following table. Table A.4 Olympic Pointe Condominium/Public Facility Timing Facili Facili Descri tion Timin Financin Method Street Improvements Prior to issuance of Building Permits Subdivision exaction Traffic Pay DIF Fees Prior to issuance of Building Permits Fee Program Traffic Signal Fee Prior to issuance of Building Permits Fee Program Service Avail Letter from prior to issuance of Building Pernits N/A OWD to Cit Potable Water Improvements per OWD Prior to issuance of Building Permits Capacity Fees and Water &SAMP Exactions Capacity Fees and OWD CIP Fees Prior to issuance of Building Permits Exactions Recycled Improvements per O W D & Prior to issuance of building Permits Capacity Fees and Water SAMP Exactions Connection [o Salt Creek Basin prior to issuance of Building Pernits Fee Program Fee Salt Creek Sewer DIF Sewer Pay Sewerage Participation prior to issuance of Building Permits Fee Program Fee Storm Connect to exist. public storm prior to issuance of Building Permits Subdivision exaction Drain drains stem Schools No specific facility Subject to pay-Prior to issuance of building Permit Mello-Roos CFD School Fees Parks Pay PAD Fees' Prior to issuance of Building Permit Fee Program Recreation Pay PFDIF Fee Prior to issuance of Building Permit Fee Program Library Pay PFDIF Fee Prior to issuance of Building Permit Fee Program Fire & EMS Pay PFDIF Fee Prior to issuance of Building Permit Fee Program Police Pay PFDIF Fee Prior to issuance of Building Permit Fee Program Civic Pay PFDIF Fee Prior to issuance of Building Permit Fee Program Corp. Yd. Pay PFDIF Fee Prior to issuance of Building Permit Fee Program Admin Pay PFD[F Fee Prior to issuance of Building Permit Fee Program 3 Given the lack of available acreage thaz wind be acquired to serve the development, according to city staff, the developer has negotiated a waiver of [he acquisition contponwt of [he PAD Fee in exchange for a payment of $2,666,260, which can be utilized to fund wnstmction of park and public facilities serving [he Eastlake Community (See section 1[.5.4.6.8.1). Any excess funds that remain once these facilities are complete can be utilized on other park or public facilities serving the Eas[em Temtories of Chula Vista The Developer will pay the development component of fhe PAD Fee as required by the City. II.S-21 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP IL5.2.2 DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES A. Transportation The current Transportation Development Impact Fee (TDIF) Ordinance sets forth the calculation of development impact fees. This PFFP uses the CVMC Chapter 3.54 as the basis for the estimated TDIF fees. Table A.5 below illustrates the current fee schedule: Table A.5 TDIF Schedule° East of I-805 Land Use Classification TDIF Rate 0-6 dwelling units per gross $ 11,317 per DU Residential (Low) acre 6.1-18 dwelling units per $ 9,054 per DU Residential (Med.) ross acre >18.1 dwelling units per $ 6,791 per DU Residential (High) ross acre Senior housin $ 4,528 er DU >18 dwelling units per gross $ 4,528 per DU Residential mixed use acre Commercial mixed use < 5 stories in hei ht $ 181,074 er 20,000 s . ft. General commercial acre $ 181,074 er acre Re Tonal commercial (acre > 60 acres or 800,000 s . ft. $ 124,488 er acre Hi h rise commercial acre > 5 stories in hei ht $ 316,879 er acre Office acre < 5 stories in hei ht $ 101,854 er acre Industrial RTP acre) $ 90,542 er acre 18-hole olf course $ 803,515 er acre Medical center $ 735,612 er acre ° TD[F Fees based on Form 5509 dated 9/30/2010. Actual fee maybe different, please verify with the City of Chula Vista at the time of building permit. IL5-22 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP B. Public Facilities The Public Facilities Development Impact Fee (PFDIF) was updated by the Chula Vista City Council on November 19, 2002 by adoption of Ordinance 2887. The PFDIF is adjusted every October Is` pursuant to Ordinance 3050, which was adopted by the City Council on November 7, 2006. The current fee for single-family residential development is $8,735/unit, multi- family residential is $8,268/unit, commercial (including oftice) development is $27,461/acre and industrial development is $8,661/acre. The PFDIF amount is subject to change as it is amended from time to time. The calculations of the PFDIF due for each facility are addressed in the following sections of this report. Table A.6 provides a break down of what facilities the fee funds. Table A.65 Public Facilities Estimated DIF Fee Components Component Single Family /DU Multi-Family /DU Commercial /Acre Industrial /Acre Civic Center $2,458 $2,328 $7,841 $2,478 Police $L,565 $1,691 $7,394 $1,595 Corporation Yard $421 $338 $7,148 $3,367 Libraries $1,413 $1,413 $0 $0 Fire Suppression $1,243 $894 $3,283 $653 GIS, Computers, Telecom & Records Mana ement $0 $0 $0 $0 Administration $563 $532 $1,795 $568 Recreation $1,072 $1,072 $0 $0 Total per Residential Unit $8,735 $8,268 Total per Com'VInd. Acre $27,461 $8,661 The total number of acres for the Olympic Pointe Project is 18.4. The calculations of the PFDIF due for each facility are addressed in the following sections of this report. s DIF Fees based on Form 5509 dated 9/30/2010. Actual fee may be different, please verify with the City of Chula Vista at the time of building permit. Eastlake tII Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP II.5.3 FACILITY ANALYSIS This portion of the PFFP contains 13 separate subsections for each facility addressed by this report. Of the l3 facilities, 11 have adopted threshold standards; the Civic Center and Corporation Yard do not. Table A.7 highlights the level of analysis for each facility. Table A.7 Level of Anal sis Facili Ci ide East of I-805 Service Area Sub-basin S ecial District Traffic Pedestrian Bridges J J J Police J Fire/EMS J J Schools J Libraries J Parks, Recreation & Open Space J Water J J Sewer J Drama e J Air ualit J Civic Center J Corp. Yard J Fiscal J J Each subsection analyzes the impact of the Olympic Pointe Condominium Project based upon the adopted Quality of Life Standards. The analysis is based upon the specific goal, objective, threshold standard and implementation measures. The proposed SPA plan is used to determine facility adequacy and is referenced within the facility section. Each analysis is based upon the specific project processing requirements for that facility, as adopted in the Growth Management Program. These indicate the requirements for evaluating the project consistency with the threshold ordinance at various stages (General Development Plan, SPA Plan/Public Facilities Finance Plan, Tentative Map, Final Map and Building Permit) in the development review process. A service analysis section is included which identifies the service provided by each facility. The existing plus forecasted demands for the specific facility are identified in the subsection based upon the adopted threshold standard. Each facility subsection contains an adequacy analysis followed by a detailed discussion indicating how the facility is to be financed. The adequacy analysis provides a determination of whether or not the threshold standard is being met and the finance section provides a determination if funds are available to guarantee the improvement. If the threshold standazd is not being met, mitigation is recommended in the Threshold Compliance and Recommendations subsection which proposes the appropriate conditions or mitigation to bring the facility into conformance with the threshold standazd. Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP IL5.4. PUBLIC FACILITIES THRESHOLD STANDARDS AND INFRASTRUCTURE REQUIREMENTS II.5.4.1. TRAFFIC II.5.4.1.1. GMOC THRESHOLD STANDARDS: Citywide: Maintain Level of Service (LOS) "C" or better, as measured by observed average travel speed on all signalized arterial segments except that during peak hours a LOS of "D" can occur for no more than any two hours of the day. IL5.4.1.2 GMOC LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) DEFINITION Six levels of services (LOS) have been defined varying from A (free flow) to F (severe congestion). A general definition of LOS is summarized in Table B.1. The City of Chula Vista's GMOC uses an LOS defmition for signalized arterial segments as a method for evaluating and comparing traffic conditions. Arterial LOS measurements consider average weekday peak hours and exclude seasonal and special circumstance variations. The following table summarizes the GMOC Traffic Quality of Life Threshold Standard for signalized arterial streets: Table B.1 GMOC LOS Definition f S i Avera a Travel S eed m h Level o erv ce Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 A >35 >30 >25 B >28 >24 > l9 C >22 >18 >13 D >17 >14 > 9 E >13 >10 > 7 F <13 <10 < 7 SOURCE: Highway Capacity Manua(, 1994. The arterial streets are divided into the following three classifications: A. Class l arterials are roadways where free flow traffic speeds range between 35 mph and 45 mph and the number of signalized intersections per mile is less than four (4). There is no parking and there is generally no access to abutting property. B. Class II arterials are roadways where free flow traffic speeds range between 30 mph and 35 mph, the number of signalized intersections per mile range between four (4) and eight (8). There is some parking and access to abutting properties is limited. C. Class III arterials are roadways where free flow traffic speeds range between 25 mph and 35 mph, and the number of signalized intersections per mile are closely spaced. There is substantial parking and access to abutting property is unrestricted. II.S-25 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP II.5.4.1.3 FREEWAY SEGMENT LOS AND THRESHOLDS The analysis of freeway segment LOS is based on the procedure developed by Caltrans District 11, which is based on methods described in the 1994 Highway Capacity Manual. The procedure involves comparing the peak hour volume of the mainline segment to the theoretical capacity of the roadway (V/C). Directional and truck factors are also used to calculate the future Freeway volumes. V/C ratios are then compared to the V/C ranges shown on the tables to determine the LOS for each segment. Caltrans recommends LOS E or better as an acceptable threshold for determining impacts on the regional freeway system. LOS E is used as the threshold of significance because a decrease from this level of service to LOS F determines the need to develop a freeway Deficiency Plan. Table B.2 Caltrans District 11 Freeway Segment Level of Service Definitions LOS V/C Con estion/Dela Traffic Descri tion Used or reewa s, ex resswa s and conventional hi hwa s A <0.41 None Free flow B 0.42-0.62 None Free to stable flow, li ht to moderate volumes. C 0.63-0.80 None to minimal Stable flow, moderate volumes, freedom to maneuver noticeabl restricted D 0.81-0.92 Minimal to substantial Approaches unstable flow, heavy volumes, very limited freedom to maneuver. E 0.93-I.00 Significant Extremely unstable flow, maneuverability and psychological comfort extreme) oor. Used or conventional hi hwa s Forced or breakdown flow. Delay measured in average F <L00 Considerable travel speed (MPIn. Signalized segments experience delays >60.0 sec./vehicle Used or reewa s and ex resswa s Considerable 0-1 hr Forced flow, heavy congestion, long queues form behind F(0) I.OI-1.25 dela breakdown oints, sto and o. F q L26-1.35 Severe 1-2 hr dela Ve heav con estion, ve Ion ueues. Very Severe 2-3 hr Extremely heavy congestion, longer queues, more numerous F(2) 1.36-1.45 dela breakdown oints, Ion er sto eriods. F(3) >L46 Extremely Severe 3+ Gridlock hours of dela SOURCE. Caltrans 1992 Caltrans LOS DeSnition The concept of LOS is defined as a qualitative measure describing operational conditions within a traffic stream, and the motorist's and/or passengers' perception of operations. A LOS definition generally describes these conditions in terms of such factors as speed, travel time, freedom to maneuver, comfort, convenience, and safety. LOS for freeway segments can generally be categorized per Table B.2. IL5.4.1.4 SEGMENT LOS STANDARDS AND THRESHOLDS This section presents the LOS standards and thresholds utilized by the City of Chula Vista to analyze roadway segment performance. Table B.3 presents the City of Chula Vista roadway segment capacity and level of service standards for arterial roadways. Eastlake IH Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP Table B.3 Chula Vista Segment Capacity and LOS Standards Average Daily Traffic Volumes Functional Level of Service Classification A B C D E Expressway (6-lane) 52,500 61,300 70,000 78,800 87,500 Prime Arterial (6-lane) 37,500 43,800 50,000 56,300 62,500 Major Street (6-lane) 30,000 35,000 40,000 45,000 50,000 Major Street (4-lane) 22,500 26,300 30,000 33,800 37,500 Village F,ntry 16,500 19,300 22,000 24,800 27,500 Secondary Village Entry w/ Median 5,600 6,600 7,500 8,400 9,400 Secondary Village Entry/Promenade (I) 5,600 6,600 7,500 8,400 9,400 (1) If driveway access to adjacent properties is permitted SOURCE: City ojChula ('ista Subdivision Manual (Revised 7///2002) all applicable values of LOS are reduced by 2,500 ADT. II.5.4.1.5 ROADWAY SEGMENT LOS STANDARDS AND THRESHOLDS This section presents the LOS standards and thresholds utilized by the City of Chula Vista to analyze arterial roadway segment performance. Table B.4 presents the City of Chula Vista roadway segment capacity and LOS standards for arterial roadways. Table B.4 Arterial Segment LOS Threshold Descriptions LOS Description A Describes primarily free-flow operations. Average operating speeds at the free-flow speed generally revail. Vehicles are almost com letel unim eded in their abili to maneuver within the traffic stream. B Also represents reasonably free-flow, and speeds at the free-flow speed aze generally maintained. The ability to maneuver within the traffic stream is only slightly restricted, and the general level of physical and s cholo ical comfort rovided to drivers is still hi h. C Provides for flow with speeds still a[ or neaz the free-flow speed of the roadway. Freedom to maneuver within the traffic stream is noticeably restricted at LOS C, and lane changes require more vigilance on the part of the driver. The driver now experiences a noticeable increase in tension because of the additional vi dance re uired for safe o eration. D The level at which speeds begin to decline slightly with increasing flows. In this range, density begins to deteriorate somewhat more quickly with increasing flows. Freedom to maneuver within the traffic stream is more noticeabl limited, and the driver ex eriences reduced h sical and s cholo ical comfort levels. E Describes operation at capacity. Operations in this level are volatile, because there are virtually no usable gaps in the traffic stream. At capacity, the traffic stream has no ability to dissipate even the most minor disco lions, and an incident can bee ected to roduce a serious breakdown with extensive ueuin . F Describes breakdowns in vehiculaz flow. Such conditions generally exist within queues forming behind breakdown points such as traffic incidents and recumng points of congestion. Whenever LOS F conditions exist, there is a tential for them to extend u stream for si ificant distances. SOURCE: Highway Capacity Manua[, 1994. The street segment LOS is based on the functional classification of the roadway, the maximum desired LOS capacity, roadway geometries, and the existing or forecasted average daily traffic (ADT) volume. City of Chula Vista LOS D are used to determine if a segment would operate over or under capacity. Table B.S, Street Segment Level of Service Threshold Descriptions, is a description of the various street segment LOS thresholds. II.S-27 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP Table B.5 Chula Vista Segment Capacity and LOS Standards Avera a Dail Traffic Volumes Functional Level of Service Classification A B C D E Expressway (6-lane) 52,500 61,300 70,000 78,800 87,500 Prime Arterial (6-lane) 37,500 43,800 50,000 56,300 62,500 Major Street (6-lane) 30,000 35,000 40,000 45,000 50,000 Major Street (4-lane) 22,500 26,300 30,000 33,800 37,500 Class I Collector (4-lane) 16,500 19,300 22,000 2A,800 27,500 Class ^ Collector(3-lane) 9,000 10,500 12,000 13,500 15,000 Class III Collector (2-lane) 5,600 6,600 7,500 8,400 9,400 SOURCE: C!ry of Chula Vista Shee! Design S(andards Policy (July [99/J II.5.4.1.6 INTERSECTION LOS STANDARDS AND THRESHOLD The City of Chula Vista requires an analysis of existing and projected peak hour intersection performance be conducted using the methodology documented in the 1994 Highway Capacity Manual (Transportation Research Board Special Report 209). LOS D or better indicates acceptable operating conditions for signalized intersections during AM and/or PM peak hour conditions. Those intersections found to have LOS E or F under an analysis of future conditions are considered to have significant impacts and will require mitigation. Table B.6 Intersection LOS Threshold Descri bons LOS Descri tion Occurs when progression is extremely favorable and most vehicles arrive during the green phase. Most A vehicles do not sto at all. Short c cle len ma also contribute to low dela . Generally occurs with good progression and/or short cycle lengths. More vehicles stop than for LOS A, B causin hi er levels of avers a dela . , Generally results when there is fair progession and/or longer cycle lengths. Individual cycle failures may C begin to appear in this level. The number of vehicles stopping is significant at this level, although many still ass throu the intersection without sto m . Generally results m noticeable congestion. Longer delays may result from some combination of D unfavorable progression, long cycle lengths, or high volume-to-capacity ratios. Many vehicles stop, and the ro rtion of vehicles not sto in declines. Individual c cle failures are noticeable. Considered to be the limit of acceptable delay. These high delay values generally indicate poor E progression, long cycle lengths, and high volume-to-capacity ratios. Individual cycle failures are frequent occurrences. Considered to be unacceptable to most drivers. This condition often occurs with over saturation i.e. when F arrival flow rates exceed the capacity of the intersection It may also occur at high volume-to-capacity ratios below 1.00 with many individual cycle failures. Poor progession and long cycle lengths may also be ma'or contributin causes to such dela levels. SOURCE: Highway Capaclry Manua( 1994. A. Sienalized Intersection Analysis The City of Chula Vista requires an analysis of signalized intersections during the AM and PM peak hours by determining the average delay per vehicle entering the ILS-28 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP intersection. The delay is determined by using a computer program that utilizes the methodology found in Chapter 9 of the 1997 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). The delay values (seconds) are qualified by giving a Level of Service (LOS) or "Grade" to the corresponding delay value for the intersection as a whole. LOS for signalized intersections vary from A (free flow, little delay) to F (forced flow, significant delays). Table B.6 is a description of the various intersection LOS thresholds. B. Unsi¢nalized Intersection Analvsis The City of Chula Vista requires an analysis of unsignalized intersections be analyzed by determining the delay and LOS based on Chapter 10 of the 1997 HCM. Different methodologies are used to assess two-way stop-controlled intersections and all-way stop-controlled intersections. II.5.4.1.7 Intersection LOS Standards and Threshold The analysis of existing and projected peak hour intersection performance was conducted using the methodology documented in the 1994 Highway Capacity Manual (Transportation Research Board Speciad Report 209). LOS C or better indicates acceptable operating conditions for signalized intersections during AM and/or PM peak hour conditions. Those intersections found to have LOS E or F under an analysis of future conditions are considered to have significant impacts and will require mitigation. IL5.4.1.7.1 Signalized Intersection Analysis The measure of effectiveness for intersection operations is level of service. In the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), LOS for signalized intersections is defined in terms of delay. The LOS analysis results in seconds of delay expressed in terms of letters A through F (see Table B.7). Table B.7 Level of Service Thresholds For Si nalized Intersections Average Control Delay per Vehicle Level or service (SecondsNehicle) 0.0 < 10.0 A LO.Lto20.0 B 2LLto35.0 C 35.1 to 55.0 D 55.1 to 80.0 E > 80.0 F SOURC6~: Highway L'apacity Manual, 1000. Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP Table B.8 Intersection LOS Threshold Descri lions Level of Description Service LOS A describes operations with very low delay, (i.e. less than 10.0 seconds per vehicle). This A occurs when progression is extremely favorable, and most vehicles arrive during the green phase. Most vehicles do not sto at all. Short c cle len the ma also contribute to low dela . LOS B describes operations with delay in the range 10.1 seconds and 20.0 seconds per vehicle. B This generally occurs with good progression and/or short cycle lengths. More vehicles stop than for LOS A, causin hi her levels of avera a dela . LOS C describes operations with delay in the range 20.1 seconds and 35.0 seconds per vehicle. C These higher delays may result from fair progression and/or longer cycle lengths. Individual cycle failures may begin to appear. The number of vehicles stopping is significant at this level, although man still ass throu h the intersection without sto in . LOS D describes operations with delay in the range 35.1 seconds and 55.0 seconds per vehicle. D At level D, the influence of congestion becomes more noticeable. Longer delays may result from some combination of unfavorable progression, long cycle lengths, or higher v/c ratios. Many vehicles stop, and the proportion of vehicles not stopping declines. Individual cycle failures are more fre uent. LOS E describes operations with delay in the range of 55.1 seconds to 80.0 seconds per vehicle. E This is considered [o be the limit of acceptable delay. These high delay values generally indicate poor progression, long cycle lengths, and high v/c ratios. Individual cycle failures are frequent occurrences. LOS F describes operations with delay in excess of over 80.0 seconds per vehicle. This is F considered to be unacceptable to most drivers. This condition often occurs with over-saturation (i.e., when arrival flow rates exceed the capacity of the intersection). [t may also occur at high v/c ratios below 1.00 with many individual cycle failures. Poor progression and long cycle len the ma also be ma'or contributin causes to such dela levels. SOURCE.' Highway Capacity Manual 2000. Delay is a measure of driver discomfort, frustration, fuel consumption, and lost travel time. Table B.8 is a description of the various intersection LOS thresholds. II.5.4.1.7.2 Unsignalized Intersection Analysis For unsignalized intersections, level of service is determined by the computed or measured control delay and is defined for each minor movement. Level of service is not defined for the intersection as a whole. Table B.9 below depicts the criteria, which are based on the average control delay for any particular minor movement. Table B.9 Level of Service Thresholds for Unsi nalized Intersections Average Control Delay Per Expected Delay to Minor Street Level of Service Vehicle SecondsNehicle Traffic 0.0 < 10.0 A Little or no delay 10.1 to I5.0 B Short traffic delays 15. l to 25.0 C Average tratl-ic delay 25.1 to 35.0 D Long traffic delays 35.1 to 50.0 E Very long traffic delays > 50.0 F Severe con estion Source: Highway Capacity Manual, 2000. II.S-30 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP LOS F exists when there are insufficient gaps of suitable size to allow a side street demand to safely cross through a major street traffic stream. This LOS is generally evident from extremely long control delays experienced by side-street traffic and by queuing on the minor-street approaches. The method, however, is based on a constant critical gap size; that is, the critical gap remains constant no matter how long the side- street motorist waits. LOS F may also appear in the form ofside-street vehicles selecting smaller-than-usual gaps. In such cases, safety may be a problem, and some disruption to the major traffic stream may result. It is important to note that LOS F may not always result in long queues but may result in adjustments to normal gap acceptance behavior, which are more difficult to observe in the field than queuing. IL5.4.1.8 CHULA VISTA TRAFFIC MONITORING PROGRAM The Traffic Monitoring Program (TMP) sfipulates that the existing level of service on arterial segments in Chula Vista be maintained at LOS C or better, with the exception that LOS D is acceptable on signalized arterial segments for two hours per day maximum. The Engineering Department of the City of Chula Vista evaluates LOS for arterial roadway segments utilizing the HCM methodology, Chapter 11, based on average travel spceds to adhere to the Growth Management traffic threshold standards. The adopted Growth Management Ordinance mandates the project's participation in the traffic section as it relates to the City's annual review of network performance. All major circulation element facilities within the City of Chula Vista are subject to review. Those facilities where traffic volumes have increased by at (east 10% since the last review or have experienced a significant change in conditions or are at the upper fringes of LOS C approaching LOS D are included in the annual traffic study, which is reviewed for conformance by the Growth Management Oversight Commission (GMOC). The City of Chula Vista requires the application of these guidelines to the development of the Olympic Pointe Supplemental SPA Amendment Project. Utilization of the roadway and intersection performance standards presented in this chapter and the required adherence to the Growth Management Traffic Threshold Standards will result in full conformance with the requirements of the City of Chula Vista. IL5.4.1.9 SERVICE ANALYSIS The Engineering & Public Works Department of the City of Chula Vista is responsible for ensuring that traffic improvements are provided to maintain a safe and efficient street system within the City. Through project review, City staff ensures the timely provision of adequate local circulation system capacity in response to planned development while maintaining acceptable LOS. To accomplish their review the Engineering Department has adopted guidelines for Traffic Impact Studies (January, 2001). These guidelines ensure uniformity in the preparation of traffic studies. Further, the guidelines assist in maintaining acceptable standards for planned new roadway segments and signalized intersections at the build out of the City's General Plan and Circulation Element. The Circulation Element of the General Plan serves as the overall facility master plan. In conformance with requirements of the Congestion Management Program (CMP), an analysis of CMP freeways and arterials is required for any project that generates 2,400 daily, or 200 peak hour trips (As detailed in the 1991 Congestion Management Program). This analysis, Olympic Pornte -Traffic Study Addendum, June 24, 2010 by Linscott, Law and Greenspan (LL&G) was prepared for the City of Chula Vista. This document is Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP referred to as the "LL&G Traffic Study Addendum" throughout this PFFP. The LL&G Traffic Study Addendum addresses both existing and planned circulation system conditions, details necessary improvements and outlines the incremental circulation improvements based upon planned project phasing. Further, the LL&G Traffic Impact Study Addendum also includes an evaluation of impacts that are considered significant as a result of project development. A. Background The site was analyzed in the Eastlake III Woods and Vistas Replanning Program Final Subsequent EIR and associated Addendum (City EIR#01-01); June 2001 and has been rough graded. In 2006 the subject site was converted from Commercial Tourist to Multi-Family Seniors designation. A Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) with an updated Traffic Analysis (Tra>~c Impact Analysis for Eastlake Senior Residential Community, August 16, 2005, by LL&G) was prepared for the Seniors Project and approved in 2006. In 2007 a SPA Plan Amendment was submitted to the city to permit the Windstar Pointe Resort luxury apartment project on the previously approved site. This project was approved by the City Council in 2008 but subsequently abandoned by the developer. The Traffic Study for the Windstar Pointe Resort project entitled Traffic Impact Analysis for Windstar Pointe Resort, October 18, 2007 by LL&G is no longer valid. An addendum would be required by the City to address the impacts of any subsequent development proposals on the subject site. In 2010 a new SPA Plan Amendment was requested to permit the Olympic Pointe market rate multi-family housing project for the subject site. Since the review of the Eastlake III Senior Housing 2005 project traffic study, several changes have occurred. First, the Proposed Project is market-rate multi-family housing. Second, the residential unit count has been reduced from 494 to 389 multi-family units. Third, existing baseline counts have changed, given five years of development in the area. Finally, the City's traffic model used to analyze long-term operations has been updated. Linscott, Law & Greenspan prepared a Traffic Study Addendum (Olympic Pointe Traj~c Study Addendum, September 22, 201Qby LL&G) to determine if the conclusions and recommendations provided in the August 2005 traffic report are still accurate given the changes in land use, size, near-term and long-term traffic volume discussed above. To determine these facts, LLG has provided a trip generation compazison (use and size), a review of intersection and street segment LOS analyses recently completed in the study area, a comparison of existing average daily traffic (ADT) volumes (2005 and 2008), and a comparison of long-term traffic volumes for the key segments along Olympic Pazkway (2005 report vs. current projections). If the original and current volumes and projections in the area aze compazable, then the results of the intersection and segment Level of Service (LOS) analyses originally conducted for the site would be comparable as well. Thus, the findings of no significant impacts originally detertnined would remain accurate. Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP B. Traffic Modelint=_ The basis of the 2005 LL&G Traffic Analysis and the LL&G Traffic Study Addendum is the Series 10.0, 2030 City/County Forecast Traffic Model, which is produced by the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG). For the 2005 traffic analysis LL&G worked with the City of Chula Vista and SANDAG to input the proper land use and network designations into the model for the following scenarios: • Existing • Scenario 1: Existing + Growth + Cumulative Projects + Approved BC-3 land uses • Scenario 2: Existing + Growth + Cumulative Projects + Proposed Project • Scenario 3: Year 2010 With Adopted Land Uses • Scenario 4: Year 2010 With Proposed Land Uses • Scenario 5: Buildout The 2005 traffic analysis, a model was prepared with the appropriate land use, City of Chula Vista circulation element including a constructed SR 125 for each scenario. The Eastlake Seniors project land use was coded into the Traffic Model exactly as proposed/adopted, as appropriate. After the proper land use intensities and network configurations were entered into the model for each study scenario, the model was run. The SANDAG model outputs ADTs on all Circulation Element street segments. For the 2010 LL&G Traffic Impact Addendum the 2005 traffic analysis was updated. The addendum includes the following sections: • Trip generation comparison • Existing daily traffic volume forecast comparison; • Long-term daily traffic volume forecast comparison; • Site plan review; and • Conclusions C. GMOC Analvsis The Chula Vista Traffic Monitoring Program (TMP) assesses the operating performance of the City's arterial street system for compliance with the Threshold Standards of the GMOC. The threshold standards specify that a Level of Service (LOS) of C or better, as measured by average travel speeds on the arterial, shall be maintained with an exception that during peak hours LOS D can occur for no more than any two hours of the day or LOS E for one hour. Olympic Parkway operates at an LOS A with or without the Olympic Pointe Condominium project. Therefore, no GMOC TMP Analysis is required. Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP II.5.4.1.10 PROJECT PROCESSING REQUIREMENTS The PFFP is required by the Growth Management Program to address the following issues for the Traffic Facilities: A. Identify onsite and offsite impacts and improvements by phase of development. B. Provide cost estimates for all improvements. IL5.4.1.11. EXISTING TRAFFIC FACILITIES: This section summarizes the operation of the existing transportation network in the Olympic Pointe Condominium Project Study Area for the key street segments and intersections. The following discussion presents the key existing and future street segments and intersections that were analyzed in the 2005 LL&G Traffic Analysis. A. Study Area: The study area includes the street network and intersections along Olympic Parkway between East Palomar Street and Wueste Road. The study area was selected by LL&G based on the project traffic distribution, which was determined using a select zone assignment (SZA) obtained for the project from SANDAG. The project study area includes the following: Intersections • Olympic Parkway/ East Palomar Street • Olympic Parkway/ SR 125 SB Ramps • Olympic Parkway/ SR l25 NB Ramps • Olympic Parkway/ Eastlake Parkway • Olympic Parkway/ Hunte Parkway (South) • Olympic Parkway/ Olympic Vista Road • Olympic Parkway/ Project Driveway (Future) • Olympic Parkway/ Wueste Road (North) Segments Olympic Parkway • East Palomar Street to Eastlake Parkway • Eastlake Parkway to Hunte Parkway • Hunte Parkway to Wueste Road (South) B. Street Network: The principal roadways in the project study area are described briefly below. The description includes the physical characteristics, and intersection traffic control. Olympic Parkway is classified as a Six-Lane Prime Arterial from I-805 to Hunte Pazkway, and as a Four-Lane Major east of Hunte Pazkway in the City of Chula Vista Circulation Plan. Currently, it is built to its ultimate classification. On-street parking is prohibited. The posted speed limit is 45 mph. Bike Lanes aze provided. A raised Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP median is provided along Olympic Parkway between Wueste Road and the Olympic Training Center driveway. A median opening is also provided for the project. Wueste Road is classified as a Two-Lane Class III Collector in the project vicinity. No direct access is provided to the project via Wueste Road. C. Street Segments: Table B.10 summarizes the daily segment operations for existing conditions. As seen in the following table, all segments in the study area are calculated to currently operate at LOS C or better. Table B.10 Existing Street Segment Operationsa Se ment g Existing LOS "C" 2008 a LOS ClassiFication Ca achy ADT Olympic Parkway SR 125 Toll Road to Eastlake Pkwy. Prime Arterial (6L) 50,000 40,500 B Eastlake Pkwy. to Hunte Pkwy. Prime Arterial (6L) 50,000 13,900 A Hunte Pkwy. to Wueste Rd. Major Arterial (4L) 30,000 7,100 A a 2008 counts were collected by City of Chula Vista with SR 125 open to traffic. Source: LL&C I[.5-35 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP D. Intersection Oaerations: Table B.11 summarizes the peak hour intersection operations for the 2005 traffic analysis existing conditions. As seen in Table B.l 1, all key signalized intersections were calculated to operate at LOS C or better. Currently, a traffic signal is installed at the Olympic Parkway/Wueste Road intersection. In addition, the critical movements at the Olympic Parkway/Wueste Road intersection were calculated to operate at LOS C or better conditions. Table B.I1 2005 Intersection O erations Intersection Control Peak Hour Dela a LOS AM 32.4 C 1. Olympic Pkwy/East Palomar St. Signalized PM 22.7 C 2. Olympic Pkwy/SR l25 SB Ramps c PM c c 3. Olympic Pkwy/SR 125 NB Ramps c PM c c AM 28.0 C 4. Olympic Pkwy/Eastlake Pkwy. Signalized PM 27.0 C '4M 28.5 C 5. Olympic Pkwy/Hunte Parkway Signalized PM 26.8 C AM 31.7 C 6. Olympic Pkwy/Olympic Vista Rd. Signalized PM 24.6 C 7. Olympic Pkwy/Project Dwy. TWSC d PM c c AM 14.4 B 8.Olympic Parkway/Wueste Rd. Signalized PM 15.4 B FoaMOres: a. Average delay in seconds per vehicle b. Level of Service c Intersection does not curten[ly exist d. TWSC-Two Wa Sto Controlled intersection. Minor left turn dela . Source: LL&G IL5.4.1.12 TRANSIT Potential transit stops will be strategically located neaz vehicular and pedestrian main access points along Hunte Parkway, Olympic Parkway and/or Otay Lakes Road to serve future Eastlake Woods and Eastlake Vistas residents. Medium-high to high level transit facilities are expected to be provided in the Eastlake IIUOTC Activity Center and lower level facilities at other locations. Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) has developed the "Transit First" service concept to reduce the public's dependence upon the automobile. Transit and land use patterns should work together. The easy access to transit facilities in correlation with the service offered can make transit a viable travel mode alternative to the automobile, thus reducing traffic congestion. Currently, two percent of trips are conducted on public transit in the region. Efforts should be made to increase this travel mode split by making transit accessible and convenient. Additionally, providing transit facilities will meet the objectives ofthe City's Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP COz Reduction Plan, which mentions transit as one of the action measures to reducing COZ emissions along with enhanced pedestrian connections to transit, increased housing density near transit, and site design with transit orientation. The "Transit First" strategy includes a network of service types ranging from neighborhood shuttles serving short-distance trips, to higher-speed, limited stop routes for longer distance trips. The service types planned for the areas east of I-805 are as follows: A. Yellow Car: Serves longer-distance trips (6+ miles), maintaining high average speeds (35-40 mph) with limited stops. Yellow Car routes would complement Red Caz services to form the spine of the regional transit system. Yellow Car services would require extensive use of transit priority treatments such as dedicated mooing ways, queue jumpers, and signal priority. Yellow Car service is used in two ways: • Serving corridors where longer station spacing is justified based on links between major origins and destinations and land use patterns that lead to longer-distance trip making. • Serving as an overlay in selected Red Car corridors where a faster, more limited- stop service is justified (in addition to Red Car service) for high-volume, long- distancetrip needs. B. Red Car: Serves medium-distance trips (1-9 miles), maintaining relatively high average speeds (20-25 mph) with limited stops. Red Car services are often linked to Blue Car service for local distribution. The current San Diego Trolley system and the County's express bus routes mostly operate as Red Caz service. Red Car services would require use of transit priority treatments such as dedicated running ways, queue jumpers, and signal priority. C. Green Car: Serves community-level trip making that could include neighborhood circulators, feeder access to Yellow and Red Car service, and/or specialized fixed-route shuttles. Green Car services would likely use smaller shuttle vehicles. in some situations, Green Car services would benefit from dedicated mooing ways and queue jumpers. D. Blue Car: Serves short-distance trips (0-5 miles) with frequent stop spacing. Blue Car service provides basic mobility, albeit at low speeds (10-25 mph), on primarily local and arterial streets. Most of the current San Diego region bus system operates as Blue Car service. The planned transit system within Eastlake III is shown in the Transit Plan, Exhibit 5. Bus stops are based on Green Car and Blue Car service concepts described in the adopted Transit Works Strategic Plan by MTS. The Green Caz represents local circulators using mini to mid-size buses. The Green Car would act as a collector and provide feeder access to Blue Caz and/or Red Car concepts. Bus stop facilities would be Low to Medium level with service provided on residential streets and major streets. The Blue Caz provides short distance trips (1-5 miles) with frequent stops. This concept describes the current Chula Vista Transit service. Bus stop facilites would be at a Medium to High level. Service is provided on major streets and arterials. The Red Caz concept is the light mil service planned for the Otay Ranch area II.S-37 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP To Olympic Parkway © Bus Stap with shelter & turnout * Curbside Bus Stop ~-- Blue Car Service Line -•- Green Car Service Line Note: The bcatione o/ bue atalx are mnuaptual. TM exact number ano location shell M Vatemrinatl M Vie Va0 maa level IEASTLAKE III A planned community by The Eastlake Company Transit Plan tole: The sue SEOp'Sheller M eie Cammerrral She rneua x hbmea wM me Wmmeroal. ti, Land Planning ::.. m.M.~. ,~ ~1 ~,.o Exhibit 5 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP II.5.4.1.13. TRIP GENERATION AND PHASING: II.5.4.1.13.1 Project Trip Generation Table B.12 below compares and summarizes the Olympic Pointe project with the Eastlake III Seniors project. The project trip generation was calculated by LL&G using trip generation rates obtained from the (Not So) Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates for the San Drego Regron, dated April 2002, by the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG). As seen in Table B.12, the proposed Olympic Pointe project is calculated to generate 2,334 ADT with 187 trips (37 inbound and 150 outbound) during the AM peak hour, and 2l0 trips (147 inbound and 63 outbound) during the PM peak hour. Olympic Pointe is calculated to generate an additional 358 ADT over the previously approved Seniors project. Table B.12 Project Trip Generation Summa Com arison Daily Trip AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Ends ADTs Use Size % of In:Out Volume % of In:Out Vo lume Rate Volume ADT Slit In Out ADT Slit In Out Eastlake III Senior Housin 2005 Retirement 494 Units 4 DU 1,976 5°/a 40:60 40 59 7°/a 60:40 83 55 Communit OI m is Pointe A artments 389 Units 6 DU 2,334 8°/a 20:80 37 150 9°/a 70:30 l47 63 Net chan a with Pro osed Pro'ect: +358 - - -3 +91 - - +64 +8 a. Rate is based on SANDAG's of So Brief Guide of Vehicular t'raftic Generation Rates for the San Die o Re ion, A ri12002 Source: L(,&G According to the 2010 LL&G Addendum, the Olympic Pointe Condominium project would slightly increase site trips over what was calculated in 2005 for the original senior housing project. This nominal increase would impact daily and peak hour levels of service on street segments and intersections in the study area. LL&G reviewed the current intersection and street segment LOS in the vicinity of the Olympic Pointe Condominium project, prepared for the proposed adjacent Lake Pointe residential project located to the north and west. Tables B.13 and B.14 show summaries of the current intersection and segment operations, respectively. These tables show LOS C or better operations in the study area during the near-term, including volumes for the Olympic Pointe project as proposed. Given the acceptable LOS calculated in the study area, no new off-site impacts would be expected and no new mitigation measures would be required. 11.5-39 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP Table B.13 Near-Term Intersection Operations Control Peak Existing+project+ Intersection Type Hour Cumulative Growth Dela LOS 1. Olympic Pazkway / SR 125 SB Signal AM 24.8 C Ramps PM 23.1 C 2. Olympic Parkway / SR 125 NB Signal AM 31.4 C Ramps PM 26.2 C 3. Olympic Parkway / Eastlake Signal AM 20.4 C Parkway PM 24.3 C 4. Olympic Parkway / Hunte Parkway Signal AM 12.7 B PM 13.9 B 5. Olympic Parkway /Olympic Vista Signal AM 12.3 B Road PM 13.9 Genera[ Note: Based on analysis presented in the Lake Pointe Traffic Analysis (LLG, July 2, 2010) Analysis includes growth [o account for [he Olympic Pointe project. Footnotes: a. Delay is measured in seconds. b. Level of Service Source: LL&G Table B.14 Near-Term Street Segment Operations Existing / Existing Existing + Project + Street Segment Buildout Capacity Cumulative Growth Classification (LOSE)' ADTb V/c` Los° Olympic Parkway SR 125 to Eastlake Pkwy 8-Ln Prime 87,500 44,620 0.510 A Eastlake Pkwy to Hun[e Pkwy 6- Ln Major 62,500 20,280 0.324 A Hunte Pkwy to Olympic Vista Rd 4- Ln Major 37,500 10,190 0.272 A Olympic Vista Rd to Wueste Rd 4-Ln Major 37,500 2,590 0.069 A General No[e: Based on analysis presented in the Lake Pointe Traffic Analysis (LLG, Iuly 2, 2010). Analysis includes growth [o account for the Olympic Pointe project. Footnotes: a. Capacities based on City of Chula Vista's Roadway Classification & LOS [able. b. Average Daily Trattic c. Volume [o Capacity ratio d. Level of Service Source: LL&C Eastlake [II Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP II.5.4.1.13.2 Near-Term Traffic Volumes Comparison (2005-2008) The 2005 LL&G Traffic Analysis is based the existing traffic volume data collected in 2005. In the time elapsed between 2005 and the present, some residential development has continued, although much has been tempered by the current economic downturn. Additionally, the SR 125 Toll Road (Southbay Expressway) has been completed and opened to public use, which has changed local traffic patterns in the study area. Given these developments, some baseline growth is expected. LL&G conducted a comparison between the existing 2005 counts and the 2008 count volumes available for key segments along Olympic Parkway to determine their viability and then base the analysis on these counts. The most recent counts dated 2008 were from the City of Chula Vista. Table B.15 compares the original 2005 volumes from the Eastlake I[I Senior Housing project study with the most recent 2008 volumes. Exhibit 6 illustrates both of these daily volumes along Olympic Parkway in the study area. Table B.15 Existin Dail Traffic Volumes Avera a Dail Traffic Street Segment a 2005 2008 SR 125 Toll Rd to Eastlake Parkway 25,400 40,500 Eastlake Parkway [o Hunte Parkway 10,700 13,900 Hunte Parkway to Olympic Vista Road 6,000 7,100 Footnotes: a. 2005 counts were conducted with SR 125 under construction and no[ open [o vehicular traffic. b. 2008 counts were collected by City of Chul a Vista with SR 125 open to traffic. c. A 20 % rowth factor was added [0 2005 count to re resent Year 20008 conditions. Source: LL&G Table B.15 above shows increases in daily traffic volume on Olympic Parkway between 2005 and 2008. While this increase in traffic may appear large, Olympic Parkway is classified and constructed as a six-lane Prime Arterial, and these traffic volumes have been anticipated in the City's general plans. The increase between SR 125 and EastlLake Parkway is clearly related to the completion and operation of the planned SR 125. To these points, it should be noted that Olympic Parkway currently operates at acceptable LOS C or better on a dailybasis, using the higher 2008 traffic volumes. The higher traffic volumes anticipated with the Olympic Pointe project can be accommodated by the street system, even with an observed increase in baseline traffic volumes due to development of the SR 125. Therefore no new off-site impacts would be expected, and no new mitigation measures would be required. II.5.4.1.13.3 Long-Term Traffic Volumes Comparison The long-term 2030 daily traffic volumes utilized in the 2005 LL&G Traffic Analysis were obtained from the Series 10 traffic models being completed at that time. Since then, the regional traffic model has been updated to include the latest General Plan and Community Plan land uses in all of the jurisdictions in the County, including Chula Vista. This update also includes proposed street networks, and the "reasonably ILS-41 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP xx: Exhibit 6 Near-Term Traffic Volumes ADTs OLYMPIC POIME RESIDENTIAL ILS-42 Eastlake III Olmpic Pointe Supplemental PFFP Exhibit 7 Loug-Term Traffic Volumes ADTs OLYMPIC POMTe RESIDENTIAL Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP expected" Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) appropriate to the area. Based on their current experience in the area, LL&G obtained current future forecast volumes from traffic models completed for Otay Ranch (2010). Table B. 16 compares the future forecast volumes from the original Eastlake I[I Senior Housing project traffic study with the most recent forecast traffic volumes in the study area from "The Villages" traffic report, completed by LL&G in 2010. This table shows that currently forecasted future daily traffic volumes on Olympic Parkway are in line with the previous projections. Even with the higher forecasted volumes assumed in 2005, Olympic Parkway was calculated to operate at LOS C or better at buildout Considering that forecasted traffic volumes on Olympic Parkway are now lower, buildout operations would be expected to continue at LOS C or better conditions. Exhibit 7 illustrates the comparative traffic model forecast volumes along Olympic Parkway. No new off-site impacts were calculated, and no new mitigation measures are required. Table B. 16 Lon -Term ear 2030 Dail Traffic Volumes Avera a Dail Traffic Street Segment Otay Ranch Village 7 Otay Ranch Traffic Traffic Model 2000 a Model 2010 b Olympic Parkway SR 125 Toll Road to Eastlake Parkway 55,600 49,400 Eastlake Parkway to Hunte Parkway 34,500 34,200 Hunte Parkway to Olympic Visa Road 33,100 30,100 Footnotes: a Source.' Model obtained jor "Otay Ranch Pillages 6, 7, l!"traffic report prepared by LLG, 2000. b Source: "The Pillages" traffic report prepared by LLC, 2010 Source: LL&G II.5.4.1.13.2 Project Phasing The LL&G Traffic Study Addendum assumed that the build out of the Olympic Pointe Condominiums Supplemental SPA Plan Amendment would occur prior to 2012. This results in total trips of 2,334 daily trips loaded onto the circulation network at the build-out of the development. One primary phase of development is envisioned due to the need of the project to complete the infrastructure improvements in a single increment. ILS-44 Eastlake III Olmpic Pointe Supplemental PFFP II.5.4.1.14 Adequacy Analysis The City of Chula Vista created the Guidelines For Traffic Impact Studies in February 2001. This document establishes written guidelines for identification of project traffic impacts in Environmental Impact Report documents. Prior to the establishment of the guidelines, the City of Chula Vista hired BRW to review criteria that was being utilized by the City of San Diego and traffic impact study guidelines recommended by the San Diego Traffic Engineer's Council (SANTEC) /Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). The objective was to determine the applicability of these standards to developments and facilities within the City of Chula Vista, and develop a specific set of standards for the City of Chula Vista based on this review. The City of San Diego and SANTEC/ITE standards were used to reevaluate several completed studies in the City of Chula Vista to determine potential changes in the identification of project impacts. Results of this evaluation were communicated to the City of Chula Vista department heads and staff through a series of workshops. Discussions, comments and recommendations precipitated from these workshops provided the foundation for the guidelines. The guidelines provide written criteria for determining the need and scope of traffic studies and identifying impacts. The use of these guidelines ensures uniformity in the preparation and review of traffic studies for developments within the City of Chula Vista. In addition, the guidelines help determine timelines for the implementation of specific improvements to address identified deficiencies. A. Determiuina When A Studv Is Needed In conformance with requirements of the Congestion Management Program (CMP), an analysis of CMP freeways and arterials will be required for any project that generates 2,400 daily, or 200 peak hour trips (As detailed in the 1991 CMP). For those developments that do not satisfy the requirements for a CMP analysis, a traffic study may be required based on direction provided by the City Engineer and the Environmental Review Coordinator. B. MethodoloQv 1. Study Area Definition a. Volume Thresholds for Study of CMP Freeway Facilities: All freeway segments are by definition included in the CMP network. All freeway mainline segments to which the proposed project will add 2400 total trips (Average Daily Trips or ADT) or 150 or more peak hour trips in either direction must be analyzed. b. Volume Thresholds for Study of CMP Arterial Facilities: All CMP arterial segments, including Regionally Significant Arterials (RSA) and other CMP arterial segments and intersections (including freeway on/off ramp intersections), to which the proposed project will add 800 or more total trips (ADT) or 50 or more peak hour trips in either direction must be analyzed. c. Volume Thresholds for Local Roadways and Intersections: Traffic studies will be required to review those local and collector roadway facilities that are Eastlake IQ Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP not included in the CMP network based on direction provided by the City Engineer. 2. Analysis Scenarios Each of the study area freeway segments, roadway segments, and intersections must be analyzed for the following scenarios: a. Existing Conditions b. Existing Conditions + Proposed Project c. Existing Conditions + Approved and Pending Projects + Proposed Project (Only for non-master planned projects) d. Horizon Years (Usually defined asfive-yeaz incremental study years for project, i.e. 2005, 2010, 2015, & 2020. However, fmal determination on yeazs to be studied may vary based on direction of the City Engineer) e. Regional Buildout Year + Proposed Project Additional scenarios may be required depending on the size and phasing of any proposed development. For each analyzed scenario, peak hour analysis will include the AM and PM peaks. At the direction of the City Engineer, special studies of midday peak or other off-peak periods may be required. 3. Growth Management Oversight Committee (GMOC) Near-Term Analysis As determined by the City Engineer, analysis of roadway segments under neaz- term conditions (Years 0-4) may be conducted using the methodology described in Chapter 11 (Arterial Streets) of the most recent version of the Highway Capacity Manual, which determines segment level of service based on speed, as detailed in the Significance Criteria below. Classification of facilities and definition of segment lengths must be consistent with the City's current Growth Management Traffic Monitoring Program. The Threshold Standard for these arterial analyses requires the maintenance of LOS C or better as measured by average travel speeds except that LOS D can occur for no more than any two hours of the day. Thus, if LOS D conditions are determined for any period of two (2) hours, additional analysis may be required along these high volume segments based on direction provided by the City Engineer. For planned arterial facilities that aze not currently included in the current Traffic Monitoring Program, the definition of segment length and facility classification will be based on direction provided by the City Engineer. C. Significance Criteria Project impacts will be defined as either project specific impacts or cumulative impacts. Project specific impacts are those impacts for which the addition of project trips result in an identifiable degradation in LOS on freeway segments, roadway segments, or intersections, triggering the need for specific project-related improvement strategies. Cumulative impacts are those in which the project trips contribute to a poor level of service, at a nominal level. Study horizon year as used herein is intended to describe a future period of time in the traffic studies, which corresponds to Sandag's traffic model years, and are meant to Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP synchronize study impacts to be in line with typical study years of 2005, 2010, 2015 and 2020. Criteria for determining whether the project results in either project specific or cumulative impacts on freeway segments, roadway segments, or intersections are as follows: Short-term (Study Horizon Year 0 to 4) For purposes of the short-term analysis roadway sections may be defined as either links or segments. A link is typically that section of roadway between two adjacent Circulation Element intersections and a segment is defined as that combination of contiguous links used in the Growth Management Plan Traffic Monitoring Program. Analysis of roadway links under short-term conditions may require a more detailed analysis using the GMOC methodology if the typical planning analysis using volume to capacity ratios on an individual link indicates a potential impact to that link. The GMOC analysis uses the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodology of average travel speed based on actual measurements on the segments as listed in the Growth Management Plan Traffic Monitoring Program. a. Intersections 1. Project specific impact if both the following criteria are met: a) LOS E or LOS F. b) Project trips comprise 5% or more of entering volume. 2. Cumulative impact if only (i) above is met. b. Street Links/Segments If the planning analysis using the volume to capacity ratio indicates LOS C or better, there is no impact. If the planning analysis indicates LOS D, E or F, the GMOC method should be utilized. The following criteria would then be utilized. 1. Project specific impact if all the following criteria are met: a) LOS D for more than 2 hours or LOS E/F for 1 hour b) Project trips comprise 5% or more of segment volume. c) Project adds greater than 800 ADT to the segment. 2. Cumulative impact if only (i) above is met. c. Freeways 1. Project specific impact if both the following criteria are met: a) Freeway segment LOS is LOS E or LOS F b). Project comprises 5% or more of the total forecasted ADT on that freeway segment. b. Cumulative impact if only (i) above is met. 2. Long-term (Study Horizon Year 5 and later) a. Intersections 1. Project specific impact if both the following criteria are met: a) Level of service is LOS E or LOS F. b) Project trips comprise 5% or more of entering volume. 2. Cumulative impact if only (i) above is met. [I.5-47 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP b. Street Segments Use the planning analysis using the volume to capacity ratio methodology only. The GMOC analysis methodology is not applicable beyond afour-year horizon. 1. Project specific impact if all three of the following criteria are met: a) Level of service is LOS D, LOS E, or LOS F. b) Project trips comprise 5% or more of total segment volume. c) Project adds greater than 800 ADT to the segment. 2. Cumulative impact if only (i) above is met. However, if the intersections along a LOS D or LOS E segment all operate at LOS D or better, the segment impact is considered not significant since intersection analysis is more indicative of actual roadway system operations than street segment analysis. if segment Level of Service is LOS F, impact is significant regardless of intersection LOS. 4. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the impact identified in paragraph a. above occurs at study horizon year l0 or later, and is offsite and not adjacent to the project, the impact is considered cumulative. Study year 10 may be that typical SANDAG model year which is between 8 and 13 years in the future. In this case of a traffic study being performed in the period of 2000 to 2002, because the typical model will only evaluate traffic at years divisible by 5 (i.e. 2005, 2010, 2015 and 2020) study horizon year l0 would correspond to the Sandag model for year 2010 and would be 8 years in the future. If the model year were less than 7 years in the future, study horizon year 10 would be 13 years in the future. 5. [n the event a direct identified project specific impact in paragraph a. above occurs at study horizon year 5 or earlier and the impact is offsite and not adjacent to this project, but the property immediately adjacent to the identified project specific impact is also proposed to be developed in approximately the same time frame, an additional analysis may be required to determine whether or not the identified project specific impact would still occur if the development of the adjacent property does not take place. If the additional analysis concludes that the identified project specific impact is no longer a direct impact, then the impact shall be considered cumulative. c. Freeways 1. Project specific impact if both the following criteria are met: a) Freeway segment LOS is LOS E or LOS F b) Project comprises 5% or more of the total forecasted ADT on that freeway segment. 2. Cumulative impact if only (i) above is met. IL5-48 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP II.5.4.1.15. FINANCING TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS: A. TransooMation Development Imuact Fees (TDIF): The project is within the boundaries of the TDIF program and, as such, the project is subject to the payment of the fees at the rates in effect at the time building permits are issued. However, the improvements identified in the Threshold Compliance and Requirements Section 11.5.4.1.16 of this PFFP is required to be constructed prior to approval of the first building permit. The current Transportation Development Impact Fee (TDIF) Ordinance sets forth the calculation of development impact fees. This PFFP uses the CVMC Chapter 3.54 as the basis for the estimated fees. This amount is subject to change as it is amended from time to time. The current TD[F charged for "Residential Low" density (0-6 DU/gross acre) is $ 11,317/DU. The amount charged for "Residential Medium" density (6.1-18 DU/gross acre) is $ 9,054/DU. The amount charged for "Residential High" density (>18.1 DU/gross acre) is $ 6,791/DU. The estimated TD[F for the Olympic Pointe Condominiums Project is presented in Table B. 17 below. Table B. 17 OI m is Pointe Condominiums TDIF Fees Number of Number of Fee per Residential High Land Use Acres Units Densi Dwellin Unit Total Fees Olympic Pointe 18 4 389 $6,791 $2,641,699 Condominiums Totals 18.4 389 $2,641,699 B. Trallic Signal Fees: Future development within the project will be required to pay Traffic Signal Fees in accordance with Chula V ista Council Policy No. 475-O1. The estimated fee is calculated based on the current fee of $31.80 (the date of this PFFP) per vehicle trip generated per day for various land use categories. Table B.18 is provided as an estimate only. Fees may change depending upon the actual number dwelling units, the actual acreage for commercial and industrial land and the current city fee, which is subject to change from time to time. Final calculations will be known at time building permits are applied for. Table B. 18 Ol m is Pointe Condominiums Traffic Si nal Fees Land Use Residential Trips Traffic Signal Fee @ $31.80/Tri Olympic Pointe Condominiums 2,334 $74,221 Total 2,334 $74,221 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP IL5.4.1.16. THRESHOLD COMPLIANCE AND REQUIREMENTS: Based upon the Olympic Pointe Traffic Study Addendum, September 22, 2010, by Linscott, Law and Greenspan, threshold compliance is projected to be maintained with implementation of the identified measures and improvements and the payment of the TDIF Fees. The following measures are recommended to maintain compliance with city threshold standards: A. Threshold compliance shall continue to be monitored through the annual congestion monitoring program. B. The Olympic Pointe Condominiums project shall be conditioned to pay TDIF Fees and Traffic Signal Fees prior to the issuance of building permits; the Fees shall be paid at the rate in effect at the time payment is made. C. Prior to approval of the first building permit or as otherwise determined by the City Engineer, the Developer shall: 1. Design, wnstruct, and secure a fully actuated traffic signal including interconnect wiring, mast arms, signal heads and associated equipment, undergound improvements, standards and luminaries at the Olympic Parkway/Project Driveway intersection. The design of the traffic signal shall be to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and conform to City standards. The intersection geometry shall be the following: Westbound: One left-turn lane (with 100 feet of storage) and two through lanes; Northbound: One left-tum lane and one right-tum lane (with a storage length of 75 feet in each lane); Eastbound: One shared through/right-turn lane and one through lane; Southbound: None. A traffic signal shall be installed at the project driveway and two outbound (northbound) lanes, one left-tum and one right-tum lane and two inbound (southbound) lanes shall be provided (see Exhibit 9). 