HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Statement 1978/11/14 Item 06, 06a. ~ ~ CITY OF CHULA VISTA
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item No. 6 - 6a
For meeting of 11/14/78
Public hearing - Consideration of tentative subdivision map for Woodside Village-
Plaza Valle Verde (C.V. Tract 79-07) at the southeast corner of Otay Valley
ITEM TITLE Road and Melrose Avenue
Resolution ~~~/ -Approving the tentative subdivision map for Woodside Village-
Plaza Valle Verde (C.V. Tract 79-07)
SUBMITTED BY Director of Planning
ITEM EXPLANATION (4/5TH'S VOTE REQUIRED YES N0~)
A. BACKGROUND
1. The applicant has submitted a tentative subdivision map. to divide a 6.4 acre
parcel located at the southeast corner of Otay Valley Road and Melrose into two lots (one
2.3 acre commercial lot and one 4.1 acre residential condominium lot).
2. At the meeting of October 11, 1978, the Planning Commission considered rezoning
this property from C-V-P to C-N-P and R-3-G, and adopted the Negative Declaration on
IS-79-16 for this project, which was forwarded to the City Council on November 7, 1978.
B. DISCUSSION
1. Existing site characteristics.
The subject site is relatively level property, sloping gently from the northwest
corner toward the southeast. The property drops approximately 14 feet in elevation.
2. Proposed development.
Lot 1 will be developed with a neighborhood shopping center and lot 2 is planned as
a 64 unit condominium project. The plans for this development were approved by the
Planning Commission on October 11, 1978.
C. ANALYSIS
1. The proposed division will allow for the independent development and financing
of each parcel. A division of property into two lots is normally handled by the parcel
map procedure. However, lot 2 will be developed as a 64 unit condominium project which
requires the submittal of a tentative subdivision map. No official development plans for
~uc:nm EX NIBITS (continued on supplemental paae)
Agreement Resolutions Ordinance Platte Notification List
Res. PGS-79-7
OtherTentative Mao ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT: Attached Submitted on llj7/78
FINANCIAL IMPACT
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Concur with Planning Commission recommendation.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
On October 25, 1978 the Planning Commission Voted 5-0 (with one vacancy and one
member absents to recommend to the City Council the approval of the tentative map for
Woodside Village-Plaza Va11e Verde in accordance with Resolution PCS-79-7.
COUNCIL ACTION
a J-,
-~ ;
~.
~.. .:~c %i`~;~ ~-'~'i:'.~s iii
." , ^
Form A-113 (Rev. 5/77)
AGENDA ITEM N0.6 - 6a
Meeting of 11/14/78
Supplemental page No. 2
the condominium project have been submitted or approved at this time; therefore, approval
of the tentative subdivision map is in anticipation that a 64 unit condominium project
will be constructed on lot 2. The developer is not obligated to build condominium units
on parcel 2 but would be limited to a maximum of 17.4 dwelling units per acre under the
R-3-G zoning. Those units could then be rented or sold, depending on market demands.
2. The applicant's plans are not sufficiently detailed at this point to determine
if they conform to the various condominium standards approved by Council on November 8;
however, he will be obliged to incorporate those standards into the development prior
to approval of the final map.
~3~j
;,.
r
NEG,~TIVE DECLARATIC?N
PROJECT TITLE: Plaza Valle Verde/(n'oodside Village
Project Location: Southeast corner of Main St. & Melrose Ave.
Project Proponent: Dewat Corporation
CASE N0. IS-79-16 DATE:
8014 Armour St. San Diego 92111
September 21, 1978
A. Project Setting
The project entails approximately 7.18 acres of property located
at the southeastern corner of Melrose Ave. and Otay Valley Rd.
(Exhibit A) The site is currently vacant but has been cultivated
agriculturally for a number of years. The property slopes gently
from the northwestern property line toward the southeast with a
4 ft. elevation difference and is about 3 ft. below the elevation
of Otay Valley Rd. along the north.
Property to the north, east and west is vacant, however, developments
are planned and are currently being processed by the City. A
medium density residential development is planned to the north
across Otay Valley Rd., a motel and restaurant is proposed
immediately east and a condominium complex and 7-11 store are'
planned to the west. An existing medium density residential
development is located immediately adjacent to the south and
includes privately owned townhouses, several of which abut the
project area. The site is generally void of significant vegetation
with the exception of a small grove of Eucalyptus trees. The
applicant has noted that these trees will be retained.
The Conservation Element of the General Plan indicates that there
are no significant mineral resources present. The soils report
prepared for EIR-78-10 (Plaza Valle Verde) states that expansive
soils are located on-site. EIR-78=10 also indicates. that there
are no fault traces located on the property.
B. Project Description
The applicant proposes to subdivide the subject property into two
separate parcel's for the purpose of constructing: (1) an office/
retail commercial development and (2) a condominium development.
The commercial center is planned to accommodate approximately
24,800 sq. ft. of leasable floor area and will include 146 parking
spaces. A number of mature eucalyptus trees located on this
portion of the site will be preserved and incorporated into the
landscape plan.
~~ a`
t~• ~S-79-16 'l~
~, •~ page 2
Residential structures will be constructed on the southern portion
of the site. Ten buildings are planned to house 32 two bedroom
flats and 32 three bedroom townhouses. 128 covered parking spaces
and 38 guest spaces will also be provided. Landscaping will
involve 2.2 acres which also includes a swimming pool and recreation
area.
Grading operations will involve filling the entire site about
2 ft. to bring the property to an elevation equal to that of
Otay Valley Rd. It is anticipated that 23,000 cubic yards of earth
will be imported.
C. Compatibility with zoning and laps
The subject site is designated for retail or visitor commercial use
on the General Plan. Currently, the site is zoned for C-V-P
development. The applicant is requesting a rezoning to C-C-P which
is consistent with the General Plans retail commercial land use and
wil allow the proposed commercial development. The rezoning will
also permit medium density multiple family residential units with
the approval of a conditional use permit.
D. Identification of Environmental Effects
Geology
The project site will be exposed to ground shaking due to potential
earthquake activity which is typical of the Southern California area.
There are no potential impacts due to ground rupture or liquifaction,
however. (See Section 3.1 and Appendix G of EIR-78-10 for detail
geologic analysis.)
Soils
The site contains expansive soils which
through grading operations or foundation
impact. (See Section 3.1 and Appendix G
analysis)
Air Quality
will have to be treated
design to avoid significant
of EIR-78-10 for detailed
The proposed project is estimated to generate approximately 18,060
vehicle miles per day. This milage will increase pollutant levels
both regionally and locally. The incremental increase in pollutants
is insignificant, however, relative to the San Diego Air Basin and
Chula Vistas contribution to the San Diego Air Basin.
Noise-:2obile Sources
Section 3.5 of EIR-78-10 discusses existing, on-site noise levels
~~`~~
ti~ ,IS-79-16
page 3
generated by vehicle traffic
on the noise contours shown
levels between 53dB and 61dB
proposed residential units.
utilizing adjacent roadways. Based
on Figure 9 of that section, noise
exist within the boundaries of the
A SWING noise analysis was prepared to estimate future noise
levels due to projected ADT on Otay Valley Rd. after project
implementation and 1995 ADT on I-805. The analysis indicates that
proposed residential units closest to I-805 will be subject to
exterior noise levels of 66dB and units closest to Otay Valley Rd.
will be subject to 58dB+.
According to '.the SWING report,. conventional construction with some
windows open will provide an interior noise reduction of 15dB and
conventional construction with windows closed will result in a
20dB+ loss. In view of the noise levels-projected to result after
the project, it is anticipated that no major impact due to noise
from vehicle traffic will result.
Noise - Stationary Source
Commercial air handling systems will most likely be the main source
of stationary noise. This type of equipment is capable of generating
considerable levels of noise. When the type of equipment and
capacity is known an acoustical analysis relative to adjacent
residential development should be conducted by a qualified acoustician
and recommendations should be imcorporated into the project.
Parks & Recreation
The project is located within City park district #9.03 which
currently has no dedicated parkland. Based on standards within
the Parks & Recreation Element of the General Plan, 1.4 acres
of parkland are needed within this distirct. A population of 170
people is estimated to result from the proposed project and an
additional .34 acres of parkland would be necessary to serve these
people.
Parkland has not been dedicated as a part of this project, however,
open spaces and a recreational area have been provided. In
addition, the proponent will be required to pay in-lieu park fees
which will contribute toward the purchase of future parkland within
the district.
Traffic
The proposed commercial center is anticipated to generate approxi-
mately 3010 one way vehicle trips/day and the residential develop-
ment 510 trips/day. This amount of traffic, combined with traffic
from adjacent proposed developments, will significantly increase
1.? ~ ~
i, 75-79-16
page 4
traffic volumes utilizing adjacent roadways. This increase is
almost a 50~ reduction in traffic projected from the original
commercial center proposed for this site, however.
Potential cumulative impacts due to traffic in the project vicinity
primarily involves additional conjestion at the Melrose Ave. and
Otay Valley Rd. intersection. Access points to the subject
property could also create conflict if not designed to facilitate
inbound and outbound circulation.
Though the project will result in
substantial impact can be avoided
Ave./Otay Valley Rd. intersection
egress to reduce points of confli~
of existing and projected traffic
see Section 3.3 of EIR-78-10)
a significant incr--ease in traffic,
by signalization of the Melrose
and a well designed ingress and.
~t. (For a more detailed analysis
volumes within the project vicinity
E. MitiGating necessary to avoid si nificant im act
1. Expansive soils be treated through grading or foundation
design.
2. An analysis of stationary noise relative to proposed
residential units be conducted by a qualified acoustician
and recommendations incorporated into the project.
3. Fees in-lieu of parkland dedication will be required.
4. Participation in the signalization of the Melrose Ave.
and Otay Valley Rd. intersection will be required. Access
points to the project should be reviewed by the City's Traffic
Engineer to ensure minimal conflict with through traffic.
5. The grove of mature eucalyptus trees should be retained.
F. Findings of insignificant impact
1. The project site is void of endangered wildlife and there
are no significant mineral resources known to be present.
There is a small grove of mature eucalyptus trees located
on the subject property which will be preserved and incorporated
into the landscape plan. The proposed development is not
underlain by any known faulting, however expansive soils
are present and will require special treatment.
2. The proposed commercial center is not inconsistent with
the General Plan and if proposed zoning is approved, zoning
will be consistent with the General Plans land use element.
1 ~ ',c,
I ~
~I~-79-16
page 5
3. Effects of increased traffic and related circulation
problems can be mitigated to an acceptable level and no
substantial cumulative impact is anticipated to result from
project implementation.
4. Air quality is not expected to be significantly effected
and noise from existing and projected traffic is not anticipated
to result in any substantial adverse effect on the proposed
residential use. An analysis of stationary sources of noise
will be required and impacts mitigated if anticipated to occur.
G. Consultation `
1. Organizations and individuals
City of Chula Vista Planning Dept.
Engineering Dept.
Fire Dept.
Schwerin, Xinos & Assoc. - Consulting Eng. Sid Rinos
2. Documents
EIR-78-10 Plaza Valle Verde
IS-78-50 Plaza Valle Verde
EIR-78-12 National Properties
;o ~
T`:e Initial Stud. application and evaluation forms documenting the
fi;,ciin~:s or no signi ricant impact are attached.
~:1VIR0:::•~~. :1L REVIES•1 CCORDI:.ATOR
c~3~'
t~-
c~~~`~
r ~~~ ~~ ~
;r ~ _
_, _,_
.,~ _.._. ., a ^ _ r reni C~ ~~ __ __'
i tz0'li and a '__ _~
c ~a r -. _ - -, _
~,cr ~ .,, ~ ~u c-~=as ~rn2r or 0 ..~ .ally/ ?oad an _,-
„~;,5 ~e Bwii aen tal it~+ Ca:r:^it=^e o' -
-god mi r=~ hat said _- _ - i _.,_ _
1 ^' ~C]n'_ 1'CdCt BI: ~ c^V1r'Si nt a',d 'h. r '_,-_ ~ '_.. >n
Cu Jl ..~.'- S
p o pr-+^dY_d 0^ Sid -TC; ^_CL, dnC
~nV1 On~'~2n tal ...OdCL ePOYt ~J
1 l~ _..
~~: pin nr psi a ;e
rl, ri ~ -_ ~~ ~ - ~ _. _
,nd ~
_, ~ent:l .,set ~... ars on sa a ,-'-' ~.
~_,`,
_~~._:S _ s _sJ _:: _ _._._
- n o~ice ~.
..-., ~ ~ o` `.,~ C~ ty or ~ J1 , _ _.. ~ I,_rcg _. _
a~a l~bili t. o•" said dr ait Envi ror entsl -ct
r i i -
cr ul ~ icn ro rcn do inr ara a '~o*ice ole r ,~ ~ ~_ I
St t_ of Ccls r 'a, aru
~. [r -i~ nurc°s
_ c ~c
' gyp= ~ ?1 nctna Com~ns icn ar he City or rn .•' ~ _~.
.art ~r_n;-en ~I i r?a_t C2 ,;ors on ~r i ~_. - I
r-n; on
7esti~sny cn said aooJrenc, and
=~.",S, Cie Enuonienta~ 4erei ~°ct~cr or t.. r~„'~ci- ~are~i ^°ara^
a nal _nvi ron.-ental uct °eport rncludi nn the to -~.onv '- ,aid pd i. ne3rin~
end a r_s rouse to thos!: rc r'.cen ts.
