Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Rpts./1996/03/27 (6) PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT Item ~ Meeting Date: March 27. 1996 ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing: PCM 95-01; Consideration of approving the Otay Ranch Sectional Planning Area (SPA) One Plan including the Planned Community District Regulations, Overall Design Plan, Village Design Plan, Public Facilities Finance Plan, Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan, Regional Facilities Report, Phase 2 Resource Management Plan, Non-renewable Energy Conservation Plan, Ranch-wide Affordable Housing Plan, SPA One Affordable Housing Plan, and Geotechnical Report The Baldwin Company has submitted the first Otay Ranch Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan governing Villages One and Five. SPA One covers 1,061.2 acres generally located south of Telegraph Canyon Road between Paseo Ranchero and the future SR-125 alignment The Otay Ranch SPA One application is the first SPA/specific plan submitted to implement the Otay Ranch General Development Plan/Subregional Plan (GDP/SRP) jointly approved by the City and the County of San Diego in October of 1993. The public hearing on SPA One was continued in November of 1995 in order for new information to be added to the SPA One EIR. Portions of the EIR containing new information were recirculated for public comment. After the Planning Commission closes the public review period on the recirculated Draft EIR, the SPA One Plan is ready for public hearing. ISSUES: The following are unresolved policy and design issues between the project applicant and City staff: . Should there be additional internal access north of Palomar Street in Village One? . Should access to the single-family neighborhoods north of Palomar Street be gated? . Should pedestrian parks receive 100% park credit? RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission conduct the Public Hearing on the proposed Otay Ranch SPA One Plan (pCM 95-01); and Adopt Resolution PCM 95-01 recommending the City Council approve the Otay Ranch SPA One Plan (PCM 95-01) including the Overall Design Plan, Village Design Plan, Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan, Regional Facilities Report, Public PCSRSP A2.DOC March 13, 1996 //s-- Page 2, Item 2- Meeting Date: March 27. 1996 Facilities Finance Plan, Phase 2 Resource Management Plan, Non-renewable Energy Conservation Plan, Ranch-wide Affordable Housing Plan, SPA One Affordable Housing Plan, and Geotechnical Report with the proposed conditions of approval. Adopt Resolution PCM 95-01B recommending the City Council adopt the ordinance approving the Planned Community District Regulations. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDA nON: Commission on Aging: On October 11, 1995, the Commission on Aging met to consider the Regional Facilities Report concerning senior citizen services in SPA One. The Commission tabled the report and asked for additional information !Tom Parks and Recreation staff regarding fire, police, transit and park services and facilities. Design Review Committee: On October 23, 1995, the Design Review Committee voted unanimously to recommend approval of the Overall Design Plan for the Otay Ranch and conceptual approval of the Village Design Plan for SPA One, Villages One and Five of the Otay Ranch. Housing Advisory Committee: On November 22, 1995, the Housing Advisory Committee voted unanimously to recommend adoption of the Ranch-wide and SPA One Affordable Housing Plans. Parks and Recreation Commission: The Parks and Recreation Commission reviewed the SPA One Parks Master Plan in August of 1994 and in January, March and April of 1995. On October 26, 1995, the Commission voted 5 to 2 to recommend approval of the SPA One Plan for Villages One and Five with the pedestrian parks to receive partial credit to be determined by staff only if the pedestrian parks are maintained under separate agreement (homeowners association or landscape/open space maintenance district). DISCUSSION: 1. Site Characteristics: SPA One is located in the Otay Valley Parcel of the Otay Ranch on 1,061 acres south of Telegraph Canyon Road/Otay Lakes Road. SPA One includes all of Village Five and the portion of Village One east of Paseo Ranchero. Historically, this portion of the Otay Ranch has been used for ranching, dry-farming, and truck farm activities. The site is currently vacant, unoccupied and unimproved. The rolling hills of Villages One and Five are adjacent to Telegraph Canyon to the north and Poggi Canyon on the south. The Otay Water District property is located on the east side of Village Five, and the future Sunbow project is located to the west of Village One. PCSRSPA2DOC March 13, 1996 //If Page 3, Item 2- Meeting Date: March 27. 1996 2. ZODiD!! aDd Land Use: Villages One and Five, along with the entire Otay Ranch properties, were prezoned Planned Community (PC) as part of the General Development Plan (GDP) process. The PC zone implements the GDP by requiring the preparation of a sectional planning area (SPA) plan. The SPA plan provides for the orderly planning and development of large tracts ofland with a variety ofland uses. The Otay Ranch GDP requires the implementing of SPAs to focus on the pedestrian oriented village concept. SPA One accomplishes that goal. The Otay Ranch GDP and the PC Zone also require additional master plans and studies to be completed in conjunction with the first SPA. Those include: Planned Community District Regulations, Overall Design Plan, Village Design Plan, Public Facilities Finance Plan, Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan, Regional Facilities Report, Phase 2 Resource Management Plan, Non-renewable Energy Conservation Plan, Ranch-wide Affordable Housing Plan, SPA One Affordable Housing Plan, and Geotechnical Report. These plans and reports are outlined in the Document Organization Flow Chart, Exhibit I- 1, of the SPA One Plan and summarized in the Project Proposal section of this agenda statement. Since this is the first SPA application in the Otay Ranch, the GDP requires the preparation of several additional Ranch-wide plans including the Overall Design Plan (ODP), Ranch- wide Affordable Housing Plan and Phase 2 Resource Management Plan (RMP). The GDP further requires concurrent approval of the ODP and Phase 2 RMP Funding and Conveyance Plans and Preserve OwnerlManager (POM) by the County of San Diego and the City of Chula Vista prior to the adoption of the first SPA. The San Diego County Planning Commission reviewed and recommended approval of the ODP at their May 26, 1995 meeting. On the November 17, 1995 the County Planning Commission recommended approval of the Funding and Conveyance Plans and the formation of the POM. The Board of Supervisors on March 6, 1996 adopted the Funding and Conveyance Plans, POM and Overall Design Plan. 3. ProDosal: SPA One Plan Alternative B-2 The B-2 Alternative is the land plan proposed by the applicant and recommended by City staff with modifications. This plan is a revision of Alternative B in the SPA One Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The revisions were prepared to respond to staff concerns over the original submittal. Staff is satisfied the proposed B-2 Alternative meets the goals, objectives and policies of the Otay Ranch GDP with the resolution of the policy issues and adoption of the proposed conditions of approval. The plan proposes access points to Villages One and Five off Telegraph Canyon Road. These access points are proposed to enable the applicant to start construction of single- PCSRSPA2DOC March 13, 1996 //7 Page 4, Item 2 Meeting Date: March 27. 1996 family homes in the villages without the major infTastructure improvement costs associated with constructing La Media. Second phases will provide access ITom Paseo Ranchero and La Media. The B-2 Alternative also proposes pedestrian parks located in the single-family neighborhoods. The applicant believes these parks are a key component of the pedestrian- oriented village concept. Both villages implement the GDP village concept policy by planning the villages around urbanized cores that contain future transit stations at the center of the village. Elementary school sites are planned for each village just off the core along with large neighborhood parks. Telegraph Canyon Road and East Orange Avenue are Prime Arterial streets in scenic corridors that border SPA One on the north and south. The Prime Arterials providing north/south access are Paseo Ranchero and La Media (the extension of Otay Lakes Road south into the project). These roads provide sidewalks on one side and regional trails on the other. Palomar Street is planned as a Village Entry and Core street and it is proposed that the transit right-of-way run in the street median. Placing the transit in the median eliminates the need for gates on the village streets under current Public Utilities Commission and Metropolitan Transit Development Board (MTDB) design criteria. The transit alignment is designated on the SPA land use plan, and its dedication will be a condition of tentative map approval. However, transit alignment west and south of SPA One still needs to be determined and construction funding identified for extending the transit to Villages One and Five. The Village Core streets also have a 10-foot electric cart path in addition to as-foot sidewalk on one side of the street. The Promenade streets provide the main pedestrian access to the village core. These streets have a 6-foot wide sidewalk with an 8-foot parkway with trees on both sides of the sidewalk. This design promotes a better pedestrian walking environment than City-standard monolithic sidewalks by providing a shaded walkway separated ITom the street. The Promenade streets run ITom the residential areas to the village core. Residential streets are proposed to have 6-foot parkways with street trees and 4-foot sidewalks to enhance the pedestrian experience. A specific list of street trees using root barriers has been developed to avoid root damage to sidewalks. While cart paths are part of the village design in the paseos, promenade and village core streets, no provision is proposed by the project applicant to make electric carts available as part of the home sale. The City's Environmental Resource Manager has identified funding sources that could assist in acquisition by residents of electric carts in the future. Staff believes the carts will be utilized when the village core or other destinations are built. The pedestrian bridge between Villages One and Five has been included in the Public Facilities Finance Plan and required by the conditions of approval. Its construction will be phased with other improvements between the two villages. The future bridges to Village PCSRSPA2DOC March 13, 1996 //~ Page 5, Item 2 Meeting Date: March 27. 