2. Relocate the median opening on Olympic Pazkway further west from its current location to acwmmodate the proposed project driveway. In addition, the applicant shall provide the pertinent landscape improvements to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning & Building, and the Director of General Services. 3. Provide pedestrian ramps to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 4. Install a "No U Turn" sign for eastbound traffic on Olympic Pazkway at the Olympic Pazkway/Wueste Road intersection. The Developer shall fully design the aforementioned improvements in conjunction with the improvement plans for the related project to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP Circulation r ,or K L P QIXa T p Y rS Oucripson s B 3 ?C ~ 0 0 ~ uz ~ d ua A e lane Pnme rsMb secibns (Otay Lakes Rosa) _ _ fare Myor B (~ Pe~kT/aY. %actor VaAey Rona. Mer b secsms dole: TwMdione of eMeL aasefiakpn Meryw (ar b ew4na matlel and plWkq d 411plpranlena b ee debimkrd al TenMM klep a0spa ®EASTLAKE III A planmd eommlmlly blr The Eastlake Compalry P P ~, li s Q (prmte) p H p Upper Ofoy Reaervav b 0 1 ° ~o-~ l ~ I `~ ~ T ~ C T T 3 ~ T arc T I aw - 6 Lane Prirtre Arterial ~ ~ 4 Lane Major Arterial .... CWss III Residential Collector ~• • e o o a • • oe~ Residential Street No N: Refer to Sections krMoW'ficefiona ~'w Wwntl~l~laming ~~ m T.,7.a, Exhibit 8 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP Circulation Improvements /~ Q LEGEND (xx)- Recommended Turn lane storage length in feet Exhibit 9 IL5-52 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP II.5.4.2 POLICE II.5.4.2.1 Threshold Standard A. Emergency Response: properly equipped and staffed police units shall respond to 81% of "Priority One" Emergency calls throughout the city within 7 minutes and shall maintain an average response time to all "Priority One" emergency calls of 5.5 minutes or less (measured annually). B. Urgent Response: Properly equipped and staffed police units shall respond to 57% of "Priority Two" Urgent calls throughout the city within 7 minutes and maintain an average response time to all "Priority Two" calls of 7.5 minutes or less (measured annually). II.5.4.2.2 Service Analysis The City of Chula Vista Police Department provides police services. The purpose of the Threshold Standard is to maintain or improve the current level of police services throughout the City by ensuring that adequate levels of staff, equipment and training are provided. Police threshold performance was analyzed in the "Report on Police Threshold Performance 1990-1999", completed April 13, 2000. In response to Police Department and GMOC concerns the City Council amended the threshold standards for Police Emergency Response on May 28, 2002, with adoption of Ordinance 2860. Police Facilities are also addressed in A Master Plan for the Chula Vista Civic Center Solving City Space Needs Through Year 2010, dated May 8, 1989. II.5.4.2.3 Project Processing Requirements The PFFP is required by the Growth Management Program to address the following issues for Police Services. A. Services reviewed must be consistent with the proposed phasing of the project. B. Able to demonstrate conformance with A Master Plan for the Chula Vista Civic Center dated May 8, 1989, as amended. II.5.4.2.4 Existing Conditions The Chula Vista Police Department (CVPD) provides law enforcement services to the area encompassing the project. The CVPD is located in a new headquarters building at the corner 4th Avenue and F Street in Chula Vista. This new facility is expected to be adequate through the build-out of eastern Chula Vista. Currently, CVPD maintains a staff of approximately 231 sworn officers and approximately 95 civilian support personnel. The Project is within Police Patrol Beat 32 that is served by at least one Beat Officer per shift. Police Facility Inventory New Police Headquarters at 4'h Avenue and F Street. Eastlake Ill Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP II.5.4.2.5 Adequacy Analysis According to the GMOC 2010 Annual Report the response times for "Priority One" Calls for Service (CFS) were met during the 2008-2009 time period (see Table C.1). The department is in compliance with "Priority One" CFS with 84.6% of the calls responded to within 5:30 minutes (see Table C.l below). "Priority Two" CFS during the same period were not met. The Priority Two CFS has not been met for several years. For Priority Two CFS, the department responded to 53.9% of the calls within an average of 9:16 minutes. The GMOC has determined that "Priority Two" or the Urgent Emergency Response time threshold has not been met. Table C.1 Historic Response Times Priorit I -- Emer enc Res onse Calls For Service Call Volume % of Call Response w/in 7 Minutes Average Res onse Time Threshold 81.0% 5:30 FY 2008-09 788 of 70,051 84.6% 4:26 FY 2007-08 1,006 of 74,192 87.9% 4:19 FY 2006-07 976 of 74,277 84.5% 4:59 FY2005-06 1,068 of 73,075 82.3% 4:51 FY2004-OS 1,289 of 74,106 80.0% 5:11 FY2003-04 1,322 of 71,000 82.1% 4:52 FY 2002-03 1,424 oE71,268 80.8% 4:55 FY 2001-02 1,539 of 71,859 80.0% 5:07 FY 2000-01 1,734 of 73,977 79.7% S:13 FY 1999-00 1,750 of 76,738 75.9% 5:21 CY 1999 11,890 of 74,405 70.9% 5:50 Source: GMOC 2010 Mnual Repon e The FY98-99 GMOC Report used calendar 1999 data due to the implementation ofthe new CAD system in mid-1998. 1L5-54 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP After reviewing the history of the Priority II threshold standard being out of compliance for twelve consecutive years, the GMOC requested atop-to-bottom review to consider modifying the Priority II threshold. This would be the second modification since its inception in 1991. The original 1991 Urgent Response or Priority II threshold standard was: Respond to 62% of calls within 7 minutes, maintaining an average of 7 minutes or less. In 1999, the City's Special Projects Division and the Police Department presented the GMOC with a report titled "Report on Police Threshold Performance 1990-1999." The report indicated that, prior to implementation of the CAD system, human error occurred when measuring dispatch time. The report suggested that the Priority II threshold should have been set at 57% of calls within 7 minutes, with an average response time of 7.5 minutes. Subsequently, the City Council approved the proposed change to the threshold standard in 2002, which is the standard currently in effect. One result of the aforementioned police threshold report was a 2003 change in the methodology for reporting the threshold data. The report pointed out that 42% of the Priority II calls were alarm calls, and 99.9% of the alarm calls were false alarms. Therefore, the false alarms were taken out of the calculations. However, the Priority II threshold standard still could not be met. The Chula Vista Police Department believes that, "With appropriate staffing levels...the current Priority II goals could be met "The current Chula Vista staffing per capita, is the lowest of the nine city police departments in San Diego County. Unfortunately due to the current economic situation, increased staffing levels are not likely in the near future. Table C.2 Historic Response Times Priori II -U ent Res nse Calls for Service Call Volume of Call Response within Average Response Time* Threshold 57.0% 7:30 FY 2008-09 22 686 of 70 051 53.5°/a 9:16 FY 2007-08 23 955 of 74 192 53.1 % 9:18 FY 2006-07 24 407 of 74 77 433% 11:18 FY 2005-06 24 76 of 73 075 40.0% 12:33 FI' 2004-OS 24 923 of 74 106 40.5% 11:40 FY 2003-04 24 741 of 71000 48.4% 9:50 FY 2002-03 22 71 of 71 68 50.2% 9:24 FY 2001-02 22 199 of 71 59 45.6% 10:04 FY 2000-01 25 34 of 73 977 47.9% 9:38 FY 1999-00 23 98 of 76 738 46.4% 9:37 CY 1999 20 405 of 74 405 45.8% 9:35 FY 1997-98 22 42 of 69196 52.9°/a 8:13 FY 1996-97 22 140 of 69 904 62.2% 6:50 FY 1995-96 21,743 of 71,197 64.5% 6:38 IL5-55 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP II.5.4.2.6 Financing Police Facilities The Public Facilities Development impact Fee (PFDIF) was updated by the Chula Vista City Council on November 19, 2002 by adoption of Ordinance 2887. The Public Facilities Development Impact Fee (PFDIF) is adjusted every October ls` pursuant to Ordinance 3050, which was adopted by the City Council on November 7, 2006. The Police Public Facilities DIF Fee for Multi-Family Development is $1,691 /unit (see Table A.6)'. This amount is subject to change as it is amended from time to time. The project will be subject to the payment of the fee at the rate in effect at the time building permits are issued. At the current fee rate, the project Police Fee obligation at buildout is $657,799 . Table C. 3 Police Fee For -Olympic Pointe Condominiums Number police Fee for Olympic Pointe Development of DUs police Fee/DU Condominiums OI m is Pointe Condominiums 389 $1,691 $657,799 The projected fee illustrated in Table C.3 is an estimate only. Actual fees may be different. PFDIF Fees are subject to change depending upon City Council actions and or Developer actions that change residential densities, industrial acreage or commercial acreages. II.5.4.2.7. THRESHOLD COMPLIANCE AND REQUIREMENTS The City will continue to monitor police responses to calls for service in both the Emergency (priority one) and Urgent (priority two) categories and report the results to the GMOC on an annual basis. That the Police Department remain diligent in meeting and achieving shorter response times than what is indicated as the Threshold Standard through the active pursuit and implementation of their current and planned programs and report on how these measures improved response times to next years GMOC. Compliance will be satisfied with the payment of Public Facilities Fees. The proposed project will be required to pay public facilities fees for police services, based on the number of dwelling units, prior to the issuance of building permits; the fees shall be paid at the rate in effect at the time payment is made. ' Fee based on Form 5509 dated 9/30/2010. Actual fee may be different, please verify with the City of Chula Vista at the time of building permit. Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP II.5.4.3 FIRE AND EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES IL5.4.3.1 Threshold Standard Emergency response: Properly equipped and staffed fire and medical units shall respond to calls throughout the City within seven (7) minutes in 80 percent (current service to be verified) of the cases (measured annually). II.5.4.3.2 Service Analysis The City of Chula Vista Fire Department (CVFD) provides Fire and Emergency Medical Services (EMS). EMS is provided on a contract basis with American Medical Response (AMR). The City also has countywide mutual and automatic aid agreements with surrounding agencies, should the need arise for their assistance. The purpose of the Threshold Standard and the monitoring of response times are to maintain and improve the current level of fire protection EMS in the City. Fire/EMS facilities are provided for in the 1997 Fire Station Master Plan, as amended. The Fire Station Master Plan indicates that the number and location of fire stations primarily determine response time. The Fire Station Master Plan evaluates the planning area's fire coverage needs, and recommends a nine (9) station network at build out to maintain compliance with the threshold standard (see Table D.1). Additionally, the City of Chula Vista is updating the currently adopted Fire Station Master Plan. The updated Master Plan will set forth the locations and staffing for future fire and emergency service resources/facilities. II.5.4.3.3 Existing Conditions There are currently eight (9) fire stations serving the City of Chula Vista. The existing station network is listed below: Table D.1 Current & Planned Fire Station Facilities Station Location E ui ment Staffin Current Fire Station Facilities Station 1 447 F SL En ine 51/Truck 51/Battalion S I Assi ned: 8 On Dut : 24 Station 2 80 East J St. En ine 52/Brush 52 Assi ned: 3 On Dut : 9 Station 3 1410 Brand wine Ave. US & R 53 Assi ned: 4 On Dut : 12 Station 4 850 Paseo Ranchero En ine 54 Assi ned: 3 On Dut : 9 Station 5 391 Oxford S[. En ine 55 Assi ned: 3 On Du : 9 Station 6 605 Mt. Mi uel Rd. En ine 56 Assi ned: 3 On Du : 9 Station 7 1640 Santa Venetia Rd. En ine 57/Truck 57Battalion 52 Assi ned: 8 On Du : 24 Station 8 1180 Woods Dc En ine 58 Assi ned: 3 On Du : 9 Station 9 291 E. Oneida Street En ine 59 Assi ned: 3 On Du : 9 Planned Fire Station Facilities Station Location E ui ment Staffin Station 10 Eastern Urban Center EUC Truck Assi ned: 4 On Du : 12 Station l l J Street & Ba Blvd. Ba front Truck Assi ed: 4 On Du : 12 Note: these Tanned facilities onl re resent those new facilities as listed within the 1997 Fire De artment Master Plan. Source: CVFD Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP II.5.4.3.4 Adequacy Analysis The City of Chula Vista Fire Department (CVFD) currently serves azeas within the City's boundaries, including the Olympic Pointe project. The closest CVFD stations to the project site are: • Fire Station #4, located Rancho Del Rey • Fire Station #6, located in Rolling Hills • Fire Station #7, located in Village 2. • Fire Station #8, located in Eastlake III The station nearest to the Olympic Pointe Condominium project is Station #8. This station is within 2 miles of the Olympic Pointe Condominium project. Station #8 is located in the Eastlake Woods neighborhood. The Fire/EMS response time threshold was met for calendar year 2009. This is the fifth year in a row that the CVFD met the threshold. Dispatch time improved significantly with full operation of its dispatch center. American Medical Response (AMR) provides emergency medical services to the project site, on a contract basis for the City of Chula Vista. There are two AMR stations, which provide paramedic with EMT services to the City of Chula Vista exclusively. Table D.2 Olympic Pointe PFFP Fire/EMS - Emer enc Res onse Times Since 1999 Years Call Volume % of All Call Response Within 7:00 Minutes FY 2009 9,363 84.0% FY 2008 9,883 86.9% FY 2007 10,020 88. I CY 2006 10,390 85.2% CY 2005 9,907 81.6% FY 2003-04 8,420 72.9% FY 2002-03 8,088 75.5% FY 2001-02 7,626 69.7% FY 2000-01 7,128 80.8% FY 1999-00 6,654 79.7% Source: GMOC 2010 Annual Report II.5.4.3.5. FIRE & EMS FACILITY ANALYSIS: The CVFD responded to 84% of calls within seven minutes. The department met the threshold standard of responding to 80% of calls within seven minutes. However, this was 2.9% worse than last year's percentage of 86.9%, and there were 520 less calls received from the previous year. Generally, the actual response and travel times for 80% of the calls improved from last year. Response times improved from 6 minutes 31 seconds in FY 2008 to 4 minutes 46 seconds in FY 2009. The average travel time also improved from 3 minutes 17 seconds Ea~gtLake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP in FY 2008 to 3 minutes 1 second in FY 2009. Of all calls received, 3% were for fire, 87% were for medical, and 10% were for other emergencies. Since March 2008, the City of Chula Vista has contracted with San Diego Dispatch to respond to fire and medical dispatch calls. During the first 16 months of this arrangement, dispatch and travel times, as well as percentage of calls within 7 minutes, have worsened slightly. The average response time increased to 25 seconds longer; average dispatch time was 21 seconds longer; average travel time was 14 seconds longer; and the percentage of calls within 7 minutes was 3.4% less. Development of Olympic Pointe Condominium project is not anticipated to change the need for fire service in the area. Fire Station No. 8, located at 1180 Woods Drive in the Eastlake Woods neighborhood, would be the primary station to serve the project. IL5.4.3.6. FINANCING FIRE & EMS FACILITIES: The Public Facilities Development Impact Fee (PFDIF) was updated by the Chula Vista City Council on November 19, 2002 by adoption of Ordinance 2887. The Public Facilities Development Impact Fee (PFDIF) is adjusted every October l~` pursuant to Ordinance 3050, which was adopted by the City Council on November 7, 2006. The Fire Public Facilities DIF Fee for Multi-Family Development is $ 894/unit (see Table A.6)s. This amount is subject to change as it is amended from time to time. The project will be subject to the payment of the fee at the rate in effect at the time building permits are issued. At the current fee rate, the project Fire Fee obligation at buildout is $ 347,766. Table D.3 Fire/EMS Fee For Olympic Pointe Condominiums Number Fire/EMS Fire/EMS Fee for Olympic Development of DUs Fee/DU Pointe Condominium Ol m is Pointe Condominium 389 $894 $347,766 The projected fee illustrated in Table D.3 is an estimate only. Actual fees may be different. PFDIF Fees are subject to change depending upon City Council actions and or Developer actions that change residential densities, industrial acreage or commercial acreages. II.5.4.3.7 THRESHOLD COMPLIANCE AND REQUIREMENTS: A. The City will continue to monitor fire department responses to emergency fire and medical calls and report the results to the GMOC on an annual basis. B. The Olympic Pointe Condominium Project shall pay public facilities fees prior to the issuance of building permits; the fees shall be paid at the rate in effect at the time payment is made. C. The GMOC and the CVFD will continue to monitor the effectiveness of using San Diego Dispatch in regards to meeting the threshold standard. a Fee based on Form 5509 dated 9/30/2010. Actual fee may be different, please verify with the City of Chula Vista at the time of building permit. IL5-59 Eastlake II[ Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP II.5.4.4 SCHOOLS II.5.4.4.1 Threshold Standard The City annually provides the two local school districts with a 12 to 18 month development forecast and requests an evaluation of their ability to accommodate the forecast and continuing growth. The Districts' replies should address the following: 1. Amount of current capacity now used or committed. 2. Ability to absorb forecasted growth in affected facilities. 3. Evaluation of funding and site availability for projected new facilities. 4. Other relevant information the District(s) desire(s) to communicate to the City and GMOC. II.5.4.4.2 Service Analysis School facilities and services in Chula Vista are provided by two school districts. The Chula Vista Elementary School District (CVESD) administers education for kindergarten through sixth grades. The Sweetwater Union High School District (SUHSD) administers education for the Junior/Middle and Senior High Schools of a large district, which includes the City of Chula Vista. The purpose of the threshold standard is to ensure that the districts have the necessary school sites and funds to meet the needs of students in newly developing areas in a timely manner, and to prevent the negative impacts of overcrowding on the existing schools. Through the provision of development forecasts, school district personnel can plan and implement school facility construction and program allocation in line with development. On November 3, 1998, California voters approved Proposition lA, the Class Size Reduction Kindergarten-University Public Education Facilities Bond Act of 1998. Prior to the passage of Proposition lA, school districts relied on statutory school fees established by Assembly Bill 2926 ("School Fee Legislation") which was adopted in 1986, as well as judicial authority (i.e., Mira-Hart-Murrieta court decisions) to mitigate the impacts of new residential development. [n a post Proposition lA environment, the statutory fees provided for in the School Fee Legislation remains in effect and any mitigation requirements or conditions of approval not memorialized in a mitigation agreement, after January 1, 2000, will be replaced by Alternative Fees (sometimes referred to as Level II and Level III Fees). The statutory fee for residential development is referred to in these circumstances as the Level I Fee (i.e., currently for unified school districts at $ 2.97 per square foot for new residential construction and $ 0.47 per square foot for new commercial and industrial construction). CVESD utilizes their current School Facilities Needs Analysis (SFNA), June 2009, to quantify, for the next five-year period, the impacts of new residential development on the district's school facilities, and to calculate the permissible Alternative Fees to be collected from such new residential development. To ensure the timely construction of school facilities to house students from residential development, alternative fees or implementation of a Mello Roos Community Facilities District (CFD) will be necessary. In compliance with Government Code Section 65995 et. Seq. the SFNA provides the determination of eligibility for and the calculation of a Level II Fee of $ 2.43 per square Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP foot of new residential construction. A corresponding Level III Fee of $ 4.87 per square foot of new residential construction is also identified. Sweetwater Union High School District utilizes their current "Sweetwater Union High School District Long Range Comprehensive Master Plan" dated July 20, 2004. Implementation of the SUHSD Plan is ongoing and has resulted in the upgrading of older schools and accommodating continuing growth. In November 2000, a supportive community approved Proposition BB. The district leveraged $187 million from Proposition BB into a $327 million effort utilizing state funding to modernize and upgrade twenty-two campuses. Additional work efforts associated with Proposition O have commenced and construction has begun. In November 2006, the community supported Proposition O, a 644 million dollar bond measure. This bond measure addresses the critical and urgent safety needs of the 32 campuses within the SUHSD. The types of repairs and improvements that Prop O addresses includes: improving handicap accessibility, removing asbestos and lead paint, and upgrading fire and life safety systems. II.5.4.4.3 Project Processing Requirements The PFFP is required by the Growth Management Program to address the following issues for School Services: 1. Identify student generation by phase of development. 2. Specific siting of proposed school facilities will take place in conformance with the Sweetwater Union High School District Long Range Comprehensive Plan, and Chula Vista Elementary School District's Standards and Criteria. 3. Reserve school sites, if necessary, or coordinate with the district for additional school classrooms. 4. Provide cost estimates for facilities. 5. Identify facilities consistent with proposed phasing. 6. Demonstrate the ability to provide adequate facilities to access public schools in conjunction with the construction of water and sewer facilities. 7. Secure financing. II.5.4.4.4 Existing Conditions School Facilities Inventory, Chula Vista Elementary School District Currently, the CV ESD's inventory consists of 44 elementary schools including 6 Charter schools. Approximately 26 schools are on a traditional calendaz and 18 are on a year- round calendar. Table E.1 lists existing schools together with the capacity and enrollment of each. Capacity using existing facilities is approximately 30,244. Projected enrollment for the 2009-2010 school year was approximately 27,270. Thirty-seven of the 44 schools have capacity. Three schools are near capacity and five schools are over capacity (see Table E.1). At this time there is sufficient capacity throughout the district to accommodate additional students. In addition, this project is located in the district's Eastlake Community Facilities District No. 1. Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP Table E.1 Chula Vista Elementary School District Enrollments vs. Ca aci School Estimated Enrollment for 2009-2010 Approximate Ca acit Approximate Remainin Ca acit Allen/Ann Dal 411 477 66 Arro o Vista Char[er 840 913 73 Casillas 646 776 130 Castle Park 430 526 96 Chula Vista Hills 601 613 12 Chula Vista LCC 574 664 90 Clear View Charter Sl4 622 108 Cook 522 588 66 Discove Charter 743 872 129 Eastlake 644 726 82 Feaster/Ed Charter 1054 1135 81 Finne 489 563 74 Halecrest 502 626 124 Harborside 650 839 189 Hedenkam 1001 984 -17 Herita e 872 913 41 Hillto Drive 527 614 87 Juarez-Lincoln 648 751 103 Kello 428 564 136 Lauderbach 773 889 116 Libert 684 714 30 Loma Verde 489 622 133 Los Altos 407 502 95 Marshall 744 725 -19 McMillin 847 825 -22 Mont ome 388 476 88 Mueller Charter 893 834 -59 OI m is View 794 800 6 Ota 614 763 149 Palomar 389 448 59 Parkview 444 519 75 Rice 686 733 47 Ro ers East/West 507 587 80 Rohr 416 476 60 Rosebank 677 713 36 Salt Creek 930 950 20 Silver Win 435 525 90 Sunn side 397 451 54 Tiffan 602 651 49 Valle Lindo 589 676 87 Valle Vista 509 525 l6 Veterans 714 693 -21 Vista S uare 609 717 108 Wolf Canyon 637 664 27 Total 27,270* 30,244 2,974 Less Capacity for Future Mitigated Students 2,154 2,154 Total Current Available Capacity 28,090 820 Source: CVESD Schoo! Faci(ilies Needs Analysis, June 2010 * Does not include unassigned pupils, preschool or Daley Academy. EaetLake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP Table E.2 Sweetwater Union High School District Enrollments vs. Capacity School Site Adjusted Total Capacity 2010/2011 projected Enrollment Capacity vs. Forecasted Middle Schools Bonita Vista 1,530 1,060 470 Castle Park 1,530 1,051 479 Chula Vista 1,410 L,204 206 Eastlake 1,665 1,536 129 Granger* 1,380 980 400 Hilltop 1,410 1,159 251 Mar Vista* 1,581 1,103 478 Montgomery 1,614 893 721 National City* 1,054 738 316 Rancho del Rey 1,440 1,611 -171 Southwest* 1,350 614 736 Subtotal 15,964 11,949 4,015 High Schools Bonita Vista 2,550 2,224 326 Castle Park 1,920 1,414 506 Chula Vista 2,850 2,617 233 Eastlake 2,940 2,489 451 Hilltop 2,550 2,119 431 Mar Vista* 1,879 1,671 208 Montgomery* 2,440 1,652 788 Otay Ranch 2,900 2,799 101 Olympian 2,460 1,742 718 Palomar** 600 421 179 San Ysidro* 2,400 2,450 -50 Southwest* 2,400 1,695 705 Sweetwater* 2,163 2,464 -301 Subtotal 30,052 25,757 4,295 Total 46,016 37,706 8,310 Source.' SUHSD * Schools outside of the City of Chula Vista ** Actual Daily Enrollment numbers used - 4/8/10 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP Some excess capacity is suggested by comparing existing enrollment identified in Table E.1 to the current capacity. However, by applying the current student generation rates identified in Table E.3, to the estimated undeveloped dwelling units to be constructed within Mitigated Developments which must be housed within the District's current facilities, a significant number of students are expected to be generated. These students are expected to come from the following Mitigated Developments Eastlake-Landswap (CFD No. 1), Rolling Hills Ranch (fee mitigation), Otay Ranch Villages 2, 6, 7 & 11 (CFD Nos. 11, 14 ,15, &17), San Miguel Ranch (CFD No. 13) and Bella Lago, EI Dorado Ridge and Dennery Ranch (CFD No. 10). As a result of [his development and as indicated in Table 10, relatively few seats will be available to house students generated from new Unmitigated Developments. The District has identified almost 6,800 future dwelling units to be constructed within Mitigated Developments. Further, the district estimates that approximately 2,154 elementary school students will be generated from Mitigated Developments. The Olympic Pointe project is included in the district's Mitigated Development category and it is within an existing CFD. School Facilities Inventory, Sweetwater Union High School District The SUHSD currently administers eleven (11) junior high/middle schools and thirteen (13) senior high schools including one continuation high school within the District. In 2002, the district completed construction of the San Ysidro High School. In July of 2003 the district opened the Otay Ranch High School (near Otay Ranch Village 2) located at 1250 Olympic Pkwy, Chula Vista and Eastlake Middle School (Eastlake Woods) located at 900 Duncan Ranch Road Chula Vista. In August 2006, the district opened Olympian High School (Village 7) at 1925 Magdalena Ave, Chula Vista. There is a new combination middle/high school proposed within the vicinity of the EUC area with a possible middle school opening on the Olympian High School Campus in the future. Also planned for the future is middle school # 12 and high school # 14. The district wide student enrollment is very stable (in fact it is declining at many schools). According to the district, the Olympic Pointe Condominium project is within the Eastlake Middle School and the Eastlake High School and the Otay Ranch High School attendance areas. In addition, the site is with in CFD 1. II.5.4.4.5 School Sizing and Location The project is proposed to consist of 389 dwelling units at build out. At completion, the proposed project could generate approximately 170 students using the following Student Generation Factors: Table E.3 Sin le-Famil Attached Student Generation Rates Elementa K-6 .2490 students/d.u. Middle School 7-8 .0635 students/d.u. Hi School 9-12 .1229 students/d.u. Source: CVh:.SU ShNA June ZO10 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP By school category, the project is expected to generate the following students: IL5.4.4.6 Table E.4 Student Generation Multi- Family Elementary Middle High School Total Students Dwellin Units K-6) 7-8 9-12) 389 97 25 48 170 School Size Standards: Elementary 750-1000 students Middle 1,500 students Senior High 2,400 students Chula Vista Elementary School District As noted in Table E.4, the build-out of the Olympic Pointe Condominiums would generate the need to house approximately 97 elementary school age students. The District is currently awaiting clearance from the Califomia Department of Education (CDE) to build a school at 1650 Exploration Drive in Village l 1 of Otay Ranch. This would be the nearest school (at completion) to the Project. Students would be bussed to a nearby school should the construction of this school not be completed by the time the Olympic Pointe Condominium project becomes occupied. Sweetwater Union High School District The maximum capacity of a middle school is approximately 1,500 students. It is anticipated that the approximately 25 middle school students generated by the Olympic Pointe Condominium project will attend the Eastlake Middle School located approximately 3 miles north of the project. Currently, Eastlake Middle has the capacity to accept the estimated students generated by the project. The maximum capacity of a high school is approximately 2,400 students. It is anticipated that approximately 48 high school students will be generated from the Olympic Pointe Condominium project. These students will attend Eastlake high school located approximately 3 miles northwest of the project. Currently, Eastlake High has the capacity to accept the estimated students generated by the project. Demand for adult school facilities will be satisfied within existing facilities in the Sweetwater Union High School District, until a new facility can be constructed in the Eastern Urban Center (EUC) or a site reserved pursuant to the Otay Ranch GDP. Financing School Facilities Califomia Government Code section 65995 et. seq. and Education Code Section [ 7620 et. seq. authorizes school districts to impose facility mitigation exactions on new development as a way to address increasing enrollment caused by that development. Although the collection of school fees is one method available to defray the cost of new development, it is not an acceptable solution since the maximum amount that could be collected by law represents less than one-fourth the cost to constmct schools. The SUHSD is unable to meet the needs of this project with current school facilities and it is unable to constmct new facilities to meet the impacts of this project through the provision of school fees. Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP In recognition of this funding deficiency, it is the policy of each district to fully mitigate the facility impacts caused by a master planned community via the creation of a Mello Roos Community Facilities District. The following Mello-Roos Districts have been created by each district: SUHSD m Location m ber Nu Nu ber t Eastlake 1 2 Bonita Long Canyon 2 3 Rancho del Rey 3 4 Sunbow 4 5 Annexable 5 6 Otay Ranch 6 7 Rolling Hills Estate 10 8 Coral Gate (Otay Mesa) l l 9 Ocean View Hills 12 10 Remington Hills/Annexable 13 I l Lomas Verdes 14 l2 Otay Ranch (Village 1 West) I S l3 San Miguel Ranch 14 Otay Ranch Village 1 I CVED Location Eastlake Bonita Long Canyon Rancho del Rey Sunbow Annexable Otay Ranch Annexable for future annexations Otay Ranch (Lomas Verde) Otay Ranch (Village 1, West) San Miguel Ranch Otay Ranch Village I 1 (BrookfielNShea) Otay Ranch Village 6 (ORC) Based on historical data available from each district an estimate of costs for the construction of school facilities on a per student basis is provided. Both districts follow state standards for determining the costs and size for school construction. The cost for a high school, including land acquisition, is approximately $ 31,300 per student (2009 dollars). Excluding land, the cost for a high school is approximately $ 23,000 per student. The cost for a middle school, including land acquisition, is approximately $ 26,700 per student (2009 dollars). Excluding land, the cost for a middle school is $18,700 per student. The cost for an elementary school, including land acquisition, is approximately $ 36,440 per student (2009 dollars). Excluding the land, the cost for an elementary school is approximately $27,340 per student. Land acquisition cost is calculated at approximately $ 730,000/net usable acre (10 acre elementary school site). Using the aforementioned costs per student together with the school size, the following estimated costs per facility can be anticipated. Elementary School Cost (800 students) ($27,340/student w/o land cost) $ 21,900,000 (800 students) ($ 36,440/student w/land cost) $ 29,200,000 Middle School Cost (1,500 students) ($ 18,700/student w/o land cost) $ 28,000,000 (1,500 students) ($ 26,700/student w/ land cost) $ 40,000,000 High School Cost (2,400 students) ($ 23,000/student w/o land cost) $ 55,200,000 (2,400 students) ($ 31,300/student w/ land cost) $ 75,200,000 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP II.5.4.4.7 Threshold Compliance and Recommendations A. Prior to building permit approval, the project proponent(s) shall provide documentation to the City confirming satisfaction of SUHSD and CVESD facility funding requirements to offset student generation impacts. Funding shall be satisfied through the Mello-Roos Community Facilities District financing method or other means acceptable to each District. In addition, condition the project to require that no building permits shall be issued unless and until a school facility financing mechanism is in place to the satisfaction of the Sweetwater Union High School District and the Chula Vista Elementary School District. B. Since this project is a part of Eastlake, portions of the school mitigation have been satisfied through participation in the CFD for both districts. The mitigation agreement also established a fee due at the time permits for residential units are pulled. The rate in effect should be verified with the SUHSD and CVESD at the time building permits are requested. Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP IL5.4.5 LIBRARIES II.5.4.5.1 Threshold Standard In the area east of I-805, the city shall construct, by buildout (approximately year 2030) 60,000 Gross Square Feet (GSF) of library space beyond the citywide June 30, 2000 GSF total. The construction of said facilities shall be phased such that the city will not fall below the citywide ratio of 500 GSF per 1,000 population. Library facilities are to be adequately equipped and staffed. II.5.4.5.2 Service Analysis The City of Chula Vista Library Department provides library facilities. II.5.4.5.3 Project Processing Requirements The PFFP is required by the Growth Management Program to address the following issues for Library services: 1. Identify phased demands in conjunction with the construction of streets, water and sewer facilities. 2. Specifically identify facility sites in conformance with the Chula Vista Library Master Plan. II.5.4.5.4 Existing Conditions The City provides library services through the Chula Vista Public Library at Fourth and "F" Street (Civic Center), the South Chula Vista Library in the Montgomery/Otay planning area, and the library at the Eastlake High School. The Castle Park and Woodlawn Libraries have been closed. The existing and future libraries are listed on the Table F.1 and Table F.2, respectively. Table F.1 Existing Library Facilities Existin Libraries S ware Foota e Civic Center 55,000 South Chula Vista 37,000 Eastlake 10,000 Total Existin S uare Feet 102,000 II.5.4.5.5 Adequacy Analysis Using the threshold standard of 500 square feet of library space per 1,000 population, the demand for library space based on Chula Vista's estimated population for year end 2010 of a population of 237,5379 is 118,769 squaze feet. Chula Vista currently provides 102,000 square feet of library space. This represents a 16,769 square foot deficit. The demand by the 2014 forecasted population (GMOC 2010 Annual Report) of 249,654 is 124,828 square feet. Comparing this demand to the existing library square footage of 9 GMOC 2007 Annual Report Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP 102,000 square feet results in a deficit of 22,828 square feet unless the first Regional Library is completed before 2014. The SANDAG buildout population for Chula Vista is approximately 282,664. This population will require approximately 152,000 square feet of Library Facilities. The Chula Vista Public Library Master Plan addresses such topics as library siting and phasing, the impacts of new technologies on library usage, and floor space needs. The plan calls for the construction of a full service regional library of approximately 30,000 square feet in the Rancho del Rey area at the corner of Paseo Ranchero and East H Street and the construction of a second full service regional library of similar size in the Otay Ranch Eastern Urban Center (EUC). Currently, it is unknown when sufficient funds will become available for the construction of the Rancho del Rey Branch Library. Preconstruction planning and design have been completed. In addition, the timing of the EUC Library is unknown at this time. Future library facilities are listed in the following table: Table F.2 Future Libra Facilities Future Libraries Square Footage Estimated Cost 1st regional library (Rancho Del Rey) @ 30,000 sf 30,000* $30,000,000+ 2nd regional library (Otay Ranch EUC) @ 30,000 sf 20,000** Unknown Estimated Total Future Net Square Feet 50,000 Total Master Plan Library Square Feet (existing and future) 150,000 * Assumes construction of the first 30,000-square foot regional library by Summer 2015. ** Assumes construction of the second 20,000-square foot (minimum size) regional library and the closure of the 10,000-square foot Eastlake library, per [he Chula V is[a Public Library Master Plan. Table F.3 highlights existing plus forecasted project demands for library space as compared to the existing and scheduled library space as well as the impact of the project on library facilities. According to the GMOC Annual Report, the City of Chula Vista's library threshold standard has been out of compliance for six years in a row. The threshold standard is to construct 500 gross squaze feet per 1,000 population. The City currently has a deficit of approximately 15,000 square feet. In June 2007, the City Council adopted the Libraries Threshold Standard Implementation Measure, which requires the City to "formally adopt and fund tactics to bring the library system into conformance, and that construction, or another actual solution, shall be scheduled to commence within three years of the threshold not being satisfied." It appears that the library threshold will be non-compliant for the next five years since the City Finance Department has indicated that the construction of a new library would not commence until at least 2015. II.5-69 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP Table F.3 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Condominium SPA Library Space Demand vs. Supply 10 Demand Supply Above/(Below) Population S uare Foota e S ware Foota a Standard Estimated Existing Citywide 102,000 (16,769) 12/31/10 237,537 118,769 ls` regional library 30,000 11,836 (Rancho del Re 2008 Forecasted Projects to 201 l 12,1 l7 6,059 Subtotal 249,654 124,828 132,000 7,172 11.5.4.5.6 Financing Library Facilities The Public Facilities Development Impact Fee (PFDIF) was updated by the Chula Vista City Council on November 19, 2002 by adoption of Ordinance 2887. The Public Facilities Development Impact Fee (PFDIF) is adjusted every October ls` pursuant to Ordinance 3050, which was adopted by the City Council on November 7, 2006. The Library Public Facilities DIF Fee for Multi-Family Development is $ 1,413/unit (see Table A.6)". This amount is subject to change as it is amended from time to time. The project will be subject to the payment of the fee at the rate in effect at the time building permits are issued. At the current fee rate, the estimated Library Fee obligation at buildout is $549,657. Table F.4 Library Fee For Olympic Pointe Condominiums Development Number of DUs Library Fee/DU Library Fee for Olympic Pointe Condominiums Olympic Pointe Condominiums 389 $1,413 $549,657 The projected fee illustrated in Table F.4 is an estimate only. Actual fees may be different. PFDIF Fees are subject to change depending upon City Council actions and or Developer actions that change residential densities, industrial acreage or commercial acreages. 11.5.4.5.7 Threshold Compliance and Recommendations A. Based upon the analysis contained in this section, the city's current library facilities (approximately 102,000 square feet) are 16,769 square feet below the threshold standazd (see Table F.3). The existing plus proposed new librazy space totals 132,000 square feet in 2015. The total forecasted projects including the Olympic Pointe Condominiums SPA project totals a demand of approximately 131,650 square feet by 2014. This results in an excess (above standard) supply of 7,172 square feet. The 10 Based on City of Chula Vista Estimates, GMOC 2010 Annual Report. " Fee based on Form 5509 dated 9/30/2010. Actual fee may be different, please verify with [he City of Chula Vista at the time of building permit. Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP library threshold standard will not be met until the new library at Rancho del Rey is completed. B. The GMOC provided recommendations to the City Council to improve the library threshold compliance. These recommendations include: 1. The City Council should formally identify and adopt funding for an interim and/or permanent solution, based on recommendations from the Library Director, to bring the library system closer to conformance before 2012. 2. Update the 1998 Library Facilities Master Plan to address changing trends, and to account for updated data in the City's General Plan Update (December 2005). The update needs to consider changing library trends and redefine the adequacy of library facilities, equipment, adequate staffing and hours of operation. Libraries can provide a variety of services, such as computer usage, that can be provided in smaller spaces instead of providing book storage. No mitigation is required other than the payment of the Public Facilities DIF for library facilities at the rate in effect prior to the approval of building permits. Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP IL5.4.6 PARKS, TRAILS AND OPEN SPACE II.5.4.6.1 Park Threshold Standard Three (3) acres of neighborhood and community parkland with appropriate facilities shall be provided per 1,000 residents. This standard is specified in Section 17.10.040 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. II.5.4.6.2 Service Analysis The City of Chula Vista provides public park and recreational facilities and programs through the Public Works and Recreation Departments, which are responsible for the acquisition and development of parkland. All park development plans are reviewed by City staff and are presented to the Parks and Recreation Commission for review. This Commission to the deciding body, the City Council, makes a recommendation. The City Council approved the Chula Vista Parks and Recreation Master Plan in November 2002. The Plan provides guidance for planning, siting and implementation of neighborhood and community parks. II.5.4.6.3 Project Processing Requirements Identify phased demands in conformance with the number of dwelling unit's constructed, street improvements and in coordination with the construction of water and sewer facilities. Specific siting of the facility will take place in conformance with the Chula Vista Parks and Recreation Master Plan. 3. Site/s reserved for park purposes within the project. II.5.4.6.4 Existing Conditions The existing and future parks as depicted in the Park and Recreation Element of the General Plan and as updated by the inclusion of more recent information are contained in the city's Parks and Recreation Master Plan. II.5.4.6.5 Project Park Requirements Compliance with Public Park Standards The Olympic Pointe Condominiums Project generates an estimated population of 1,190 (389 dwelling units x 3.059~Z population factor). To meet the city threshold requirements the amount of pazkland dedicated is based on a standard of 3 acres per 1,000 populations (see Table G.1). The standard is based on State of California Government Code 66477, also known as the Quimby Act that allows a city to require by ordinance, the dedication of land or payment of fees for park or recreational purposes. ~z GMOC 2010 Mnual Report II.S-72 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP Table G.1 uimb Act Parkland Re uirements Olympic Pointe Standard Parkland Acres Required Condominiums Po ulation 1 190 3 acres per 1,000 3.57 ' o ulation All new development in the City of Chula Vista is subject to the requirements contained in the City's Parkland Dedication Ordinance CVMC Chapter 17.10. The ordinance establishes fees for park land acquisition and development, sets standards for dedication and establishes criteria For acceptance of parks and open space by the City of Chula Vista. Fees vary depending upon the type of dwelling unit that is proposed. There are four types of housing; Single Family dwelling units (defined as all types of single family detached housing and condominiums), Multi-Family dwelling units (defined as all types of attached housing including townhouses, attached condominiums, duplexes, triplexes and apartments), Mobile Homes and Hotel/Motel Rooms. Single Family Housing is defined as a freestanding structure with one residential unit. Multi-Family Housing is defined as any freestanding structure that contains two or more residential units. Parkland dedication requirements are shown below on Table G.2. Table G.2 City of Chula Vista Parkland Dedication Ordinance Standards Dwellin Unit T e Land Dedication er Unit Dwellin Units er Park Acre Sin le-Famil 460 sf/du 95 du/ac. Multi-Famil 341 sf/du 128 du/ac. Table G.3 Olympic Pointe Condominiums Project Preliminary Parkland Dedication Requirements Ci Ordinance A lied to Plannin Prediction of Unit Numbers and T es Dwelling Unit Type* Number of Parkland Required Acres D.U. Re uired/DU Multi le Famil 389 341 sf/du 3.05 TOTALS 389 3.05 * Dwelling unit type -Note that number and type of units listed reflect 'Land Use Designations' listed in the Eastlake III General Development Plan, since this level of information is all that is available at the time of this document's preparation. Defmifions of dwelling unit type used for calculating park obligations are based upon from the Cit}~s Parkland Dedication Ordinance CVMC chapter 17.10. These definitions differ from the way unit types are defined from a planning, land-use and caning perspective that uses unit density per acre m categorize the type of wit CVMC chapter 17.10 uses product type [o categorize the type of unit distinguishing between attached and detached units. Consequently, the figures in this chan are preliminary estimates, and shall be recalculated at the time when the obli ions are due as determined b ch ter 17.10 of the CVMC. The City's Parklands and Public Facilities Ordinance (CVMC 17.10) is based on the Quimby Act. Based on the City's Parklands and Public Facilities Ordinance, the parkland requirement for the Olympic Pointe Condominiums is approximately 3.05 acres (see Table G.3). However, the entire Eastlake H[ SPA Amendment will be re-evaluated in the PFFP. Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP The Site Utilization Plan (Exhibit 4) identifies the park designations and acreage that are shown in Table G.4. The Neighborhood Park has been graded and it is currently under construction. The City's Parkland Dedication Ordinance requirements for the Eastlake III SPA 2006 Amendment are outlined in Table G.4are applicable to the Olympic Pointe Condominiums project. Table G.4 Eastlake III SPA 2006 Amendment Park Acrea a Provided and Eli ible Credits Nei hborhood Park Provided Pro osed Credit Estimated Credit Acres Eastlake Woods PAD Fees = 5.6 Ac 100% 5.6 Eastlake Vistas 12.9 Ac 100% 12.9 P-1 Public Pazk & P-2 Private Park Total Provided 18.5 Ac -- Total Re aired -- -- 21.51 SPA Balance -- -- -3.01*ac *Any shortfall in parkland acreage dedication shall result in payment of the park acquisition component of the Park Acquisition and Development (PAD Fee). Given the lack of available acreage that could be acquired to serve the development, [he acquisition component of [he PAD Fee will be waived and a payment of $2,666,260 will be made which can be utilized to fund construction of park and public Facilities serving the Eastlake Community. Any excess funds that remain once these facilities are complete can be utilized on other park or public facilities serving the Eastern Territories of Chula Vista. The Developer will pay the development component of the PAD Fee as required by the City. Source: Cin[i Land Planning Table G.4 indicates that the 2006 Eastlake Q[ SPA Amendment provided parkland less than that required, by 3.01 acres, based on the Site Utilization Plan statistics. This park acreage calculation may be refined during the more detailed levels of review. II.5.4.6.6 Park Adequacy Analysis Table G.5 is a comparison of park acreage demands and supply east of Interstate 805 for existing, approved projects, as well as the phased addition of the project. A review of the existing and approved park demands for Chula Vista east of I-805 including the project indicates a projected 2014 demand of approximately 387.79 acres of Neighborhood and Community Park. The 2010-projected supply of park acreage east of I-805, 434.02 acres, is 46.23 acres more than the projected demand. East Lake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP Table G.5 Estimated Park Acreage Demand Compared to Supply East of Interstate 805 Population Demand Existing Eligible Net Acres E g tS f I Park Acres ° Park Acres Credit Acres +/-Standard O Estimated 12/2010 l 13,953 341.86 389.4415 389.44 +47.58 Forecasted Projects 12/2010 15,31016 45.93 44.58" 44.58 -1.35 to 12/2014 Total 129,263 387.79 434.02 434.02 46.23 Table G.6 Eastlake III SPA Amendment Park Land Dedication Re aired Dwelling Unit Type Dwelling Units(DUs) Park Area/DU Park Acres Required (AC) Woods Vistas Woods Vistas Sin le Famil 667 782 423 SQ FT/DU 6.48 7.59 Sin le Famil 0 73 366 SQ FT/DU 0 0.61 Multi le Famil 0 928* 288 SQ FT/DU 0 6.14 TOTALS 667 1,783 -- 6.48 14.34** PROJECT TOTAL 2,450 -- 20.82** * Increased by 389 Multi-Family Units. *• Ma not total due to roundin . Source: Cinii [,and Ylannmg The dedication requirement for the Eastlake I[I SPA, based on the proposed changes in dwellings calculated in Table G.6. The Eastlake III SPA Amendment identifies a requirement of 20.81 acres net for parkland. However, the Eastlake [[I SPA Amendment provides a total of 18.5 acres, which results in a shortfall of 2.32 acres. 13 Population figures are from the GMOC 2009 & 2010 Annual Report. 14 Based on City Threshold requirement of 3 acres of neighborhood and community parkland per 1,000 residents east of I-805. is Existing Park Acreage from the GMOC 2009 Annual Report. 16 Population figure derived from the GMOC 2010 Annual Report. '~ Park acreage from Park Acreage Table from the GMOC 2009 Annual Report. Assumes that Mt. Miguel Community Park, All Seasons and Pazk P-3 in Village 2 are built by 2014. 75 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP II.5.4.6.7 Open Space, Trails and Recreation A. Open Space Open space within Eastlake III will be provided for buffer areas, slopes and open space corridors as required by the Eastlake III GDP. Open space lands indicated on the Eastlake II[ Site Utilization Plan include the Salt Creek corridor within the Eastlake Woods neighborhood, slopes adjacent to both Upper and Lower Otay Reservoirs, slope/buffer areas adjacent to Otay Lakes Road, Hunte Parkway and Olympic Parkway, and a buffer between the western edge of the Eastlake Woods residential neighborhood and the Eastlake Business Center light industrial uses, off- site to the west. B. Trails Eastlake III is served by two types of trails. These include: • Greenbelt trails • Community trails These trails provide non-vehicular circulation throughout the community linking Eastlake BI with the adjacent regional trail system within the City's greenbelt. The trails also provide limited and controlled access into the open space areas and provide access for Eastlake III neighborhoods to the parks and community facilities. See Trails Plan for the location of the main framework of the trails system. It should be noted that these trails are in addition to concrete sidewalks required as part of street construction. 1. Greenbelt/Multi-Purpose Trail In accordance with the Chula Vista General Plan, the Greenbelt Trail is a proposed 26- mile continuous loop trail that generally encircles the city. The trail is designed as an eleven-foot wide, grade separated trail free from vehiculaz traffic. 2. Communiri Trail Community trails provide access to regional trails and destination points and are typically the internal routes of communities and neighborhoods. They can be similar in design to regional trails but are determined by volume. [n some cases, the trail will be the concrete sidewalk in residential areas. The Eastlake Community Trail, extending from Eastlake Hills through the developed portion of the Eastlake Planned Community to its current terminus in Eastlake Trails within Salt Creek, will be extended across the Eastlake Vistas neighborhood to the pazk overlooking Lower Otay Lake. A pedestrian trail through Salt Creek park/open space corridor branch of the Greenbelt as well as along the Otay Lakes branch, will connect to the citywide system. All trails will be designed and constructed to City standards. In the absence of specific trail design standards, all trails will be designed and constructed to the satisfaction of the Director of Parks and Recreation. II.5.4.6.8 Financing Park Facilities Chapter 17.10 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, as amended, governs the financing of parkland and improvements. Included as part of the regulations aze Park Acquisition and ILS-76 Eastlake 111 Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP Development (PAD) fees established for the purpose of providing neighborhood and community parks. The Ordinance provides that fees be paid to the City prior to approval of a final subdivision map, or in the case of a residential development that is not required to submit a final map, at the time of the final building permit application. II.5.4.6.8.1 SPA Plan Amendment The project is responsible for both the park development component and the acquisition component PAD Fees. The project parkland requirement is 21.51 acres based on CVMC 17.10 (Table G.6) in effect at the time the Eastlake III SPA was approved in 2002. The 2006 SPA Plan Amendment provided 18.5 net acres of parkland. Any shortfall in parkland acreage dedication shall result in payment of the park acquisition component of the Park Acquisition and Development (PAD Fee). Given the lack of available acreage that could be acquired to serve the development, according to city staff, the developer has negotiated a waiver of the acquisition component of the PAD Fee in exchange for a payment of $2,666,260, which can be utilized to fund construction of park and public facilities .serving the Eastlake Community. Any excess funds that remain once these facilities are complete can be utilized on other park or public facilities serving the Eastern Territories of Chula Vista. The $2,666,260 payment must be paid at the time the development component of the PAD fee is paid, which is prior to issuance of building permits. The Developer will pay the development component of the PAD Fee as required by the City. The estimated development component of the PAD Fee is $1,367,724 (see Table G.7). Combined, the estimated fee for both components of the PAD Fee is $4,033,984. Table G.7 Olympic Pointe Condominiums Project Ac uisition and Develo ment PAD Fees Prelimina Calculation Dwelling Acquisition Component Development Component ° of PAD Fee's/DU Total of PAD Fee's/DU Total Development ,1, e '` Total Fees Due MF Acquisition Payment per MF @ $3,516 Agreement Olympic Pointe 389 $2,666,260 $1,367,724 $4,033,984 Condominiums otal 389 $2,666,260 $1,367,724 $4,033,984 * Dwelling unit type -Note that number and type of units listed reflect 'Land Use Designations' listed in the Eastlake ^I General Development Plan, since this level of information is all that is available at the time of this document's preparation. Definitions of dwelling unit type used for calculating pazk obligations are based upon from the City's Parkland Dedication Ordinance CVMC chapter lZlO. These definitions differ from the way unit types are defined from a planning, land-use and zoning perspective that uses unit density per acre to categorize the type of unit. CVMC chapter 17.10 uses product type to categorize the type of unit distinguishing between attached and detached units. Consequently, the figures in [his chart are preliminary estimates, and shall be recalculated at the time when the obligations are due as determined by chapter 17.10 of the CVMC. PAD Fees are subject to periodic annual increases. Table G.7 identifies the estimated fees calculated for the parkland development component of the PAD fees. These fees are estimates only and are dependent upon the actual numbers of units filed on the final map. Fees are also subject to change by the City Council. Single Family dwelling units are defined as all types of single-family detached housing and condominiums. Multi-Family II.S-77 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP dwelling units are defined as all types of attached housing including townhouses, attached condominiums, duplexes, triplexes and apartments. IL5.4.6.9 Financing Recreation Facilities Chapter L7.10 of the CVMC, which requires the collection of fees from residential developments to pay for parkland acquisition and various park facilities within the City of Chula Vista, is subject to changes by the City Council from time to time. On July 13, 2004, the City Council approved Resolution 2004-222 and on January 2004, City Council approved the Ordinance 2945. Resolution 2004-222 amended the master Fee schedule to adjust the Parkland Acquisition and Development (PAD) Fees for Neighborhood and Community Park requirements. Ordinance 2945 amended Chapter 17.10 of the CVMC, which requires the collection of In-Lieu Park Acquisition and Development Fees from Residential developments that are not required to submit a subdivision map or parcel map. Some of the previous council actions that contributed to an increase in the in-lieu fees for park development and land acquisition are Ordinances No. 2886 and 2887 (both approved on November 19,2002). Ordinance 2886 amended Chapter 17.10 of the CVMC to update the Parks Acquisition and Development Fees. Ordinance 2887 amended Chapter 3.50 of the Municipal Code, as detailed in the "Public Facilities DIF, November 2002 Amendment', adding a new recreation component to the Public Facilities DIF, updating the impact fee structure and increasing the overall fee. Chapter 17.10 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, first adopted in 1971, details requirements for parkland dedication, park improvements and the collection of in-lieu fees (i.e., PAD fees) from developers of residential housing in subdivisions or in divisions created by parcel maps, both east and west of I-805. PAD fees cover parkland acquisition and the cost of related capital items associated with parkland development, including: • Drainage Systems • Street Improvements • Lighted Parking Lots • Concrete Circulation Systems • Security Lighting • Park Fixtures (drinking fountains, trash receptacles, bicycle racks, etc.) • Landscaping (including disabled accessible surfacing • Irrigation Systems • Restrooms and Maintenance Storage • Play Areas (tot lots, etc.) • Picnic Shelters, Tables, Benches • Utilities • Outdoor Sports Venues (tennis courts, baseball/softball fields. basketball courts, multi purpose sports fields, skateboard and roller blade venues) II.S-78 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP In addition to parks-related items, a 1987 revision called for the dedication, within community parks, of major recreation facilities to serve newly developing communities, including: • Community centers • Gymnasiums • Swimming pools Historically, PAD fees have not been sufficient to construct these additional large capital items. However, major recreation facilities are now funded through a newly created component of the Public Facilities DIF. The major capital items to be included in the new component aze community centers, gymnasiums, swimming pools, and senior/teen centers. Based on the Parks and Recreation Master Plan, 140,595 square feet of major recreation facilities will be required to meet new development growth through build-out at a gross construction cost of over $32 million. Since the demand for major public recreation facilities is created by residential development, facilities costs are not spread to commerciaVindustrial development. Table G.8 provides an estimate of the Recreational PDIF Fees for the project. Table G.8 Olympic Pointe Condominiums Project Public Facilities Fees for Recreation18 (Prelimina Calculation Dwellin Units Recreation Fee Development SF MF $1,072/SF Unit $1,072/MF Unit Total Olympic Pointe ~ 0 389 0 $417,008 $417,008 ect Condominiums Pro Total 389 0 $417,008 $417,008 The projected fee illustrated in Table G.8 is an estimate only. Actual fees may be different. Recreation Fees are subject to change depending upon City Council actions and or Developer actions that change residential densities. II.5.4.6.10 Threshold Compliance and Recommendations Based upon the analysis contained in this section of the PFFP, the parks standazd for both neighborhood and community parks measured on an area-wide basis east of Interstate 805 is projected to be met at the completion of the project. Prior to issuance of the building permit, the Developer shall pay to the City the applicable acquisition in lieu fee payment and the development component of the PAD fee in accordance with CVMC Chapter 17.10, Parkland Dedication Ordinance ("PDO") and Recreation Fees. The developer has negotiated a waiver of the acquisition component of the PAD Fee in exchange for an in lieu payment of $2,666,260, which can be utilized to fund construction of park and public facilities serving the Eastlake Community. is Fee based on Form 5509 dated 9/30/2010. Actual fee may be different, please verify with the City of Chula Vista at the time of building permit. Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP II.5.4.7 WATER II.5.4.7.1 CITY THRESHOLD STANDARDS: A. Developer will request and deliver to the Ciry a service availability letter from the Water District for each project, as defined by the City. B. The City shall annually provide the San Diego County Water Authority, the Sweetwater Authority, and the Otay Water District with a l2 to 18 month development forecast and requests an evaluation of their ability to accommodate the forecast and continuing growth. The Districts' replies should address the following: 1. Water availability to the City and the Planning Area should consider both short and long-term perspectives. 2. Amount of current capacity, including storage capacity, now used or committed. 3. Ability of affected facilities to absorb forecasted growth. 4. Evaluation of funding and site availability for projected new facilities. 5. Other relevant information the District(s) desire(s) to communicate to the City and GMOC. The growth forecast and water district response letters shall be provided to the GMOC for inclusion in its review. II.5.4.7.2 EXISTING CONDITIONS: The Otay Water District (OWD) provides water service for Eastlake Village Center North project including the proposed Olympic Pointe Condominium_project. The OWD has existing facilities in the vicinity of the project that can provide domestic water service. The OWD also provides recycled water to the project and has existing facilities in the vicinity of the project. The OWD utilizes the 1995 Water Resources Master Plan prepared by Montgomery Watson. This document is the planning document used for all future CIP water facilities work. An environmental impact report was also prepared to assess the impacts of the Master Plan. The City of Chula Vista Growth Management Ordinance requires a Water Conservation Plan to accompany a SPA Plan. The Eastlake III SPA Plan Amendment for the Olympic Pointe Condominium project includes a Water Conservation Plan. Details of the project and developer commitments to minimize the use of water can be found in the Water Conservation Plan chapter of the Eastlake [II SPA Amendment. No SPA application shall be deemed complete or accepted, by the city, unless: A. It is accompanied by a city approved Water Conservation Plan; or B. A Water Conservation Plan which includes the project has already been initiated; or C. The applicant initiates the preparation of a Water Conservation Plan that is acceptable to the Director of Planning. This section of the PFFP is based upon the Olympic Pointe Condominium On-site Fire Service Study (Revised) dated, July 12, 2010, by PBS&J. In addition, the PBS&J Report uses the approved Sub- Area Water Master Plan for Eastlake III (SAMP) dated January 2002 by PBS&J as the basis of their report. Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP II.5.4.7.3 WATER FACILITY ANALYSIS A. Potable Water: The design criteria implemented to evaluate the potable water systems for the Project area are established in accordance with the aforementioned 1995 Water Resources Master Plan. The design criteria are utilized for analysis of the existing water system as well as for design and sizing of proposed improvements and expansions to the existing system to accommodate demands of the proposed Project. 1. Pressure Zones: OWD has established criteria to determine pressure zone boundaries within new and existing developments. Minimum pressure criteria are based on maximum day and fire flow requirements while maximum pressure limitations are imposed to protect internal residential and commercial building water piping from failure under static and transient operating conditions. Maintaining water pressures within the limitations summarized in Table H.I will also protect the water distribution system piping, valves, pumps, and other appurtenances from premature failure or increased maintenance requirements. Table H.1 Water Pressure Criteria Operating Condition Criteria Pressure Static Minimum Pressure 65 si Static Maximum Pressure 200 si Peak Hour Minimum Pressure 40 si Maximum Da lus Fire Flow Minimum Pressure 20 si Fire H Brant The potable water distribution system is typically designed to maintain static pressures between 65 pounds per square inch (psi) and 200 psi. The potable water distribution system has been designed to yield a minimum of 40 psi residual pressure at any location under peak hour demand flows and a minimum residual pressure of 20 psi during maximum day demand (MDD) plus fire flow conditions. In addition, potable water mains are sized to maintain a maximum velocity of 10 feet per second (fps) under a maximum day plus fire flow scenario and a maximum velocity of 6-8 fps under peak hour flow conditions. The supply of potable water to the Project will be furnished from the existing and proposed District reservoirs, pump stations, and transmission mains. The 980 Pressure Zone (PZ) will serve the Project. Base on a graded pad elevation range of 556 to 5685 feet, it is anticipated that static hydraulic pressures within the proposed on-site domestic system will range approximately 178 psi to 183 psi. 2. Water Consumption: Domestic water use projections by PBS&J were based on planning criteria provided in the 2001 California Plumbing Code (2001 CPC), Charts A-2 and A-3 of Appendix A. Estimated peak water demands for each building and for the total Development are provided in Table H.2. The peak water demand for the Development is estimated at 685 gallons per minute (gpm) based on a total Development fixture count of 5,380 fixture units. re Static pressure is based on high water level of operational reservoir Eastlake Ill Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP Average Day Demands (ADD) and Maximum Day Demands (MDD) were computed by PBS&J. Conservative peaking factors of 7 were used to convert the peak demand to ADD and 3.0 to convert the ADD to MDD. Based on these peaking factors, the estimated MDD is 294 gpm (422,745 gpd), and ADD is 98 gpm (140,915 gpd) for the Development. In addition, the domestic water demand projections were estimated for the purpose of evaluating the capacity of existing off-site regional facilities during a peak hour flow condition. Table H.2 Pro'ected On-Site Water Demands Unit No. Units Total Fixture Units Site Peak Demand m Carria a Home 141 1,839 Row Home l28 1,901 Tri Plex 120 1,640 Site Total 5,380 685 1. Fixture unit counts provided by Integral Communities on March 17, 2010. 2. Total peak water demand for Development is based the total fixture count and Chart A-2 in A endix A of2001 CPC, no[ the wmulative total of eak demand for all buildin son-site. Source: PRS&J 3. Fire Flows: The Chula Vista Fire Department utilizes the 2001 Uniform Fire Code (2001 UFC) for determining the required fire flows and durations for new developments. The Chula Vista Fire Department required a minimum Fire Flow of 8,000 gpm for a duration of 4 hours for the Olympic Pointe Condominium project. The fire flow includes hydrant and building sprinkler requirements. Since anticipated fire flow requirements to the site will exceed peak domestic flow rates, the existing regional potable water system, as analyzed in the SAMP, will have sufficient capacity to provide adequate domestic water and fire service for the proposed Olympic Pointe Condominium project. B. Recycled Water Recycled water will be used to irrigate all landscaped areas identified in the sub-area master plan, and shall be consistent with the Water Conservation Plan. Land that drains to the Upper and Lower Otay Reservoirs (Tributary Basin) will not be included. This includes the Olympic Pointe Condominium project within the Tributary Basin, potable water will be used for irrigation to avoid the potential for contamination of the drinking water supplies in the reservoirs. Exhibits Sand 10 illustrate the Adopted Potable Water Plan and Recycled Water Plan for Eastlake III, respectively. IL5.4.7.4 RECOMMENDED ON-SITE WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM A. Potable Water: The proposed private potable inch water service lines and supplied through an 8-inch c Parkway. A master meter domestic service connection. domestic water service system. or domestic service system consists of 4-inch, 6-inch, and 8- ~rvice laterals ranging from %-inch to '/a-inches indiameter mnection to the existing public 12-inch main in Olympic nd backflow prevention device are also required at the No Ere service will be provided from the private onsite Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP B. Fire Flows: The proposed PBS&J fire service distribution system is supplied from a recommended 16 inch connection to the 12-inch 980 PZ public main at the Development's entry way in Olympic Parkway. The connection will utilize a 10-inch District-approved reduced pressure backflow devices to isolate the private fire line from the public main. The fire backflow prevention devices are sized based on Febco Master Series manufacturer's data. No domestic service connections will be made to this main. The on-site fire service loop consists of l2-inch and 10-inch PVC with l0-inch PVC dead-end lines branching from the loop to serve the hydrants. Sizing of the riser stubs, fire sprinkler laterals to the buildings and associated pressure and flow for each fire service will be determined during detailed design. The necessary on-site fire service facilities will be verified and provided to ensure that the minimum design criteria per the Fire Department, Building Department, and relevant fire service standards and codes are met prior to final approval of the design plans. C. Recycled Water The Olympic Pointe Condominium Project will connect to the existing 16-inch recycled water main within Olympic Parkway. II.5.4.7.5. FACILITY PHASING: It is anticipated that the project water facilities will be built in one phase. II.S.4.7.6. FINANCING WATER FACILITIES: Potable Water: There are two methods of financing and construction of potable water facilities for the Olympic Pointe Condominium project. These methods are as follows: A. Capacity Fees: OWD's Capital Improvement Program (CIP) provides for the design and construction of facilities by OWD. Through this program, OWD collects an appropriate share of the cost from Developers via the collection of capacity fees from water meter purchases. The capacity fees are collected upon the sale of water meters after building permit issuance according to OWD's fee schedule in effect at the time of sale. CIP projects typically include supply facilities, pumping facilities, operational storage, terminal storage, and transmission mains. Specific CIP projects, if required, are identified in OWD's approved SAMP. The OWD may require amendment to the SAMP for this project. B. Exaction: The Developer designs and constructs facilities that serve their development only. Upon completion, the facilities are dedicated to OWD. According to OWD's policy No. 26, OWD will provide reimbursement for construction and design costs associated with development of these improvements. II.5.4.7.7. THRESHOLD COMPLIANCE AND REQUIREMENTS: A. Prior to issuance of the building permit, the Developer shall present verification to the City Engineer in the form of a letter from Otay Water District that the subdivision will be provided adequate water service and long-term water storage facilities. 2. The developer shall provide water and recycled improvements according the OWD approved SAMP for the Eastlake III SPA Plan Amendment. The construction of potable water and recycled water facilities, based on the approved SAMP, shall be completed prior to the approval of building permits. II.S-83 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP Potable Water System 711 Pipelines -Existing - ' - - 711 Pipelines -Proposed 990 Pipelines -Existing ---- 980 Pipelines -Proposed 18" Pipeline Diameter to future dev. ~~. ~ Souris: John PoweIIIPBS&J /EASTLAKE III SPA "~~~'~ is-isao A planned community by The Eastlake Company ~ , ~ Exhibit 10 980 reservoir II.S-84 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP ~ 944 Recycled Water Line -Existing ~ ~ ~ 944 Recycled water Line -Proposed _ 944 Zone Recycled Water Use Areas Note: Areas tributary to Otay Reservoirs will not use recycled water. Refer also to Technical Repon for additional detail. / EASTLA KE I II A planned cwnmunlty by The Eastlake Company Bouroa: John PoweNPBS3J Ci. Ali Land Planning YY'.Y~~~1YM ~m i znros Exhibit 11 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe , Supplemental PFFP ^„ Recycled Water Plan II.5.4.8. 5EWER II.5.4.8.1 CITY THRESHOLD STANDARDS: A. Sewage flows and volumes shall not exceed City Engineering Standards. B. The City annually provides the City of San Diego Wastewater Department (Metro) with a 12-18 month development forecast and requests confirmation that the projection is within the City's purchased capacity rights and an evaluation of their ability to accommodate the forecast and continuing growth, or the City Engineering Department staff gathers the necessary data. The information provided to the GMOC includes the following: 1. Amount of current capacity now used or committed. 2. Ability of affected facilities to absorb forecast growth. 3. Evaluation of funding and site availability for projected new facilities. 4. Other relevant information. II.5.4.8.2. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The City of San Diego Metro provides sewer treatment services for the City of Chula Vista and 14 other participating agencies in accordance with the teens of amulti-agency agreement (Metro Agreement). The Metro system currently has adequate sewage treatment capacity to serve the region until approximately 2025. The Developer shall pay capacity fees prior to building permit issuance. Development shall not occur without adequate sewer capacity as determined by the City Engineer Building permits will not be issued if the City Engineer has determined that adequate sewer capacity does not exist. All development must comply with the Municipal Code, specifically Municipal Code sections 19.09.O10(A) 6 and 13.14.030. Sewer service to the project site is provided by the City of Chula Vista. The Olympic Pointe Condominium project is located in the Salt Creek drainage basin. The project will connect to the existing public 8 and l2-inch gravity sewer mains located north of Olympic Parkway in the approved Neighborhood C-1 site of the Eastlake SPA Plan. This sewer collects flows generated from the VR-9, VR-10, VR-11 and C-1 sites and conveys the flows to the 15-inch diameter main in Olympic Parkway. The IS-inch main connects to the 18-inch Salt Creek Interceptor. The capacity of these facilities to serve the previous Seniors project was assessed in the Final Eastlake Peninsula off-site Sewer Capacity Analysis Study dated November 8, 2005, by PBS&J. A letter dated June 2Q, 2007, from PBS&J, was requested by city staffto be revised per city comments dated July l7, 2007. PBS&J responded with the Final Windstar Pointe Resort Off-Site Sewer Capacity Analysis Study, dated September 18, 2007. A subsequent letter report was prepared entitled Olympic Pointe Ojfsite Sewer Capacity Analysis Study, dated April 2, 2010 by PBS&J to address the Olympic Pointe project. The aforementioned 2005 study and the 2007 study and the April 2010 study is the basis for the Supplemental PFFP Amendment sewer analysis. Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP PBS&J utilized the City Subdivision Manual to calculated by land use type the average daily wastewater inflows to the off-site sewer. The calculated average inflows for the Development are presented in Table [.l. The Development is estimated to have an average wastewater flow of 77,800 gallons per day (gpd), approximately 21,000 gpd less than the previously approved development's plan in 2007. Table I.1. Projected Average Flow to Off-site Sewer10 Generation Projected Average Flow Land Use Units Pop/Unit Rate d Olympic Pointe 389 2.5 80 gpd/person 77,800 Condominiums Windstar Pointe 494 2.5 80 gpd/person 98,800 Resort Decrease 21,000 J'ource: rvx~/ Projected wastewater flows from the Olympic Pointe Condominium Project will ultimately discharge into the Salt Creek Interceptor. The previous approved land use for the site was Windstar Pointe Resort, a 494 unit apartment project. The average daily sewage flow for Windstar Pointe was estimated to be 98,800 gpd. Table 1.1 presents a comparison of the average wastewater flow projections between the two multi-family residential. The Olympic Pointe Condominium Project will result in an decrease in average flow of 21,000 gpd. According to the GMOC 2009 Annual Report and City Staff, the City's current contracted capacity rights with Metro are expected to be exceeded in about five years (see Table 1.2). The city has begun working with Metro to address the best way to increase the city's allocated amount of sewage treatment capacity in order to meet buildout sewage flow estimates. The City of San Diego provides sewer treatment services for the City of Chula Vista and 14 other participating agencies in accordance with the terms of amulti-agency agreement (Metro Agreement). The City of Chula Vista holds capacity rights of 19.843 mgd in the Metro system. The City has additional capacity of 1.027 mgd through the Re-Rating process. The total entitled capacity rights that the City of Chula Vista is 20.870 mgd. The City's current average wastewater flow into the Metro system is approximately 16.2 mgd. The Metro system currently has adequate sewerage treatment capacity to serve the region until approximately 2025. The City of Chula Vista may reach its contractual capacity limits prior to 2025. The Metro system includes the Point Loma Sewage Treatment Plant, the North City Reclamation Plant and the Southbay Treatment Plant. For the longer term capacity needs the Wastewater Master Plan, completed in 2005, provides the city's buildout treatment capacity and infrastructure needs. In addition, it also established the basis for the sewer capacity fee update. 20 The PBS&J 2010 Study assumed that all other off-site wastewater flows are the same as in their September 2007 Analysis. II.S-87 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP Table I.2 Estimated Sewa a Flow and Treatment Ca aci Projection for next Projection for next Projection Curren[ Flow 18 mo. 5 ears "Buildout" Average Flow 16 2 17.326 19.251 26.2* MGD) Ca aci 20.87** 20.87** 20.87** 20.87** Buildout Projection based on the General Plan Update (Adopted General Plan "Buildout" = 26.2 MGD) * Increase in capacity is based on the allocation of additional capacity rights resulting from the construction of the new Sou[hbay Treatment Plank Jource: uty o) c,nu~a vista IL5.4.8.3. FACILITY ANALYSIS: The PBS&J 2010 study was prepared as an update to the PBS&J study. Both PBS&J studies used calculations in accordance with the methods described in the City of Chula Vista Subdivision Manual. Dwelling unit counts for the Windstar Pointe Resort project were based upon information provided to PBS&J by P&D Consultants and the Preliminary Sewer Study for Eastlake III Woods and Vistas. Dwelling unit counts for the Olympic Pointe Condominium project were based upon information provided to PBS&J by Fuscoe Engineering. The average daily wastewater inflows to the off-site sewer were calculated at each node by land use type (see Final Windstar Pointe Resort Off-Site Sewer Capacity Analysis Study dated September 18, 2007, by PBS&J for details) and updated by the PBS&J 2010 study (see Olympic Pointe Off- Site Sewer Capacity Analysis Study dated April 2, 2010 by PBS&J). The Salt Creek Interceptor Sewer Hydraulic Basis of Design Report, dated 2002 by Dudek & Associates, identified Reach 5 as a critical reach of the interceptor sewer Since the 2002 analysis assumed a connection point for the EUC flows downstream of Reach 5, the EUC flow contribution, aswell asUniversity -Phase 1 and High Tech High, were not originally considered. The PBS&J September 18, 2007, study reevaluates Reach 5 with the addition of the current estimate of flows to verify that capacity is available in the Salt Creek Interceptor. The City of Chula Vista's 2004 Update to the Salt Creek Sewer Basin Plan (2004 Basin Plan Update) identified changes in development projections in the Salt Creek Basin as of August 2004, but this was used as an internal accounting document only. PBSRtJ obtained city projections from the Chula Vista Planning Department. The September 2007 PBS&J sewer study of the Windstar Pointe project determined that 16,477 EDUs were projected to contribute flows to Reach 5. The proposed Olympic Pointe project will reduce flows into the Salt Creek Interceptor by an additional 79 EDUs resulting in 16,398 EDUs contributing to Reach 5. The contributing flows assumed in the 2007 study are less than those projected in the 2002 Design Report total. Additionally, PBS&J analyzed the capacity of the critical reach under current projections in accordance with the more conservative City Subdivision Manual criteria of 265 gpd/EDU. Table I.4 illustrates that the critical reach identified in the 2002 Design Report will flow at 68.3 percent full under the ultimate maximum condition, which is less than the City's design criterion of 75 percent. [I.5-88 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP Table I.3 Critical Reach Calculation Average Daily Equiv Peakin Peak Design Flow Dia Sl pe Depth d/D Velocity Pi e Flow . g . o p EDU gpd Pop. Factor gpd BPm (in) (/o) (in) (/o) (fps) Reach 16,398 4,345,565 54,320 l.7 7,387,460 5,130.2 24 0.23 16.39 68.3% 5.0 5 1. Average flow based on maximum ultimate condition of 563 EDUs from [he F.UC Source: PBS&J PBS&J concluded that there are no significant impacts to the existing off-site wastewater facilities due to the proposed reduction in residential units of the Olympic Pointe Condominium project based on the off-site sewer analysis and the conclusions in the previously submitted September 2007 analysis study. The critical reach in the Salt Creek Interceptor will be in compliance with the City Design Criteria. II.5.4.8.4. FACILITY PHASING One primary phase of development is proposed due to the need to balance grading and complete infrastructure improvements in a single increment. The off-site connection to the City Sewer system shall be constructed at the first phase of the project. The development of individual building sites will commence as the market dictates. Build-out of all building sites may occur over a several year period. Sewer laterals to serve the proposed project are the responsibility of the developer. IL5.4.8.5. FINANCING SEWER FACILITIES: To fund the necessary future improvements to the Salt Creek Interceptor Sewer, development impact fees have been established by the City of Chula Vista. Adoption of City of Chula Vista Ordinance Number 2617, as amended, established a fee to be paid for future development within the Salt Creek Basin that connects into the existing system. The Chula Vista City Council has authorized the collection of a fee to aid in the cost of processing sewerage generated in the city. The current fee is $1,330/EDU. Single Family Dwellings are considered 1.00 EDU and Multi-Family Units (apartments and condominiums) are considered .75 EDU. The Sewer Capacity Fee for commercial projects is based on the number of Equivalent Fixture Units (EFU). The Sewer Capacity Fee is subject to periodic adjustments. The following table summarizes the fees to be paid by the Olympic Pointe Project. These fees will be collected before building permits are issued. Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP Table I.4Z` Projected Olympic Pointe Condominium Estimated Sewer Fees Land Use Acres EDU's/ Fee Estimated Fee Olympic Pointe 18.2 293.6 Salt Creek Sewer DIF $390,488 Condominium ro'ect $1,330/-EDU Sewerage Olympic Pointe 18.2 293.6 Participation Fee $1,021,141 Condominium $3,478/EDU Total 18.2 293.6 $1,411,629 II.5.4.8.6. THRESHOLD COMPLIANCE AND REQUIREMENTS: Based on the PBS&J off-site sewer analysis, there are no significant impacts to the existing off-site wastewater facilities due to the proposed Olympic Pointe Condominium Project. The critical reach in the Salt Creek Interceptor and the off-site pipe reaches are in compliance with the City Design Criteria. The Olympic Pointe Condominium Project shall pay fees pursuant to City of Chula Vista ordinance, as may be amended from time to time, or provide sewer improvements, as needed. Fees shall be paid prior to the issuance of Building Permits. The City of San Diego Metropolitan Wastewater Department ("Metro") provides sewer treatment services for the City of Chula Vista and 14 other participating agencies in accordance with the terms of amulti-agency agreement ("Metro Agreement'). The Metro system currently has adequate sewerage treatment capacity to serve the region until approximately 2025 when new treatment facilities are expected to become operational. The City of Chula Vista, however, may reach its contractual capacity limits sooner than 2025. The developer shall pay capacity fees at building permit issuance. Development shall not occur without adequate sewer capacity as determined by the City Engineer. Building permits will not be issued if the City Engineer has determined that adequate sewer capacity does not exist. All development must comply with the Municipal Code, specifically M.C. Sections 19.09.010 (A) 6 and 13.14.030. Z' This table is only an estimate of the potential fees that may be required for the Olympic Pointe Condominium Project. Actual fees will be calculated at the time building permits are issued and may be different than this table. Table does not include the current Sewer Administration Fee, which is currently $45Building Connection. Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP ~` 1c' ~~~ ~ S\ N . ~ K ibis k _.-a ,_ `` ~~ t` t ~ 1 \ w ` ~'Y ~ 0 t ~ } ow ~q~r \1~ '~ . `` \ ' ~,~ Internal Sewer Line and flow direction Existing Gravity Sewer Main Note: The sewer system indicated is subject to technical refinement during the subdivisbn process. Reter also to Techinical Sewer Reports for additional detail. Tnrm~ng Crum, ! ~% ~ Lnwe,r Source: S880, Inc. /EASTLAKE III SPA A planned community by The Eastlake Company ~. ,.,, ~arxi P~IOnnM~ ~t.J tznros Exhibit 12 Sewer Plan Adopted t ~i \" 1- rI~ y` ~'~ 1 ~1 ~w UPPai ~ Rexnarr ~' "/4 `~ ~-~ `~ ~ /~~,`w ti ~ 1 \ i~ `~~ - + ~ ~ ~~ / + ! ~ ~, f\ f' / 1 ~1\Y l ± + Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP IL5.4.9. DRAINAGE II.5.4.9.1. EXISTING CITY THRESHOLD STANDARDS: A. Storm water flows and volumes shall not exceed City Engineering Standards. B. The GMOC shall annually review the performance of the City's storm drain system to determine its ability to meet the City's goals and objectives. II.S.4.9.2. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The Olympic Pointe Condominium property is located southwest of the intersection of Olympic Parkway and Wueste Road. The elevations on the parcel range from approximately 520 to 580 feet above mean sea level. The proposed development is located on an undeveloped, graded parcel consisting of approximately 18.4-acres of graded pad area and approximately 1.7-acres of vegetated slopes. The 1.7-acres are designated open space and are not the subject of the Eastlake III SPA Amendment. The 18.4-acre site is proposed for 389 multi-family residential units. The project will include three types of condominium units including two-story triplexes, three-story row homes, and three-story carriage units. Private streets within the project consist of a main entrance road, a loop road around the perimeter of the site, and alleys that provide access to the majority of the condominium units. Parking for the units will be provided in garages, with surface parking for guests and visitors. A recreation center with pool will be located in the southeast corner of the project. The entrance to the project will be from Olympic Parkway. Generally, the Runoff from the project site flows in a north/northwesterly direction. Runoff is collected in an existing desilting basin at the northwesterly corner of the site. After settling, the runoff is conveyed via a riser pipe to an existing 42" RCP that leaves the site and connects to a 42" public storm drain system along the north side of Olympic Parkway. The existing 42" storm drain conveys runoff from the site and Olympic Parkway approximately 0.5 miles to the west, where it discharges into Salt Creek. This storm drain in Olympic Parkway has been sized for the ultimate development of the project site and surrounding area. The discharge point to Salt Creek is located just downstream of a regional detention facility. This facility was designed for the ultimate development of the area and over detains the upstream flows in order to account for the additional flow from the Olympic Parkway storm drain system. IL5.4.9.3. DRAINAGE FACILITY ANALYSIS: The Olympic Pointe project site was previously proposed as the Windstar Pointe Resort, which was ahigh-density apartment project with 494 dwelling units. The hydrologic and hydraulic aspects of this project were analyzed in the Drainage Study for Windstar Pointe Resort, dated January 4, 2008 by Rick Engineering. The Rick Engineering Study for Windstar Pointe Resort was reviewed and approved by the City of Chula Vista, and included analysis of the public storm drain system in Olympic Parkway and the Salt Creek detention facility. The Drainage Study for Windstar Pointe Resort concluded that the 50-year peak discharge from the Windstar Pointe Resort was 76.9 cfs and that the downstream storm drain system in Olympic Parkway was adequate to convey this runoff. Additionally, the Salt Creek detention facility was shown to over detain flows from the regional area for the 2-year, 10-year, 50-year and 100-year storms such that the Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP development of the Windstar Pointe Resort would not increase flow rates in Salt Creek just south of Olympic Parkway to above historical levels. Thus, the study concluded that onsite detention was not required for the Windstar Pointe Resort. A Drainage Study Addendum for Olympic Pointe, dated May 2010 by Fuscoe Engineering was submitted to the City of Chula as an addendum or update to the previously approved Drainage Study for Windstar Pointe Resort, dated January 4, 2008 by Rick Engineering. The Fuscoe Engineering study analyzed the onsite hydrology of the Olympic Pointe. Fuscoe concluded that the Olympic Pointe project will not have a substantial impact on the hydrology of the surrounding area and that the hydrology/hydraulics characteristics of Olympic Pointe are in accordance with the approved Drainage Study for Windstar Pointe Resort. The storm drain system for Olympic Pointe has been designed with adequate capacity to safely convey runoff From the 50-year storm in accordance with the design guidelines of the City of Chula Vista. Additionally, the downstream storm drain system in Olympic Parkway has adequate capacity to convey flows from the project site to Salt Creek. Although discharge from the project site will increase due to the construction of the project, the Salt Creek detention facility overdetains flows from the region such that the project will have no adverse impacts on Salt Creek. IL5.4.9.4. UaBAN Ru[v-oFF: A. Existine Conditions: The Olympic Pointe Condominium project is subject to National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements. NPDES requirements are contained in Section 402(p) of the Federal Clean Water Act, which established a framework for regulating storm water discharges from municipal, industrial, and construction activities. These requirements are implemented through permits issued by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) or the local Regional Water Quality Control Board in which the project is located. [n San Diego County the local board is the California Regional Water Quality Control Board San Diego Region, herein (SDRWQCB). For implementation through the City of Chula Vista a Water Quality Technical Report (WQTR) is required per the 2010 City of Chula Vista Development Storm Water Manual, and City Municipal Code Chapter 14.20, under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Municipal Permit, Order No. R9- 2007-0001. A Preliminary Water Quality Technical Report for Olympic Pointe, dated May 2010, by Fuscoe Engineering was prepared to address the 2010 storm water requirements of the City of Chula Vista, including all LID (Low Impact Development) BMP, and Hydromodification Control BMP requirements. This report updates the previous Water Quality Technical Report for Windstar Pointe Resort, dated September 19, 2007, by Rick Engineering. The 2010 City of Chula Vista Development Storm Water Manual was used by Fuscoe Engineering to comply with the rules and regulations enforced by the City, under RWQCB Permit 2007-0001 issued by the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board to the County of San Diego, and the incorporated cities within. The Olympic Pointe Condominium project is a planned attached residential development. The Olympic Pointe Condominium project applies to three priority project categories based on Appendix B of the City of Chula Vista's Storm Water Standards Manual (1) Home subdivisions of over 10 units, (2) Parking lots 5,000 square feet or more with 15 or II.S-93 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP more parking spaces, and potentially exposed to urban runoff; and (3) Streets, roads, highways, and freeways. The San Diego Basin Plan dated September 8, 1994, indicates that the proposed Olympic Pointe Condominium project is located in the following hydrologic basin planning area: Savage Hydrologic Sub Area within the Dulzura Hydrologic Area within the Otay Hydrologic Unit. The corresponding number designation is 910.31 (Region `9', Hydrologic Unit `10', Hydrologic Area `3', Hydrologic Sub Area `1'). The drainage path for the Olympic Pointe Condominiums, however, goes through the Otay Valley Hydrologic Arca (910.20) which also contains Poggi Canyon Creek, a 303(d) listed water body. The drainage from the Olympic Pointe Condominium project does not directly dischazge to Poggi Canyon Creek. Based on the definition of primary pollutants of concern from the Storm Water Standards Manual, there are no primary pollutants of concern for the project. For projects where no primary pollutants of concern exist, the identified pollutants of concern shall be considered secondary pollutants of concern. Post-construction BMPs were selected for the project based on the anticipated pollutants. B. Pre-Construction Conditions and Flow: The Drainage Study for Windstar Pointe Resort by Rick Engineering, dated January 4, 2008, determined the following pre-construction flow rates at Olympic Parkway below the Salt Creek detention facility. Table J.1 Existin Draina a Flows DRAINAGE CONDITION AREA Qz(CFS Q~e(CFS) (CF9) Qioo(CFS) S .MILES Historical 2.52 789 1,623 2,480 2,874 Jource: huscoe Cngineenng C. Post-Construction Conditions and Flow Fuscoe Engineering prepared Onsite runoff calculations for the 50-year 6-hour storm event. The proposed development was assigned a runoff coefficient of 0.72 based on the projects impervious area. The peak runoff from the project during the 50-year storm event will be approximately 59 cfs. The Rick Engineering Drainage Study determined the pre-construction flow rates at Olympic Parkway below the Salt Creek detention facility. The Rick analysis accounted for 76.9 cfs from the project site, so actual runoff quantities after the development of Olympic Pointe will be slightly below those presented in the table. These flows are below the historical condition due to the attenuation provided by the Salt Creek detention facility. Fuscoe determined that the development of Olympic Pointe will not create any hydrologic conditions of concern, and no onsite detention is required. Table J.2 Pro osed Draina a Flows Condition Drainage Area QZ(CFS Q~o(CFS) Qso(CFS) Q~eo(CFS) s .miles Post- 3.64 774 1,360 2,297 2,723 Pro'ect Jource: Puscae Cngtneertng Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP 1. Potential Pollutants: Based on the Storm Water Standards Manual, the Windstar Pointe Resort project was as a whole expected to generate the following pollutants: sediment, nutrients, heavy metals, organic compounds, trash and debris, oxygen demanding substances, oil and grease, bacteria and viruses, and pesticides; because it includes the following priority project categories: "Attached Residential Development," "Parking Lots," and "Streets, Highways & Freeways" (see table below). ~~ f ~ ~ 1y ~ ~ ~ z ,~i ~ - Development a+ e ~n ~ o -y ~' h Q Q V ~ y r~i CJ d ~ s, > iA ~ o y L •C ODD A C7 ~ ~ C ~ '~ ~ ~ " ms Type ~ x~ 'e ~ ~A ~ e ° o `~ ~ z ~ N Q~ ~ a Detached X X X X X X X ~ - , ~ =~ , Commercial P P Pt~t }( p<'> ~{ p<t> P(s> Automotive X Xt4t «> X X Restaurants X X X X Steep Hillside X X X X X X iii ,,: ,, ~ ... Notes: X =Anticipated P= Potential Q) A potential pollutant if landscaping exists on-site. (2) A potential pollutant if the project includes uncovered parking areas (3) A potential pollutant if laud use involves food or animal waste products. (4) Including petroleum hydrocarbons (s) Including solvents wurce: ruscoe rngrneenrg The City of Chula Vista Development Storm Water Manual groups pollutants into categories based on their behavior in a liquid- course sediments and trash, pollutants that tend to associate with fine particles during treatment, and pollutants that tend to be dissolved following treatment. The following table categorizes the anticipated and potential pollutants from the project into these groups. II.S-95 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP Table J.4 Grou in of Pollutants Course Sediment and Trash Pollutants that tend to associate with Fine Particles durin treatment Pollutants that tend to be dissolved followin treatment Sediment X X Nutrients X X Hea Metals X Or anic Com ounds X Trash & Debris X X Oxygen Demanding Substances X Bacteria X Oil & Grease X Pesticides X Source: Huscae Engineenng Receiving waters have 303(d) beneficial use impairments consisting of PCBs. Since PCBs have been banned in the United States since 1979 due to their toxicity, PCBs are not an anticipated or potential pollutant from the project. Therefore, the project has no primary pollutants of concern, which are designated as anticipated or potential pollutants from the proposed site that also have 303(d) impairments downstream. Table J.5 Pollutants of Concern Primary Pollutants of Concern Specific 303(D) Impairment None None Source.' Fuscoe Engineering In both the pre and post project condition the project area drains northerly from the Olympic Pointe Condominium project site and then joins an existing storm drain system along Olympic Parkway. Runoff from the project site will drain northerly from the site and confluence with an existing storm drain system along Olympic Parkway. As a second line of defense against runoff pollution, an existing CDS unit is located in this storm drain system. The existing storm drain system will convey flows westerly to Salt Creek. The flows outlet in Salt Creek just downstream of an existing detention facility designed to over detain for the ultimate buildout of the Olympic Pointe Condominium site. Salt Creek will convey the flows southerly to the Otay River. The Otay River conveys the flows westerly until ultimately conveyed to the Pacific Ocean. Just u Creek,' detain detenti pstream of where the there is an existing flows to account for the on basin is in essence Parkway system basin, which has ultimate buildout of the ~vo detention basins in es not outlet into either confluence's with Salt been designed to over- surrounding area. This series. The Olympic of the detention basins. Parkway storm drain system do ILS-96 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP Olympic detention However, this detention basin has been designed to over detain for the 5-, 10-, 25-, 50-, and 100-year storm events for the ultimate development of the surrounding area, .including the project site. Because a 2-year storm analysis is required to show that this detention basin is mitigating for possible erosion problems, a 2-year analysis was run by Rick Engineering. The Rick Engineering report determined that the existing detention basin adequately mitigates for the 2-, 10-, 50-, and 100-year storm events, no on site detention is necessary and no pre-project analyses for the Windstaz Pointe Resort site were performed. 2. Construction BMPs The constmction of the Olympic Pointe project will disturb more than one acre of land. Therefore, the project construction will need a Statewide General Constmction Permit (GCP) and a Waste Discharge Identification (WDID) number prior to the beginning of site preparation and grading operations. The Fuscoe Engineering study discusses the construction phase pollutants and BMPs in general terms only. These subjects will be addressed in more detail in a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan that will be completed prior to the start of construction. 3. Post Construction BMPs To address water quality, BMPs will be implemented regarding the projects site planning, activities on site, and structural treatment. The 2010 Ciry of Chula Vista Development Storm Water Manual guidelines were utilized by Fuscoe Engineering in the selection of post constmction BMPs. In addition, any features or activities of in the project that aze applicable for the inclusion of California Storm Water Quality Association (CASQA) BMPs are included as well. a. Low Impact Development Site Design BMPs The Olympic Pointe project will be designed to include LID Site Design BMPs, which reduce runoff, prevent storm water pollution associated with the project, and conserve natural azeas onsite. Incorporating LID design strategies for priority development projects is required per R9-2007-0001, the Municipal Storm Water Permit issued to the County of San Diego and the incorporated cities and districts within. The Fuscoe Preliminary WQTR provides a discussion of the suitability and, where feasible, implementation of the LID BMPs listed in Table 3.3 of the City of Chula Vista Development Storm Water Manual. See Exhibit 13, WQTR Exftibit, for locations of LID site design BMPs. b. Source Control BMPs "Source Control BMP (both structural and non-structural)" means land use or site planning practices, or structures that aim to prevent urban runoff pollution by reducing the potential for contamination at the source of pollution. Source Control BMPs minimize the contact between pollutants and urban runoff. Based on the City of Chula Vista Development Storm Water Manual, the following is a summary of the Source Control BMPs are applicable to Olympic Pointe project22: • Provide storm water conveyance system stenciling and signage: Curb stenciling for storm drain inlets associated with the project shall say "No u Please see the City of Chula Vista Development Storm Water Manual for complete Source Control descriptions, Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP Dumping- I Live Downstream" or equivalent massage as desired by the City of Chula Vista. • Design trash storage areas to reduce pollution introduction: Trash enclosures will be on an impervious surface, walled, covered by a roof, and designed in accordance with Chula Vista Municipal Code 09.58.340. • Use efficient irrigation systems and landscape design: Rain shutoff devices will be required to prevent irrigation during and after precipitation events. • Building and grounds maintenance: Additional Building and Grounds Maintenance BMPs from SC-41 to be implemented to prevent or reduce the introduction of nutrients from fertilizers. • Employ integrated pest management principles: Eliminate and/or reduce the need for pesticide use in the project through maintenance, using native plant materials and construction techniques. • Pool and fountain maintenance: The pool in the recreation center will be maintained in accordance with SC-72, "Fountain and Pool Maintenance." • Design new building fire sprinklers systems to enable discharge to sanitary sewer: The buildings within the project that provide fire sprinkler systems shall be able to drain to sanitary sewer for operational maintenance and testing. • Plazas, sidewalks, and parking lots: Plazas, sidewalks and parking lots shall be swept regularly to prevent the accumulation of letter and debris. • Roads (Individual Priority Project Category): Drainage from the interior roadways of the project will drain to either permeable pavers or high-rate biofilters. • Residential Driveways & Guest Parking (Individual Priority Project Category): The alleys within the project will drain to a strip of permeable pavers along the low side of the alley • Surface Parking Areas (Individual Priority Project Category): Much of the guest parking areas will be paved with permeable pavers as well, while the remaining parking spaces will drain either to the permeable pavers or to high-rate biofilters. D. Treatment Control BMPs The Olympic Pointe Project is designed with structural treatment facilities to remove pollutants contained in storm water runoff. Internal project rnnnoff will flow from impervious and semi-pervious surfaces, picking up pollutants and other associated debris as it does so. Treatment of these anticipated pollutants will be accomplished by implementing the BMPs from the list below. Table J.6 below is based on the treatment matrix located in the City of Chula Vista Development Storm Water Manual. While there are no primary pollutants of concern for the project, anticipated and potential pollutants from the project exist in all three categories of pollutants. Treatment Control BMPs will be implemented to remove these anticipated and potential pollutants to the Maximum Extent Practicable (MEP). The shaded columns on Table J.6 indicate the Treatment Control BMPs proposed for the Olympic Pointe project. II.S-98 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP • Treatment Control 1- Bioretention Basins The project proposes bioretention basins along the main entry road in the central portion of the site. See Exhibit 13, WQTR Exhibit, For the locations of bioretention basins. Roadway drainage will be diverted via a sidewalk under drain. The drainage is directed to the depressed landscaped areas between the rows of buildings. The bioretention basins will be sized in accordance with City Regulations. These basins provide a 6" depth of ponding on the surface, and a surface area of at least 4% of the tributary area. The basins will be planted with turf and will be underlain by a 4" layer of treatment soil, a 16" layer of treatment soil, and a gravel layer with a perforated pipe to act as a subdrain. The bioretention basins will be lined with an impermeable liner due to the poor infiltration capacity of the onsite soils. See the Fuscoe Engineering Report for details. ,g • Treatment Control 2 -Permeable Pavers Permeable pavers are planned for the alleys and much of the surface parking areas throughout the project. These pavers will be located in a 4' wide strip along the low side of the alley to intercept and treat runoff from the building roof drains on either side of the alley along with runoff from the alley pavement. In addition, permeable pavers will also be strategically used in the surface parking areas to treat runoff from the site roads, as well as from adjacent buildings, hardscape, and landscaping. Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP Treatment Control 3 -High Rate Biofilters The project proposes to use proprietary high-rate biofilters in two locations on the project to treat runoff from the roadways and buildings. The high-rate biofilters are used in locations where it is not feasible to drain runoff to landscaping, bioretention basins, or areas of permeable pavers due to space and slope constraints. The Filters system is proposed as an effective treatment system for the size of the tributary areas draining to the two locations. E. Hydromodification BMPs On July 14, 2010, the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Diego Region (San Diego Water Board) adopted Tentative Resolution No. R9-2010-0066, a Resolution for Approval of the Hydromodification Management Plan for the County of San Diego, the Incorporated Cities of San Diego County, the San Diego Unified Port District, and the San Diego County Regional Airport Authority. This action was taken pursuant to Section D.l .g. of Order No. R9-2007-0001. Provisions D.l.g and J.2.a of Order No. R9-2007-0001 (the San Diego County Municipal Storm Water Permit) require the incorporated cities of San Diego County, the San Diego Unified Port District, and the San Diego County Regional Airport Authority (Copermittces) to submit a Hydromodification Management Plan (HMP) to manage increases in runoff discharge rates and durations from all Priority Development Projects (PDPs), where such increased rates and durations are likely to cause increased erosion of channel bed and banks, sediment pollutant generation, or other impacts to beneficial uses and stream habitat due to increased erosive force. The City of Chula Vista is required to incorporate the approved HMP into its local SUSMP and implement the HMP for all applicable Priority Development Projects (PDPs) by January 14, 201 L In the mean time and before the new HMP requirements take effect on January 14, 2011, development projects as applicable must meet the Interim Hydromodification Management Requirements as described in Section 3.6.2.d of the Chula Vista Development Storm Water Manual. F. Maintenance The owner of the project shall enter into a Storm Water Management Facilities Maintenance Agreement with Grant of Access and Covenants with the City. The terms of this agreement will run with the land, so the responsibility may be pass to the "to-be-formed homeowner's association." The property owner or the "to-be-formed" homeowner's association shall be responsible for all areas within private property as follows: properly disposing of waste material from their assumed areas within the project site, maintaining landscaping throughout those areas in a manner that will prevent soil erosion and minimize sediment transport, maintaining drainage facilities in a clean manner and in good repair, and properly maintaining all post-construction BMPs (both structural and non-structural) that exist within the private property of the project. G. Storm Water Quality Conclusions: The project has the potential to introduce pollutants into storm water runoff. However, LID Site Design, Source Control, and Treatment Control BMPs will be required in order to maintain water quality. The use of Source Control and LID Site Design BMPs in practice through the day-to-day function of the project will result in a decreased potential for storm water pollution. Treatment Control BMPs will function around the clock, IL5-100 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP providing removal of pollutants from storm water runoff'. In addition, maintenance will be conducted by a "To-Be-Formed Homeowner's Association," or a new owner or a responsible party who will be responsible for maintaining the Site Design, Source Control, and Treatment Control BMPs throughout the lifetime of the project. ILS.4.9.5. FINANCING DRAINAGE FACILITIES: A. On-site facilities: City policy requires that all master planned developments provide for the conveyance of storm waters throughout the project to City Engineering standards. As such, the Developer will be required to construct those facilities to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. B. Maintenance of On-site Facilities: Storm drain facilities not located within the right of way of a public street or easement dedicated to the City of Chula Vista shall be private and maintained by the property owners. These facilities include graded swales, concrete swales, drainage inlets, pipes, headwalls, sedimentation basins, stormwater treatment devices, etc. Before the approval of grading plans for the site, the Developer shall enter into a Storm Water Maintenance Agreement with the City to ensure the maintenance and operation of the aforementioned On-site Facilities. C. Off-site facilities: Any permanent or temporary storm drain facilities required by the City Engineer of Chula Vista, shall be designed and installed pursuant to city standards. D. Maintenance of Off-site facilities: Storm drain facilities constructed to convey, collect, detain or retain runoff from the project, that are not located within the right of way of a public street or easement dedicated to the City of Chula Vista, will be maintained by the City of Chula Vista. These facilities include but aze not limited to graded swales, concrete swales, drainage inlets, pipes, headwalls, sedimentation basins, detention basins, stormwater treatment devices, etc. IL5.4.9.6. THRESHOLD COMPLIANCE AND REQUIREMENTS: A. The Developer of the Olympic Pointe Condominium project shall enter in to a Storm Water Facilities Maintenance Agreement with the City before approval of the grading plans for the site. The Developer shall agree to install, inspect, maintain, repair and replace all private Storm Water Management Facilities within the Developer's project. B. Prior to approval of grading plans, the Developer shall demonstrate the adequacy of existing drainage runoff detention facilities or include, in the grading plans, the construction of additional detention facilities, to ensure that the maximum allowable discharges after development do not exceed pre-development discharges, all to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The Developer shall provide for the future maintenance of the detention basin facilities through the establishment of a Master Home Owners Association, or other funding mechanism as approved by the City. C. Development of this project shall comply with all requirements of State Water Resources Control Boazd (SWRCB) NPDES General Permit No. CAS000002, Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges of Storm Water Runoff Associated with Construction Activity. In accordance with said Permit, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and a Monitoring Program Plan shall be developed and implemented concurrent with the commencement of grading activities. The SWPPP shall specify both construction and post-construction structural and non-structural pollution prevention measures. The SWPPP shall also address operation and maintenance ofpost-construction Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP pollution prevention measures, including short-term and long-term funding sources and the party or parties that will be responsible for the implementation of said measures. A complete and accurate Notice-of-Intent (NOn must be filed with the SWRCB. A copy of the acknowledgement from the SWRCB that a NOl has been received for this project shall be filed with the City of Chula Vista when received. Further, a copy of the completed NOI from the SWRCB showing the Permit Number for this project shall be filed with the City of Chula Vista when received. The applicant is required to complete the applicable forms (see City of Chula Vista's Development and Redevelopment Storm Water Management Requirements Manual) and comply with the Manual's requirements. The Storm Water Manual is available on the web at: http://www.chulav istaca.gov/C ity_Serv ices/Deve lopment_Services/Engineers ng/storm WaterManual.asp Pursuant to NPDES Municipal Permit, Order No. 2007-0001, the proposed project is considered a Priority Development Project and therefore subject to the requirements of the Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plans (SUSMPs) and Numeric Sizing Criteria. D. The owner/developer of the property is responsible for the maintenance of the BMPs. A Storm Water Management Facilities Maintenance Agreement with Grant of Access and Covenants shall be executed between the City of Chula Vista and the owner/developer. The terms of the agreement will run with the land. The responsibility may be passed to the "to-be-formed" homeowner's association. E. Prior to the issuing of a grading permit for the project, a "Storm Water Management Facilities Maintenance Agreement" will be executed between the owner/developer of the property and the City of Chula Vista. The owner/developer of the property shall verify BMP implementation and ongoing maintenance through inspection, self-certification, survey, or other equally effective measure. The certification shall verify that, at a minimum, the inspection and maintenance of all structural BMPs including inspection and performance of any required maintenance in the late summer /early fall, prior to the start of the rainy season. The enforcement and verification of this task is conducted by The City of Chula Vista Storm Water NPDES Coordinator, who can be reached at 619-397-6000, or at 1800 Maxwell Road, Chula Vista, CA 91911. G. The City of Chula Vista will only verify that the appropriate documentation of maintenance exists. It is the owner/developer's sole responsibility to conduct maintenance and provide work orders/receipts etc, upon request. H. If the Olympic Pointe project is approved by the City Council before the new HMP requirements take effect on January 14, 2011, shall if applicable, meet the Interim Hydromodification Management Requirements as described in Section 3.6.2.d of the Chula Vista Development Storm Water Manual. If the Olympic Pointe project is approved by the City Council on or after January 14, 2011, shall if applicable, meet the Hydromodification Management Requirements as described in the Chula V ista Development Storm Water Manual. Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP Storm Drainage ~r~=- ~~ ' ~, Adopted i ( / / ~ '_ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~, \ ~P~~ l \ uppe. ~~ ~ °~ P1 ' P ~ \_ ~_ - ~ \ L ~ ~E ~ ~ ~ Lower P ~ Proposed Detension Basin ~ ~ ~ / E ® Existing Detension Basin °"`°~ i ~ ~ - ~ E ~~"'~ Existing Strorm Drain O1;",~',"' P ~~ Proposed Storm Drain ~- Direction of Drainage /EASTLAKE III SPA A planned community by The Eastlake Company Source: SBd~O, Inc. ~~~~ rl ~~ t. ~ io-iaao Exhibit 13 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP Exhibit 14 WQTR Exhibit IEGENO io t~iMweux ~_ ~~ Per®wua~pt ICR®ccaKVn NMW~ ~. ~~ ~ .~x~ ci raw'r ~\ IIO~NRMM \ laFAiMFNf CONIaOL BE1R wWarerwm ~A ~~ ~ w~mnioNr n~~ At~w Ia~PI ~~ ~ 42 SRF OE5IGN JAYS Mfaum~ouut ~~~~ nOX~llilYM lNPfii~i' ~~ Soa~ WIN4FOMIATON ~. 