.:0':! NE?.EFORE i;~ IT 2eSOL1'EG AS POLLC'F5:
itsslon
-. ,. ,.he facts ,.r e~°nted ~ ~h° Pla nir~ Cc~~-niss=cn, *'°
~ .nut n~cncer '.al ~aipac ,aport 78 1~ sas ~oe n ~ ^_ezreu ~ .^~..ni,'.'~-
ri _,_ "_, ii'o rnia Environn:ent31 i~ ality r t of 1970 a ~r'mv1 =d, the Cal Hernia
:i of Chula :'ista
~n- _„-.i'e Ccde nd the 6r~i ronnrn [~1 .-_iiesa Fol icy of t.-
_r'd ^.. infor-
m o- r'C'/ C'3 r'i fl^d `::^at the IJ 1s5'rn `:li YC`/iCV .~ aPd C'J^
-aura i.. said dr,c~.'~n~nt.
--ni- i n. rs ° ,;ohnson, -rr-sou tti, Cha na icr, `_.',i Ch, G. .,. ~,~a°~
~E.: ~"
°enneS;en ;: O'~:eill.
_ ri
. car-,.~ ~ .~ ~ha~rran
.~ --. i
~xr-ecary l~sct:n!l
FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL ILIP ACT REPORT
EIR-78-10
~ , -' ~
Plaza Valle Verde
Issued by the
Environmental Review Committee
March 23, 1978
Adopted by the
Chula Vista Planning Commission
May 10, 1978
Plaza Valle Verde
EIR-78-10
Table of Contents
page
1.0 Introduction 1
1.1 Purpose & Intent 1
1.2 Executive Summary. 1
2.0 Project Description. 3
3.0 Impact Analysis. 3
3.1 Geology & Soils. 3
3.2 Grading s Drainage 6
3.3 Traffic. 9
3.4 Air Quality. lg
3.5 Noise. 19
3.6 Aesthetics 2g
3.7 Light & Glare. 32
3.8 Natural Resources, Consumption &
Waste Products 34
4.0 Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts. s7
5.0 Alternatives to the Proposed Action. 37
6.0 Gro~oth Inducement. 37
7.0 Relationship Between Local Short-Term Use of
the Environment and the Maintenance and
Enhancement of Long-Term Productivity. 38
g.0 Any Irreversible Environmental Changes which
would be involved in the Proposed Action,
should it be Implemented. .. .. 38
9.0 References & Consultants 40
10.0 Effects found to be Insignificant. 41
11.0 Comments received at hearing of April 26, 1978 42
12. Response to Comments 49
?~ 1 q(?
Fig. 1 Regional Locator 4
Fig. 2 Sub-regional Locator 5
Fig. 3 Schematic Site Plan 6a
Fig. 4 Existing Traffic Volume. 11
Fig. 5 Existing Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 12
Fig. 6 Projected Traffic Distribution 14
Fig. 7 Projected Peak Hour Traffic
movements . .. 16
Fig. 8 Noise Measurements 21
Fig. 9 Existing Noise Contours. ^~
Fig. 10 Stationary & Parking Lot Sources 23
Fig. 11 1995 Noise Contours. 24
Fig. 12 Stationary Noise Contours. 25
Fig. 13 Relationship between Center
& Residences to the South - 31
Fig. 14 Proposed Luminaires. 33
Table 1 Modified Mercalli Scale ~
Table 2 Vehicle Trip Generation 15
Table 3 Estimated Air Pollutants Emission 20
Table 4 Noise Measurement 26
Table 5 Air Handling Equip. Noise 2~
Appendices on file in the Planning Department and available for
public review.
A. IS-78-50
B. Acoustical Impact Report prepared by San Dieao Acoustics
C. Transportation Analysis prepared by Harvey E. Heger, Ph.D.,
VISA, Inc.
D. Air Quality Analysis prepared by Harvey E. Heger, Ph.D.,
h1SA, Inc.
E. Analysis of grading and drainage, aesthetics, light,
glare, energy and waste generation, consumption of non-
renewable resources, prepared by Schwerin, Xinos &
Associates.
F. Technical data on proposed Luminaires
G. Soil & Geologic Investigation prepared by Geocon, Inc.
ii
Plaza Valle Verde
EIR-78-10
1.0 PITRODIICTION
1.1 Purpose and Intent
This Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared to
fulfill the requirements of the California Environmental Quality
Act of 1970 (CEQA) in disclosing all significant environmental
impacts o` the proposed projects to the decision-making authority
of the City cf Chula Vista, other responsible agencies and the
public.
This document is informational in nature and intended to enable
aparopriate governmental authorities to evaluate the environmental
impacts associated with the project, consider measures to reduce
the magnitude of any significant impacts and examine alternatives
to the project as proposed.
Public agencies are required by law to deny any project for
which an EIP, has been prepared and has identified one or more
significant effects unless changes or alternatives which would
mitigate or avoid such impacts were incorporated into the project;
such changes are the responsibility of another jurisdiction or agency
and adopted by that jurisdiction or agency; or specific economic,
social or other considerations make infeasible such mitigation or
alternatives.
~lthouch this LIP is prirarily an anal_VSis o` the potential
environmental consequences of the provision of 7?,250 sq. ft.
community shopping center at the southeast corner of Otay Valley
Rd. and Melrose Ave., the cumulative effects of this and other
projects in the vicinity is also provided. The other projects
include a motel/restaurant at the southwest intersection of I-805,
a 52 unit apartment and small commercial area at the southwest
corner of Otay Valley Rd. and Melrose Ave, and a 121 unit
condominium north of Otay Valley Rd. and west of I-805.
1
1.2 Executive Summary
This project involves the construction of a community
scale shopping center at the southeast corner of Otay Valley Rd.
and Melrose Ave. The findings of the report are as follows:
1.2.1 The project site does not involve any geological
features which could cause around rupture or liquefaction
but will be exposed to ground shaking due to earthquake
activity which is typical of Southern Calif. There are
expansive soils present which can be adequately treated.
There will therefore be no significant impact due
to geologic or soil conditions.
1.2.2 About 55,000 cubic yards of fill will be placed on
this site and the motel/restaurant site to the east. This
will raise the average height of the property 3-4 feet above
current levels.
The shopping center site will generally drain toward
the south of the site and then easterly over the southern
portion of the motel/restaurant site into an open channel.
There will be a slight increase in the amount of
runoff due to this project but this is within the capacity
of existing drainage facilities.
Runoff will be directed away from the residental
areas to the south of the project.
1.2.3 There is a potential for a cumulatively significant
traffic impact due to this project and others in this area.
With the provision of a traffic signal at the intersection
of Otay Valley Rd. and Melrose Ave., significant traffic
impacts can be avoided.
It will also be necessary to reduce the number of
access points onto Otay Valley Rd. and improve on-site
circulation with coordinated access points and flows
between the various uses to provide acceptable traffic
patterns.
1.2.4 There will be an incremental but insignificant
impact on air quality.
1.2.5 Implementation of the project as proposed could have
a substantial and adverse impact on adjacent residential uses
due to the location of loading docks, garbage pickup areas,
refrigeration equipment and roof mounted air conditioning
equipment. This impact can be mitigated through various
shielding techniques including a 10' high zoning wall along
the southern boundary.
2
These impacts would be mitigated in a more positive
manner by redesigning the site plan to provide greater
separation between the noise generators and the residential
uses.
1.2.6 With the proposed architectural theme, the project
will not result in any substantial and adverse aesthetic
impact.
1.2.7 Because of the strong downward lighting orientation
proposed, there will not be any substantial glare on
adjacent properties.
1.2.8 There will not be any substantial consumption of any
natural resources by this project nor will there be any
significant waste generation.
2a
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project involves the construction of a community scale
shopping center at the southeast corner of Otay Valley Rd. and
Melrose Ave. The center would include a27,200 sq. ft. market, a
19,200 sq. ft. drug store, a bank of 6500 sq. ft. and other specialty
stores for a total of 73,260 sq. ft. The entire site has an area
of 6.87 acres, so less than 250 of this lot will be covered by
buildings. About 356 parking spaces are planned along with
perimeter and interior landscaping.
The sites are presently several feet lower in grade than the
Otay Valley Rd. elevations. To increase the visibility of the
commercial facilities from Otay Valley Rd., and to facilitate
access to this major roadway, it will be necessary to fill the
proposed project site at an average of three to four feet. This
will necessitate the import of approximately 55,000 cubic yards of
fill. The import requirements is further necessitated by the expansive
nature of the soils on the site.
Fig. 1 and 2 show the location of the proposed shopping center
and Fig. 3 the schematic site plan.
Approval of the project would require a change in the
General Plan from Visitor Commercial to Retail Commerical land use
designation and, change in zoning from C-V-P to C-C-P or C-N-P and
consideration of a precise plan for the development of the site.
3.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS
3.1 Geology & Soils
3.1.1 Project Setting
The results of the drilling and trenching operations
and a survey of geologic reports indicate the site is underlain
by Quaternary-aged stream terrace deposits consisting of brown,
silty to clayey sands, silts, and clays.
Topsoils developed on the terrace deposits are typically
one to two feet thick and consist of an upper silty sand horizon
underlain at a depth of one to two feet by a lower clay horizon.
The results of expansion tests performed on typical samples of
topsoil clays indicate potential swells of up to 10.8 percent.
An examination of on-site exposures and a revieca of
published geologic maps indicates that the site is not underlain
by any known faults. The site lies approximately one-half mile
west of the La Placion Fault and 10 miles from the Rose Canyon
Fault system.
The La Nacion Fault zone extends for a distance of
approximately 15 miles from the San Ysidro area to the San Diego
State University area near Montezuma Rd. Faults within this
zone are considered to be potentially active, meaning that they have
had frequent activity within the Pleistocene Epoch (last two million
years +), but that evidence indicating recent movement is lacking.
There is evidence that at least some portions of the fault have
not been active for nearly 11,000 years.
SO ,An
~.
PACIFIC
NlFSia~
LOC[AM
~ti
'y~j, 'i01hi
ref
~O
rL?~
.~
r
I
SCALE
m
o ~
z
D ~
r
r
0
n
D
--1
O
__ _ ~
--~ ,,, ,
,,
,. ~~ ~ ~=
~ ~t~ - ~~~~ ~ ~~ ,LOTS se.o ~ ~ ~/~~~ ~ I~~ ~~
E..
/2 ~~
~ w
/ i-
F I
Q i ~ i ~ ~ l ''- 50 '~
~ /ea d ~~
~ ti,- ~ ~ ~~
z ~ _ ~ Y~S ~ .~ _
~^~ .. -_ _ _ _ j '
J ~2
1 ~~~ _
• __ ~._ . ,~~ ~ R~TAY r o
,, VA~Lt'1r~ /3/0 -
.~ lz~.o , _,___ ~~
--° _ - . ~~
~~=~ i
- -~~ ~ I~
-~ . ~~ I I ~ , ~ ~ \,I 133.0 ~ ,} u~ / l,1 ~i II ~~ - ~ ' ~I
PROJECT S/TE ~ ~: ~`- ~ j ~ Ir I~
{
a ??...~ E,y~ ~1es ~ % 1 ~ ~~~
i
{ ~~ ~I~ I 1
K, s~ ~,~ , ,y '; „ ~ • i
~~ ~ i ~ ~*- ~' I f '
~ ~
..- _ ! ~~ ~~ 1 ~ ~
"'sl 5 ~ ~/ ' ' ~ ~ ,
~ ~. ~~CHO ~ ,~~: /~ ~,'~i ~ rt I~
.. ,«.
x-
~: ..~
I
~ ~ ' NORTH ~ ~ 1 Ty `-`~' .' FIVUf~E #'2
J ;
~~~ I ~ :~~ 0 100 200 '
~ ~ ~ /;~~ SUB REGIONAL b'.'^
. ~ ' ioo LOCATOR _,_ ~.
,... =~
Y r.~ .. .
>• DR.
.~
/ r
., ,__..
The Rose Canyon Fault zone, located approximately 10
miles northwest of the site, is also classified as potentially
active. Recently published reports indicate that the fault zone
may be capable of producing a Magnitude 6.5 earthquake (Richter
scale) on the average of once every 300 years. Although seismic
shaking at the site would be severe in the event of a large
magnitude earthquake along the La Nacion or Rose Canyon faults, it is
believed that there is little likelihood of such a major event _
occurring on these potentially active faults within the lifespan of
the proposed structures.
The closest known active fault to the site is the Elsinore
Fault which lies approximately 30 miles to the east. This fault
is capable of producing a Magnitude 7.3 earthquake (Richter scale)
on the average of once every 60 years. The Elsinore Fault, because
of its seismically active history, probably represents the greatest
source of seismic risk to the project. Seismic shaking with Modified
i~tercalli Intensities ranging between VI to VIII could be expected
as a result of a major seismic event originating on the fault at a
point closest to the project. Expected effects corresponding to
specific riercalli Intensities are presented on Table I.
3.1.2 Potential Impact
The project site will be exposed to ground shaking due
to earthquake activity cahich is typical of the Southern California
area. There are no potential impacts due to ground rupture or
liquefacation.
The site does contain expansive soils which will have
to be treated through grading operations or foundation design to
avoid significant impact.