1996 Two and Six are proposed to be financed by the facilities portion of the open space maintenance district. In November of 1995, the Baldwin Company modified their SPA One proposal to include eight gates at entrances into the single-family neighborhoods north of Palomar Street. These gates will restrict vehicular access but not public pedestrian, bicycle or electric cart access. The gates would control the access to most of the single-family product in SPA One. They would not impede access to the multi-family sites or any of Village-wide services in SPA One such as the neighborhood parks, the elementary schools, the commercial areas in the village cores or the community purpose facility sites. The Chula Vista School District will provide school bus service on the private roads behind these gates. The proposed gates would be staffed or electronically controlled and provide visitor lane with turn around and resident lane. Behind these proposed gates, streets and pedestrian parks would be privately maintained but constructed to City standards. The storm drains the gates would be private up to the point where they collect runoff ITom public streets. The lighting located on the private streets would be private but also conform to public standards. Four gates are proposed for each village. The four gates in Village One would be located on the Residential Promenade streets that provide the access into the single-family neighborhoods. Three gates control the access ITom Palomar Street and the fourth is located at the entrance ITom Telegraph Canyon Road. In Village 5, two gates control the access on the Residential Promenade streets form the village core while the other two are located at the entrances at Telegraph Canyon Road and ITom EastLake. Village One Village One comprises 585 acres located in the northwestern portion of the Otay Valley Parcel. Village One is an urban village with transit and pedestrian orientation. The land use pattern emphasizes balanced yet diverse land uses, environmentally sensitive development, transit and pedestrian orientation, and creating a "sense of place" for the Village One residents. The village core is centrally located and includes 1,566 multi- family residential units, an elementary school site, two neighborhood parks, commercial and Community Purpose Facility (CPF) sites and the light rail transit right-of-way. The Village One core is based on a traditional "main street" theme. The main street concept is implemented with commercial, office and public/quasi-public uses along a pedestrian friendly, tree lined main street with a transit station. The secondary area of Village One contains 1,314 single-family homes with a range oflot sizes and two pedestrian parks. Village Five Village Five is comprised of 476 acres located south of Otay Lakes Road between La Media and the future alignment of SR-125. Village Five is an urban village to be served by the light rail transit. The land use pattern emphasizes balanced yet diverse land uses, environmentally sensitive development, and transit and pedestrian orientation creating a "sense of place" for the Village Five residents. The village core is located in the southwestern portion of the village and includes 1,615 multi-family units, an elementary PCSRSPA.2DOC March 13, 1996 //f Page 6, Item -2 Meeting Date: March 27, 1996 school site, two neighborhood parks, a town square, commercial and CPF sites and light rail transit right-of-way The Village Five core identity is based on a traditional town square design Commercial buildings, multi-family units, community purpose facilities and a larger neighborhood park are planned around the town square park. The transit station for the light rail has also been planned at the town square. The Village Five secondary area contains] ,263 single-family units in a variety of densities. Planned Community District Regulations Part III of the SPA One Plan contains the Planned Community (PC) Regulations These regulations will be adopted pursuant to Title 19, Zoning, of the Chula Vista Municipal Code and are intended to implement and integrate the Chula Vista General Plan, the Otay Ranch GDP and the SPA One Plan. These regulations set forth the development and use standards for all property within the Otay Ranch Planned Community District for setbacks, building heights, parking requirements, landscape requirements, land use restrictions, lot sizes and signage regulations The PC District Regulations are organized into three different land use districts: Residential, Village Core, Open Space and Parks. The PC will be adopted by ordinance by the City Council. Each of the three land use districts are divided into specific land use categories as follows: Residential: Single-Family Three (SF-3) Single-Family Four (SF-4) Residential Multi-Family One (RM I) Residential Multi-Family Two (RM 2) 5,000-8,000 square foot lots 3,000- 5,000 square foot lots Small lot single-family detached housing Attached multi-family housing It is the intent of the residential regulations to provide one set of residential regulations for the entire Otay Ranch. The SF-4 designation is proposed for small lot single-family home projects such as auto court or alley products The SF-3 designation will allow standard single-family projects. The rural villages that have lower density single-family GDP designations will have the SF-E, SF-I and SF-2 districts designations. These designations are not part of this SPA One Plan. The Village Core Districts contain the Commercial (C) and Community Purpose Facility (CPF) designations, and the Open Space/Park District contains the Open Space/Park One and Two designations Additional sections in the PC District Regulations cover special and conditional uses, comprehensive sign regulations, off street parking and administration of these districts. Neo-traditional design concepts are described in the Village Design Plan and are included in the PC Regulations. The regulation set minimum number of "Hollywood" driveways, front porches and other neo-traditional to be porvided in Villages One and Five. PCSRSPA2DOC March 13, 1996 / ;::~~ Page 7, Item 2 Meeting Date: Mareh 27, 1996 The project applicant is concerned with the Community Purposes Facility requirements for SP A One. The concern focuses on the amount of land required and the limited land uses allowed in the designation The Zoning Ordinance allows additional uses in the SPA CPF designation upon the approval of the Planning Commission. The applicant has proposed additional uses in the SPA One CPF designation which staff is reviewing and will bring forward to the Planning Commission at a later time Additional SPA One Documents The SPA One Plan is organized as outlined in the Document Organization Flow Chart, Exhibit 1-1, of the SPA One Plan and summarized in this section of the agenda statement A. Overall Design Plan The Overall Design Plan (ODP) identifies the major design features that will tie the 23,OOO-acre Otay Ranch Project together. The goal of the Plan is to identify the features that will be present in all three major parcels to let people know they are within the Otay Ranch. The ODP is required by the Otay Ranch GDP and is one of the plans that requires both City and County approval. The San Diego County Planning Commission reviewed and recommended approval of the ODP at their May 26, 1995 meeting. The Board of Supervisors adopted the ODP on March 6, 1996. The ODP identifies nine unifying elements that tie the three major parcels together. Those elements are: Riparian Meander, Mountain Landforms, Dominant Skyline Landscape Treatment, Major Streetscapes, Landscape Palette, Signage, Furnishings, Linkages and Pedestrian Design The ODP design elements will be applied and implemented in two ways: through open space, streetscape and landscape zones and by identifying elements, linkages and destinations. These elements further define functional outdoor spaces, enhance natural features and create a cohesive sense of community. Each feature is fully explained with text and exhibits. Special design criteria are also provided for grading and viewshed development B. Village Design Plan The Village Design Plan (VDP) is required by the Otay Ranch GDP for each village at the SP A level of planning. Villages are the heart of the Otay Ranch communities, and the GDP requires special attention to such design considerations as overall character, creation of a sense of place and pedestrian/transit orientation of the village core. Village-specific design guidelines are required to address the following: landscaping and streetscapes, signage, site plan, grading and architectural guidelines, special visual studies and the village core concept Conceptual design for the gates to the single-family neighborhoods are also provided. PCSRSP A2DOC March 13, 1996 /' " Page 8, Item 2 Meeting Date: March 27, 1996 The SPA One VDP is divided into three main sections Part One establishes the overall framework for future village design plans and addresses overall design guidelines and administrative procedures which will apply to this and each of the subsequent Otay Ranch villages. Part One also provides a description of the 'village concept", addresses the required design elements of the Overall Design Plan and presents guidelines for the pedestrian/transit orientation of the villages. Part Two and Three address the specific design guidelines for Villages One and Five, respectively. When the Design Review Committee (DRC) reviewed this plan, the graphics had not been updated to reflect the B-2 Alternative, so they recommended approval of the plan in concept. No additional review of the plan by DRC is necessary since the B-2 Alternative was presented during their revIew. C. Public Facilities Financing Plan The Otay Ranch GDP and the City's Growth Management Program require the preparation of a Public Facilities Finance Plan (PFFP) in conjunction with each SPA Plan for the Otay Ranch The PFFP is required to ensure that the phased development of the villages is consistent with the GDP and General Plan Quality of Life Threshold Standards. The PFFP is based on the phasing of Alternative B-2. This phasing is done to assist in the prediction of when additional or upgraded facilities will be needed to meet or maintain compliance with the City's Quality of Life Threshold Standards. The PFFP provides recommended mitigation necessary for the continued compliance with the Growth Management Program and Quality of Life Threshold Standards. Willdan Associates was selected to prepare the PFFP for SPA One. Public facility master plans for all utilities have been prepared for the SPA One Plan as indicated in the document organization chart. Master plans for water, water conservation, sewer and drainage were used as the basis for the PFFP. Those plans reflect Alternative B-2 and indicate that acceptable levels of service and threshold standards can be maintained if the recommended conditions are implemented. Approval of SPA One includes the approval of these master plans The PFFP identified several issues that reqUIre addition attention in the Plan and conditions of approval. The GDP indicates the developer of the Otay Ranch is to participate in the Otay Ranch's fair share of the operation and maintenance cost for the light rail transit. The PFFP concludes that the dedication of transit right-of-way constitutes the Otay Ranch's fair share obligation for construction. For operation and maintenance, the conditions require the project developer enter into an agreement not to protest the formation of a regional benefit district for the enter South Bay line. The PFFP indicates that the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee (PFDIF) area does not include the Otay Ranch. The PFFP indicates the PFDIF needs to be updated. The conditions of approval require the SPA One developer to finance the update prior to approval of the first final map, and allow 100% credit for the cost ofthe update study. PCSRSP A.2DOC March 15, 1996 '" /Jr( Page 9, Item...? Meeting Date: March 27, 1996 The PFFP further identifies that the first high school and community park will be needed sooner in the development of the Otay Ranch than previously anticipated The conditions of approval require the identification, grading and transfer of these two sites at specific trigger points during the development of SPA One. The Baldwin Company has initiated the formation of benefit assessment districts with both school districts. D. Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan The Otay Ranch GDP requires the preparation of a Parks Master Plan for each SPA. The SP A One Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Master Plan is the project applicant's proposal to satisfy the GDP requirements. The Plan presents the Otay Ranch Park System with its recreation facility requirements including plans for opcn space, trails and community gardens in SPA One. Phasing, funding and maintenance are also part of the Plan. This Plan satisfies the GOP requirement for a recreation access master plan. The Plan's proposals are sightly different from the standard City parks and open spacc requirements SPA One's local park obligation at 3 acres per 1,000 population is 49.7 acres. The applicant has proposed that 2/3 of this obligation be satisfied by neighborhood parks within SPA One, and the remaining 1/3 obligation would be satisfied by the future community park in Village Two unless the location is change by subsequent GOP amendments. Based on a household population of2.88, SPA One requires 33.2 acres of neighborhood park. SPA One proposes 41. 