1 gnlWaTpl.NiWY04KMn NOIO YTS tlOYIONaR l 1 1I ov ~~ 6 ~~m ~~lflSSswm ~r~~ s s~r~"'is ~WCo //~ rev °('-m s• s BA1E FXNIBR WARP WWIY iEU1NKLL CldI ~RISCOF ~ /' WT.WKIpNR m 'v9 ,~ II.5-104 Eastlake III Olmpic Pointe Supplemental PFFP II.5.4.10. AIR QUALITY II.5.4.10.1. CITY THRESHOLD STANDARDS: The City annually provides the San Diego Air Pollution Control District (APCD) with a 12 to 18 month development forecast and requests an evaluation of its impact on current and future air quality management programs, along with recent air quality data. The growth forecast and APCD response letters must be provided to the GMOC for inclusion in its review. II.5.4.10.2. SERVICE ANALYSIS: Air Quality Improvement Plan: The City of Chula Vista has a Growth Management Element (GME) in its General Plan. One of the stated objectives of the GME is to be proactive in its planning to meet federal and state air quality standards. This objective is incorporated into the GME's action program. Although adopted in 1989, the GME has remained current by not only requiring air pollution reduction measures identified in 1989 but also "measures developed in the future." To implement the GME, the City Council has adopted the Growth Management Program that requires Air Quality Improvement Plans (AQIP) for major development projects (50 residential units or commercial/industrial projects with equivalent air quality impacts). Title l9 (Sec. 19.09.0508) of the Chula Vista Municipal Code requires that a SPA submittal contain an AQIP. The AQ[P shall include an assessment of how the project has been designed to reduce emissions as well as identify mitigation measures in accordance with the adopted AQIP Guidelines. See the Air Quadity Technical Report for the Olympic Pointe Project, dated June 2010 by Dudek. The project was previously evaluated under the 2002 AQIP Guidelines and, pursuant to those guidelines, opted to comply with the GreenStar program. The developer is now required to comply with the Green Building and Energy Efficiency Ordinances, CVMC 15.12 and 15.26.030 respectively, which require developers/applicants to implement sustainable design features and improve building energy conservation 15% to 20% above 2008 State Energy Code requirements. Therefore, the previous 2002 AQIP requirements related to GreenStar and the 2001 energy code are no longer applicable and were removed from the AQIP Guidelines in 2009. The Air Pollution Control District is responsible for the Air Quality Maintenance Program in compliance with the California Clean Air Act. There is no local Master Plan for Air Quality. An Air Quality Improvement Plan -Eastlake III SPA dated August 13, 2002. The plan identifies the following goals: A. To minimize air quality impacts during and after construction of the Project. B. To comply with the air quality standards and policies of the City of Chula Vista and San Diego County APCD. C. To create a framework for the design and implementation of air quality mitigation measures in this commercial and employment development project. D. To be economically efficient and cost effective. IL5-105 Eastlake Ill Olmpic Pointe Supplemental PFFP The 2010 Dudek air quality report concluded that the analysis evaluated the potential for adverse impacts to the ambient air quality due to construction and operational emissions resulting from the proposed project. Construction of the proposed project would result in a temporary addition of pollutants to the local airshed caused by soil disturbance, fugitive dust emissions, and combustion pollutants from on-site construction equipment, as well as from off-site trucks hauling construction materials. The analysis concludes that the daily construction emissions would not exceed the significance thresholds for criteria pollutants. Air quality impacts resulting from construction would be less than significant. The proposed project would not result in any significant longterm (operational) impacts to air quality, as new mobile and stationary sources associated with the proposed project following the completion of construction activities would remain well below the significance thresholds. The Dudek report also evaluated the project's potential effect on global climate change, and emissions of greenhouse gases were estimated based on the use of construction equipment and vehicle trips associated with construction activities, as well as operational emissions once construction phases are complete. With implementation of Chula Vista required GHG reduction measures the proposed project would reduce GHG emissions by as much as 28% by the year 2020. The proposed project would therefore exceed the target of 20% below business as usual that has been established for the purposes of assessing operational GHG emissions of projects in the Ciry of Chula Vista, and this reduction would be consistent with the goals of AB 32. Furthermore, the proposed project would be consistent with Section 15.26.030 of the City's Municipal Code by employ energy efficient measures beyond that required by the Energy Code, resulting in a 20% reduction in emissions generated by in-home energy use. Lastly, it should be noted that the project is higher-density residential development, which ultimately helps in reducing vehicle miles traveled. The project would therefore have ales-than significant impact on global climate change. II.5.4.10.4. THRESHOLD COMPLIANCE AND REQUIREMENTS: The City will continue to provide a development forecast to the APCD in conformance with the threshold standard. See the Air Quality Technical Report for the Olympic Pointe Project, dated June 2010 by Dudek., located in the Eastlake III SPA Plan Amendment. A. Prior to approval of building permits for Olympic Pointe project, the applicant shall demonstrate that air quality control measures outlined in the Air Quality Improvement Plan pertaining to the design, construction and operational phases of the project have been implemented. B. Prior to approval of the grading permit for Olympic Pointe project, the following measures shall be placed as notes on all grading plans and implemented during grading of each phase of the project: 1. Minimize simultaneous operation of multiple construction equipment units; 2. Use low pollutant-emitting equipment; 3. Use catalytic reduction for gasoline-powered equipment; 4. Use injection timing retard for diesel-powered equipment; 5. Water the grading areas twice daily to minimize fugitive dust; 6. Stabilize graded areas as quickly as possible to minimize fugitive dust; IL5-106 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP 7. Apply chemical stabilizer or pave the last 100 feet of internal travel path within the construction site prior to public road entry; 8. Install wheel washers adjacent to a paved apron prior to vehicle entry on public roads; 9. Remove any visible track-out into traveled public streets within 30 minutes of occurrence; 10. Wet wash the construction access point at the end of each workday if any vehicle travel on unpaved surfaces has occurred; 11. Provide sufficient perimeter erosion control to prevent washout of silty material onto public roads; 12. Cover haul trucks or maintain at least 12 inches of freeboard to reduce blow-off during hauling; 13. Suspend all soil disturbance and Navel on unpaved surfaces if winds exceed 25 mph; 14. Cover/water onsite stockpiles of excavated material; and 15. Enforce a 20 mile-per-hour speed limit on unpaved surfaces. IL5-107 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP II.5.4.11. CIVIC CENTER: II.5.4.11.1 CITY THRESHOLD STANDARDS: There is no adopted threshold standards for these facilities. The facility information is being provided in this report to aid in establishing operational benchmarks which will determine construction phasing of the Civic Center. These facilities are funded through the collection of the DIF fees in effect at the time building permits are issued. IL5.4.11.2 SERVICE ANALYSIS: Although the existing Civic Center successfully accommodated city administration offices prior to the mid-1980's population growth, increase in City staff to meet new demands of growth has caused increasing congestion problems. City staff in the Public Services Building experience space shortages, lack of privacy and storage, and frequent noise distractions. This was reported in a survey, which is included in the Civic Center Master Plan dated May 8, 1989. Site Alternative Three "The Suburban Scheme" was selected from the master plan at a City Council conference on June 22, 1989. II.5.4.11.3 EXISTING CONDITIONS: In July of 2001, the final master plan for the renovations to the Civic Center was approved by City Council. Rebuilding the Civic Center will cost approximately $50 million, which will primarily be funded by development fees (89%). The Civic Center Redevelopment is currently underway and expected to be completed in three phases by 2008. The new City Hall Redevelopment, or Phase One of the Civic Center Complex, is completed. Phase Two, the construction of the new Public Services Building is also complete. Phase Three is the gutting and remodeling of the old Police Station for additional offices and was completed in 2008. ILS.4.11.4 ADEQUACY ANALYSIS: The need for the Civic Center cannot be easily related to population figures or acres of commercial and industrial land, which will be developed in the future. The original facilities, according to the master plan, are inadequate because of the lack of space. This has worsened as employee numbers and their workloads have increased in response to demands for services, which have been generated by new development. Expansion of the Civic Center Complex is currently underway. This expansion included space planning, design, and construction is expected to keep pace with demand for additional work space. City Hall facilities have been renovated and now include a new state of the art Council Chambers. Consistent with the Master Plan, further expansions and renovations include a conversion of the old Police Station to additional office space and re-building of the Public Services Building. fI.5-108 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP II.5.4.11.5 FINANCING CIVIC CENTER FACILITIES: The Public Facilities Development Impact Fee (PFDIF) was updated by the Chula Vista City Council on November 19, 2002 by adoption of Ordinance 2887. The Public Facilities Development Impact Fee (PFDIF) is adjusted every October ls` pursuant to Ordinance 3050, which was adopted by the City Council on November 7, 2006. The PFDIF amount is subject to change as it is amended from time to time. The Civic Center DIF Fee for Multi-Family Development is $ 2,328/unit (see Table A.6)23. The Olympic Pointe Condominium Supplemental SPA Amendment project is within the boundaries of the PFDIF Program and, therefore, the project will be subject to the payment of the fee at the rate in effect at the time building permits are issued. At the current fee rate, the Olympic Pointe Condominium Civic Center Fee obligation at buildout is $928,598 (see Table K.1). Table K.1 Civic Center Fee For Ol m is Pointe Condominiums Development Nu r of Civic Fee/bIF DU Civic Center Fee DUs Olympic Pointe Condominium 389 $2,328/DU $928,598 The projected fee illustrated in Table K.1 is an estimate only. Actual fees may be different. PFDIF Fees are subject to change depending upon City Council actions and or Developer actions that change residential densities, industrial acreage or commercial acreages. ILS.4.11.6. THRESHOLD COMPLIANCE AND REQUIREMENTS: Civic Center facilities will be funded through the payment of the public facilities fees; the fees shall be paid prior to the issuance of building permits, at the rate in effect at the time payment is made. 23 Fee based on Form 5509 dated 9/30/2010. Ac[ual fee may be different, please verify with the CiTy of Chula Vista at the time of building permit. 109 Eastlake III Olympic Poiote Supplemental PFFP II.5.4.12 CORPORATION YARD II.5.4.12.1 THRESHOLD STANDARDS: There is no adopted threshold standard for this facility. The facility information is being provided in this report to aid the City in establishing operational benchmarks which will determine construction phasing of the corporation yard. II.5.4.12.2 SERVICE ANALYSIS: New development, with its resultant increase in required maintenance services, creates a need for a larger corporation yard. Anew 25-acre yard located at 1800 Maxwell Road was completed this year by the city. II.5.4.12.3 EXISTING CONDITIONS: The new 25-acre Corporate Yard Facility was previously an SDG&E equipment and repair facility. The city has renovated and added new improvements for the maintenance and repair of city owned equipment. This facility consists of a renovated building that serves as the administration building for the Corporate Yard. Existing shop buildings have been renovated and new shops have been added as well as a new maintenance building. The Corporate Yard includes parking for employees, city vehicles and equipment. In addition, there is a Bus Wash/Fuel lsland/CNG and associated equipment. II.5.4.12.4 ADEQUACY ANALYSIS: The need for a Corporate Yard cannot be easily related to population figures or acres of commercial and industrial land, which will be developed in the future. The growth in population, increase in street miles and the expansion of developed areas in Chula Vista, requires more equipment for maintenance as well as more space for storage and the administration of increased numbers of employees. The need for a larger Corporation Yard has been specifically related to new development. II.5.4.12.5. FINANCING CORPORATE YARD FACILITIES: The Public Facilities Development Impact Fee (PFDIF) was updated by the Chula Vista City Council on November 19, 2002 by adoption of Ordinance 2887. The Public Facilities Development Impact Fee (PFDIF) is adjusted every October la` pursuant to Ordinance 3050, which was adopted by the CiTy Council on November 7, 2006. The PFDIF amount is subject to change as it is amended from time to time. The Corporate Yard DIF Fee for Multi-Family Development is $323/unit (see Table A.6)za. The Olympic Pointe Condominium Supplemental SPA Amendment project is within the boundaries of the PFDIF Program and, therefore, the project will be subject to the payment of the fee at the rate in effect at the time building permits are issued. At the current fee rate, the Olympic Pointe Condominium Corporate Yard Fee obligation at buildout is $131,482 (see Table L.1). ~ Fee based on Form 5509 dated 9/30/2010. Actual fee may be different, please verify with the Ciry of Chula Vista a[ the time of building permit. IL5-110 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP Table L.1 Corporate Yard Fee For Olympic Pointe Condominium Development NnDUs of Corporate Yard Fee/MF DU Estimated Corporate d F e Y ar e Olympic Pointe 389 $338 $131,482 Condominium The projected fee illustrated in Table L.l is an estimate only. Actual fees may be different. PFD[F Fees are subject to change depending upon City Council actions and or Developer actions that change residential densities, industrial acreage or commercial acreages. IL5.4.12.6. THRESHOLD COMPLIANCE AND REQUIREMENTS: Corporate Yard facilities will be funded through the payment of the public facilities fees; the fees shall be paid prior to the issuance of building permits, at the rate in effect at the time payment is made. Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP II.5.4.13. OTHER PUBLIC FACILITIES II.5.4.13.1. THRESHOLD STANDARD: There is no adopted threshold standard for these facilities which are part of the Public; Facilities Development Impact Fee Program and include GIS, Computer Systems, Telecommunications, Records Management System and Administration. The information regarding these capital items is being provided in this section of the PFFP to aid the Ciry and the Developer in calculating the PFDIF fees to be paid by the Olympic Pointe Project. II.5.4.13.2. EXISTING CONDITIONS: The City continues to collect funds from building permit issuance in the Eastern Territories for deposit to the accounts associated with Administration costs only and not the other aforementioned public Facilities. These other public facilities that funds are not currently collected include records management, telecommunications, computer systems and GIS. II.5.4.13.3. FINANCING ADMINISTRATION FACILITIES: The Public Facilities Development Impact Fee (PFDIF) was updated by the Chula Vista City Council on November l9, 2002 by adoption of Ordinance 2887. The Public Facilities Development Impact Fee (PFDIF) is adjusted every October Is` pursuant to Ordinance 3050, which was adopted by the City Council on November 7, 2006. The PFDIF amount is subject to change as it is amended from time to time. The Administration DIF Fee for Multi-Family Development is $532 /unit (see Table A.6)25. The Olympic Pointe Condominium Supplemental SPA Amendment project is within the boundaries of the PFDIF Program and, therefore, the project will be subject to the payment of the fee at the rate in effect at the time building permits are issued. At the current fee rate, the Olympic Pointe Condominiums Other Public Facilities Fee obligation at buildout is $206,948 (see Table M.1). Table M.1 Public Facilities Fees For Administration Facilities Administration Facilities Administration Development DUs Fee /MF DU Facilities Fee Olympic Pointe 389 $532 $206,948 Condominiums zs Fee based on Form 5509 dated 9/30/2010. Ac[ual fee may be different, please verify with the City of Chula Visa a[ the time of building permit. Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP The projected fee illustrated in Table M.1 is an estimate only. Actual fees may be different. PFDIF Fees are subject to change depending upon City Council actions and or Developer actions that change residential densities, industrial acreage or commercial acreages. II.5.4.13.4 THRESHOLD COMPLIANCE AND REQUIREMENTS: Administration Facilities will be funded through the payment of public facility fees; the fees shall be paid prior to the issuance of building permits, at the rate in effect at the time payment is made. [LS-113 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP II.5.4.14. FISCAL: II.5.4.14.1. THRESHOLD STANDARD: A. The GMOC shall be provided with an annual fiscal impact report, which provides an evaluation of the impacts of growth on the City, both in terms of operations and capital improvements. This report should evaluate actual growth over the previous 12-month period, as well as projected growth over the next 12-18 month period, and 3-5 year period. B. The GMOC shall be provided with an annual "economic monitoring report" which provides an analysis of economic development activity and indicators over the previous 12-month period, as well as projected growth over the next 12-18 month period, and 3-5 year period. IL5.4.14.2. FISCAL IMPACT ASSUMPTIONS AND CONCLUSIONS: There is no existing Master Plan For fiscal issues. However, the City of Chula Vista has a fiscal model that is used to determine the land use changes to the General Plan. A Fiscal Impact Analysis was prepared by CIC Research, Inc., (see Appendix A), based on the city's model, it identifies the estimated fiscal impact that the Olympic Pointe Project will have on the operation and maintenance budgets ofthe Ciry of Chula Vista (general fund). The Fiscal Impact Analysis of the Olympic Pointe Development , dated October 19, 2010, by CIC Research, Inc. identifies the estimated fiscal impact that the project will have on the operation and maintenance budgets of the City of Chula Vista (general fund). The entire CIC Fiscal Analysis is attached as Appendix A to this PFFP. The 18.4-acre Olympic Pointe project is a proposed to be developed into a 389 multi-family condominium unit project located northeast of the Olympic Training Center (OTC). The project site is adjacent to Olympic Parkway, between the OTC and the Lower Otay Reservoir. The projected absorption schedule occurs over a six-year period (2011-2016) as used in the CIC fiscal report. CIC Research used two basic methodologies in estimating public agency revenues and expenditures; the case study and per unit/acre multiplier methods. The case study method was used to estimate secured property tax. The case study method is based on specific characteristics of the project from which revenues can be estimated. Appropriate city officials were contacted to identify actual tax rates. The per unit/acre multiplier method, which represents a more general approach was utilized to estimate sales tax, TOT, property transfer tax, utility tax, and other revenues and all expenditures. The City of Chula Vista's SPA Fiscal Impact Analysis Framework (February 2008, Economic Research Associates) was utilized to estimate per unit/acre multipliers. Future revenues and expenditures are presented in current (2010) dollars. The development absorption schedule is based on information provided by the applicant as well as estimations on future absorption made by CIC. Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP Table N.1 Net Fiscal Impact Of The Olympic Poiute Project On The City Of Chula Vista Revenue Sources Revenues (In Thousands) 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Secured Property Tax $22.4 $45.5 $69.3 $85.9 $104.4 $126.5 Property Transfer Tax 1.6 3.3 5.0 6.2 7.6 9.2 Sales & Use Tax 9.7 19.7 30.0 37.2 45.3 54.8 Franchise Tax 2.6 5.2 7.9 9.8 11.9 14.4 TOT Tax 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.8 Utility Tax 3.0 6.0 9.2 11.4 13.8 16.7 Vehicle License Fee 15.3 31.1 47.4 58.7 71.4 86.5 TOTAL REVENUES $54.8 $111.2 $169.2 $209.7 $255.0 $309.0 Expenditure Sources Expenditures (In Thousands) 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Legislative & Administrative $I.0 $2.1 $3.1 $3.9 $4.8 $5.8 Development and Maintenance Services 7.0 14.2 21.6 26.8 32.5 39.5 Police 16.9 34.4 52.3 64.8 78.9 95.5 Fire 10.0 20.2 30.8 38.2 46.3 56.2 Cultural and Leisure 14.6 29.6 45.1 55.9 67.9 82.3 Non-Departmental $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $49.5 $100.5 $152.9 $189.6 $230.4 $279.3 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 TOTAL REVENUES $54.8 $111.2 $169.2 $209.7 $255.0 $309.0 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $49.5 $100.5 $152.9 $189.6 $230.4 $279.3 NET FISCAL IMPACT $5.3 $10.7 $16.3 $20.1 $24.6 $29.7 Source: CIC Research, Inc.. II.5-115 Eastlake III Olmpic Pointe Supplemental PFFP The project applicant indicated that the units would range from approximately $250,000 to $400,000. Based on this information, the average price per unit was estimated to $300,000 as indicated in Table N.l. [t should be noted that the average price for a condominium sold in the past year (2009) in the South County area was approximately $175,000 and slightly higher ($191,000) in Chula Vista. II.5.4.14.3. THRESHOLD COMPLIANCE AND REQUIREMENTS: Utilizing the previously mentioned methodologies C[C estimated the net fiscal impacts that are presented in Tables N.1. As previously mentioned, all values are in 2010 dollars. No annual adjustments to revenues or costs were utilized. The estimated annual flows of costs and revenues are primarily related to the estimated project absorption. Table N.l presents the results of the fiscal impact associated with the Olympic Pointe Project. Fiscal revenues would begin at $54,800 annually and rise to $390,000 at build- out. Fiscal expenditures would be initially $49,500 and rise to $279,300 at build-out. The net fiscal impact from developing the Olympic Pointe is positive through-out the development and at build-out results in an annual surplus of $29,700 at build-out. The results of the analysis will be included in the next annual fiscal and economic report prepared for the GMOC. II.5-116 Eastlake III Olmpic Pointe Supplemental PFFP II.5.4.15. PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCE II.5.4.15.1 OVERVIEW: All development within the City of Chula Vista must be in compliance with the City's Growth Management Program. The appropriate public facility financing mechanisms are required and approved by the City to fund the acquisition, construction and maintenance of public facilities. New facilities will be required to support the planned development of the project. The public facilities are generally provided or fmanced in one or more of the following ways: Subdivision Exaction, Development Impact Fee and Debt Financing. [t is anticipated that two methods will be utilized for the project to construct and finance public facilities. IL5.4.15.2.-DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE (DIF): Public infrastructure is funded through the wllection of an impact fee. Constructed by the public agency or Developer constructed with a reimbursement or credit against specific fees. Development Impact Fees (DIF) are acceptable methods to contribute to the financing of capital improvements within the city of Chula Vista. The Olympic Pointe Project is subject to fees established to help defray costs of facilities that will benefit the project. These fees include but may not be limited to: A. Transportation Development Impact Fee (TD[F): Established to provide financing for circulation element road projects of regional significance. B. Public Facilities Development Impact Fee (PFDIF): Established to collect funds for civic center facilities, police, corporation yard, libraries, fire suppression system, recreation and administration. C. Traffic Signal Fees: To pay for traffic signals associated with circulation element streets. D. Otay Water District Fees: The district may require annexation to an existing improvement district or creation of some other fmance mechanism that may result in specific fees being modified. E. Salt Creek Sewer Development Impact Fee: To pay for sewer facilities within the Salt Creek Sewer Basin. II.5.4.15.3. DEBT FINANCE PROGRAMS: The City of Chula Vista has a history of using assessment districts to finance a number of street improvements, as well as sewer and drainage facilities. The Otay Municipal Water District has used such improvement districts for water system improvements. Both school districts have implemented Mello-Roos Community Facility Districts to fmance school facilities. A. Assessment Districts Special assessment districts may be proposed for acquiring, constructing and/or maintaining certain public improvements under the Municipal hnprovement Act of 1913 and the hnprovement Bond Act of 1915. The City has suspended the use of the Lighting and Landscape Act of 1972 for new open space district formation due to the passage of Proposition 218. The administration of the special assessment district is the responsibility of the public agency. II.5-117 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP B. Communi~ Facilities District (CFD) On January 13, 1998, the City Council adopted the "City of Chula Vista statement of goals and policies regarding the establishment of Community Facilities Districts" (CFD's). The approval of this document ratified the use of CFD's as a public financing mechanism for: • The construction and/or acquisition of public infrastructure, and • The financing of authorized public services, including services provided by open space districts. On April 28, 1998, the City Council enacted the "Chula Vista Community Facilities District Ordinance." This ordinance adopted the Mello-Roos Act with modifications to additionally include the following: • Incorporate all maintenance activities authorized by the "Landscaping & Lighting Act of 1972" (1972 Act) and • Include maintenance activities not listed in the "Mello-Roos Act" or the "1972 Act." Special assessment financing may be appropriate when the value or benefit of the public facility can be assigned to specific properties. Assessments are levied in specific amounts against each individual property on the basis of relative benefit. Special assessments may be used for both publicly dedicated on-site and off-site improvements. C. Mello-Roos Communit~Facilities Act of 1982 The Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 authorizes formation of community facilities districts that impose special taxes to provide financing for certain public facilities or services. Facilities which can be provided under the Act include the purchase, construction, expansion, or rehabilitation of: Local park, recreation, or parkway facilities; Elementary and secondary school sites and structures; Libraries; and, any other governmental facilities that legislative bodies are authorized to construct, own or operate. [n addition, the City has enacted an ordinance that adopted the Mello-Roos Act with modifications to accomplish the maintenance of facilities. II.5.4.1$.4. OTHER 1VIETHODS USED TO FINANCE FACILITIES: A. General Fund: The City of Chula Vista's general fund serves to pay for many public services throughout the City. Those facilities and services identified as being funded by general fund sources represent those that will benefit not only the residents of the proposed project, but also Chula Vista residents throughout the City. In most cases, other financing mechanisms are available to initially construct or provide the facility or service, and then general fund moneys would only be expected to fund the maintenance costs once the facility is accepted by the City. B. State and Federal Fundin¢: Although rarely available to fund an entire project, Federal and State financial and technical assistance programs have been available to public agencies, in particular the public school districts. Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP C. Dedications: Dedication of sites by Developers for public capital facilities is a common financing tool used by many cities. D. Developer Reimbursement Agreements: Certain facilities that are located off-site of a project and/or provide regional benefits may be constructed in conjunction with the development of the project. In such instances, developer reimbursement agreements may be executed to provide for a future payback to the Developer for the additional cost of these facilities. Future developments are required to pay back their fair share of the costs for the shared facility when development occurs. E. Homeowners Associations One or more Community Homeowner Associations may be established by the developer to manage, operate and maintain private facilities and common areas within the project. F. Special Agreements/Development Agreement: This category includes special development programs for financing special arrangements between the City and the Developer such as credits against fees, waiver of fees, or charges for the construction of specific facilities. A development agreement can play an essential role in the implementation of the Public Facilities Financing Plan. The Public Facilities Finance Plan clearly details all public facility responsibilities and assures that the construction of all necessary public improvements will be appropriately phased with actual development, while the development agreement identifies the obligations and requirements of both parties. G. Park Acquisition and Development Fees: Fee established to pay land and improvements by new development. II.5.4.15.5. CUMULATIVE DEBT The City of Chula Vista has an established policy limiting the maximum debt to be placed on a residential dwelling unit to an additional one percent above the property tax. This policy was restated in the adopted Growth Management Program. Like many other cities, Chula Vista has long understood that it is not the only agency that can utilize public finance mechanisms and, therefore, can not always guarantee that the total debt will remain at or below a maximum of 2 percent. The City needs to coordinate its debt finance programs with the other special districts that provide service to the residents of Chula Vista to ensure that the cumulative debt does not become excessive. Coordination is also necessary to guarantee all public facilities needed to support a development can be financed and constructed as needed. IL5.4.15.6.LIFECYCLE COST Section 19.09.060 Analysis subsection F(2) of the Growth Management Ordinance requires the following: II.5-119 Eastlake Ili Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP "...The inventory shall include Life Cycle Cost ("LCC") projections for each element in 19.09.060(E) ... as they pertain to City fiscal responsibility. The LCC projections shall be for estimated life cycle for each element analyzed. The model used shall be able to identify and estimate initial and recurring life cycle costs... A. Back@ of und: Life Cycle Costing (LCC) is a method of calculating the total cost of asset ownership over the life span of the asset. Initial costs and all Subsequent expected costs of significance are included in the LCC analysis as well as disposal value and any other quantifiable benefits to be derived as a result of owning the asset. Operating and maintenance costs over the life of an asset often times far exceed initial costs and must be factored into the decision process. LCC analysis should not be used in each and every purchase of an asset. The process itself carries a cost and therefore can add to the cost of the asset. LCC analysis can be justified only in those cases in which the cost of the analysis can be more than offset by the savings derived through the purchase of the asset. Four major factors that may influence the economic feasibility of applying LCC analysis aze: 1. Energy Intensiveness -LCC should be considered when the anticipated energy costs of the purchase aze expected to be large throughout its life. 2. Life Expectancy -For assets with long lives (i.e., greater than five years), costs other than purchase price take on added importance. For assets with short lives, the initial costs become a more important factor. 3. Efficiency -The efficiency of operation and maintenance can have significant impact on overall costs. LCC is beneficial when savings can be achieved through reduction of maintenance costs. 4. Investment Cost - As a general rule, the larger the investment the more important LCC analysis becomes. B. ARplications for LCC Anal The City of Chula Vista currently utilizes LCC analysis in determining the most cost effective purchase of capital equipment as well as in the determination of replacement costs for a variety of rolling stock. The use of LCC techniques takes place in the preparation of the City's Five Year Capital Improvement Budget (CIP) as well as in the Capital Outlay sections of the annual Operating Budget. There are no project facilities that are not covered by LCC analysis In these existing processes, the City should require the use of LCC analysis prior to or concurrent with the design of public facilities required by new development. Such a requirement will assist in the determination of the most cost effective selection of public facilities. [I.5-120 Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP APPENDIX A FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS Eastlake III Olympic Pointe Supplemental PFFP FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS OF THE OLYMPIC POINTE DEVELOPMENT Prepared for: City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 Prepared by: CIC Research, Inc. 8361 Vickers Street San Diego CA 92111 October 19, 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS Pape TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................ ......................................ii INTRODUCTION .................................................................................. ..................................... 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................ ..................................... 1 PROJECT DEMOGRAPHICS AND LAND USES .............................. .:................................... 2 REVENUES ...................................................................................... ..................................... 4 Secured Property Tax .................................................................... ..................................... 