3.1.3 Mitigation
The above noted potential impacts can be mitigated through
standard development regulations contained in the City Code and the
conclusions and reccmmendations of the Soils & Geologic Investigation
contained in Appendix G. No unusual or severe mitigation measures
are required to reduce impacts due to soil or geologic hazards to an
insignificant level.
3.1.4 Analysis of Significance
No substantial and adverse impacts due to geologic or
soils conditions are anticipated.
3.2 Grading & Drainage
3.2.1 Project Setting
The subject project and the adjacent commercial development
are within the same site drainage area and therefore are discussed as
a single unit.
6
T2,BI,E 1
MODIFIED '4ERCALLI INTEtISI'LY (DAitAGE) SCALE OF 1931 (ABRIDGED)
I. Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable circumstances.
II. Felt only by a few persons at rest, especially on upper floors of build-
ings. Delicat=ply suspended objects may swing.
III. Felt quite noticeably indoors, especially on upper floors of buildings,
but many people do not recognize it as an earthquake. Standing motor-
cars may rock slightly. Vibration like passing tructc. Duration estimated.
IV. During the day felt indoors by many, outdoors by few. At night some
awakened. Dishes, windows, and door disturbed; walls making creaking
sound. Sensation like heavy truck striking building. Standing motorcars
rocked noticeably.
V. Felt by nearly everyone; many awakened. Some dishes, windows, etc.,
broken; a few instances of cracked plaster; unstable objects overturned.
Disturbance of trees, poles, and other tall objects sometimes noticed.
Pendulum clocks may stop.
VI. Felt by a11; many frightened ar.d run outdoors. Some heavy furniture
moved; a few instances of fallen plaster or damaged chimneys. Damage
slight.
VII. Everybody runs outdoors. Damage negligible in buildings of good design
and construction; slight to moderate in well built ordinary structures;
considerable in poorly built or badly designed structures. Some chim-
neys broken. Noticed by persons driving motorcars.
VIII. Damage slight in specially designed structures; considerable in ordin-
ary substantial buildings with partial collapse; great in poorly built
structures. Panel walls thrown out of frame structures. Fall of chim-
neys, factory stacks, columns, monuments, walls. Heavy furniture over-
turned. Sand and mud ejected in small amounts. Changes in well water.
Persons driving motorcars disturbed.
IX. Damage considerable in specially designed structures; well-designed
frame structures thrown out of plumb; great in substantial buildings,
with partial collapse. Buildings shifted off foundations. Ground
cracked conspicuously. Underground pipes broken.
X. Some well-built wooden structures destroyed; most masonry and frame
structures destroyed with foundations; ground badly cracked. Rails
bent. Landslides considerable from river banks and steep slopes.
Shifted sand and mud. Water splashed (slopped) over banks.
XI. Few, iE any (masonry), structures remain standing. Bridges destroyed.
Broad fissures in ground. Underground pipelines completely out of ser-
vice. Earth sliunps and land slips in soft ground. Rails bent greatly.
XII. Damage total. Waves seen on ground surfaces. Lines of sight and level
distorted. Objects thrown upward into the air.
7
The site is a relatively flat, vacant parcel. The site
topography falls evenly and diagonally approximately 17 feet from
the north;aest corner to the southeast corner of the properties.
There appears to have been no recent grading on the site; however,
the properties were apparently graded at one time to provide its
currently generally sloping terrain for agricultural purposes.
The predominat site drainage is currently toward the
southeast and into an existing open channel immediately adjacent
to the easterly boundary of the site and just westerly of I-805.
This channel is in the highway right-of-way. The channel directs
the flow approximately 1/4 of a mile to the Otay River waterway.
A limited porticn of the site runoff does flow into the residential
units south of the project site.
3.2.2 Potential Impact
The sites are presently several feet lower in grade than
the Otay Valley Rd. elevations. To increase the visibility of the
commercial facilities from Otay Valley Rd., and to facilitate access
to this major roadway, it will be necessary to fill the proposed
project site at an average of three to four feet. This will necessitate
the import of approximately 55,000 cubic yards of fill for the motel/
restaurant and shopping center site. The import requirements is
further necessitated by the expansive nature of the soils in several
areas.
Drainage from the motel/restaurant site will be directed
in a sheet form to the east into the existing open channel. The
majority of the drainage from the shopping center development will
be directed toward the south of the site, and then easterly over the
southerly portion of the motel property and into the open channel.
Drainage from the northerly portion of the shopping center site
will be directed onto Otay Valley Rd. where it can flow easterly
along the street right-of-way and into the open channel. The
westerly portion of the shopping center site will drain onto Melrose
Avenue ~:~here it will run to drop inlets in Rancho Drive, eventually
leading to the Otay River Basin.
The proposed import will bring the site up to existing
Otay Valley Rd. and Melrose Avenue right-of-way elevations. This
will have a positive impact in that the existing slopebank from Otay
Valley Rd. to the project site will be eliminated. The imports will
result in the increase of the existing slopebank between the proposed
site and the residential properties to the south. This increase of
approximately four feet in elevation gradients between the sites
would not create a major impact visually while providing an
additional physical barrier between the commercial and existing
residential properties.
$ _ _ - - --
The volume of drainage generated by the proposed
development will increase some~.ahat due to the additional runoff
created by placing asphalt on a large portion of the site. The
majority of the sites' drainage will be directed to the open
channel to the east which is the current course of the site
drainage. Though a portion of the site drainage will be directed
onto Otay Valley Rd. and Melrose Ave., since only approximately
t~ao to three acres of the proposed site will drain to the street
right-of-ways, the increase in water volumes added to the existing
drainace provided by the roadways will be insignificant. The
project development will have a positive impact in that the site
runoff will no longer be directed over any portion of the
residential properties to the south.
3.2.3 Mitigation/Significance
The result of the proposed grading will have little
sicr.ificance in that the site is currently flat and will remain the
same follocaina completion of the project with the exception of
a fill slope aloha the southern boundary. In addition, no large cut
or fill slopes will be created. Because of the volume of import
and the proximity of existing residential uses, great care should
be taken during grading operations to ensure that dust is controlled
and not allowed to drift onto surrounding developed sites.
The proximity of the subject site to a major drainage
basin (Otay River) and the existing drainage channel adjacent to
I-805 mitigates any drainage impact created by the development of
the subject site. The final drainage design should direct site
drainage away from surrounding residential sites and not overload
the existing drainace systems.
3.3 Traffic
3.3.1 Project Setting
The Environmental Review Committee of the City of Chula
Vista determined that there were potential significant cumulative
traffic impacts due to this and other planned projects in the area
of this proposal. Therefore this section of the EIR will deal with
the cumulative impacts.
Otay Valley Rd. is the main street serving the site and
presently accommodates an average weekday traffic volume (ADT) of
9394 vehicles with a morning peak hour averaging 728 vehicles and
an evening peak of 856 vehicles (5:00-6:00)': The evening peak is
about 8.6 percent of the ADT. Otay Valley Rd. is currently a two
lane bidirectional arterial which San Diego County is presently in
the process of widening to four lanes west of I-805 and the project
site ~ ~?elrose Avenue, which will provide secondary access to the
shopping center, is, in this sector, a short two-lane unstriped
residential access road to an existing medium density townhouse
development to the south. To the north, Melrose provides access
to a number of residential developments, existing and proposed.
9 ___
Traffic counts (ADT) for this link of Melrose Ave. have
not been made by the City or Countyy however, evening peak hour
counts taken by IdSA personnel on February 22, 1978 showed 161
vehicles passing the project site, which is approximately 19 percent
of the present evening peak on Otay Valley Rd. Melrose traffic
entering Otay Valley Rd. is regulated by 2-way stop signs. Traffic
volumes and movement patterns for Melrose Ave., Otay Valley Rd., and
I-805 and ramps are shown on Figure 5.
Given the expected importance to the proposed project
of the Melrose Ave ./Otay Valley Rd. intersection, the consultant
compiled evening peak hour counts for the intersection, including
turning movements, Plednesday, February 22, 1978. The results are
shown in Figure 6. At the same time, I-805 ramp counts (southbound
off and northbound on) were taken to update CALTRANS data. The
counts for the two ramps also include subsequent turning movements
as motorists leave the ramps; these are shown in brackets in Fig. 5.
The apparent decrease in peak hour ramp traffic, between 1975 and
1978 such as on the southbound off ramp from 320 to 920 (9% decrease)
and the northbound on ramp from 370 to 306 (17% decrease), may be
attributed to the deterent effect of the County's present widening
effort on Otay Valley Rd. to the west which was not a factor in
1975 traffic counts.
Streets serving the project area are presently at an
acceptable "C" level of service ;'which provides for a free flow of
traffic.
Local bus service is currently provided to the site.
Routes 1 & 2 of Chula Vista Transit System pass by the site on
Otay Valley Rd.
3.3.2 Potential Impact
Construction traffic will be a temporary impact on
adjacent street traffic flow. A substantial amount, a minimum
55,000 cubic yards, of fill will be brought to the site to raise the
property to street level. This impact should last no more than
two weeks. In subsequent building stages, construction traffic
will not significantly impair normal traffic flow. Workers will
drive before the morning peak and depart prior to the evening peak;
materials delivery will be intermittent.
The completed project is estimated to generate an average
of 8174 weekday vehicle trips as shown in Table 29 Nearly three-
fourths of this generated traffic (6040 trips) may be attributed
to the community shopping center. Approximately 1016 daily vehicle
trips will be generated by the motel and 1118 by the restaurant.
During the evening peak traffic hour on Otay Valley Rd.,
the project will increase traffic by about 719 vehicle trips, an
increase of almost 84 percent over the current peak level. The
project's peak hour traffic generation is almost equally divided
10
CURRENT TRAFFIC VOLU'~1ES
D
c
s
0
b
c
m
G
N
Key:
ADT - Average Weekday Traffic
(A.hi./P.M.)- Weekday Peak-Hour Traffic
LP.,1.~ - Evening Peak-Hour Counts by
consultant,2/22/78.
-/186
3,600 (300/320)
~290~
~229~
Otay Valley Road
9,894 (728/856)
~61~
_ '
~ Motel/Restaurant_
1
~-- ---~
PROJECT SITE (
~ 970
Community Shopping Center ~ '(70/160)
(
(
27,000 I
0
0
0
0
m
rn
m
w
H
U
W
h
a
w
I-aos
22,000
Figure 4. Current Traffic Volumes on Area Streets.
SOURCE: San Diego Coun ty,Traffic Engineering Division,
RU hi-2/16/77; CALTRAtdS (for I-805 and ramps),
RUN-11/75.
~~ 3, 570 (320/370)
~306~
238 ~ ~~68~
I
N
olo
(70/90)
SCALE: 1" = 200'
INTERSECTION ANALYSIS
(186);
(822) 56
363 }
2 9 e~
54 21 17
y ~ ~ 24
~~307
59
(760)
13 45 25
(161)
?Melrose Avenue
Key:
= Peak-Hour Turning Movements
(100) = Peak-Hour Street Segment Volumes
Otay Valley Road
Figure 5 Otay Valley Road/Melrose Avenue Intersection Analysis
Evening Peak-four Turning Movements
Counts taken: 2/22/78, MSA,Inc.,personnel
11
NO SCALE
between inbound and outbound trips. Table 2 gives the breakdown of
vehicle trip generation by activity and by peak hour. The peak hour
for the restaurant will actually occur after the street peak and
could reach an estimated 151 trips between 6:00-7:00 p.m. assuming
a restaurant with a high turnover rate.
The community shopping center would be oriented mostly
towards the residential areas in the vicinity of the project. The
proposed activities for the center have limited customer "pull"
because of the availability of similar activities in nearby competing
centers; hence, this center's hinterland will be restricted in
geographic area, with consumer trips probably averaging less than 3
miles. Trips will be mostly to and from the residential areas
immediately north, south and west of the site. The closest comparable
facilities are at Third and Palomar in Chula Vista, approximately
2 miles from the project site and at Melrose Ave. & Orange Ave.
about z mile north of the site. Comparable facilities are also
lccated at Palm and Beyer Way in San Diego.
In contrast to the shopping center, the motel/restaurant
complex will be oriented to the freeway traveler for its business.
The restaurant may have some attactiveness to the nearby residential
areas but it appears to be designed to serve motel guests and other
freeway traffic.
The existing traffic volumes and patterns of movement are
shown on Figures 5 and 6. The projected distribution of daily vehicle
trips generated by the proposed projects is given in Figure 7; this
figure also accumulates projected traffic with current average
daily traffic on Otay Valley Rd. and Dlelrose Ave.
The increase in Otay Valley R.d. traffic is estimated at
33 percent west of Melrose Ave. and 36 percent east of the project
site. The estimated 13,492 ADT on Otay Valley Rd. east of the
project is well under the approximate maximum ADT capacity limits
for a major arterial; with an 80 foot curb to curb width and 4 lanes
the capacity would be about 25,000 ADT !O Consequently, when the County's
widening project is completed on Otay Valley Rd. in late 1978,
nearly half (460-) the road's capacity will be available for additional
growth in the vicinity. The "C" level of service is not expected
to change as a result of the proposed projects.
13
PROJECTED TRIP-DISTRIBUTION
.n
D
n
m
m
C
N
Key:
r-1
~1G0~ ~ ADT - Current plus Project Traffic
(100) = Projected Traffic from project during
street peak-hour
~50/50~ = Projected Inbound/Outbound traffic
during street peak-hour.