7 acres of neighborhood and pedestrian parks The 34.2 acres of neighborhood park exceeds the park standard. The 7.5 acres of pedestrian parks located in the gated neighborhoods are not eligible for park credit under current City policies. The SPA One Parks Master Plan is based on Alternative B. The B-2 Alternative is a refinement of the B Alternative in the SPA One ElR. Staff supports and recommends approval of the Village One and Village Five proposed neighborhood and pedestrian park locations with the exception of Park P-2. This 7.3 acre neighborhood park is located in the single-family area on the south side of Palomar Street east of the village core. Staff recommends this park be relocated just to the east to better serve the single-family neighborhoods on the east side of Village One. The conditions require the relocation of Park P-2 across the Promenade Street to the west end of Neighborhood R-12. The Parks and Recreation Commission has recommended the B-2 Alternative park plan as proposed by the project applicant with conditions on maintenance and credit. They recommended maintenance for the pedestrian parks not be funded by the General Fund but by an open space maintenance district or homeowner's association. They recommended credit for the pedestrian parks be determined by City staff Staff recommends that pedestrian park credit range from 25% to 50% depending on compliance with small park criteria that will be developed by City staff Pedestrian parks located within gated neighborhoods will not receive park credit under current City policy. The Parks Master Plan will be revised to reflect the plan adopted by the City Council. PCSRSPA.2DOC March 15,1996 Page 10, Item-2 Meeting Date: March 27, 1996 Open space areas and street parkways and medians will be maintained by an open space and landscaping assessment district. Conditions are proposed by staff requiring the project applicant to study the feasibility of forming a master open space maintenance district for the entire Otay Valley parcel Future SPAs will annex to this district as development occurs. E. Regional Facilities Report The Otay Ranch General Development Plan/Subregional Plan (GDP/SRP) requires that SP A applications be accompanied by a Regional Facility Report. This report identifies the forecasted demand for regional facilities generated by development of the SPA One Plan and addresses how that demand will be satisfied. The regional facilities considered in this report, as required by the GDP, are Integrated Solid Waste Management, Arts and Cultural Facilities, Child Care Facilities, Health and Medical Services and Facilities, Hospitals, Mental Health Facilities, Community Clinics, Nursing Facilities, Community Health, Education, Screening and Research Organizations, Medical Practitioners, Community and Regional Purpose Facilities, Social and Senior Services, Correctional Facilities, Justice Facilities and Cemetery Facilities. F. Phase 2 Resource Management Plan The Resource Management Plan (RMP) is a comprehensive plan for the preservation, enhancement and management of sensitive natural and cultural resources within the Otay Ranch. The tasks required to implement the RMP are collectively called Phase 2. Phase 2 is comprised of the resource related studies, plans and programs that are required prior to the approval of the first SPA. A Habitat Maintenance Assessment District is proposed to maintain the Otay Ranch Open Space Preserve as identified in the Phase 2 RMP. This district is proposed to maintain all of the 11,375 acres in the preserve and will be funded by the residences of the Otay Ranch. This district is limited to charging $25 per year per parcel by State law with adjustments for inflation. The GDP does not require the developer or land owner to provide for recreation, education or research funding. These functions are the City's responsibility under the proposed joint powers agreement between the City and the County of San Diego for establishing the Preserve/Owner Manager. Future City funds will have to be identified and budgeted for these functions to occur within the Otay Ranch Open Space Preserve. The other functions of operation and maintenance of the open space preserve will be performed by the County supported by the $25 per parcel habitat district. Also, in the area of education, even though there is a requirement that the developer will identify the location and study funding source for a Nature Center, there is no requirement that they fund its construction. This probably means such a center will not be built unless other funds are found. PCSRSPA.2DOC March 15, 1996 /'1// I ,?\ )''' Page II, Item 2 Meeting Date: Mareh 27, 1996 Timing and methodology of conveying the open space to the POM has become a major issue with the other owners of the Otay Ranch. Conveyance of the open space to the POM is proposed by staff to be based on developable acres. When 50 % of SPA One is developed 50 % of the open space is required to be conveyed to the POM. The balance is due for conveyance when 90 % of the SPA is developed. The phasing of conveyance is proposed by staff to enable the County to generate sufficient funds from the Habitat Maintenance District to maintain the preserve. Several of the other Otay Ranch property owners have suggested that the conveyance of open space should be based on dwelling units Staff has analyzed this method and found the non-residential land uses in the Eastern Urban Center, Village 3 and Planning Area 18- B would not have a conveyance responsibility. Basing the conveyance requirement on equivalent dwelling units factors used by the City for open space maintenance districts places the majority of conveyance requirement on these revenue generating land uses. The other alternative analyzed was based on sensitive lands containing habitat. This alternative places the majority of conveyance on the rural eastern parcels. Staff believes the most equitable method for conveying open space is based on developable acres as recommended in the Phase 2 RMP. On March 6, 1996, the San Diego County Board of Supervisors adopted the Phase 2 RMP for SPA One as recommended by County staff and supported Chula Vista City staff G. Non-Renewable Energy Conservation Plan The Otay Ranch GDP requires the preparation of a Non-renewable Energy Conservation Plan for each SPA to address energy conservation within each village of the project. This Plan identifies measures to reduce the consumption of non-renewable energy resources by feasible methods in areas of transportation, building construction and operation, and land use patterns. Residential measures focus on housing efficiency with attached and smaller detached single-family homes which use less energy. Pedestrian-oriented villages, with public transit facilities in their core areas and integrated urban villages with commercial and residential services, will also reduce energy consumption. The compact design and integrated street/path circulation systems will encourage pedestrian/walking trips to the core. In addition, the extension of the San Diego light rail transit system through Otay Ranch and provision of electric cart pathways when utilized will lead to a reduction in automobile trips. H. Ranch-wide Affordable Housing Plan The Otay Ranch General Development Plan/Subregional Plan (GDP/SRP) requires an Affordable Housing Plan (AHP) for the entire Otay Ranch Project area as well as an AHP for each village within the Otay Ranch. The GDP/SRP requires the Ranch-wide AHP be consistent with the Housing Elements of both the City and the County for those portions of Otay Ranch which lie within the boundary of either jurisdiction. As a result of the first PCSRSPA.2DOC March IS, 1996 /' '.- Page 12, Item ~ Meeting Date: March 27, 1996 phase being proposed in the City of Chula Vista, this AHP details how, at both Ranch- wide and SPA levels, Otay Ranch will satisfy the affordable housing requirements of the City housing Element and GDP/SRP. Under the current City of Chula Vista Housing Element, the Otay Ranch is required to provide 10% of the total units be affordable. At least 5% of these units should be for low income households and 5% should accommodate moderate income households. Staff has proposed tiering requirements for the Ranch-wide Plan indicating the level of detail and standards for each Plan and subdivision map. I. SPA One Affordable Housing Plan The SPA One AHP addresses the phasing and potential location of affordable housing units to be provided in SPA One, including the area west of Pas eo Ranchero. SPA One is projected to contain 6,20 I dwelling units at build out, and the affordable housing obligation associated with this construction is 310 low income units and 310 moderate income units. Through a prior agreement with The Baldwin Company on Telegraph Canyon Estates project, the City Council required a 3-acre site within Village Five of the Otay Ranch to satisfy that project's affordable housing obligation. The applicant is proposing to satisfy the Telegraph Canyon Estates obligation by providing an additional 34 affordable units in SPA One. The existing agreement for the Telegraph Canyon Estates requirement will need to be amended by the City Council in order to implement the applicant's proposal. No action is necessary at this time in relationship to SPA One. The AHP provides five potential sites for low income affordable housing within SPA One. The governing site selection principles include density, proximity to parks and schools, and proximity to transit and retail and other services. A phasing approach is proposed within the proposed SPA One AHP, which encourages the provision of both low and moderate income units in sequence with the proposed development phases in SPA One. J. Geotechnical Report The GDP required a site-specific geotechnical study at the tentative map level, based on proposed development plans, prior to construction In this case, the geotechnical studies will be used at the SPA One level. The Geotechnical Report found no faults or geological hazards that can not be mitigated to a level ofless than significant within SPA One. 4. Analvsis The B-2 Alternative implements the Otay Ranch GDP policies for urban villages. City staff has worked closely with the Metropolitan Transit Development Board and the Chula PCSRSPA2DOC March 15, 1996 /, Page 13, Item ~ Meeting Date: March 27,1996 Vista Elementary and Sweetwater High School Districts in designing these two villages. The plans for Village One and Five are comprehensive, well-integrated and balanced. A wide range of residential densities provide a variety of housing opportunities within each village. Alternative modes of transportation are promoted with pedestrian, bicycle and cart facilities and the future light rail transit. The village cores have been planned to give a sense of place to the villages by focusing on the main street and town square commercial location surrounded by recreational, educational and civic uses. The proposed project phasing begins construction of both villages concurrently. Phases 1 A will initiate construction in Village Five while Phase IB will open Village One. Both of these phases are single-family except for one multi-family site in Village One. The first elementary school site is proposed for Village One in Phase IB while the initial large neighborhood park will be in Phase 2A in Village Five. Pedestrian parks are proposed in Phases lA and lB. This phasing will allow an initial deficit in the large neighborhood parks. The project applicant has proposed and staff has concurred with the deficit up to 500 units after which the provision of neighborhood parks will remain in surplus. Initial Phases lA and IB will require off-site Telegraph Canyon Road improvements According to the traffic study at 10,295 trips, a 1,400 unit threshold requiring additional off-site road improvements will be reached during the construction of Phase 2B. At this point in the project development, either Palomar Street or East Orange Avenue needs to be constructed from the western SPA boundary to I-80S. This phase of development will also require the identification of the high school site as required by the high school district Staff proposes that at the 1, 150th building permit, a project review be initiated by the project applicant and reviewed by the City to determine: · Which arterial street is extended to I-80S . Where the high school site will be located · Where the community park will be located · Which village should be encouraged to be completed before additional development is allowed in the other village · How can development of the village core be accelerated. · How will the affordable housing requirement be met The project review requirement has been included as a condition of approval. 