4 Propertv Transfer Tax .................................................................... ..................................... 5 Sales Tax ....................................................................................... ..................................... 6 Franchise Fees .............................................................................. ..................................... 6 Transient Occupancy Tax ............................................................. ...................................... 6 Utility Users' Tax ........................................................................... ...................................... 7 OPERATING EXPENDITURES ........................................................ ...................................... 7 Legislative and Administration ....................................................... ...................................... 9 Development and Maintenance Service ........................................ ...................................... 9 Police ............................................................................................ ...................................... 9 Fire Protection .............................................................................. ...................................... 9 Cultural and Leisure ...................................................................... .................................... 10 NET FISCAL IMPACT ...................................................................... .................................... 10 APPENDIX A ....................................................................................... ...................................A-1 ~~~~ TABLES Paae 1. Olympic Pointe Project Absorption Schedule and Market Values by Land Use.....3 2. Olympic Pointe Project Fiscal Impact General Assumptions .................................3 3. Olympic Pointe Project Fiscal Impact Revenue Generation Assumptions .............4 4. Olympic Pointe Project Fiscal Impact Cost Allocation Assumptions ...................... 8 5. Net Fiscal Impact of the Olympic Pointe Project on the City of Chula Vista......... 11 Appendix A- Olympic Pointe Detailed Tables A-1 Absorption Schedule by Land Use ........................................................... ..........A-2 A-2 Assessed Value ....................................................................................... ..........A-2 A-3 Secured Property Tax Revenue ............................................................... ..........A-2 A-4 Estimated Property Transfer Tax Revenue .............................................. ..........A-2 A-5 Estimated Sales Tax Revenue ................................................................. ..........A-2 A-6 Estimated Franchise Fees ....................................................................... ..........A-3 A-7 Estimated Transient Occupancy Tax ........................................................ ..........A-3 A-8 Estimated Utility Tax ................................................................................ ..........A-3 A-9 Estimated Vehicle License Fee Revenue ................................................. ..........A-3 A-10 Estimated Legislative And Administrative Expenditures .......................... ...........A-4 A-11 Estimated Development And Maintenance Services Expenditures .......... ...........A-4 A-12 Estimated Police Services Expenditures ................................................. ...........A-4 A-13 Estimated Fire Services Expenditures ..................................................... ...........A-4 A-14 Estimated Cultural And Leisure Expenditures ......................................... ...........A-4 ~~~~ INTRODUCTION This analysis identifies the estimated fiscal impact that the Olympic Pointe development will have on the operation and maintenance budgets of the City of Chula Vista (general fund). Information pertaining to the scope of development was provided by the applicant. Two basic methodologies were utilized in estimating public agency revenues and expenditures; the case study and per uniUacre multiplier methods. The case study method was used to estimate secured property tax. The case study method is based on specific characteristics of the project from which revenues can be estimated. Appropriate city officials were contacted to identify actual tax rates. The per uniUacre multiplier method, which represents a more general approach was utilized to estimate sales tax, TOT, property transfer tax, utility tax, and other revenues and all expenditures. The City of Chula Vista's SPA Fiscal Impact Analysis Framework (February 2008, Economic Research Associates) was utilized to estimate per uniUacre multipliers. Future revenues and expenditures are presented in current (2010) dollars. The development absorption schedule is based on information provided by the applicant as well as estimations on future absorption made by CIC. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Olympic Pointe Project is proposed to be developed in the City of Chula Vista and will have 389 multi-family residential units (condominiums). Presented in Table 1 is the projected absorption schedule. For the purpose of this analysis, it was assumed that development of the residential units would commence in 2011. Absorption represents new units being sold and occupied. 1 The applicant indicated that the units would range from approximately $250,000 to $400,000. Based on this information, the average price per unit was estimated to be $300,000 as indicated on Table 1. It should be noted that the average price for a condominium sold in the past year (2009) in the South County area was approximately $175,000 and slightly higher ($191,000) in Chula Vista. PROJECT DEMOGRAPHICS AND LAND USES In developing per uniUacre multipliers for expenditures, CIC utilized demographic and land use information related to the City of Chula Vista as a whole and, more specifically, the subject Olympic Pointe Project. Included in Table 2 are population, housing, land-use and infrastructure characteristics. 2 Table 1 OLYMPIC POINTE DEVELOPMENT ABSORPTION SCHEDULE AND MARKET VALUES BY LAND USE Per UniU Net Acre Value Cumulative Developed and Occupied Units/Net Acres Land Use (000's) 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 TOTAL MULTI FAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS $300 69 140 213 264 321 389 389 Source: CIC Research, Inc. Table 2 OLYMPIC POINTE PROJECT FISCAL IMPACT GENERAL ASSUMPTIONS Chula Vista Sources Po ulation 237,595 Cal. De t. of Finance Occu ied Housin Units 76,130 Cal. De t. of Finance Persons Per Household 3.12 Cal. De t. of Finance Avera a Condominum 2009. $191,000 Data Quick OI m is Pointe Pro'ect Estimated Po ulation 1214 CIC Research, Inc Housin Units 389 The McKinle Assoc. Estimated Median Housin Price $300,000 CIC Research, Inc 3 REVENUES Operating revenues for the City of Chula Vista resulting from the development of the proposed Olympic Pointe Project are estimated in this section. The major revenue sources which are expected to be generated from the subject developments and detailed in this chapter include property tax, property transfer tax, sales tax, franchise fees, TOT, utility tax, and motor vehicle license fees. Other revenues that the development would generate are fees and fines which are already removed from the "Cost" calculation of the fiscal impact. The City of Chula Vista's Budget (FY 2010) for these revenue items is detailed in Table 3 along with allocation rates. The following section details each of the revenue sources and the methodology employed to estimate revenues from the subject developments. For each identified revenue source, a detailed table reflecting the revenue flow of the project is presented in the Appendix of this report. All dollar figures are presented in 2010 dollars. Table 3 OLYMPIC POINTE PROJECT FISCAL IMPACT RFVFNIIF rFNFRATION ASSUMPTIONS City of Chula Vista Revenues FY2010-11 Allocation Assumption Revenues Pro ert Taxes $24,073,147 Based on 10.844% of 1 % of TAV Annual Avg. $.078 per $1,000 of assessed Property Transfer Tax $841,402 value for residential and $.039 per $1,0000 of assessed value for commercial and a artments $96 per housing unit for multi-family residential Sales & Use Tax $23,633,851 based on estimated income needed for housing cost Franchise Fees $7,652,012 $37 er housin unit TOT $1,940,930 $2 erhousin unit Utilit Tax $8,755,835 $43 er housin unit Vehicle Licenses Fees $16,993,500 $71 er erson Secured Prooertv Tax Secured property tax revenues generated from the proposed developments were calculated on the basis of a one- percent tax rate on the current market value of the residential and commercial construction. According to the County of San Diego, the City of Chula Vista 4 would receive 10.844 percent of the one-percent of the property taxes collected in those tax rate areas. It should be noted that the citywide average share of property tax is roughly 14.7 percent. As previously mentioned, market values (assessed values) for the residential units were estimated to average $300,000 Although assessed values increase two percent per year and readjust after the property resells, this analysis assumes no inflation and all values remain in 2010 dollars. This is the same methodology employed in previous fiscal impact analyses for this property. Included in Tables A-2 in the appendix is the cumulative assessed value over the build-out of the developments. Total assessed values for Olympic Pointe Project is estimated to be $116.7 million at build-out. The City of Chula Vista's share of the collected annual property tax is estimated to be $22,400 in the first year rising to $126,500 (Table A-3) at build-out. Property Transfer Tax Sales of real property in San Diego County are taxed at a rate of $1.10 per $1,000 of the sales price. Chula Vista would receive 50 percent of the tax. An analysis conducted by the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) indicates that the average turnover rate for residential property is once every seven years and once every 14 years for nonresidential property. The following formulas, which take both the transfer tax formula and the average turnover rate into account, were utilized to yield average annual per unit property transfer tax. Single Family Residential .55 X 1/7 = .00007857 $1,000 Using these formulas, an estimated annual average property transfer tax can be calculated. The Olympic Pointe development would generate $9,200 (refer to Table A-4) in average, annual property transfer tax at build-out. 5 Sales Tax This fiscal impact methodology estimates the sales tax generated by residential units that create new demand. Per household sales taxes were estimated by imputing the household income based on the cost of housing. Average household income for those purchasing residential units is estimated to average $86,000 based on mortgage payments comprising 25% of gross income. Utilizing the Consumer Expenditure Survey of the U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, the amount of taxable sales is estimated to be 25% or a little over $21,000 per household for the different housing categories. Conservatively 66.7 percent of those taxable sales would be expected to be spent in Chula Vista. Therefore it is estimated that each household would generate $141 per household (refer to Table A-5) in sales taxes annually for the City of Chula Vista. This amount includes the property tax shift the State reimburses the City for the loss of sales taxes. Total annual sales tax generated by Olympic Pointe at build out is estimated to be $54,800. Franchise Fees The City of Chula Vista receives a franchise tax fee from sales of cable television and trash collection. Using the sale of gas and electricity as a guideline and based on a study prepared by San Diego Gas and Electric (SDG&E), 37 percent of the franchise fees are attributed to residential uses. Using these guidelines, the city budget, area demographics and land use information results in an estimated $37 in annual franchise fees per housing unit. Utilizing these ratios results in a total annual franchise fee of $2,600 in the first year and $14,400 at build-out for Olympic Pointe (see Table A-6). Transient Occuaancv Tax Transient occupancy tax (TOT) is a tax added to the price charged for the use of a hotel or motel room. The majority of the tax is associated with new hotel developments. Since there is no planned hotel/motel development in this project, TOT would be generated by the demand Chula Vista residents create for local hotels/motels. The San Diego Convention and Visitors 6 Bureau estimates that of all visitors who stay in hotels and motels eight percent are visiting friends or relatives. Utilizing the City's budget for TOT of $1,940,930 results in multiplier ratios of roughly $2 per household. Using this ratio the City of Chula Vista will receive at build- out a total annual TOT tax of $800 associated with the Olympic Pointe (refer to Table A-7). Utility Users' Tax The City of Chula Vista's FY2010-11 budget for utility taxes is $8,755,835. These taxes are paid by the residents and businesses on gas, electric and telephone services. CIC utilized the same methodology for utility taxes and franchise fees. Using the land use allocation of 37 percent residential uses results in an estimated $43 in annual utility tax per housing unit. These ratios result in a total annual utility tax of in the first year $3,000 rising to $16,700 at build-out (refer to Table A-8). Vehicle License Fees The City of Chula Vista's FY2010-11 budget for Vehicle License Fees (VLF) is $16,993,500. These fees are allocated by population, therefore, an average of $71 per person is used in the analysis. Based on that average, the project would generate an estimated $86,500 in VLF at build-out (Table A-9). OPERATING EXPENDITURES Operating expenditures for the City of Chula Vista resulting from development of the Olympic Pointe are outlined in this section. CIC updated the cost factors developed by Economic Research Associates (ERA) and the City of Chula Vista Finance Department as presented in the report "SPA Fiscal Impact Analysis Framework" (February, 2008). Table 4 presents those cost factors which represents a decrease in per unit costs since ERA's analysis.. Detailed tables reflecting the annual expenditure cash flows are presented in the appendix to this report. 7 Table 4 OLYMPIC POINTE PROJECT FISCAL IMPACT COST ALLOCATION ASSUMPTIONS Land Uses Population Retail Office Hotel Industrial Parks (per aae) Public USe Open Space Other Residential (Per person) (Per AC2) (Per Acre) (PerAae) (Per Acre) Private Public (Per Aae) (PerAae) (Per Acre) (Per DU) Human Resources Finance TOTAL LEGIS LATNE AND ADMNISTRATION $321 $29.88 $3227 $19.10 $7.88 $0.00 $OAO $0.00 SOHO $OAO $4.84 DEYELOI+~@1TAM MANTENRIiCESERVICES Community Devebpment $0.66 $725.91 $783.99 $464.01 $191.48 $6.67 $6.41 P fanning and Building Services $1.06 $85.40 $91 BO $56.51 $26.45 $61.61 $1259 $12.75 E ngineedng $997.75 $52822 $234.77 $99.77 $23.98 $119.89 $61.61 $11.15 Public Works $2,038.15 $1,079A2 $479.56 $203.81 $11989 $22.78 General Services $13.76 TOTAL DEVELOPMENT AND MAINTENANCE SERVICES S15A8 $3,847.21 $2,483A3 $1,234.85 $521.51 $0.00 $8559 $119.89 $OAO $200.76 $53.09 PLB,GCSAFETY P olice (Excluding Resitlen6al) $5.76 $5,495.95 $5,495.95 $5,495.95 $734.29 $1,715.16 $1,715.16 $0.00 $1,715.16 $227.61 Fire (Excluding Residential) $0.94 $2,033.87 $2,03367 $2,033.87 $251.20 $105.96 $105.96 $105.96 $10586 $105.96 $141.56 CCLTWEAAD LE6Y/RE Pads and Recreation $21.78 Library $44.13 Nature Center $6.02 TOTAL CULTURE AND LEISURE $65A1 $6.02 SW-TOW IhR Coat ,891.30 S11p06.91 Sf0,00.S12 $&7&177 $1,519.88 5T0'S9K 51,906.71 51,941D1 510.896 52,021.88 557aJ6 Source: CIC Research, Inc., September, 2010 Modified from: City of Chula Vista, Budget Analysis Economic Research Associates October, 2007 8 Legislative and Administration The cost for the City Council, various boards and commissions, the City Clerks office, the City Attorney's office and general city administration make up the legislative and administration cost center. Based on the City's and ERA's analysis, and adjusted for reductions in cost since the analysis, the cost for the Olympic Pointe project is allocated at a rate of $4.04 per dwelling unit and $3.21 per person. Table A-10 in the appendix shows annual legislative and administration expenditures for the development of $5,800 at build-out. Development and Maintenance Service Development and Maintenance Services include community development, planning and building services, engineering, and public works operations. Residential land uses are allocated costs of $53.09 per dwelling unit. Residential populations are allocated an additional $15.48 per capita in costs. These multipliers translate into Development and Maintenance Services costs of $39,500 for the finished project (refer to Table A-11 ). Police Police services costs are allocated to all land uses. Residential land uses are allocated on the basis of $227.61 per dwelling unit with an additional allocation of $5.76 per capita for the residential population. Total police costs at build-out is estimated to be $95,500 (refer to Table A-12) Fire Protection Fire costs are $141.56 per dwelling unit for residential land uses. An additional $.94 per capita is allocated to the residential population. These ratios result in annual fire protection costs of $56,200 for the Olympic Pointe Project (refer to Table A-15) at build-out. 9 Cultural and Leisure Based on the City of Chula Vista model, cultural and leisure costs are only allocated to residential development. This sector is made up of the non-fee-reimbursable costs associated with the recreation department, the library, and the nature center. For the Olympic Pointe Project residents were assessed $6.02 per dwelling unit and $65.91 per capita to determine their cultural and leisure costs. The total cost at build-out is estimated to be $82,300 (Table A- 14). NET FISCAL IMPACT Utilizing the previously mentioned methodologies estimated net fiscal impacts are presented in Tables 5. As previously mentioned, all values are in 2010 dollars. No annual adjustments to revenues or costs were utilized. The estimated annual flows of costs and revenues are primarily related to the estimated project absorption. Table 5 presents the results of the fiscal impact associated with the Olympic Pointe Project. Fiscal revenues would begin at $54,800 annually and rise to $309,000 at build-out. Fiscal expenditures would be initially $49,500 and rise to $279,300 at build-out. The net fiscal impact from developing the Olympic Pointe is positive through-out the development and at build- out results in an annual net surplus of $29,700 at build-out. 10 Table 5 NET FISCAL IMPACT OF THE OLYMPIC POINTE PROJECT ON THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA Revenue Sources Secured Property Tax Property Transfer Tax Sales & Use Tax Franchise Tax TOT Tax Utility Tax Vehicle License Fee TOTAL REVENUES Expenditure Sources Legislative & Administrative Development and Maintenance Services Police Fire Cultural and Leisure Non-Departmental TOTAL EXPENDITURES Revenues (In Thousands 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 $22.4 $45.5 $69.3 $85.9 $104.4 $126.5 1.6 3.3 5.0 6.2 7.6 9.2 9.7 19.7 30.0 37.2 45.3 54.8 2.6 5.2 7.9 9.8 1 1.9 14.4 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.8 3.0 6.0 9.2 11.4 13.8 16.7 15.3 31.1 47.4 58.7 71.4 86.5 $54.8 $111.2 $169.2 $209.7 $255.0 $309.0 Ex penditures (In Thousands) 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 $1.0 $2.1 $3.1 $3.9 $4.8 $5.8 7.0 14.2 21.6 26.8 32.5 39.5 16.9 34.4 52.3 64.8 78.9 95.5 10.0 20.2 30.8 38.2 46.3 56.2 14.6 29.6 45.1 55.9 67.9 82.3 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $49.5 $100.5 $152.9 $189.6 $230.4 $279.3 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 TOTAL REVENUES $54.8 $111.2 $169.2 $209.7 $255.0 $309.0 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $49.5 $100.5 $152.9 $189.6 $230.4 $279.3 NET FISCAL IMPACT $5.3 $10.7 $16.3 $20.1 $24.6 $29.7 Source: CIC Research, Inc 11 ~~~~ APPENDIX A Detailed Tables A-1 OLYPIC POINTE FISCAL IMPACT ABSOF Per Uric/ Net Acm Valui_ Land Use (000'sl MULTI FAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS $300 POPULATION 10.844 Per Urit/ Net Acre Value Cumulative Assessed Value(000'sl Land Use (000's) 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 MULTI FAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS $300 $ 20,700 $ 42,000 $ 63,900 $79,200 $ 96,300 $116,700 Table A-3 SECURED PROPERTY TAX REVENUE Secured Total Assessed Values Tax Rate Total Chula VIEW Share Table A-1 IPTION SCHEDULE BY LAND USE Cumulative Developed and Oxuded Units/Net Acres 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 TOTAL ~ 140 213 264 321 389 369 215 437 665 ffi4 1,002 1,214 1,214 Table A-2 ASSESSED VALUE $ 20,700 $42,000 $ 63,900 $ 79,200 $ Table A-4 ESTIMATED PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX REVENUES Residential Resale Ratio 0.00007857 Commercial/ApartmeMS Resale Ratio 0.00003929 Pesale Rate Product (Years) Tntal Multi Family Units 7 Total Property Transfer Tax .6 Table A-5 ESTIMATED SALES TAX REVENUES Sales Tax Per UniVAcl inm~~ Iti Family Units $0.141 39 7 319.7 330.D ToWI Sales Tax 59.7 519.7 530.0 $116,700 59.2 537.2 545.3 $54.8 A-2 Table A-6 ESTIMATED FRANCHISE FEES Total Franchise Fees Table A-7 ESTIMATED TRANSIEf~ OCCUPANCY TAX $11.9 Transient Occuvancv Tax W00's) TOT per Land Use UnitlNet 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Multi Family Units $2 801 $0 3 $0 4 $0 5 $0.6 $0.8 Total TOT 50.1 $0.3 E0.4 $0.5 $0.6 $0.8 Table A-8 ESTIMATED UTILITY TAX Table A-9 VEHICLE LICENSE FEE Land Use U51ity Tax Revenue (000's) Tax per Total Multi Family Units Total Vehicle License Fee $58.7 $71.4 A-3 Table A-10 ESTIMAT ED LEGISLATIVE AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENDITURES Estimated Cost (000's1 Le lslatNe & Administrative 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Multi-Family Residential $ a.sa perdu $ 0.3 $ 0.7 $ 1.0 $ 1.3 $ 1.6 $ 1.9 Population $3 zt pep so $ 0 7 $ 1 4 $ 2 1 $ 2 6 $ 3 2 $ 3.9 Total Legislative&Administrative $ 1.0 $ 2.1 $ 3.1 $ 3.9 $ 4.8 $ 5.8 Table A-11 ESTIMATED DEVELOPMENT AND MAINTENANCE SERVICES EXPENDR- URES Estimated Cost (000's) Deveb ment and Maintenance Services 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Multi-Family Residential $ 53.09 $ 3.7 $ 7.4 $ 11.3 $ 14.0 $ 17.0 $ 20.7 Population $ts.aa $ 3.3 $ 6.8 $ 10.3 $ 12.8 $ 15.5 $ 18.8 Total Development and Maintenance Services $ 7.0 $ 14.2 $ 21.6 $ 26.8 $ 32.5 $ 39.5 Table A-12 ESTIMATED POLICE SERVICES EXPENDITURES Estimated Cost (000's) Police 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Multi-Family Residential $ 2zT.st $ 15.7 $ 31.9 $ 48.5 $ 60.1 $ 73.1 $ 88.5 P p lat o $5 7s $ 1 2 $ 2 5 $ 3 8 $ 4.7 $ 5.8 $ 7.0 Total Police $ 16.9 $ 34.4 $ 52.3 $ 64.8 $ 78.9 $ 95.5 Table A-13 ESTIMATED FIRE SERVICES F~CPENDITURES Estimated Cost (000's) Fire 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Multi-Family Residential $ tat.ss $ 9.8 $ 19.8 $ 30.2 $ 37.4 $ 45.4 $ 55.1 Population $o sa $ 0 2 $ 0 4 $ 0.6 $ 0.8 $ 0.9 $ 1.1 Total Fire $ 10.0 $ 20.2 $ 30.8 $ 38.2 $ 4&3 $ 56.2 Table A-14 ESTIMATED CULTURAL AND LEISURE EXPENDITURES FsAmated Cost (000's) CuRural and Leisure 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Multi-Family Residential $ 6.02 $ 0.4 $ 0.8 $ 1.3 $ 1.6 $ 1.9 $ 2.3 Population $ss st $ 142 $ 28 8 $ 43 8 $ 54.3 $ 66.0 $ 80.0 Total Cultural and Leisure $ 14.6 $ 29.6 $ 45.1 $ 55.9 $ 67.9 $ 82.3 A-4 IN7 ~:t>-„ ,~ DIVFk51f1 _ ~l Y ~~ ®~- ., -... ~~ _.. • e~n_ ~~ ~ ' m, p /' ., ~_. ~~~- Vr~ _s ~T `~"` `~~~., s. -_ .~ ,, y ,.< ,f ~,~ oESrea r€hew s~ ww / caxx-rn~u mnoxc aaN Fcrr OLYMPIC POINTS CRY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA / \ \ /~ ~~~ ~' /. ~ ~~ ~~ / . i~ / ~~ rn~ ~'V~\ ~~. a~, . , ~ . i ~~i; I ~ ~~ /,~.I i,,l~ 'i-~ LI~~C`1^ i ']rI i ~~ ~ .. um m~ ~ a ~ !, j // i ~~ ~ . A ~.. .mESrvffr OLYMPIC POINTS ary m aw vi., cwol.i. i B 5 } k ~__ ~~~~~ ~~ OU o.l FUSCOE caxctvrva~ cnaowc rurv 13 OLYMPIC POINTE cary a aw. vwa coon.. 9 -,o6 I /~/ ~\ .r l~ `~ ,, .I~ ml~~ ~'~ ~,. ~ ,; f ~f a ~'! i` . '~ E ' ~., a i ..., m..m ~.~ _, - _- _ r ~ --~ ,- w. ~m .. ~ s: ~ s~ M .~ .~ ~.. .. ~m ... o ~FUSCOE / , . i a. I 9P 1 • A a B B ~ i ... _ _ _" '__.C ~ ..L,.._, ........w... 55_....~.. P9 3 ! q P A 1 v _ __ k Ck Y h 4 Y . 6 ysaFay 5a K f 6 q f 6 96 B `::..e. a. q ,.-.=.g ee.; tiff jp$j~~ e F 69uE.9 Pa.§t1.F F.@,9 FV ~9~id 1• ~ okY eah alax-l-a;@.h .. F E m x m q ~ ~~~ 9FF, !- 9-, 9le9 ., 3 ~ a i 96' / e ® ® a ® z u:f,~ O ~ / /° > _ ~~~€~v3 ~j ~ i p~ j .. ~ ~ ~~ / ~ ei~ 3 ~ 7 i __ i-.~\ ~ ~~ ~~ /~~~ 2 u~ 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ `~ A 1 ~~ ~ ~ ti i ~ ~-- ~1 ~ o ~ ~ ~_ l r~ ~ ~ ~. __, ,_ i f ~ L ~~~?', ~ o ~ ~, r ~~ ~~ .~< -. ! C ~ ~ i d°o 3 r~ y r~ a .. l ~~ r~ I L1 ~ /ti~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~__ ~ i r { ,.. n, ~.~ y\ i ~ ~ 1 ~~ J ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ i ~ ~\ ', 8 m ~ .( T l lam' ® i v ~~ ~ ~ ~ ° ~' I~~ ~ ,wry- ~ s o e / ~~ n m~ L~~F-' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ i Jd 3 ~ °® ~ ,.~ ',` I~~°}Y :3 a le~~~ ~ ® $7! ri ~ y e '+ *, ~ @93 ~ 93 e3 7 7 a 3 ~/ m FP ~q~ ~, qP, e7A 1~, F a el U~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~~~ \ ~ a\ c7~ ~ ~ @~I i Ff 3 ~. ~ @ ~ SGF f~° ~ 3 ~~ @ J F !. i ~ F7 ~~~ J I i i a"+ g 5 ~., L ~ ® ti O n ~'~ V ~ ~~~~~~ m ~ \ o %% sd p ~ \\, c : P ~ ~\ Rh ~` a .\ Og 9Q O",. ~ ~ \ "'°" ` A ~ ~' INTEGRAL ' _ Integral Communities i~fi~~~~ d®Nd~~~u~~ ~~N~~Ga~~ ~N~~~~~N~N~~, GITI' of GHULA VISTA, GALIPORNIA ~~~~ ~~ ~~~ ' ~ ~ mP~ roc ~o -~ ~ n.:uis ~~ ~ " _ ~~ mcazixe~vr ~ 1 _ wnJ LINEAR SARK RECREATION AREA -'A' ~~ P.~~ TYPICAL OVERLOOK -'E` rox.~. v~mwmr sMm w.xrw,..e. mmi ~ K ~ma .-a`te` N W z ~ W Q ~ N W ~ ~ Z Q 9 J J Z 3N' W ~~' MAIN ENTRY -'D '~~ m~~ Q .arc ~ >o°~ w a~~ ~ ~o'"~ ~~8 it MAIN RECREATION AREA -'G' ~= ~~w ~~~~ ~~~ a .. ~. ~. ~a~s..„u ~.. ~e.µ.. ~. x IN.U.GO L9 fM'RE ES WA ~a w y MA ~ SmNW~v 'eEE cnwb 55141KS ~ 36 ~z i+en Rvxux eELUNni+ ~ vA p a.4M al r2NK ~-. a[wS.wtlw.iw My.ip tors llv[OKK a, x ~ i,+w _ _ ~~ Wt` ~€ ~W~wc AeRS W.Ki ~oxz ~ws rEllowvWG RSK. P ~~ ~ ~ enis a a ~~iws ~v rrrx oRU~e neo. xwwvnar sus u ~ mmn~ c iwwnn r iuiiuc r ers zxSVasE _ _ wf °~" ~iuw eu 4 ~m n x e w w ~i rvo Ra ~ a ~P n ' xrs vxwr x~ rrxu~ ~~ W~,aer gar ~ c ~~a ~~ `~REe1 orv ~rni~. svi e an x~ ~~ w+> ~'swEnaw w.xr w z~. ~.w.rw ~ uvnrou ueumw~in i+rscrr~ vna¢e~.A~ iwveuoE¢ £ u+o w.x i a~ r siPn mussuu e r_.n,K.c 6zrss ¢ ~nvrs - WU.G.a.Ls p ~ nn~ ray uoe a ~ e w. n. r.~nve n eo v s 4 ~ n~. ~ i e c ox o 'xeo srwx xe -~z a cmv+~.r~ ~ a-.nnimn~~~~:icz mnuu _ 05MiI5 Rl`FRS' Y.Nf +WOR2>Jww~WI0E5 3uEa YiK i.E-i sF[zWLbJER ® BKUra15 a y.ORiZart TIM4 ~ M doFLw v ~K' ~R ~~rc. c ~ r mA4KLlHRwM JnSVlbVas 55 A¢ NSnINE ~uD. Ma0./.rvu i. bo x16+. GRaX.xi iOLEn~wr ® L xPNSw GILiRPW1!'~MOX Ya~f M1iYX) LOrI I Nfi~~~~ ~®N~~PTU~kL ~,~N~~~~P~ D~fi~~~ $ ~L.ANfiIN~ L~~E~~ UTY of GHULA VISTA, GALIPORNiA ENTRY ELEVA TUBULAR STEEL POOL PENGE NEIGHBORHOO~_ -ARK 'E n z W J ~ F Z W ~~' Z ~ ~ ~ ~~i I rQ Fla3 Q .fps ~ sfo° ~ j~w~ z ~~Fy L. ~o~ '~. 1 ENTRY MONUMENT ELEVATION .., PROTECT INFORMATION TRIPLEX ROW HOME rm~ ~,ne m mn nccoa~ umn u mxmumoxme-v-e m~i~mexnTaiiear M ~ ~ in CARRIAGE ROW HOME uu i~a .a ~ ~~~~ .~s.r~ ...,. ~. ~. ~. ~~.•~~ I F- 3 3 1 i 6000ND FLOOR PLAN ~, J i; -- PLw: iwa sF ©m PLAN I ~ V.,.a` ~E9 5F ~~ v °' i PL6N 3 ~L~ a~sv ~ ~, ~~O ~ x ~ 1 i ®,.. av. ..,.. ~ _______ ~____ m _____ L~.: ..~..~ ~ ..., u: RIRBT FLOOR PLAN 3 q PLAN 3 PLAN 2 16535Q. P! PLAN I 1.1,3SQ. Ff. 1•_p ~ 3 Iuiv 14. 2010 ......_..._.- FIRM FLOOR PLAN THIRD FLOOR PLAN SECOND FLOOR PLAN FIRST FLOOR PLAN THIRD FLOOR PLAN bE00ND FLOOR PLAN FIRST FLOOR PLAN THIRD FLOOR PLAN bE00ND FLOOR PLAN - V ~ ~~ ~~ 0 II L~UI ~ 9 _y® a ~- .o ^. +. o. uvr. J umPo mv. L m mr m~ my THIRD FLOOR PLAN SECGND FLOOR PLAN THIRD FLOOR PLAN aTF_reuuier.FUr f- ° ____ O a N1ssMs 0 ® ~ III _~. ~ ^ ... SECOND FLOOR PLAN ~aL® .,. ~ OECOND FLOOR PLAN FIRbT FLOOR PLAN PLAN 3 1.3105Q. FI. PLAN 2 36 SQ. Ff. PLAN 1 I.I6a SQ. FI. _ p_p may ~a, zaio ,.~,~.,..,,,.,, FIR6T FLOOR PLAN FIROT FLOOR PLAN ~ ~ THIRD PLOOR PLAN REAR ELEVATION `A' ~ .~ ,~ ~~ I ~, FRONT ELEVATION `A' RIGHT ELEVATION `A' LEFT ELEVATION `A' ~n FRONT ELEVATION B' FRONT ELEVATION `C' FRONT ELEVATION `A' ~ ~, ~ ® ® ~ ~ ~ ~ REAR ELEVATION `A' FRONT ELEVATION `B' SIDE ELEVATION `A' FRONT AND REAR ELEVATIONS `A' SIDE ELEVATIONS `A' FRONT AND REAR ELEVATIONS `B' SIDE ELEVATIONS `B' [. ;f})Di riOOlJ L- //II/01/J1/? 17 o~ ERRATA SHEET REGARDING ITEM NUMBER 9- OLYMPIC POINTE DECEMBER 14,2010 PAGE 9-77 OF THE AGENDA PACKET (PAGE 6 OF DRAFT CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION TO CONSIDER ADDENDUM AND APPROVE AMENDMENTS) SECTION B IS BEING CHANGED TO REFLECT THE CORRECT ESTIMATION OF PAD (PARKLAND AQUISTION AND DEVELOPMENT) FEES THE CORRECT ESTIMATED AMOUNT SHOULD BE $4,033.984.00 I).) Resolution No. Page 6 approval, payment of DIF fees at the building permit stage, and/or utilizing Community Facilities Districts to finance or maintain the public facility. Any impacts associated with the proposed amendments have been previously addressed by FEIR-05-02. B. THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCE PLAN IS CONSISTENT WITH THE OVERALL GOALS AND POLICIES OF THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN, GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM, AND AMENDED EASTLAKE III SPA PLAN. The Eastlake III SPA Plan PFFP outlines the necessary public facilities required to meet its land use and circulation objectives of the General Plan. The PFFP outlines detailed plans for the provision of these public facilities as they relate to the proposed Project. The PFFP identifies any required Development Impact Fees (DIF) fees which must be paid to help defray costs of facilities which will benefit the project. The estimated facilities fees required by this project are $ 7,334,906.20. PAD fees are approximately $5,027,436.00 $4011 9R4 00 The fiscal revenues to the City associated with the Olympic Pointe project, range from $54,800 annually and rise to $309,000 at build-out. Fiscal expenditures would be initially $49,500 and rise to $279,000 at build-out The net fiscal impact to the City from developing the Olympic Pointe project is positive throughout the development and results in annual net surplus of $29,700 at build-out. c. THE PFFP AMENDMENT ENSURES THAT THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROJECT WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE CITY'S QUALITY OF LIFE STANDARDS. As required by the City's Growth Management Ordinance, the PFFP analyzes the impact of the project on public facilities and services and identifies the required public facilities and services needed to serve the project to maintain consistency with the City's Quality of Life Threshold Standards. The PFFP describes in detail the cost, financing mechanisms and timing for constructing public facilities required to ensure that development occurs only when the necessary public facilities exist or are provided concurrent with the demands of the new development. Certain facility improvements include requirements for the construction of a signal at the intersection of Olympic Parkway and the project entrance. Other required measures are related to fire protection, water conservation, water quality. air quality and traffic. Implementation of these measures along with payment of any required DIF fees will ensure the Project will maintain consistency with the City's Quality of Life Standards. . . r-\e-VV\ '9 FACT SHEET ITEM PREVIOUS PROJECT PROPOSED PROJECT Number of Units 494 Apartments 389 Condominiums * Height 3 & 4 Stories 2 & 3 Stories Parking Spaces 1.83 per unit 2.3 per unit (20% increase) Traffic 2964 Trips 2334 Trips (21 % reduction) Average Unit Size 800 Square Feet 1400 Square Feet Price Range Rental high $200's to low $400's Time Line Break Ground July 2011 3- Year Buildout * 120 Triplex Homes 128 Row Homes 141 Carriage Homes