~ 1~6~~ 2 71
447-g-671 2
1492
13
I-805
i (94) ~67/27~
~~-(550) ~260/290~ )
~ (75) ~37/38~
PROJECT SITP L ~
1
I
Community Shopping Center ~ Restaurant
' Motel
I
>oo~
N
N Figure y
Projected Trip-Distribution on Adjacent Streets
from proposed project.
=,'o,e =rac ~ : Ce y e
~~ ~ ~'e:. tYee,_ ra t
TO `al ac mgt 1016 Trips' (4.3p Sour ~On from prO~ectss
Con ` leY 1118 ~ 33)
~`~~^i I peak
~`n*`r"OV ~1J`~ 9q** mound/oat ound
~0"1 6Q ~ 16g 37/38
s{`~ Proj_`_ 4J 6~/~i
p., 55° 10/6$
-a.~ .
**8a s~~-oar : , ,q 83 ~
0
*pea-~ q Ur hst: ; ,t or "'0~3 ~ 4 360/2gg
fOr Roses °r Pr~~ ~ai1~, X19
"'ran s°or` trios
The e t is 5.00 ~ Op ngine r qd 36~/3SS
ROa°~'e 1,r~ared °nd is eS rl' ~e
the ocarlo ose A Peak imated q-anon
the 1 onsul of ` enue hour ro at 151 Ta51es
inCr` Deal; ranr,o a~ 1c nrers ve,~enr `rips 196
r= r
e.2use 4 ced rut of Po esr ju dire 1On ar hrouo
srs °nae nZno rent doer °ri° ° s oh the
Ped accj The sr1O'~ mOVeme 1 rr1 nr and rods hd rt>n 1n dray
r;>i~,estr>• deny add1r at the nts dP or1U . k~.~o~ °.~e o Flour va11e
r z no°an m Pore ona inr ur1n fns Zeda n rh e ~ Y
4 Tian n°~ raf~1 ement 1a1 at urnlrz sec ~ o he e~ d atr °f th bas1s The
the ay sro~ mEn~ cycOnrr s nOr all ~ m°~,e ~ a°d en1no racr1pn area of
t,ould p°pPina c ~.elr s ~e po epaces1c Par f the r9 11 h PP1n hOUr rThe d
a1On~ olaoe ~ enre e/O rent on ed i da a1sO ~ ce 111
d, `; on ~ ay va11 3' Road~a zt ns1e y d ad rd us ~y Ro adx h ~ v e se
;Za °es bOr deve °n rh stria u1d ea place any er.
Sz u d un ~ ro rheTents a ° heavi mob~11r eJree sr o e aes,
~"erc Ir apa develo esr a e e, rhrou' bur Iron
st Ta1 srrrmenrpmenr nd noPecred sh r~air
~~ ted 1 SSO rP he °~~ 01exf 0~1 ruh1 f he the ex ff1c
r1p, a ro s~ ADT o~ e pro ay ~a1 the es Zs p ropos ~ ri.~J o
;e1rOS Pe,~~'nyflCaareaJecrsWNYRosr p1°Pose Pr°.Jet~en
~~ devel~`aY by ur rr 1y 1~D sets 11 g d from a d ~ the r• ,q ,'
slon °Ped alZe affle a°r a The rare awe ~ 1 1 Wort
a11~ rya _Y Znr w~1 re~~ se an 1so 1 aot ~; ~
`3rlon 1~ZC 1~ rse°~ . zn°r~ crept °Je°~ dd1r1p ° the +°
v°Is ~ ~ AS ~ the ~ orveVera no 1 es_
r
hjs in b ~s c~1pe rZe o ar /
n may is
15
~ ~~
ESTIMATED INTERSECTION MOVEMENT
(301)-62~
54 53 43
r~"i 5 9
x..422
~59
(1,064)-400
(1,091 )-33%
56~
456-~
Otay
Valley Road
70~
33 36 25
(276) -71~ ~
,
I
N
Melrose Avenue
Key:
NO SCALE
= Peak-Hour Turning Movements
(100) = Peak-Hour Street Segment Volumes
X°, = Percent Increase in Segment Volumes
Figure 7, Estimated Evening Peak-Hour Intersecti
t on Movement
Valley Road/
ay
with Project Traffic through the O
Melrose Avenue Intersection.
16
3.3.3 rlitigation
Upon completion of the road widening project, Otay
Valley Rd. should be striped for four lanes with a center left turn
lane and left turn poc'cets at the Melrose intersection. It is
assumed that a solid median would not be implemented; if it is,
additional traffic would pass through the Melrose Ave. intersection
adding to the conc,estion of that intersection.
Stith the build-up of the entire area around the subject
proaerty and the resultant increases in traffic movements, a traffic
signal caill be warranted at the Melrose Ave./ Otay Valley Rd.
intersection. The morning peak, while slightly less than the
evening peak, is nearly continuous with little decrease for most
of the remainder of the day. Consequently, the traffic signal
would be utilized most of the day to accommodate the side street
traffic. Most of the estimated future traffic will occur regardless
of the implementation of this project, since it will result from
growth expected in this area. This development will not generate
traffic volumes to completely satisfy traffic signal warrants at
the Melrose/Otav Valley Rd. intersection but will contribute toward
the eventual signalization. However, traffic patterns may
be different if the project is not implemented.
The planned internal circulation and parking arrangements
for the motel/restaurant complex is satisfactory. Since precise
plans for the shopping center were not available at the time the
traffic study was complete, no specific recommendations were made
regarding parking arrancements, internal circulation, access points
and pedestrian movement. The project design should accommodate
pedestrian and bycycle movements from adjacent residential areas
with minimal conflict and hazard from automobile traffic.
The schematic site plan (Fig. 3) does not show any
coordination of parking lot design or access points with the
proposed motel/restaurant to the east. To avoid potential cir-
culation conflicts both on and off the site, the site plan should
be redesigned to coordinate parking, circulation and provide joint
access with appropriate reciprocal access easements.
The number of access points on Otay Valley Rd. should
be reduced to minimize the points of conflict, and on-site
circulation with the bank site should be provided in addition
to the on-site circulation with the motel/restaurant.
17
3.3.4 P.nalvsis of Significance
Subject to the widening of Otay Valley Rd. currently
under construction and the provision of a traffic signal at the
intersection of Melrose Ave. and Otav Val~lev Rd. the traffic from
these projects can be accommodated and no significant impact will
result.
3.4 Air Quality
3.4.1 Project Setting
Air pollution has been an
San Diego Air Basin since the 1950's
concentrations in San Diego commonly
standards for all pollutants except
are the largest source (57s) of the
environmental concern in the
and 1960's. Air pollutant
exceed federal and/or state
sulfur dioxide. Motor vehiclAs
air pollutants in San Diego:'
3.4.2 Potential Imuact
The combined projects will generate an estimated 1447
kilocrams of pollutants per day;3 based on an estimated 8174
vehicle trips per day, assuming a shopping trip length averaging
3 miles and restaurant trip lengths averaging 6 miles. Obviously
motel trip lengths will be considerably longer than 6 miles;
however, it is assumed that the majority of the trip is beyond
the local air basin. The estimated increase in air pollution
emissions attributed to this proposed project is given in Table 3.
These pollutants will be spread throughout the air basin and will
add incrementally to a region-wide problem.
It must be pointed out that the emissions attributed to
this proposed project are likely to occur regardless of the imple-
mentation of the project in fact, the project, by reducing the
required trip length to acquire goods and services, could actually
reduce overall basir, pollution. Also trips attributed to the motel
complex: are more than likely going to be made and will end elsewhere
in the region if not at this site; hence, the pollutants should not
be considered directly caused by the motel complex.
3.4.3 Mitigation
The shopping complex itself may be regarded as a mitigating
measure by reducing average trip lengths of area residents. The
nearest existing shopping facilities are located two miles or more
to the west; none exist to the east. Additional mitigation will
occur outside the scope of this proposed project. Newer automobiles
emit decreasing amounts of pollutants; as the motor vehicle popula-
tion "modernizes" and the regional air quality strategies are
implemented air quality improvement will occur. Use of public
transport, if available, and other alternative modes caill also
lead to imaroved air quality.
3.4.4 Anslvsis of Significance
Implementation of the project will result in an incremental
increase in air pollutants but will not cause a significant impact.
18
3.5 Noise
3.5.1 Prciect Sett
Traffic noise data used in this report are based on
measurements made in the project area using an averaging "A" weighted
sound level meter. Measurements were made at the six locations
shown on Figure II.
Vehicular traffic was counted o~hile noise measurements
were made. On Otay Valley Rd. and Melrose Ave., aehicles traveling
in both directions were counted. On I-905 only traffic in the
southbound lanes caas counted. Northbound traffic was totally
shielded from the site by the center divider. Measured Leq's along
with the traffic counts are given in Table 4.
19
TABLE 3
ESTIh1ATED INCREMENTAL INCREASE IN AIR POLLUTION EMISSIONS
Shopping Center
Emission* Vehicle P-files**
Pollutant Factor Traveled/Day
(gm/mi)
Carbon Monoxide 37.0 18,120
CO
Kilograms
of Pollutant
Motel/Restaurant
Vehicle Pliles# Kilograms
Traveled/Day of Pollutant
Total
Both Projects
Kilograms
of Pollutant
Hydrocarbons 4.7 18,120
Nitrogen Oxides 4.3 18,120
N NOx
0
Particulates 0.58 18,120
Sulfur Dioxide 0.20 18,120
Total Kilograms of Pollutants
670.4
85. 2
77.9
10.5
3.6
847.6
12,804 473.7 1,144.1
12,804 60.2 145.4
12,804 55.1 133.0
12.804 7.4 17.9
12,804 2.6 6.2
599.0 1,446.6
* From Environmental Protection Agency,"Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors", April 1973;
as used by the City of Chula Vista.
** Vehicle miles were derived from number of estimated vehicle trips per day (6,040) times an
average shopping trip of 3 miles.
Vehicle miles were derived from number of estimated vehicle trips per day (2,134) times an
average restaurant/motel combined trip length of 6 miles. Obviously trips ending at the motel
are going to be longer but only the last few miles will impact the local air basin; also the
trips will pass through regardless if this proposed motel exists or not.
0
N ~
N w
E+
H
w
F
'L
ri
H
r+
z
a
0
~te 6
b1ARKET
SHOPS
6,000
DRUG
19,200
SHOPS ~ 27,200 sq ft
8,400 ,Site 5
Ay, Site 1
RESTAURANT
7,800
Site 2
OTAY VALLEY ROAD.
Figure ~$ - Noise Measurement Locations
SHOPS
5,950
Site 4
r
c
cn
"J
r~
C
[*1
Si~e 3
6ANK
6,500
N
1" = 100 ft.
N
N
N
~ ~ '
OTAY VALLEY ROAD.
Figure 9 - 1978 CNEL Noise Contours - Existing Traffic
1" = 100 ft.
N
N
w
OTAY VALLEY ROAD.
Air Handling Equip.
-------- Garbage
Loading Dock
Figure 10 - Stationary Noise Sources
1" = 100 ft.
N
N
~S' i
OTAY VALLEY ROAD.
Figure 11 - 1995 CNEL Noise Contours ~- Projected Traffic
1" = 100 ft.
H
H
z
a
~ 54
0
.-i
0
m
w
E. '
2
F
N
t+
z
N
a
w
H
O'
6,00
59
60~~~~ \
/ r _
1 /r
64 ~ ~ /
~ /
70
i
19,2p0
6
60
54
60
66 60
73
~ - T "'HOPS
,,950
gi 200 sq ft
8,400
63
54 / 6C
~i
~~~ OTAY VALLEY ROAD. _
Air Handling Equip.
------- Garbage
Loading Dock
Figure 12- Stationary Noise Contours
1" = 100 ft.
C
r
O
u;
r~
Y
is
c
c
o~
IN
Table 4 Noise Measurements
Site
1
2
3
4
s
6
Hourly Traffic Counts
Meas. Otay Valley I-805
:;oise Lesels Road idelrose I-SOS S.B. Ramp C;~L*
59 852 - 1212 - 61
60 804 - - -- 62
57 B10 120 - - 59
51 840 132 - - 53
56 70a - 1272 - s7
56 - - 1404 132 58
* CcmT:unit}• Noise Equivalent Level
3.5.2 Proiect Impact
The site is subjected to noise from Otay Valley Rd.,
I-805 southbound on-ramp and freeway lanes and Melrose Ave. E;cisting
noise ccatours shoran on Figure 9 are due primarily to traffic on
Otay Valley Rd. Stationary and parking lot sources are shown on
Figure 10. Ir. tY.e short term, construction noise will be a factor,
and aster completion, the long term increases in traffic will
result in increased noise levels. The average Community Noise
Equivalent Level (CNEL) will rise by 2 dB (A) due to the presence of
the protects. Noise due to 1995 traffic is shown in Figure 11.
The motel will be subject to 1978 noise levels of 62 and
1995 to le~,~e1s of 68. California Administrative Code Title 25,
Chapter 1, Subchapter 1 requires that dwellings located within an
exterior noise contour of 60 dB(A) Community Noise Equivalent
Level (CNEL), or greater, must have an interior CNEL no greater
than 45 dB(A). Additionally, the party walls shall have a Sound
Transmission Class (STC) no less than 50 and floor!ceiling
assemblies shall also have an Impact Insulation Class (IIC) no
less than 50.