5. Issues: Several policy and design issues remain unresolved between the project applicant and City staff These issues mainly relate to the provision of public facilities and phasing of SPA requirements. PCSRSPA2DOC I\.tarch 15, 1996 /""/,1 // Page 14, Item 2 Meeting Date: March 27, 1996 Village One Internal Circulation Issue: Should there be additional internal street access to the northern half of Village One? The B-2 Alternative plan for Village One provides just three connections to the northern half of Village One off Palomar Street. Two are at the large centrally located neighborhood park at the village core and the other is at the eastern end of Village One. City staff does not believe these streets provide sufficient access to the northern half of Village One. Recommendation: Condition the SPA One Plan to have two additional access points on Palomar Street at the western end between Neighborhood Areas R-2 and R-20 and in the middle of the project between R-8 and R-9. Gated Neighborhoods Issue: Should access to the single-family neighborhoods north of Palomar Street in Village One and Five be gated? The project applicant has modified their SPA One proposal to include eight gates at entrances into the single-family neighborhoods north of Palomar Street. These gates will restrict vehicular access but not public pedestrian, bicycle or electric cart access. They would not impede access to the multi-family sites or any of Village-wide services in SPA One such as the neighborhood parks, the elementary schools, the commercial areas in the village cores or the community purpose facility sites. The proposed gates would be staffed or electronically controlled and provide visitor lane with turn around and resident lane. Behind these proposed gates, streets and pedestrian parks would be privately maintained but constructed to City standards. Recommendation: Staff has prepared the Gated Communities Issue Paper to address the concerns raised over gating this large of a development. The conditions of approval require additional review of gate location and design. If the Planning Commission does not concur with concept of gating the neighborhoods this condition should be deleted. Pedestrian park credit Issue: Should SPA One receive 100% park land dedication credit for the 7.5 acres of pedestrian parks proposed in Alternative B-2? The project applicant has proposed pedestrian parks in each village ranging in size from pedestrian parks of .6 acres to 2. I acres. They believe that all of these parks should receive full park credit because the parks satisfy recreation needs of SPA One residents, and they implement the pedestrian friendly goals of the GDP. PCSRSPA2DOC March 15, J996 / /i Page 15, Item-2 Meeting Date: March 27, 1996 Other master-planned communities within the City have received 50% parkland credit for private parks within their communities. Staff believes the pedestrian parks satisfy part of the recreation needs of the residents but should not receive full credit. The Park and Recreation Commission agrees and recommended that the credit amount be determined by staff Subsequent to the Parks and Recreation Commission review, the project applicant proposed gating the single-family neighborhoods north of Palomar Street. The Policy Committee review the gate issue and determined that all facilities that do not have public vehicular access should be private. Therefore, under current City policies, the pedestrian parks are not eligible for park credit. Recommendation: All parks less than 5 acres in size are eligible to receive park fee credit. Park fee credit will range from a minimum of 25% to a maximum of 50% based on small park criteria that includes park size, location and facilities. These parks should not be maintained by the General Fund but by a homeowner's association or maintenance district. Parks in gated neighborhoods should not receive park credit. 6. Conclusion: City staff believes that the proposed SPA One Plan B-2 Alternative as conditioned implements the goals, objectives, and policies of the Otay Ranch GDP, and the PC Zone and recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council adoption of the SPA One Plan as conditioned. Attachments 1. Resolutions with Conditions of Approval 2. Board/Commission/Committee minutes 3. Disclosure Statement PCSRSPA2DOC :\1an.:n 15, 1996 . -1(/ //1 RESOLUTION PCM 95-01 RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THE OTAY RANCH SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) ONE PLAN, WHICH INCLUDES THE OVERALL DESIGN PLAN, VILLAGE DESIGN PLAN, PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCING PLAN AND SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS, PARKS, RECREATION, OPEN SPACE AND TRAILS MASTER PLAN, REGIONAL FACILITIES REPORT, PHASE 2 RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN AND SUPPORTING PLANS, NON- RENEWABLE ENERGY CONSERVATION PLAN, RANCH- WIDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PLAN, SPA ONE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PLAN AND THE GEOTECHNICAL RECONNAISSANCE REPORT WHEREAS, an application for adoption of the Otay Ranch Sectional Planning Area (SPA) One Plan, was filed with the City ofChula Vista Planning Department in July, 1994 by The Baldwin Company ("Applicant"), and; WHEREAS, the SPA One Plan project area includes all of Village Five and the portion of Village One east of Pas eo Ranchero. The SPA One Plan project area is comprised of approximately 1,061.2 acres ofland located south of Telegraph Canyon Road between Paseo Ranchero and the future alignment of SR-125 ("Project"). The area west of Pas eo Rancho has been excluded rrom this SPA One Plan due to the difficulty in master -planning a village with a major roadway, Paseo Ranchero, bisecting it. In addition, habitat in Village One, west of Pas eo Ranchero, needs further analysis, and; WHEREAS, a General Development Plan (GDP) amendment was required to process this SP A without the area west of Paseo Ranchero due to a requirement in the GDP that stated that all villages must be master-planned as a unit, and; WHEREAS, a GDP amendment was approved by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista on April 30, 1996, to allow the processing of this SPA without the area west of Pas eo Ranchero, and; WHEREAS, the SPA One Plan refines and implements the land plans, goals, objectives and policies of the Otay Ranch GDP as adopted by the Chula Vista City Council on October 28, 1993, and as amended on April 30, 1996, and; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission set the time and place for hearings on said Project and notice of said hearings, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City and its mailing to property owners and tenants within 1,000 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least 10 days prior to the hearing, and; WHEREAS, the hearings were held at the time and place as advertised on November 8, 1995 and November 15, 1995 in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning / /, ~. / , , ~ Planning Commission Sectional Planning Area One Page 2 Commission. Said hearings were continued to March 27, 1996 and April 10, 1996 by a motion of the Planning Commission at which time, said hearings were thereafter closed, and; WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has conducted a Second-tier Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) EIR 95-01 and a Recirculated Second-tier Draft EIR, and Findings of Fact and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program have been issued to address environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the Project, and; WHEREAS, this Second-tier EIR and the Recirculated EIR incorporates, by reference, two prior EIRs the Otay Ranch General Development Plan/Subregional Plan (GDP/SRP) EIR 90-01 and the Chula Vista Sphere ofInfluence Update EIR 94-03 as well as their associated Findings of Fact and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Program EIR 90-01 was certified by the Chula Vista City Council and San Diego County Board of Supervisors on October 28, 1993, and the Sphere of Influence Update EIR 94-03 was certified by the Chula Vista City Council on March 21, 1995, and; WHEREAS, to the extent that these findings conclude that proposed mitigation measures outlined in the Final ErR are feasible and have not been modified, superseded or withdrawn, the City of Chula Vista hereby binds itself and the Applicant and its successors in interest, to implement those measures. These findings are not merely informational or advisory, but constitute a binding set of obligations that will come into effect when the City adopts the resolution approving the Project The adopted mitigation measures are express conditions of approval. Other requirements are referenced in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program adopted concurrently with these Findings and will be effectuated through the process of implementing the Project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION hereby adopts Final Second-Tier Environmental Impact Report EIR 95-01. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION recommends that the City Council adopt the attached draft City Council Resolution approving the Project in accordance with the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the City Council. C:\PCM95 Ol.DOC /,1/ Planning Commission Sectional Planning Area One Page 3 PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA this Aprill 0, 1996 by the following vote, to wit AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: William C. Tuchscher ]] Chairman Nancy Ripley, Secretary Attachment: Draft City Council Resolution C:\PCM95_01.DOC ;/J'1 .< ' .;-( '-:.. - J RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AND IMPOSING CONDITIONS ON THE OTAY RANCH SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) ONE PLAN (pCM 95-01), WHICH INCLUDES THE OVERALL DESIGN PLAN, VILLAGE DESIGN PLAN, PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCING PLAN AND SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS, PARKS, RECREATION, OPEN SPACE AND TRAILS PLAN, REGIONAL FACILITIES REPORT, PHASE 2 RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN AND SUPPORTING PLANS, NON-RENEWABLE ENERGY CONSERVATION PLAN, RANCH-WIDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PLAN, SPA ONE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PLAN AND THE GEOTECHNICAL RECONNAISSANCE REPORT WHEREAS, an application for adoption of the Otay Ranch Sectional Planning Area (SPA) One Plan, was filed with the City ofChula Vista Planning Department in July, 1994 by The Baldwin Company ("Applicant"), and; WHEREAS, the SPA One Plan project area includes all of Village Five and the portion of Village One east of Pas eo Ranchero. The SPA One Plan project area is comprised of approximately 1,061.2 acres ofland located south of Telegraph Canyon Road between Paseo Ranchero and the future alignment of SR-125 ("Project"). The area west of Pas eo Rancho has been excluded from this SPA One Plan due to the difficulty in master-planning a village with a major roadway, Paseo Ranchero, bisecting it. In addition, habitat in Village One, west of Paseo Ranchero, needs further analysis, and; WHEREAS, a GDP amendment was required to process this SPA without the area west of Paseo Ranchero due to a requirement in the GDP that stated that all villages must be master-planned as a unit, and; WHEREAS, a GDP amendment was approved by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista on April 30, 1996, to allow SPA One to be processed without the area west of Pas eo Ranchero, and; WHEREAS, the SPA One Plan refines and implements the land plans, goals, objectives and policies of the Otay Ranch GDP as adopted by the Chula Vista City Council on October 28, 1993, and as amended on April 30, 1996, and; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission set the time and place for hearings on said Project and notice of said hearings, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City and its mailing to property owners and tenants within 1,000 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least 10 days prior to the hearing, and; WHEREAS, the hearings were held at the time and place as advertised on November 8, 1995 and November 15, 1995 in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning /J3 Resolution No. Page 2 Commission. Said hearings were continued to March 27, 1996 and April 10, 1996 by a motion of the Planning Commission at which time, said hearings were thereafter closed, and; WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has conducted a Second-tier Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) EIR 95-0 I and a Recirculated Second-tier Draft ErR, and findings of Fact and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program have been issued to address environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the Project, and; WHEREAS, this Second-tier EIR and the Recirculated EIR incorporates, by reference, two prior EIRs the Otay Ranch General Development Plan/Subregional Plan (GDP/SRP) EIR 90-01 and the Chula Vista Sphere oflnfluence Update EIR 94-03 as well as their associated Findings of Fact and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Program EIR 90-01 was certified by the Chula Vista City Council and San Diego County Board of Supervisors on October 28, 1993, and the Sphere of Influence Update EIR 94-03 was certified by the Chula Vista City Council on March 21, 1995, and; WHEREAS, to the extent that these findings conclude that proposed mitigation measures outlined in the Final EIR are feasible and have not been modified, superseded or withdrawn, the City of Chula Vista hereby binds itself and the Applicant and its successors in interest, to implement those measures. These findings are not merely informational or advisory, but constitute a binding set of obligations that will come into effect when the City adopts this resolution approving the Project. The adopted mitigation measures are express conditions of approval. Other requirements are referenced in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program adopted concurrently with these Findings and will be effectuated through the process of implementing the Project, and; WHEREAS, a public hearing was scheduled before the City Council of the City of Chula Vista on the SPA One, which includes the Overall Design Plan, Village Design Plan, Public Facilities financing Plan and supporting documents, Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan, Regional Facilities Report, Phase 2 Resource Management Plan and supporting plans, Non-Renewable Energy Conservation Plan, Ranch-Wide Affordable Housing Plan, SPA One Affordable Housing Plan and the Geotechnical Reconnaissance Report. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Chula Vista does hereby find, determine, resolve and order as follows: L PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD The proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning Commission at their public hearings on the Draft EIR and the Recirculated EIR held on November 8, 1995, November 15, 1995 and March 27, 1996, their public hearings held on this Project on November 15, 1995, March 27, 1996 and April 10, 1996 and the minutes and resolutions resulting thererrom, are hereby incorporated into the record of this proceeding. These documents, along with any C:\PCM95_01.DOC /"" -< / / -, '--'" .' Resolution No. Page 3 documents submitted to the decision makers, shall comprise the entire record of the proceedings for any California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) claims. II. CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA That the City Council does hereby find that FEIR 95-01, the Findings of Fact, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and the Statement of Overriding Considerations are prepared in accordance with the requirements of the CEQA, the State EIR Guidelines and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City ofChuIa Vista. lII. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL The City Council does hereby approve SPA One and associated documents subject to the following attached conditions (Attachment D). IV. CONSISTENCY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN The proposed Project is consistent with the General Plan for the following reasons: A. THE PROPOSED SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA PLAN IS IN CONFORMITY WITH THE OTAY RANCH GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND THE CHULA VISTA GENERAL PLAN. The Otay Ranch Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan reflects the land uses, circulation system, open space and recreational uses, and public facility uses consistent with the Otay Ranch General Development Plan and Chula Vista General Plan. B. THE PROPOSED SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA PLAN WILL PROMOTE THE ORDERLY SEQUENTIALIZED DEVELOPMENT OF THE INVOLVED SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA. The SPA One Plan and Public Facilities Financing Plan contain proVIsIons and requirements to ensure the orderly, phased development of the project. The Public Facilities Financing Plan specifies the public facilities required by Otay Ranch, and also the regional facilities needed to serve it. C. THE PROPOSED SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA PLAN WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT ADJACENT LAND USE, RESIDENTIAL ENJOYMENT, CIRCULATION OR ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY. The land uses within Otay Ranch are designed with a grade-separated open space buffer adjacent to other existing projects, and future developments off-site and within C:\PCM95_01.DOC /JS- Resolution No. Page 4 the Otay Ranch Planning Area One, four neighborhood parks will be located within the SPA One area to serve the project residents, and the project will provide a wide range of housing types for all economic levels. A comprehensive street network serves the project and provides for access to off-site adjacent properties. The proposed plan closely follows all existing environmental protection guidelines and will avoid unacceptable off-site impacts through the provision of mitigation measures specified in the Otay Ranch Environmental Impact Report. V. CEQA FINDINGS OF FACT, MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS A Adoption of Findings of Fact The City Council does hereby approve, accept as its own, incorporate as if set forth in full herein, and make each and every one of the findings contained in the Findings of Fact, Attachment "A" of this Resolution known as document number _, a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk. B. Certain Mitigation Measures Feasible and Adopted As more fully identified and set forth in FEIR 95-01 and in the Findings of Fact for this project, which is Attachment "A" to this Resolution known as document number --' a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk, the City Council hereby finds pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 that the mitigation measures described in the above referenced documents are feasible and binds itself and the Applicant and its successors in interest, to implement those measures. C. Infeasibility of Mitigation Measures As more fully identified and set forth in FEIR 95-0 I and in the Findings of Fact for this project, which is Attachment "A" to this Resolution known as document number --' a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk, the mitigation measure regarding habitat noise mitigation described in the above referenced documents is infeasible. D. Infeasibility of Alternatives As more fully identified and set forth in FEIR 95-01 and in the Findings of Fact, Section XI, for this project, which is Attachment "A" to this Resolution known as document number --' a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk, the City Council hereby finds pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081 and C:\PCM95_0I.DOC //i / ..< f ,~ . v- '--- Resolution No. Page 5 CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 that alternatives to the project, which were identified as potentially feasible in FEIR 95-0 I were found not to be feasible. E. Adoption of Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program As required by the Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, City Council hereby adopts Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ("Program") set forth in Attachment "B" of this Resolution known as document number ~ a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk. The City Council hereby finds that the Program is designed to ensure that, during project implementation, the permittee/project applicant and any other responsible parties and the successors in interest implement the project components and comply with the feasible mitigation measures identified in the Findings of Fact and the Program. F. Statement of Overriding Consideration Even after the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures and any feasible alternatives, certain significant or potentially significant environmental effects caused by the project, or cumulatively, will remain. Therefore, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista hereby issues, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, a Statement of Overriding Considerations in the form set forth in Attachment "C", known as document number ~ a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk, identifying the specific economic, social and other considerations that render the unavoidable significant adverse environmental effects acceptable. VI. NOTICE OF DETERMINATION That the Environmental Review Coordinator of the City of Chula Vista is directed after City Council approval of this Project to ensure that a Notice of Determination filed with the County Clerk of the County of San Diego. This document along with any documents submitted to the decision makers shall comprise the record of proceedings for any CEQA claims. VII. ATTACHMENTS All attachments and exhibits are incorporated herein by reference as set forth in full. C:\PCM95 _0 I.DOC /,]l Resolution No Page 6 PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City ofChula Vista, California, this April 30, 1996, by the following vote: YES NOES ABSENT Shirley Horton, Mayor ATTEST Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO) ss. CITY OF CHULA VISTA) I, Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista, California, do hereby certiJY that the foregoing Resolution No. _ was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council at a City Council meeting held on the 30th day of April, 1996. Executed this 30th day of April, 1996. Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk Attachments: Attachment A: Findings of Fact Attachment B: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Attachment C: Statement of Overriding Considerations Attachment D: Conditions of Approval C:\PCM95 _0 1 DOC / :?/J~ ...