TY:e interior noise is a function of the sound transmission
loss ~.~alues and area of each element. Calculations were performed
on a computer. The transmission loss values were obtained from
measurements performed by San Dieco Acoustics or from current
literature.
Interior noise levels were calculated for two conditions;
wir.doc;s closed, and 10 percent of the windoca area open. Note that
insome rooms, windocas may have to remain closed in order to achieve
the recuirod interior noise level of 45 dB(A) C~1EL or less. In
these rooms ventilation is required. The party walls have a
rating of STC 51. The party floor ceilings have an STC and IIC
ratincs in e::cess of the minimum requirements.
26
The effect of the proposed development on the noise
environment will depend upon the generated trips per day and noise
from stationary sources such as air handling systems. The Travelodge
Motel project will generate 2134 trips per day (169 peak hour) and
Plaza Valle Verde project will generate 6040 trips per day (550
peak hour).
A parking lot noise model developed by San Diego Acoustics
for the Horton Plaza Redevelopment EIR was used to assess the noise
generated with the two projects. It was the conclusion of this
analysis that parking lot noise will be low and that it will not be
a significant factor when considered with other factors.
Both projects will have air handling equipment which will
generate noise. Using a factor of 500 sg. ft./1 ton of air
conditioning, the estimated capacities are given in Table 5 along
with the estimated noise.
Table 5
Air Handling Capacities/Noise
Noise At
Project Bldg.
Area
Tonnage 50 ft dB (A)
CNEL
Salatino Restaurant 7800
59
16
62
Watts Shops
6000
12 57
60
Drug 19200 38 67 70
Shops 8400 17 60 63
Market 27200 54 70 73
Shops 5950 12 57 60
Bank 7800 13 57 60
Noise levels are based on measured data fmm a 10 ton unit
and assuming that the units operate on an 18 hour cycle, the
estimated CNEL's are given in Table 5. The impact of this noise
is shown on Figure 12 where contours are super-imposed on the
plot plan.
Other stationary noise sources include noise from the loading
docks of Plaza Valle Verde and garbage truck noise. Noise at
the loading dock area is estimated based on a truck level noise
of 69 dB(A) at 50 feet, two trucks during the hours of 0700-1900
and one truck during the hours of 0600-0700. The resulting
CNEL is 66 at 50 feet.
The garbage truck noise will be 73 dB(A) at 50 feet or a CNEL
of 59 dB(A).
27
3.5.3 b?itication
'?'he i=,p act of the protect is to raise the local traffic
noise by taro decibels. A partial mitigation of this effect oa nearby
existing residential areas will result from shielding of the
residences on the south by the shopping center buildings.
Gsing the barrier analysis detailed in "D;ew Housing and
Road Traffic ';oise", London, Her <Iajesty's Stationery Office, 1972,
the alteration of automobile noise due to the presence of the
1o;,-est building .,;ou1d be 11 dB (A) . Thus noise from Otay Valley P.d.
is partially mitigated.
Parking lot noise results in noise levels below the e:tiisting
ambient. Thus these levels will not impact the neighborhood.
?;oise from the loading dock, garbage area and air handling
system :gill result in an adverse impact and mus*_ be mitigated. Thus,
all air handling systems which are roof mounted shall be acoustically
shielded. Shielding on the drugstore and market shall provide a
rev?uctien o~ 11 and 16 decibels respectively. Shielding on the
smaller stores shall provide a reduction of 5 decibels.
The motel units have individual through the wall air
conditicaers anc' thus do not require mitigation.
The banY, and restaurant rec_uire only architectural
sheiidinq of roof top air handling systems.
Noise from the loading dock and garbage pickup area of
the shopping center will result in noise levels at the property
line on tt:e order of 60 decibels. These levels will require
mitigation via shielding or relocation of the operation.
This requires a wall of 10 foot height on the southern
boundary of the Plaza Valle Verde property or similar shielding
which would be as effective. Due to the shopping center layout,
the loading dock could be visible from the second story of the
adjacent residential homes on the south side of the property.
Thus the zoning wall along the southern boundary must be of
sufficient heicht to obstruct the line of sight. (See Fig. 13)
3.5.4 Analysis of Significance
Implementation of all mitigation measures noted above
will avoid significant environmental impact. This enforcement
effort should be carried out with careful consideration of the
adjacent residential uses. Otherwise this project, for which the
adverse impacts could feasibly be implemented, would have to be
denied
28
3.6 Aesthetics
3.6.1 Froject Settir.
The sites are currently a relatively flat field
surrocr.ded by developed, or deg,'eloping properties. During the wet
seasons, the sites are pleasing in appearance due to the lush green
grasses ~;.hich abound. Because the area is relatively flat, it has
not proved useful as an offroad vehicle site, and has not suffered
the scars of trail motorcycles.
A predominant physical feature of the site is a small
grove of approxiamtely twenty eucalyptus trees located on the
easterly: side of the shopping center site. These trees appear to
be at least forty years in age and are quite large (18" diameter).
The primary visual vantage points of these sites are
from the north along Otay Valley Rd. and the residential develop-
ment to the south. Otay Valley Rd. has a relatively high
traffic rate and shares a long common boundary with the subject
sites. In addition, the sites would be clearly visible from the
planned residential development on the north side of Otay Valley P.d.
particularly due to its higher elevation.
The sites will receive much less visibility from the
east (I-805) due to the speed of the traffic, the fact that the
primary vehicular passenger attention at the high freeway speeds is
directed forward and not to the side, and that the freeway roadbed
is much higher than the subject sites.
The proposed restaurant/motel site receives practically
no visibility from the south due to the garage structures bounding
the proposed motel's southerly property line cahich serve the
apartment complex to the south.
A prominent aesthetic feature in the vicinity of the
project is the residential development to the south. with good
architectural treatment, materials and landscpainq, it has a
pleasing appearance. The eucalyptus grove is the most aesthetically
significant feature of the existing vacant site. This grove
should be preserved and intergrated into the project design.
3.6.2 Potential Impact
It is relatively apparent that development of these sites
;gill have a dramatic impact upon the appearance of these currently
vacant areas, as does the development of any unimproved land.
29
The imposition of these relatively bulky commercial
structures at a 40'-60' set back from the residential area to the
south could have an aesthetic impact. This portion of the site
is proposed to be used for loading, trash enclosures <.nd parking/
circulation.
3.6.3 "litigation
The footprints of the proposed shipping center structures
cover approximately 28°s of the 7.18 acre site, while these of the
motel/restaurant complex cover somewhat less than 20°s. Consequently,
only one-fourth of the combined site areas will 'nave structures
built thereon.
All parking areas will be landscaped in accordance with
the City of Chula Vista's Landscape ~4anual and will not result
in a substantial aesthetic blight.
An additional characteristic of the proposed development
that prevents a monolithic appearance is the separation of the
structures. The motel/restaurant complex is essentially three
separate buildings. The proposed shopping center will be oriented
east to west with a separate structure on the north-west corner of
the site. The two larger tenants will have store frontages pulled
forward from the smaller lease spaces, thus further breaking up the
visual relief.
Consequently, the relatively low lot coverage, variance
visual relief, and the fact that no structure will be higher
than three stories with most at one story, will present a non-
bulky appearance
A zoning wall/acoustical barrier will be required along
the southerly property line. This will shield most of the area at
the rear of the center from view from the residential property.
(See Fig. 13)
A small additional slope may be created along the
southern property line. This slope should be planted with trees
to provide greater visual relief.
This area of Chula Vista has been subject to recent
accelerated development. The predominant architectural style
could be described as California Ranch. This style utilizes wood
facia, shake roofs and earth-tone stucco exteriors.
California Ranch will be the architectural style of both
the motel/restaurant complex and the shopping center. This style
has been selected due to the semi-rural nature of this area of
Chula Vista as well as the compatibility of the style with
surrounding existing structures. The proposed structures will feature
sha}:e roofs (or equivalent), exposed heavy timbers, wood post
supports, or columns enclosed with stained wood facia, and earth
tone stucco e:{teriors. Because of the importance of aesthetic appeal
to the commercial developments such as those proposed herein,
substantial design study must be incorporated in the planning of
the structures. The significant stand of eucalyptus should be
incorporated into the design of the project.
30
H
c~
c
W
3.6.4 Analysis of Significance
With the proposed architectural theme and mitigation
discussed above, the proposed project will not have a substantial
and adverse aesthetic impact.
3.7 Liqhtin
3.7.1
& Glare
Project Settin
There are currently no substantial light or glare
generation sources on the subject sites. However, the proposed
development of the sites will result in substantial lighting
requirements.
3.7.2 Potential Impact
The proposed shopping center will require lighting on
the building exterior as well as in the parking and service areas.
It is anticipated that full operational lighting will be required
until approximately 9:00 p.m. on many evenings. Thereafter, a lower
security level will be utilized.
The highest level of lighting will be in the area of
the storefront. This area of the center is at a large distance
from the surrounding residential uses and the shopping center
structures shield the front lighting from the Playmor development.
The parking area and the security lights are closest
to residential areas, thus creating the greatest potential for
impact.
3.7.3 Mitigation
Though Playmor II will be the residential units closest
to the shopping center, thus creating the greatest danger of light
and glare impact, there will be approximately 40'-60' between the
shopping center structure and those of the residential units. The
potential impact is further mitigated by the 8-9 foot elevation
gradient. The zoning wall separating the structures will assist
in limiting both the noise and light and glare impacts.
The only light sources required at the rear of the
proposed shopping center will be for security purposes. The
security problem is assisted by the visibility of the rear shopping
center area by the traffic on Melrose Ave. south of Otay Valley Rd.
Lighting in the area can be limited to fixtures on the shopping
center structure immediately above the access doors. The security
lighting in this portion of the project need only be in the immediate
vicinity of the structure, thus permitting lighting fixtures
directing the light down, immediately adjacent to the structures.
Consequently, the light sources will have limited, distant visibility
from Playmor, with no open bulbs exposed. (See Fig. 13)
32
]--]E THt~t71N LUIV1111Ai3~~
Completing the total outdoor illumination
system is the single "Throty" luminaire.
A simple fcrm which integrates with archi-
tectural environments, the single throw lumi-
naire is capable of projecting illumination
sirnifar io the performance of a floodlight,
but from a downlighting shape tvith precision
beam control which eliminates untvanted
glare.
This achievement is derived from a com-
poundoptical system that combines an ellip-
soidal and parabolic shaped reflector into a
singular, controlled projection system.
With maximum candlepower at 67° from nadir,
and spacing ratios up to six to one, this lumi-
naire is ideal for smaller parking areas, fa-
cade lighting or any architectural setting
where the projection of highly controlled
illumination is desirable.
Develop your environment at tvill, then direct
your attention to the Guth Area Lighting
System tvhich best compliments your setting
by day, while functionally illuminating by
night.
~ ~°,.~
s,i ~--.:
~a,:
i ~ ~ ~~~--
- --~
FIGURE 14
PARKING LOT LUPdINASRE
33
Lighting technology has improved dramatically in recent
years, allowing substantially more control of lighting directions
and levels. Fixtures are now available which will allow required
parking area lighting to be directed onto the desired surfaces with
limited "spalsh over" to regions beyond the project area. Con-
sequently, use of fixtures such as the Luminaire, or equivalent,
(see Fig. 14) will provide non-glare, directed lighting which will
limit impact upon surrounding residential projects. This mitigation
is further assisted by the street buffer areas.
3.7.4 Analvsis of Significance
The proposed shopping center project has been designed
in an attractive California Ranch style. This serves the dual
purpose of providing an attractive, commercially appealing project,
as well as accomplishing design compatibility with existing
surrounding structures.
The projects will not have a bulky appearance due to
the low footprint/lot area ratios, and the structure separation and
the variance in visual relief.
Potential light and glare impacts are limited by the
distances to residential structures, and can be further mitigated
by careful lighting design and selection of fixtures.
Conflicts with the adjacent residential uses could be
further mitigated by redesigning the site plan to increase the
separation between the center's commercial building and the residents.
3.8 Natural Resource Consumption & Waste Production
3.8.1 Project Setting/Impact
This development proposes a community shopping center
with structures housing approximately 80,000 sq. ft. of commercial
lease space. It is anticipated that the primary tenants will
include a supermarket, a drug store, and a bank branch. The
remainder of the lease space will house smaller speciality
businesses. Periods of operation will likely vary from 12 hours
per day for the larger tenants to 9 hours for the speciality shops.
Commercial developments are characteristically relatively
high users of electrical energy. No manufacturing or assembly
will be done on the sites, so other energy types will be used at
low levels. Flowever, the high lighting requirements of the proposed
subject uses necessitates a higher electrical use level than a
residential development on a similar lot area.
Anticipated annual electrical use level is 3,840,000 kwh
and annual gas consumption is 840,000 cubic feet.
The community shopping center will be a relatively high
generator of solid waste. The high packaging disposal characteristics
of retail facilities result in a solid waste generation factor of
approximately 2 pounds per day for each 100 sq. ft. of retail
floor space.
34
2050 lbs.
Daily solid waste generation is anticipated to be
It is anticipated that approximately 800 of the water
resources utilized will be passed on to the sewage system. The
expected daily sewage generation would be 6400 gals.
American retail businesses consume a huge volume of
non-renewable resources. Supermarkets in particular disbribute
large numbers of cans, bottles, packaging and other items ~~hose
source is unrenewable raw materials. Other retail establishments
also distribute large volumes of paper products in the form of
packaging which are limited in regeneration possibilities.
Though the volumes of nonrenewable products handled
by a shopping center are massive, the impact of a new facility
is not as great.
Community shopping centers traditionally distribute
products and packaging which is readily available at other faci-
lities. The food supermarket tenant is generally the largest
distributor of nonrenewable resources in a shopping facility. In
addition to the resources that pass from the market to the customers
to be consumed or discarded, a large volume of nonrenewable
resources is discarded by the supermarkets in the form of bulk
packaging.
The quantum increase in consumption of these resources
should be viewed considering that in the case of a market or drug '
store, many resources are necessity items. Consequently, if the
resources were not consumed or distributed on the subject site,
there would be an equivalent increase in consumption or distribution
at other sites. The large retail establishments at a shopping
center do not generate a new market for nonrenewable resources,
but instead provide a more local convenience for their distribution.
Because neither manufacturing, nor assembly, nor packaging is
anticipated on the proposed site, the facility will serve as a
distribution of resources, rather than as a user of creator.
3.8.2 Mitigation
The highest level of electrical energy will be used
for lighting purposes. Flourescent lighting will be utilized
wherever feasible to provide energy savings. It is anticipated
that the majority of the shopping center facility will be able to
utilize flourescent lighting. Utilization of mercury vapor lighting
in the outdoor parking areas will provide an additional electrical
savings.
Recent amendments to the Uniform Building Code have
provided higher insulation requirements for new structures. These
standards caill be utilized to provide an efficient utilization of
energy for climate control on all structures. Air conditioning
inlets could be located near refrigeration/freezing devises so
35
that "wasted" cool air could be used to cool the structure.
Regular trash collection services are available in the
area of this site. The refuse will be deposited at the Otay
Landfill, approximately 1~, miles from the subejct site. The Otay
Landfill has sufficient capacity to serve the community and the
development of this site ~aill not materially affect the capacity
of the landfill area.
This region is in the Montgomery Sewer District. A
10" sewer main is located in the Otay Valley Rd, right-of-way
immeriately adjacent to the subject site. According to the City
of Chula Vista Public Works Department, sufficient sewer line capacity
is available for the needs of this development.
Treatment capacity in the Metro system has been reached
and additional loads on the system could cause water quality
problems. The impact of this project is minimal in this regard.
Fortunately there has been an increased public awareness
as to the limits of certain resources and the needs to conserve the
resources that do remain. A well known example is the publicity
and resulting action surrounding the recycling of aluminum cans.
This campaign has resulted in approximately one-fourth of the
aluminum cans being recycled, with the percentage still increasing.
This conservation accomplishment has been the result of a coordinated
effort on the part of the manufactures, distributors, retailers,
and the cunsuming public.
Because retail stores are only in the distribution link
of the product consumption chain, their role in conservation has
primarily been one of cooperation with manufacturers. Shopping
facilities have generally enthusiastically cooperated with the
conservation efforts and will likely continue to do so.
3.8.4 Anal~~sis of Significance
The energy requirements anticipated by this project are
consistent with similar projects of this type. Increases in
lighting technology and insulation requirements which are to be
utilizer, by these developments allow for maximum energy efficiency
~:hile still allowing the projects to meet their commercial and
service re lls. Existing facilities and capacities are available
to facilitate the handling of the c~~astes generated by this project.
Community shopping centers generally distribute
resources rather than serving as the sources. In addition, the
products c?istributed are primarily necessity items whose aolume of
consumption increases only slic,htly by the added convenience of more
accessible distribution locations. Consequently, the quantum increase
is consumption of nonrenewable resources by a neighborhood shopping
center is insignificant. However, the retailers should continue
to play an increasing role in the cooperation with and encouragement
of conser:~ation programs.
36
1.0 G~NA`JOIDABLE ADVEBSE ENVIRONMENTAL Ih?PACTS
iQost potential impacts which would result from the
proposed project can be mitigated to an insignificant level as
discussed in Section. 3.0 of this report. Due to the nature of the
project and its location adjacent to existing family dwellings,
certain short term adverse effects such as noise and dust during
construction can not be eliminated. There are hoceever, restrictions
on the hours of construction activities and rea_uirements that
various engineering techniques be incorporated to control such
impacts.
Imp1e.T,entation of the project will also change the nature
of the existing residential environment and subject those properties
adjacent to the site to an increased amount of traffic and related
noise.
An incremental increase in both air pollutants and se<<;ac;e
effluent will contribute to a cumulative impact on regional air
quality and limited se:/age treatment caaacity respectively.
5.0 ALTLP.`.ATI~,'ES TO TFE PROPOSED ACTION
A reduction in the proposed land use intensities could be
considered to reduce the anticipated traffic volumes and the related
incremental increase in air pollutants. Project objectives would
still be attainable, and the consumption of energy, water and natural
building materials necessary for construction and future operations
would be reduced as well as traffic and associated effects on air
quality maintenance. However, these impacts are not substantial in
character.
The property could be developed with a residential project
similar to the area south of the proposal. This would result in
about 36 do~elling units. Traffic related impacts would be reduced
hoc/ever, there would be additional impacts on urban support systems
necessary for residential development. This alternative would not
be in conformance with the General Plan Land Use designation
for Visitor Commercial.
The "no project" alternative would result in none of the
impacts specified in this EIR being realized. The objectives of the
project :/ould not be realized and no significant reduction in
environmental consequences would result. The General Plan
designation in this area is for urbanization.
The site plan could be redesigned to provide greater
separation from adjacent residential uses. This would provide a
more positive mitigation of potential visual and acoustical impacts
on adjacent residential units.
6.0 GRO6ITH INDUCING I.IPACT OF THE PROPOSED ACTION
Implementation of the proposed project will result in
the conversion of these vacant lands, previously used for agricultural
purposes, to uri;an uses. None of the proposed facilities are of a
nature c/hich c/ill stimulate growth on properties within the area of
the project. Growth patterns near the project have been accelerated
since the construction of I-805 and this project is a reaction to
the growth inducing impacts of that freeway.
37
7.0 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LOCAL SHORT-TERM USE OF THE ENVIRONMENT
AND THE MAINTENANCE AND ENHANCEMENT OF LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY.
The substantial change in land use will result in a long term
environmental change.
Increasing traffic volumes along major streets in the area may
eventually result in traffic congestion at the Otay Valley Rd/ Melrose
Ave. intersection, as regional Growth approaches maximum levels.
The extent of congestion will depend, to a large degree, upon the
balance achieved between public and private transportation modes,
and the relative allocations of energy resources to support the
various components of the systems.
The street system adjacent to the proposed project is
designed to adequately serve the long-term development of the
subject property, as well as those in the area. No serious congestion
is expected, nor will the proposed project preclude additional
planned developments. The anticipated traffic loads will limit future
options available to the City in making land use decisions by
utilizing street capacities. Generators of high traffic volumes
could not be approved while maintaining an adequate level of service.
Although heavy emphasis must necessarily be placed upon
the private automobile as the major transportation mode in the area,
future options for other modes will remain open. I-805 is a major
regional travel corridor, which could become one route in a future
transportation system. Otay Valley Rd. is a natural local route
which carries bus service and eventually could accommodate a more
sophisticated type of transit system.
There will be other long-term impacts caused by the
proposed project, such as air pollution caused primarily by motor
vehicle emissions. These emissions are being reduced by increasingly
stringent control requirements, and the development of the shopping
center at a location convenient to its support area may actually
reduce the length of vehicle trips traveled in the South Bay area.
Continued improvements and greater use of public transportation
in the future ;gill also tend to minimize the long-term adverse
impacts.
8.0 ANY IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CI3ANGES bVHICH LVOULD BE INVOLVED
IN THE PROPOSED ACTION, SHOULD IT BE IMPLEMENTED.
The changes in the existing land use will be a long-term,
irreversible change caused by the proposed project. Mitigating
measures such as landscaping and design features have been pre-
viously discussed in this report. The urbanization of this currently
vacant acreage will commit the land to a pattern of development which
is essentially irreversible, depending upon the length of projection.
38
The energy resources required to provide the project with
electricity and gas, and the construction materials and labor used
will constitute an irreversible consumption of these resources in
the proposed project. Also the effects on the landform, air quality
ambient noise level, street capacities, increased runoff, water
quality, public services and utility requirements is irreversibly
committed.
The environmental changes caused by the increased traffic
air pollutants, and noise are also irreversible; however, the impact
are mitigatable as previously discussed and both air and noise
impacts are subject to improvement over the long term through new
technology.
39
9.0 REFERENCES AND CONSULTANTS
9.1 County of San Diego, Traffic Engineering Division, February
6, 1977.
9.2 Personal observation and personal communication, City of
Chula Vista Traffic Engineer, February 21, 1978.
9.3 Personal communication, City of Chula Vista Traffic Engi-
neer, February 21, 1978.
9.4 Traffic counts taken by MSA, Inc. personnel, February 22,
1978.
9,5 City of Chula Vista, Planning Dept., IS-78-15
9.6 Traffic counts by MSA personnel (taken February 22,
1978) were compared with CALTRANS counts taken November
1975.
9.7 Personal communication, Chula Vista Transit, February
27, 1978.
9,8 Trip generation rates are from Trip Generation Tables
published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers,
1976.
9.9 City of Chula Vista Street Standards, published in
Environmental Review Policy, City of Chula Vista, adopted
February 1, 1978.
9.10 Based on U.S. Dept. of Transportation data, Energy
Consumption for Transportation, 1977
9.11 San Diego Air Pollution Control District, December 1975.
9.12 Emission factors from Environmental Protection Agency
"Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors", April,
1973, as published in Environmental Review Policy, City
of Chula Vista, adopted February 1, 1978
9.13 Chula Vista Planning Dept. Douglas Reid, Environmental
Review Coordinator
9.14 Chula Vista Public works Dept., Engineering, Planning,
and Environmental Review, Bi11 Harshman, Sr. Civil
Engineer, Roger Daoust, Associate Civil Engineer, Roberto
Saucedo, Assistant Civil Engineer.
40
10.0 EFFECTS FOL?i?D TO BE INSIGNi:ICA~7T
Initial Study 78-50 (See Appendix A) details those effects
of the project which were evaluated and found to be clearly
insignificant and are net discussed in this focused EIR.
41
Section 11.0 Ccm~^fents on tl,:~ Dra=t .IR
Transcript of testim.on_i presented at City Planning Commission
public !fearing en Aaril 25, 1i3
„~„__ ~',CC~O'J: "~ Ild"e is NCO CL )'~:IC LCOd and I 11';e dL ~~~ R:anChO i)rl`;B. I'':'e rBad
the E. ,~. and I ~,e rSCnaily dlsagre°_ 1'rl 'i O h2 aCGUStiC imp aCt ail:^v^
the residents living upon the south. I think That ;riffle it can be
mitigated--r"first of ail,*_he grade :viii be raised four feet, ar.d `_^~en
10 ioo>: mall, so that :rill be 1= feel dbeve ~•.e grade. Cut, i tilinf
Chat Ylhlle l t .. Illt i~~dte the SOUnO, t'llnk the l:^-.DaCt 0~ it a `llllj a
10 `pot high ~::a11 at your r`ront ':rindosv is somethinc to be considered,
i:,o.
I'm also concerned about the traffic along ,leirose. Ric'nt ne'.v fife
only tray"fie that comes on i!elrose south of Otay Valley Road is traffi c
that's bound to our development and to the apartments that are under
construction in the plot just south of the motel, and I tifin'; the
staff report glossed over the potential impact, especially upon, you
kno:r, this closely bound to a residential area--i kno':r further uo
'elrose at the too of, at Crange, at the corner of Orange and ?:elrose
the Alpha Seta shoppinc canter there, the traffic's just gross going
in and cut of there and I foresee the same thing happening to us. I
see it being just as bad and I'm really concerned about the children
that play in the streei because it's unforiunaie that in a eeveloc~lent
like this, ':riffle There are open a.°eas, it's unfortunate but children
do play in the street.
I'm also concerned
a traffic ligr,t ai
groerth, i know you
and I think that w
are rather slim.
about
the c
can't
thout
this project
lrner of .;el n
stop it, but
this project
adding to the eventual need for
use and Otay :Talley. I',l not anti-
I really ':could like to see ~rfat,
that the chances fora light there
John ';e':rport: P1r. Chairlaan, Iny Hare's John ile~:rport. I live at 30° A Rancho Drive. I'm
the president of Rancho P.ios East Ho areo~,vners Association. It's j',ISt to
the south of the proposed shopping center. There are several questions
and maybe if the developer is here can answer regarding the impact, both
traffic::ise, noise level, and also the Impact Report suggested, strrongly
suggested that the eucalyptus stand remain. As I understand it, and I've
looked at the E.I.R., That eucalyptus stand is just to the .rest or the
western edce of the restaurant and motel ccmple:~, and could be very easily
adapted into a parking area, and yet, I've just heard that it's proposed
to take that stand dr':;n. It's a 40 year old stand of trees. !:Then you're
puttino in a large paring lot area along a busy street, I believe tf:at
it would enhance the beauty of the whole area if that stand re,'nains. I've
got some real prrohlems with the 10 foot mall. All they propose to do is
to put up cinder block walls. 4!e're doing to have Viva Otay and Palm City
':rritien all over it. I'm not against Viva Otay, I'm against '.writing it
on the :wall that fronts up no more than 15 to 20 feet from a front ':rindo':r.