-6 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR OTA Y RANCH SPA ONE I. GENERAL PROVISIONS. a) All of the terms, covenants and conditions contained herein shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs, successors, assigns and representatives of the Developer as to any or all of the Property For purposes oftrus document the term "Developer" shall also mean "Applicant" b) If any of the terms, covenants or conditions contained herein shall fail to occur or if they are, by their terms, to be implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail to be so implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have the right to revoke or modify all approvals herein granted, deny, or further condition the subsequent approvals that are derived !Tom the approvals herein granted, institute and prosecute litigation to compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their violation. c) Applicant shall indemnify, protect, defend and hold the City harmless !Tom and against any and all claims, liabilities and costs, including attorney's fees, arising !Tom challenges to the Environmental Impact Report for the Project and/or any or all entitlements and approvals issued by the City in connection with the project II. ENVIRONMENTAL a) The applicant shall implement all mitigation measures identified in EIR 95-0 I, the Candidate CEQA Findings for this project (Exhibit --.J and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Exhibit --.J b) The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Phase 2 Resource Management Plan (RMP) as approved by City Council on III. DESIGN a) The applicant shall provide a residential alley product, as such product is defined in the Village Design Plan, within Phase Two of Village Five as shown on the SPA One phasing plan and a future phase of Village One. b) The City Council may approve the construction of gated community projects within Villages One and Five if the City Council finds all of the following: a.) The continuity of public trails, as indicated on the Trails Plan, will be maintained, and b) Public pedestrian, bicycle and electric cart access will be maintained within the gated project, and c) The gated project will not have an adverse effect upon public infTastructure. The decision to approve or deny the construction of a gated community is discretionary to the City CounciL Any proposal for a gated community project shall be submitted for City Council consideration at the tentative map stage for that project. ATTACHMENT D /57 rc\'ised conditIons ~Iarch 13. 1996 IV. STREET, RIGHT-OF-WAY AND IMPROVEMENTS a) Prior to the approval of the first tentative map, the Applicant shall submit for review and approval by the City's Transit Coordinator and Planning Director, a plan which shows the design and construction details of the transit stops and the completion dates for such stops. b) Residential street parkways shall be no less than six feet in width. The Applicant shall plant trees within said parkways which have been selected ITom the list of appropriate tree species described in the Village Design Plan and approved by the Directors of Planning, Parks and Recreation and Public Works. The Applicant shall provide root barriers and deep watering irrigation systems for the trees. An irrigation system shall be provided ITom each individual lot to the adjacent parkway. As a condition of approval of the first tentative map, the Applicant shall be required to submit Improvement Plans for the residential street parkways for review and approval by the City Engineer, Directors of Parks and Recreation and Planning. c) The segment of the north/south vehicular road ITom Telegraph Canyon Road to the first residential street intersection within Village One (located between Buena Vista Way and Apache Drive) ("Temporary Roadway") shall be open for public use only until such time as a road ITom Village One to Orange Avenue is approved by the City Engineer to carry vehicular traffic. The Temporary Roadway shall be designed and constructed to City standards and the Otay Ranch SPA One standards The Applicant shall be responsible, at its sole cost and expense, for the removal and restoration of the Temporary Roadway at the request of the City Engineer Subsequent to removal of the roadway, said roadway shall be regraded and reconstructed to be consistent with the streetscape of Telegraph Canyon Road, as directed by the City Engineer The applicant shall install signs, as directed by the City Engineer, indicating that the Temporary Roadway shall be closed once the permanent road is opened for public use. Notice shall be provided in any residential sales disclosure documents that the Temporary Roadway will be closed to vehicular traffic when access to East Orange Avenue is provided. d) Street cross sections shall conform to those standards contained in the SPA One Plan. All other design criteria shall conform to the design standards contained in the document entitled Street Design Standards and the Subdivision Manual both as amended by the City from time to time, ("City Design Standards"). Any proposed variation from the City Design Standards which are not addressed in the SPA Plan shall be approved by the City and indicated on the appropriate tentative subdivision map. The following table indicates the relationship between the Otay Ranch SPA One roadway designations (i.e., cross sections) and the approved City designations in the Circulation Element of the General Plan for purposes of determining the appropriate design standards for all streets within SPA One. 2 /f/C revised conditions \!arch 1.1. ] 996 COMP ARISON OF OT A Y RANCH STREET CLASSIFICATIONS TO CITY STREET CLASSIFICATIONS FOR DETERMINATION OF DESIGN STANDARDS TO BE UTILIZED IN TENTATIVE MAP AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN PREPARATION FOR OT A Y RANCH USE DESIGN STANDARDS FOR CITY CLASSIFICATION OF STREET CLASSIFICATION OF SCENIC CORRIDOR PRIME ARTERIAL PRIME ARTERIAL PRIME ARTERIAL PRIMARY VILLAGE ENTRY CLASS I COLLECTOR SECONDARY VILLAGE ENTRY CLASS II COLLECTOR VILLAGE CORE CLASS I COLLECTOR RESIDENTIAL PROMENADE CLASS III COLLECTOR CORE PROMENADE RESIDENTIAL VILLAGE MAIN RESIDENTIAL VILLAGE PLAZA RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL A and B RESIDENTIAL ALLEY ALLEY STANDARDS e) The applicant shall provide two north/south residential promenade streets, defined in the Village Design Plan, within Village One. The western most street shall be located between the R-2 and R-20 residential parcels identified on the land use map approved with SPA One and shall connect with the first residential street The eastern most street shall align with the temporary roadway which connects 3 /::.// / ." rC\"ISCU conditions \larch ! 3, 1996 with Telegraph Canyon Road. Said streets shall be designed and constructed in accordance \vith the City Design Standards and the Otay Ranch SPA One standards for residential promenade streets. f) As directed by the Director of Planning and the City Engineer, the applicant shall construct a pedestrian bridge connecting Village One to Village Five at the vicinity of Palomar Street crossing over La Media Road. The timing of the construction of said bridge shall be determined by the City at the time of approval of the first tentative map. The applicant shall be solely responsible for the construction of said bridge. g) In addition to the pedestrian bridge described above, the Spa One Plan provides for the construction of a pedestrian bridge connecting Village One to Village Two and a pedestrian bridge connecting Village Five to Village Six. The applicant shall agree to fund half of the cost of constructing the two pedestrian bridges at the time of approval of the first final map. As a condition of approval of the first tentative map, the Applicant shall be required to enter into an af,'Teement with the City to fund half of the cost of construction of the two pedestrian bridges and to identify the mechanism to be used to fund said cost. h) The applicant shaH provide a conceptual design of the traffic circles delineated on the SP ^ Onc Plan for review and approval by the City Engineer and Planning Dircctor prior to approval of thc first tentative map. i) In the event the Federal Government adopts ADA standards for street rights of way which are in conflict with the standards and approvals contained herein, all such approvals conflicting with those standards shall be updated to reflect those standards. Unless otherwise provided for in the future ADA ref,'Ulations, City standards approved herein may be considered vested, as determincd by Federal ref,'Ulations, only after construction has commenced. V. GRADING AND DRAINAGE a) The applicant shall comply with all provisions of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and Clean Water Program. b) The quantity of runoff ITom the development shall be reduced to an amount equal to or less than present 100-year ITequency storm. Retention/detention facilities will be required as approved by the Director of Public Works to reduce the quantity of runoff to an amount equal to or less than predevelopment flows Said retention/detention facilities shall be provided by the applicant c) The applicant shall provide drainage improvements in both Telegraph Canyon and Poggi Canyon in accordance with the Master Drainage Plan for Otay Ranch SPA One, Villages One and Five by the Director of Public Works. Said Master Plan shall be consistent with the approved SPA Plan. VI. PUBLIC UTILITIES (SEWER, WATER, RECLAIMED WATER, WATER CONSERVATION) 4 /7/ ... - revised conditions .\Ian:h ] 3, 1996 a) The Applicant shall provide water and reclaimed water improvements in accordance with the report entitled Sub Area Master Plan for Otay Ranch Villages One and Five Sectional Planning Area One ("SAMP") prepared by Montgomery-Watson dated June 1995 or as amended by the applicant and approved by Otay Water District The SAMP shall be consistent with the SPA Plan. The Applicant shall be responsible for obtaining the approval of any amendment to the SPA One SAMP in order for the SPA One SAMP to be consistent with the approved SPA Plan prior to the approval of the first final map b) The applicant shall pay fees in accordance with the City of Chula Vista ordinance or provide trunk sewer improvements to both the Teleh'Taph Canyon and Poggi Canyon trunk sewers as indicated in the report entitled "Overview of Sewer Service for SPA One at the Otay Ranch Project" (SPA One Sewer Report) prepared by Wilson Engineering dated June] 5, 1995 or as amended by the applicant and approved by the Director of Public Works. The SPA One Sewer Report shall be consistent with the approved SPA Plan. The Applicant shall be responsible for obtaining the approval of anv amendment to the SPA One Sewer Report in order for the SPA One Sewer Report to be consistcnt with the approved SPA Plan prior to the approval of the first final map VII. PARKS/OPEN SPACEIWILDLlFE PRESERVATION A) General I.. The SPA One project shall satisfy the requirements of the Park Land Dedication Ordinance (PLDO). The ordinance establishes a requirement that the project provide three (3) acres of local parks and related improvements per 1,000 residents. Local parks are comprised of community parks, neighborhood parks and pedestrian parks (to the extent that pedestrian parks receive partial park credit as defined below). A minimum of two thirds (2 acres 11,000 residents) of the local park requirement shall be satisfied through the provision of turn-key neighborhood and pedestrian parks within SPA One. The remaining requirement (I acre/l,OOO residents) shall be satisfied through the payment of fees. 2. All local parks shall be consistent with the SPA One PFFP and shall be installed by the applicant. A construction schedule, requiring all parks to be completed in a timely manner, shall be approved by the City. 3. All local parks shall be designed and constructed consistent with the provisions of the Chula Vista Landscape Manual and related Parks and Recreation Department specifications and policies. 4. The applicant shall coordinate consultant selection with the City. The consultant selected for all park design shall be acceptable to the City. 5. Parks located within gated communities shall not receive park credit 5 /' / ~ ,/ ~, "'-- ,- revised conditions ~farch ] 3, 1996 6 The applicant shall receive surplus park credit to the extent the combined park credit for neighborhood parks, pedestrian parks, the town square park and the community park exceeds the 3 acres per 1,000 residents standard. This surplus park credit may be utilized by the applicant to satisfy local park requirements in future SPAs. B.) Pedestrian Parks Pedestrian parks less than five acres, as identified in the SPA One plan, shall be maintained by a funding entity other than the City's General Fund Pedestrian parks shall receive a minimum of 25% and a maximum of 50% park credit, as determined by the Director of Parks and Recreation pursuant to City wide small park credit criteria to be determined by the City of Chula Vista. C) Neighborhood Parks The applicant shall pay PAD fees based on a formula of2 acres per 1,000 residents for the first 500 dwelling units. The applicant shall commence construction of the first neighborhood park in SPA Onc, in a location determined by the Parks and Recreation Director, no later than issuancc of the building permit for the SOOth dwelling unit. The level of amenities required in the first phase of construction of the first neighborhood park shall be determined by the City in conjunction with the park master planning effort required by the City of Chula Vista Landscape ManuaL Said level of amenities shall be equivalent to five acrcs of neighborhood park improvements as described in the PLDO ordinance and the Park Master Plan as approved by the Parks and Recreation Director Prior to issuance of the building permit for the 1150th dwelling unit, the Director of Parks and Recreation shall determine the level of amenities required for the second phase of construction of this park consistent with the PLDO and the Park Master Plan, or in lieu of the second phase, require the construction of another neighborhood park at a different location The location of the other neighborhood park, if any, shall be determined in conjunction with the phasing study noted below. At no time after issuance of building permits for the SOOth dwelling unit shall there be a deficit in constructed neighborhood park acreage based upon 2 acres/!, 000 residents. The applicant shall provide a maintenance period in accordance with the City of Chula Vista Landscape ManuaL The 1.7 acre Town Square in Village Five shall receive 100% neighborhood park credit if constructed consistent with the criteria contained in the General Development Plan and if improvements constructed within the Town Square receive the approval of the Director of Parks and Recreation. 6 /f/ ;;/ rcvised conditions \Iarch lJ. 1996 The 7.3 acre neighborhood park (P-2) currently indicated in Village One south of Palomar Street on the SPA plan shall be relocated easterly within Neighborhood R-12. The applicant shall receive reimbursement of PAD fees should they deliver a turn-key facility to the City in accordance with the Parks Master Plan. D.) Communitv Parks The applicant shall pay PAD fees for the Community Park based upon a formula of I acre per 1,000 residents, until such time as a turn-key facility has been accepted by the City. Said turn- key facility is subject to the reimbursement mechanism set forth below The first Otay Ranch Community Park, to satisfy SPA One demand, shall be located in Village 2 as identified in the GDP The applicant shall identify the relocation, if any, of the Village 2 Otay Ranch Community Park prior to issuance of the building permit for the I, 150th dwelling unit. Said relocation may require an amendment to the Otay Ranch General Development Plan. The applicant shall commence construction of the first phase of the Community Park prior to issuance of the building permit for the 2,650th dwelling unit. The applicant shall commence construction of the second phase of the Community Park prior to issuance of the building permit for the 3,000th dwelling unit. Second phase improvements shall include recreational amenities as identified in the Park Master Plan. The Community Park shall be ready for acceptance by the City for maintenance prior to issuance of the building permit issuance for the 3,900th dwelling unit. If the City determines that it is not feasible for the applicant to commence construction of the first phase improvements of the community park at this time, then the City shall have the option to utilize the PAD fees for said improvements, or to construct another park or facility, east of the I-80S Freeway within an acceptable service radius of SPA One, as set forth in the GDP. The first phase of construction shall include, but not be limited to, improvements such as a graded site with utilities provided to the property line and an all weather access road acceptable to the Fire Department. The applicant shall provide a maintenance period in accordance with the City of Chula Vista Landscape Manual. The applicant shall receive reimbursement of PAD fees should they deliver a turn-key facility to the City in accordance with the Parks Master Plan 7 /t(S- revised conditions \Iarch 13. 1996 E.) Trails The first tentative map shall not be approved until the SPA One Open Space Master Plan is approved by the Director of Parks and Recreation The Open Space Master Plan shall address final recreational trail alignments and phasing All trails shall connect to adjoining existing trails in neighboring development projects to the extent feasible, as feasible is determined by the Director of Parks and Recreation F) Community Gardens Community gardens shall be consistent with the guidelines in the SPA One Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Master Plan, including creation of the Community Garden Committee and their responsibilities. Water lines shall be stubbed from the nearcst water main to the site(s) in order to facilitate development of the Community Gardens. Maintcnance of Community Gardens shall be funded by an Open Spacc Maintcnance District, Home Owner's Association or other funding mechanism approved by the City Community Gardens shall not receive park credit 3) Open Space The applicant shall prepare a study to determine the feasibility of establishing a master open space district under the 1972 Lighting and Landscape Act for the Otay Valley Parcel of Otay Ranch Said feasibility study shall be approved by the Directors of Parks and Recreation and Public Works prior to approval the first tentative map. If applicable, an Open Space District shall be formed prior to approval of the first final map. VIII. AGREEMENTS/FINANCIAL a) The applicant shall install Chula Vista Transit facilities, which may include but not be limited to benches and bus shelters, in accordance with the improvement plans approved by the City. Since transit service availability may not coincide with project development, the applicant shall install said improvements when directed by the City. The applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City to fund these facilities The requirement for said agreement will be made a condition of the first tentative map. b) The applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City of Chula Vista, prior to approval of the first tentative map regarding the provision of affordable housing. Such agreement shall be in accordance with the Chula Vista Housing Element, the Ranch Wide Affordable Housing Plan and the SP A One Affordable Housing Plan 8 /4/i rC\'ISl'd <.:onditions \larch ] 3. ] 9% c) No final maps may be recorded within SPA One until such time that an annexable Mello Roos District, or some other financing mechanism approved by the school district, to provide for the construction of needcd elementary, middlc and high schools is establishcd d) The applicant shall participatc financially in proportion to other developers in a collaborative study analyzing local park needs for the area east of the 1-805 Freeway prior to approval of the first final map e) The applicant shall prepare a design study to determine the feasibility of providing gradc separated intersections for East Orange Avenue at Paseo Ranchero and Telegraph Canyon Road at Otay Lakcs Road. Said study shall be approved by the City Engincer prior to approval of any tentative map for SPA One. t) The applicant shall enter into an agreemcnt with the City ofChula Vista to participatc. on a fair sharc basis, in any dcficiency plan or financial program adopted by SANDAG to comply with the Congestion Management Program (CMP) prior to approval of thc first final map within SP ^ Onc. g) The applicant shall be required to equitably participatc in any future regional impact fec program for correctional facilities should the region enact such a fee program to assist in the construction of such facilities. The applicant shall cnter into an agrecment with the City which states that the applicant will not protest the formation of any potential future regional benefit assessment district formed to finance correctional facilities. h) In order to satisfy their fair-share contribution for financing the light rail transit system, thc applicant shall complete the following: I.) dedicate to the City the Light Rail Transit (LRT) right-of- way on the final map containing said right-of-way, as indicated on the approved tentative map; 2) rough grade said LRT alignment; and 3) enter into an agreement with the City which states that the applicant will not protest the formation of any potential future regional benefit assessment district formcd to finance the LRT i) A reserve fund program shall be established in accordance with the Otay Ranch General Development Plan which requires that a reserve funding program be established concurrent with the approval of the first SPAThe Applicant understands that the City and County are in the process of negotiating a Master Property Tax Agreement regarding portions of the Otay Ranch which may have an impact on the reserve funding program Applicant understands and agrees that further details of the reserve funding program shall therefore be established by the City in conjunction with final approval of thc Property Tax Agreement In accordance with the Otay Ranch General Development Plan requirements, the applicant shall fund the annual fiscal reviews, conducted by the City or under the City's supervision, to evaluate the fiscal impact of the project As part of the annual review, the assumptions and inputs used in the Fiscal Impact for New Development (FIND) Model shall be evaluated, including land use types, density and 9 rc\"iscd conditions \Iarch 13. 1996 timing, factors affecting cost and revenue estimates, allocation of local, regional, state and federal funds, and any other factors deemed relevant by the City Manager The annual fiscal review will determine the need for transfers ITom the applicant reserve fund to the City in order to assure that the GDP policies are fulfilled, particularly that all City services provided to the incorporated portion of Otay Ranch, including direct and indirect costs, and including capital and operating costs, shall be covered by project revenues and projcct exactions. Prior to the approval of the first tentative map the applicant shall fund the Reserve Fund in an amount determined by the City, or at the election of the City, agree to fund the Reserve Fund, to offsct any annual operating deficit incurrcd by the City that is not covered by the Property Tax Agreemcnt in ordcr to assure that the GDP/SRP policies, as described above, are fulfilled. IX. SCHOOLS a) Thc applicant shall deliver to the School District a graded high school sitc including utilities provided to the site and an all weather access road acceptable to the District prior to issuance of thc 2,650th building permit (504 students). The all weather access road shall also be acceptable to the Fire Department. This schedule is subject to modification by the School District as based on District facility needs. b) The applicant shall deliver to the School District, a graded elementary school site including utilities provided to the site and an all weather access road acceptable to the District, located within Village One, prior to issuance of the SOOth residential building permit ( 150 students). The all weather access road shall also be acceptable to the Fire Department. This schedule is subject to modification by the School District as based on District facility needs. c) The applicant shall deliver to the School District, a graded elementary school site including utilities provided to the site and an all weather access road acceptable to the District, located within Village Five, prior to issuance of the 2,500th residential building permit (750 students). The all weather access road shall also be acceptable to the Fire Department. This schedule is subject to modification by the School District as based on District facility needs. d) The applicant shall deliver to the School District, a graded elementary school site including utilities provided to the site and an all weather access road acceptable to the District, located west of Pasco Ranchero, prior to issuance of the 4,500th residential building permit (1350 students) The all weather access road shall also be acceptable to the Fire Department. This schedule is subject to modification by the School District as based on District facility needs. X. MISCELLANEOUS 10 ., /(.../ revised conditions \.1arch ]3. 