I,` that '.:all should go up, have some kind of, if it be painted sol:~,eho:r or
~~,~ slfail tr^es ?laced in front of it or ivy gro':ring on it, something
done to that wall, then my concern would be lessened a little bit. I
also need to kno'rr~,vhether the ~:rall is ,ping to continue en across the
apartment complex, or whether it trill stop at the end, and r~rhether that's
going to be a solid ';;all or have thoroughfares through. If there are
tf•oroughfares ~;re already have a lot of problems r•rith children as hell as
adults riding motorcycles back and forth, and that ':could increase. ':fie
presently don't o::n north or our line up i'elro se to Otay Valley, but :(e
42
John ;ie°::port: do have a sprinkler system and about a 10 foot, 15 foot, maybe 20 foot
wide zzn grass arza :vith 11o•.,ers, trees, and I vrould like ~„ '~cor;
•,wi~ethzr it conterolates to kozp that and the propcszd 2ntranc_ into thz
ca:,olex on the r~rest edge of the complex, on the east side of 6'.elrose
,
south of Otay, ~;rhether that contemplates running over, doing a~:~av :•rith,
or redoing the sprirkler syst~~n. ?t's cot to i~~:pact on that someiic';r.
Chandler: '.tell, hang on a minuie, I'll sze if I can gzt you a couple of ans~;rers
right no~:r. Can you tzll them anything, Coug?
Doug Reid: I'ri not sure ;ve're really at the point of developing plans at that
level of detail. The area adjacent to i~'elrose Avenue,would have to
be landscaped to screen the parking area.
John ~`le~:rport: Along Pielrose, it's already landscaped.
Doug ,Reid: Correct. It ;vill probably havz to be supplemented with sane additional
n;atzrials, though.
John Ne;•;oort: I'm not sure if anybody's a~;iare that there's an underground sprinkler
system and I •.wouldn't think it ;~ouid be very deep. I don't kno,v for
sure--i could find out--bui if you're Going to out a dri~re across t'r.ere
'
mat
s gotta impact on that sprinkler system somehow. V~las that taken
into consideration?
Doug Reid: That ~:rould have to meet the City standards.
john lle~.vport: ~r!hat about the walls?
Doug P,eid: Along the southern side? If I understood you correctly, I believe the
slope that's existing there nova and landscaped, is on the adjoining
property and not part or" the homeo~:;ners association.
Donn l;ewport: No. we o:vn to the iop of the rise, and so, the slope is ours.
Doug P,eid: Okay. 41e11, the fill material ~:rould be placed on that so that r,~ouid
provide an additional height. You mentioned a 10 foot wall, that eras
suggested by the acoustical ccn;pany as a method, one method of mitigating
the impact. Certainly not the only one. Like I stated, the preferable one
twould be to redesign the site plan to locate the equipn~~ent, loading docks,
etc., farther array from the residential properties, and lo~.ver the height
requirement of that.wall.
Jchn .";erwoort: 4lithout the :wall? I've got real problems if you're going to have loading
docks on tf,e south side of that complex, looking right outside of our
front ;windows of some of the people.
Doug ~?eid: That was just one method of handling that problem. ble are not at a
level of detail where those problems are all resolved. The purpose or
the report is to flag those problems, to suggest ~:rays of mitigating the
icrpaci or alternatives that ~;rould be less adverse, and obviously, it's
done that.
;ohn ~;e~:room: Once that i,-pact statement--say this Commission agrees and passes this
ic•pact state:rent as they did for the motel, at what point do the hosec,~ners
have any input on the details.
43
~~oug R'id: G4:ay, there'll be a public nearing on the rezoning, assuming tF.-e General
Plan ;=:r~~er.dment i_< approved, t^e re ;rill be another public fearing on the
rezoning and precise plan at a laiar date. Consideration of the precise
plan, the Planning Commission :rill 'nave to consider mitigation of such
things as the acoustical impact, and if there are feasible .rays to :7i'iigate
that impact, then they eit'r~.er nave to be incorporated into the prof-act
or the project denied.
;ohn i;e~r;~ort: One furtf',er c,uestion, then I'll sit do~,.n. I'm an attorney, I've co r_
score problems and I'd li'<e to direct my question to ;~r. Harren. Is i~
a require;r.ent to have this meeting, to have people notified of this
meeting, !•rithin a t.vo or three hundred foot?
",ttorney Harron: That's correc*_.
~ohn F;eo-rpcrt: O'ray, I received a notice of the meeting regarding the rI':otel and
restaurant complex, did not receive, and I live well ~:tit.",in the '0~-~C~
foot minlmum, or Ind;(lmum, did nOL reCelVe arty Lhl ng 1'ega I'd ',ng th15 prC~eCt,
the impact statement, although I Heard of it ;cord of mouth, and being the
president of the association i !•rrote a little article in the bulletin,
that's !thy some of the people are here, the only reason people are here.
."o notice ';ras received by anybody, and there are about G8 families that
:rouid be ~rrithin the 2GG fioi.
Chandler: Ho!'r did you kno~:r then, or your neighbors kno:v, if somebody mere not
notified?
ohn Pleo-rpert: t3ecause I went to the library and chec':ed out the ~nvironrrental In.pact
Statement retarding the motel and the restaurant and next door to ii :ras
the other complex, and it said, the Environmental Impact statement said
there !•ras going to be a hearing tcnight, that's the only !vay I 4:ne!~, and
therefore, published a short article saying, ~;re haven't been notified,
you guys better sho!v up, or it's just going to be passed auto ,atically.
I've got some real problems !riih that, and I believe that any acticn by
this Commission !•rculd be illegal, if that's the case, if nobody received
it. F'.aybe I ',gas the only one, but I don't believe so.
Peterson: ttr. Chairman, I can't explain the circumstance here. :.'e do have all
property o~,mers on a magnetic tape, the celnputer prints out the list, b,ao
lists ~dere computed and tyro sets of clailings :rent out. Speaking to the
point of the leeality, our ordinance itself specifies that any defect
in file public i;earinn notice shall not invalidate the proceedings, and
that may seem a little harsh, but at least, the fact that people are
here toninht indicates that the ~rrord did get out in so~r~e fashion. b~e'll
try to find out what happened with the second list ~:rtlich !:gas also supposed
to have gone to essentially the same people.
voiln Je°:r'.ort: I j!ISt have problems remedying a situation because of a good turnout,
just because I have remedied their problem.
Chandler: 'dell, one thing arith regard to the Environmental Impact f2eport, that is
to brim up all of the circumstances that affect this piece of property.
That dcesn't let them put one stick of o-rood on it until they are properly
coned and until them cot:~ through ~:rith a plan that is approved to do
the BCD.
J
44
,e:vport: I understand that; the otf•~er problem ',gas that there are si•~ns "For lease"
up en the property, when the i;,Ipact statement hasn't been dealt ~.iich,
when it hasn't been rezoned, and I've got some real problems :vith that.
I guess that's their problem.
Chandler: 51211, develcpers ar•2 developers, you I:no.v
sill Johnson: fly narce's gill Johnsen, I'm a resident of 269, or 273 A Rancho Drive. I
have really nothing Herr to add, except to reinforce ~rrhat my fello:! residents
in Playmor have said. The notice iiiat I received ',~ras in the bulletin; I
received no notice in the mail or anything. fly concerns, as with tte
taro '.rho spoke before me, are the traffic. I think that's the most ir.port-
ant. ';!e have, Pla~:nor's a young area, it has quite a fe',i children and
there are probably going to be quite a ferr more, so traffic is a very
real situation, a problem. I think there are sufficient markets already
within an acceotable distance; ao. 1 would be the Alpha beta at Orange and
,'.elrose. Ti~at's a nice shopping center- right there. The ',gall is a crucial
importance to all of us in the association. Like say, you kno':r, ';!0 don't
:;ant to have sore eyesore up;here that can be marked on and ':mitten cn
arithin 10 feet or people's houses. The trees that were n.entioned, I think
it would be best if those could be left in the developer's plans. And ti:e
air handling systems, I think the only tvay to mitigate against them r~rill
6e sore sort of a :gall or something li:;e that, and you're going to have
the associated problems with that. Other than that, I don't have anything
new to add, except to support ';ghat the t~.~o previous spea!~:ers have said.
Randall f~lcQuain: idy name's Randal i i~lcQuain, I live at 16Y0 i-!aple Drive, No. 20. I'm the
vice president of the home e~;rners association, Autumn Hills Plo. 1, and
I'm speaking for the ful] 20 ';rho are at that site. Sorge units are „ust
gettinn ready io move in. Tf;ey all would like to have a shopping center
in a close proximity to r~rhere they live. As it stands right now, the
closest one is at the corner of idelrose and Orange. The amount of traffic
in that shopping center is fairly heavy at the present tine, plus tf~,e fact
there is a 116 unit condominiur going in on the corner of Otay Valley f2oad
and f!2lrose Avenue. I believe you had that before your agenda on the 17th.
Also, there is a pre posed condominium site going in on Plelrose and Otay
Valley Road cn the south side, just crest of the shopping center, ~.;hich is
going to increase this density of that area tren;endously. Plus, further
out Otay valley P.oad is practically all undeveloped, and it's going to be
developed very shortly; I can see it coming, h1ost of the people I have
tal;~:ed to and the people in our condominium complex ~rrould appreciate
having a scull cra,munity type shopping center such as this in a close
proximity so that they can get to it. And that's all I have. Thank you
very much.
:~! •3~~patu!:,ini f9y name's Ed Ca patumini, I live in the complex that i~lcQuain ~;ras just
talkin, about. I'm a senior citizen, retired. To me, I think it's
the greatest thing that ever happened--that ';re have a shopping center
in that section there. I've lived in cer;plexes and apartments and I've
had f;-.'.art on Fourth Avenue, and I never heard any noise from there.
It's only a stone's thro~,r frcn wf;ere I lived, and I don't like to see
this o;~portunity get past us. To me, they talk about the Alpha Geta on
'elrosz ar;d Orange Avenue, do I have to just shop in Alpha Beta in my
area. Can't I just r~alk doo-rn the road, it's only one block down t-rest
of f'elrose. Do I have to go do:vn to Alpha Seta to shop? Can I shop in
cry c.;n area, and lights, talking about lights, it's about tine we had a
45
C~catumini Licht on tha corner there. I can't even get out of thz place, trying
t0 BC Cn LC r~alrl `;tre°L, and ti'e's tql kl na abCiJt tile' ;121 rG S2 SeC L'. 0!l.
/iS i,_~ a5 Cillldl'2n arE COnCerned, th°'/ IliVc a blg 3r'Ca In PIayT•0re
there, :rilere they can play in, then don't have to go out to ilain Street
to play, and then thzre's Orannz Avznue. They can ao do:m there to play.
IT .,;;^2'f ';;ant t0 CC'7Z 7nt0 OUr ~. i'ea tGO, b!e're "~ 'Jni tS in tii2re anC lT
then avant ~o play there, let -.~.em come cp there and play. gut, as 'ar as
I, th1S lS `_fle crew tCS'L thing ~I:at :.YP1' Y?d,Jpen 2'1 t0 U5, is this .,nC p7lfg
dfea r'i C.",~ cn i-~aln $trcet.
mid ;Tinos: Gocd evening. .ay name is Sid ;<inos and I'm arith ti.e consulting
enginezr-ing firm or Schwerin, ;linos and Associatzs. ae represent t,~..
developer of the project, Day,;at. I kno':r it's a little srviichzd are~nd
for me to be speaking last, but I didn't r~rant io speak to the whole E.i.R.
I just want ~„ speak to a feer issues that ;were brought up in reoard to the
E.I.^.
F1 rSt Of all VldS the eLlCdl ,~ptL;S grOVe. That'S, ~ dOn't ~'.n0'.V if e'Jer";'o Re's
Seen that, i,Jt It an eXti'el':Bly d`,traCLi'/2 el e."'_°nt In that partlCLllar
area and ~,ve had no intention or ever rzr~:oving that. I dcn't Guitz un^zr-
stand how it eoi into the E.I.C. that ~;re plan on removing it. Actually
~•ve're desicnine around it and I think it's a necessary asN~ect for tV~~e czntzr.
Second of all, the 10 foot ~;rail. An outsidz consultant, an acoustical
consultant, did a noise study, and in looking superficially at ~~~zans of
mitigating the nOlSe that 4lOUld be g2ner8 Led by Lhe Center, thzy s~J CL^,°s tad
a 10 foot ';:all. I don't think t'r:ey're in the construction business: .
10 foot :vall not only is unattractive but difficult to build and soy:~~°~;rnat
expensive. Consequently, we are investigating other means or mitigating
the noise. Onz of which, another site plan has already been prepared,
that is moving the loading dock away to the west, next to the street, and
further a~.vay from the units. In additicn, I think rye plan on raising the
site elevation somzwhat, reducing the need fora hither ;;all. I thin!; o~?e
Thing that the residznts of Playr~or should keep in mind is the fact That
the wall :rill not bz at the top of the slope that they no~,v have. Tfiz fact
that the trade in that particular area of the shocpina center ~:;ill be
perhaps 5 to 6 feet higher than it is now, at a 2 to 1 slope :will move the
vall approximamtely to 10 feet further away from Playmor. T f;novr walls
aren't necessarily atiracti~de, but I think rte :viii keep the wall as lorv
as r~;e can and still mitigate the noise situation, and it Brill provide
security fcr the shopping center and decrease the esthetic negative aspects
or thz shopping center. As I understand it, there are no plans to have
any brea4a in thz walls for passing from the Playmor area into thz shoppinc
center. It ~::ouldn't be necessary, or wouldn't be appropriate for security
reasons as ~;roll as for sarety for the Playmor children.
i see one other issue is the traffic. It's been brought up son;e~:rhat. I
thin4: it should be 4:ept in mind that Otay Valley Road is going to he
e:<panded to four fail lanes, ~:rhich will decrease the traffic situation
substantially. Also, the majority of the traffic that would be generated
by this shoppinc center, as well as the motel, would be on Otay Valley
Road, and very little of it will actually have to go down i1elrose. Any of
it that Foes will only just go a short ways because the parking area is
predo`;inantly in the north center area of the shopping complex.
Let's see, with retard to the noise, a 10 foot wall was mentioned. tie arz
46
_~.. ;linos
~i'dCaler
~;:or;_ir,g ;dit.`~ d cons~il~ant so ~hsi tre =:cdl ~:2si^r. foes 'ring ti»
~._ „el level do;;n to ~n ~. Hbl2 ievel Ind :ve' i i cry io ~'doid ~ ._
ili:; 'n •:;ail, ro;s idle. T,'~lan~k ycu.
"•.rl,%0"~~ °_152 ::'d llL ~G C° (1231"~~. -11p ^ubi,c i',ed'fl`t^_. 1~ CI J52'j. r ~.... ,
in vier u. this ;nc _ ~".at e r,oul~' ~.._ t~ ao _,~ -in=i i t;:o ,.
iG,'1L?
47
re ' ~R, '' ,p ~ °~s
j c° ~8. °Pd 7°7
es'd ~~P drj ~ ,~ L.
~hPSSjb~`Pd 7asOO t p/d2 7cP c
byPd4c~~~ O'~(6eTheh,so F°R'J8 d Gd/~ hd,h~d /
CO eCGd ~J ~ it )d Z`e/ OO~n/.Y ppp'h , ~`p F GP~'d 7 Fn`jh
~° ~p/e"~~y~ °~ hPhyd4rpo°6d6Ph9 cP~2` the P„ °h~enZ`
c 6 r 7 0 ~ d ~ er T d
~hP d tj )e s ph h p 7dj e/ rI y dr hd~ ,
o~hP p~ d°c °~ ~ ~'h~b/e~s~a~9 d~ed4c~~s7z`j9°~~ a9e
cd dp es ~°~, ~he h ~ °j. °h `7 b O~ LP e ~R
6)h~er~dii°~d7`d~ 0~0 th0po . y7,i d~~d~~~ h2 t°~ ~h pdc9hP ,~d°hd
p~, I~~OeS.P 2Et0, F°h ~°~ ~ ~ h9 P CCO~O ~ d ~ h ~ ~ /dj ~~ dhPd7t~~
~'q s~ 4d ~ °'~ P00 7 ~ P hP 17/IjC h~ d y h 7e ~ 7 ess dh j ~ d ~h0
R'd~ °~ehPSe 4 U9y the d°JP9~°~P posss he ~hP dPyPbgP °,~dTh s~`hd~°~ d~Or
Cp rdthPh d~~~PP d9~ o,~Th yF~bde ~,~~ soh e,O'D~ °d~`7°~Paj>>,~d 6y`
Qy TMFNT thdne °p~'°~ Z`he drP,J'p pdc~ 4c~4 ~ °~` ~ i rv7l'~e s.
~gyFS. hFFIgApRp by7SedOdudd'h°~~Ojee~d~~es7~ej sho ~hes,PrlbP
gbses, ~p~jIN~F~ q I~ 7ahd ppO~,, T h d °h s ~ d/d 6 re ~sr
eh~ ~,°~ (/°TF TyF the°ss jb~jO~e peS~h Z`hP s6P de s4 ~~
NoohP~7ss7 T~ Fy~,j '°dr~),! ~ ph°bp°S ~ ~~`e hr°`P ds
9TT fie. °hers /~JT.R~n/~jF n9I°iOCdP~S bdhd~Uh°4/da I cc
/S -~~ C7,~Ow yT9` X07/T ~ ~P ~~ hi,~coGh/d b o°c°r,
t. ~j~.~ ~0ede ' Rol d0 ~`he ~ Pd'~ ~hd ,
(9'Ori) ;9d ds dh~ v ~ ~CCd~jd~7 ~MI`SSj~~,/ ~ d JO~ gr,°Gp
1g]8 ' c~\~ ss, oo FFTI^/c
J S7O'7S 00`dh OF~9A
SPCh yd s~`7 RIB /,
e~d''y h9s d j9,
~d ~ a
ie j
n
i
g8 ~
12.0 Response to comments received at tee public hearing of
~~oril 26, 19%0
Scott blac Lecd
as was noted at the public hearinr,, the 10 ft. wall, as
preposeci by the acoustical consultant, ~.aas one alternatic~
to mitigate the noise impact on adjacent _esidential uses.
The :gall :could not be located immediately adjacent to the
residential units but ,;ould be at or in e;:cess of 30 ft.
from the c:aellir.as. Tae inten;eninq area would inclt;de a
landscaped slope cahich would provide vertical separation
alcaa with shrubs and trees to screen any ~.aall and the
proposed use.
The proposed is being re~.~ised to locate the loaciina`acilities
fart^.er from the residential uses. This revision along ;with
the hicher pad elevation than was previously proposed, should
permit a lo:,er ;•;all while still pro.~idinq acoustical and
visual screening.
It is not li'rely that this facility. caould increase the traf_`ic
on L'elrose ave. to the south of the project. S::oppinc trigs
to and from the area to the south of the project ~.aould be
made along the same street system if the project *.aere
implemented or not. There would be a shift in traffic a~.aay
from other centers but the limited access street system
south of the project would channel traffic on the same streets.
John ~ie~•;nort
The applicant's representative stated at the public hearing
that t're~~ had no intention of removing the grove of eucal~;ptus
trees. The plans currently on file in the Planr.inq Dept.
to not sho:a the retention of the trees, however, the arc..".itect
on the project is developing alternatives to retain the trees.
Depending on how much open space can be provided around the
trees and the amount of grading and fill material needed near
the surface roots, it may or may not be possible to retain the
trees. T're City's landscape architect should revie~;: the details
of the plan to insure the maximum possible change of retention.
wee the above response for comments on the proposed wall anti
landscaplna between the shopping center and residential arc a.
As a:as stated at the hearing, there are no breaks planned in
the proposed wall and the additional slope makes such a
bree.k even more unlikely.
Bill .?ohnson
?Io new testimony was provided, see the above comments.
49
~G~ Cd vdtlli.~lril
The testi~.oag provided frcm these individuals teas i,.
support o~ the project.
50
~. ~ ,'__ ,;;;L CS 1T~CL Cui Ali _ IDiI
Ci i'i OF C.iULA VISTA, Ur.LI~ C~;lIA
April 17, 1?iS Council Conference Room 7;U,U c
~
------------------------------- .
,
--
idE~'~~3~RS °R~S~?1T: ---------------------------------------
C'r,airman G2ore Gillo~,v, 'Jic2 Ch:airc!an --------------------------
~'er2dit'n Bo°der,
Co!rmissionzrs ,iob2rt Hastinc,s, ?edgy Donovan and Ga;lz
i'cCandliss. Con~missicner John I;lein arrived after "cl
call was ta~en (at 7:13 p.m.).
f~lE?1BERS ABSE:1T: gone (one vacancy currently exists on thisCo:nmissicn).
CIT'f STAFF PRLS~:lT: Envircnr,;enta] P,zviz~,a Ccordinator Doug las Pzid.
1. CALL ~'~,E_TIP1G Chairman Gillo~,v called the ~nzeting to order ai 7: CL p
m
TC 0..°.D~R
in tnz Council Con ,;erzacz loom, City .
.
s',all.
2. ROLL CALL Roll call ,vas taken. Pie,noers orzsant constituted a Guoru~°~i
for ~ilz transacticn of business.
3. AP?RDVAL OF ;~1iPiUT~S It ',vas moved by Co~rmissiener Conovan, seconded ov Com-
r;ission2r Hastings and unanirously ca rried (5-0) tc aap~rovc
the minutes of tnz r2cuiar ,,~e2iing of March 20, 1975 as
maii2d.
d; .:^-78-7: Travel Vice Chair;~ian Poedzr's ~aritten czm~ments :~~zre read into the
!cs~:a/Sal~~r.ino"; record on both EIS-i2-7 and EIR-7o-10.
and,
(f, ~I2-;8-iU:
"Plea ';allz Verde"
i'lOtiOn tJ iCr`.:a Y'd It ''.;aS i70VBd t"~ '„~i:.~'.!1SSl Cn_°r JO n'J `i3n~ 52CnnC c'S i^.~ 1, ~'°_
CO,°T,zn LS Cn ~_.-~C^i-i end ?!I SS :On2r f-~_l i7.iS and UI'uf ~U'.0'JSl/ _;^?"1 ~.: .6 i^vr.'ir^ ~,~~
EIK-7S-i0 carried „-) v!r;t cn cc-:rents of Vice u -t~•:;~..an Bezdsr ~_e ~i12 1.. r,^~i:^.o~
l,arl it2n CC;!:;i.2nrS C. ~'~:~~.^I SSI Cn X52°_ aL ~~:C fL'.'211 T_~.
at~a C„2d t0 tileS2 !"l nU t2S~
Suppiz;-!zntal ~';oticn It :vas moved by Vicz ::i~airc!an R.c2dzr and ~~ccrdz~' by :;c,r:-
(EiR-73-10) !issioner Hastings that zh2 ~, rzcc:;,n;znd that _;~~2 71ann~na
~o!!:missicn not recc;nmend (to file Citti Ccunci i j"ray ~„_
canz,ai PLn _nznc~~.e^; rzicting tc FI- 3-10 (fr~a
,,,
"Cccmerciali~isiter'' `o ,.eta~l/Co,~::~~.ercial") 6z 9~-ar:_2d.
Dlotion r.~~rri2d ~-1 The r,.otion carried 5y the folla.vir.^ vo~2, _~-;pit:
A'l~S: Cc!!:!uis~ionzr,s 'ceder, Hastings, Donovan,
NcL"gin liss and ~~i Ilosv.
,."ices: Ccr::~issionzr Y.12in.
,~~nt. ,lone.
'-,osCain: ;Ion'.
S1
~~~:.~b;''E';T -C _,,.:~..~t~.~,L ,.,1TEOL C. ,ISSI6~! ~llil'J~~.. OF ~/17/i3 __ .,
.. _,.,. ~ _~.,i .. ~_ ~ ,. i ... _, ~. I _ I.. _..~i ~' _a_ .. i~ ..,, i'.3 ~ .., __.
~ .. ~, ,a _. ~1 ., .. ~~ _ I .... ~ I i... .. ._ _.,
_,u.. 1. ~.. ~JI.]~ ... .. ~. .. ... ~.,_ I ,,.,i~~ ~. ~r~ ~..7 i~~_I~..._ __, ~~
c _ ._ / .., i ,~. .. 3 ~ _ __. _ CJ .. I '.3 ~t~ _.. .. ~~~i .. ... _
..I _ _ ~.~ .. .. _~~.5 OT _~ ~. ~ ~ .._ C rl] . .. V~ ~~~, ,._ ~ _. Iv _. ...
._.. _.~ ~ ~ ... i., .~~ ~ ~ Wit. ,. ~, ~ _~ _ '~~ .. li .., _, ..~ .., _ _ ~.~~
~., .... ,S C'1 _. ~a~ _I',.J C~' C~!1Lc1' S ~f°~..1 l .. _~ _._!Ji'2J .,h_~i~~v J2 S'~.. ri _~ CLI. ::~
~~,
.. ___ .._„_. .. _.~ :-l 'l':.,T pl.J~i~i.' i-i~~]~~ i~ l5 T.0 ~_ ~ .x'.,;24. ..~ c.~.. _ _'l.
0. .,,_I =,,r ,,, ~ ~'~D]2C L. I ~'/ ~f ~ Sd5„:.r _°5_ _.lC = .~U[? _T~ ~?;O LI~ _~
~.r =dl i~_^ ~~~, l,l =~~_ ~~S~II L~:2 C. _... ir;° ,^, i' ,'J~_~ ~Il~ S~IOu~;7, .tl ,. ._
i'1 :2f25„ ~, _.. 1. =Ci15 ~, ,~C1 Ji .L':. ~ ~=1iU .. 'l ;'Ou~~]15, .._ ~ ., r: =~ CO
J
v Sri",.._.. ~~ f,=?' _ ~ ~Jf l ~ _~ i In _ :5 {~fl ~, ~Lt.
`, ~ :'/
~.,-. '9,c ~~ ..~ T ~ ".;'I' _,~~..~ C~, :OL r~.,_,ISSI:'I ?'E~ .,lG iiF .;^^iL 1%, ~~iS
„_~. ~~,.. o~i0fl?~ 'ail. !n ~0~=~` ~ -~.,~ i i~5, ,,:.f :..,:fl. ~~~~Ll' ~~~.. -I_;.1.
~~C25: ~, ,,, ..
/~~
- ~ q
~;~ ~ 1 i i C !1 S
~" J~~
~ ~--
52