1996 a) The applicant may file a master final map which provides for the sale of super block lots corresponding to the units and phasing or combination of units and phasing thereof: If said super block lots do not show individual lots depicted on the approved tentative map, a subsequent final map shall be filed for any lot which \vill be further subdivided All super block lots created shall have access to a dedicated public street The applicant shall post bonds to secure the installation of improvements in the amounts determined by the City Engineer prior to approval of a master final map. Said master final map shall not be considered the first final map as indicated in other conditions of approval unless said map contains single or condominium multiple family lots shown on a tentative map. b) The applicant shall comply with all requirements and ),'1Jidelines of the Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan, Public Facilities Finance Plan, Ranch Wide Affordable Housing Plan, SPA One Affordable Housing Plan and the Non-Renewable Ener),'Y Conservation Plan, unless specifically modified by the appropriate department head, with the approval of the City Manager c) Approval of the Otay Ranch SPA One does not constitute approval of the final lot confi),'1Jration, grading and street design shown within the SPA Plan d) The applicant shall secure approval of a Master Precise Plan for the Village One and Village Five Core Areas, prior to submitting any development proposals for commercial, multi-family and Community Purpose Facility areas within the SPA One Village Cores e) The applicant shall fund the revision of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee (PFDIF) Program, which shall be prepared by the City, as directed by the City Manager or his designee and approved by the City Council prior to approval of the first final map within SPA One. Said requirement shall be made a condition of approval of the first tentative map. The applicant shall receive 100% credit towards future PFDIF for funding this update. f) Pursuant to the provisions of the Growth Management Ordinance and the Otay Ranch General Development Plan (GDP), the applicant shall fund the preparation of an annual report monitoring the development of the community of Otay Ranch. The annual monitoring report will analyze the supply of, and demand for, public facilities and services governed by the threshold standards. An annual review shall commence following the first fiscal year in which residential occupancy occurs and is to be completed during the second quarter of the following fiscal year. The annual report shall adhere to those guidelines noted on page 353, Section D of the GDP/SRP. g) The applicant shall include maintenance of Telegraph Canyon channel east of Paseo Ladera in any open space district formed for SPA One on a fair share basis. This includes but is not limited to costs of maintenance and all costs to comply with the Department ofFish and Game and the Corps of Engineers permit requirements. 11 , /1/ /~ I / /1 -/ / .u' / , . rc\'isd conditions \Lm;b 13. 1996 Xl. PIL.\SING a) Pursuant to the provisions of the Gro"1h Management Ordinance and the Otay Ranch GDP. thc applicant shall prepare a five year development phasing forecast identifying targeted submittal dates for future discretionary applications (SPAs and tentative maps), projected construction dates. corresponding public facility needs per the adopted threshold standards, and identifying financint! options for necessary facilities b) The applicant acknowledges that the Otay Ranch General Development Plan is based on a village concept that provides for the construction of multi-family homes and commercial uses along with single family residential homes within SPA One The City has allowed the early phases of the project to consist almost exclusively of single family detached neighborhoods due to current market conditions However the applicant understands that it is the City's intent to require the applicant to focus development on only one of the SPA One village cores in order to increase the viability of the core and to fulfill the objectives of the Otay Ranch General Development Plan. In order to facilitate this objective, the applicant shall prepare a project phasing update to determine which of the two villages the applicant will concentrate development in. The phasing study shall provide for the following: 1) access to the high school site, community park site and neighborhood park which is economically and physically feasible; 2) establishment of a residential phasing program to complement the east-west access selection (East Palomar Street or East Orange Avenue); 3) identify the village that will be the focus of accelerated development; 4.) consideration of market conditions, product absorption and location of appropriate product to meet demand, 5) limitation of public services in the village which is not the focus of accelerated development and, 6) provision for affordable housing opportunities as identified in the approved Affordable Housing Plan. The study shall be undertaken prior to issuance of the 1 1 50th building permit and shall be approved by the Planning Director and City Engineer prior to the issuance of the 1,401 st building permit As a condition of approval of the first tentative map, the Applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City in which the applicant agrees to implement the results of said study as determined by the City Council If the applicant fails to implement the results of the study as directed by City Council, the City Council may take such actions as it deems necessary, including but not limited to withholding building permits c) Phasing approved within the SPA Plan may be amended subject to approval by the Planning Director and the City Engineer d) The Public Facilities Finance Plan shall be adhered to with improvements installed in accordance with said plan or as required to meet threshold standards adopted by the City of Chula Vista. In addition, the sequence in which improvements are constructed shall correspond to any future Eastern Chula Vista Transportation Phasing Plan adopted 'by the City The City Engineer may modify the sequence of improvement construction should conditions change to warrant such a revision. 12 '--' rcvlsed conditions \la.rch 13. 1996 XII. CODE REQUIREMENTS a) The applicant shall comply with all applicable sections of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. Preparation of the Final Map and all plans shall be in accordance with the provisions of the Subdi\ision Map Act and the City ofChula Vista Subdivision Ordinance and Subdivision ManuaL b) The applicant shall comply with all aspects of the City ofChula Vista Landscape Manual c) The applicant shall comply with Chapter 1909 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code (Growth Management) as may be amended ITom time to time by the City Said chapter includes but is not limited to threshold standards (19.0904), public facilities finance plan implementation (19.09090), and public facilities finance plan amendment procedures (19.09100) d) The applicant shall pay reimbursement associated with undergrounding of utilities in accordance with the City ofChula Vista Resolution 17516 dated June 7, 1994. e) The applicant shall comply with City Council Policy 570-03 adopted by Resolution 17491 if pump stations for sewer purposes are proposed f) The applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City, prior to approval of a final map for any phase or unit, whereby 1) The applicant agrees that the City may \vithhold building permits for any units in the subject subdivision if any one of the following occurs: a Regional development threshold limits set by the adopted East Chula Vista Transportation Phasing Plan in effect at the time of final map approval have been reached. b. Traffic volumes, level of service, public utilities and/or services exceed the threshold standards in the then effective Growth Management Ordinance. 2) The applicant agrees that the City may withhold building permits for any of the phases of development identified in the Public Facilities Financing Plan (pFFP) for Otay Ranch SPA One if the required public facilities, as identified in the PFFP or as amended by the Annual Monitoring Program have not been completed. 13 /-- , / ,~ / '-" RESOLUTION PCM 95-01B RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THE OT A Y RANCH SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) ONE PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS WHEREAS, an application for adoption of the Otay Ranch Sectional Planning Area (SPA) One Plan, was filed with the City of Chula Vista Planning Department in July, 1994 by The Baldwin Company ("Applicant"), and; WHEREAS, the Otay Ranch SPA One Planned Community District Regulations are intended to ensure that the SPA One Plan is prepared in accordance with the Otay Ranch General Development Plan (GDP), to implement the City ofChula Vista General Plan for the Eastern Territories, to promote the orderly planning and long term phased development of the Otay Ranch General Development Plan and to establish conditions which will enable the Otay Ranch SPA One to exist in harmony within the community ("Project"), and; WHEREAS, these Planned Community District Regulations are established pursuant to Title 19 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, specifically Chapter 19.48 PC Planned Community Zone, and are applicable to the Otay Ranch SPA One Land Use Plan ofthe SPA One Plan, and; WHEREAS, the SPA One Plan project area includes all of Village Five and the portion of Village One east of Pas eo Ranchero. The SPA One Plan project area is comprised of approximately 1,061.2 acres of land located south of Telegraph Canyon Road between Paseo Ranchero and the future alignment of SR-125. The area west of Paseo Rancho has been excluded from the SPA One Plan due to the difficulty in master-planning a village with a major roadway, Paseo Ranchero, bisecting it. In addition, habitat in Village One, west of Pas eo Ranchero, needs further analysis, and; WHEREAS, a GDP amendment was required to process this SPA without the area west of Paseo Ranchero due to a requirement in the GDP that stated that all villages must be master-planned as a unit, and; WHEREAS, a GDP amendment was approved by the City Council of the City ofChula Vista on April 30, 1996, to allow the processing of this SPA without the area west of Pas eo Ranchero, and; WHEREAS, the SPA One Plan refines and implements the land plans, goals, objectives and policies of the Otay Ranch GDP as adopted by the Chula Vista City Council on October 28, 1993, and as amended on April 30, 1996, and; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission set the time and place for hearings on said Project and notice of said hearings, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City and its mailing to property owners and tenants within 1,000 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least 10 days prior to the hearing, and; - --' Planning Commission SP A One PC District Regulations Page 2 WHEREAS, the hearings were held at the time and place as advertised on November 8, 1995 and November IS, 1995 in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission. Said hearings were continued to March 27, 1996 and April 10, 1996 by a motion of the Planning Commission at which time, said hearings were thereafter closed, and; WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has conducted a Second-tier Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) EIR 95-0 I and a Recirculated Second-tier Draft ErR, and Findings of Fact and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program have been issued to address environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the Project, and; WHEREAS, this Second-tier EIR and the Recirculated ElR incorporates, by reference, two prior EIRs the Otay Ranch General Development Plan/Subregional Plan (GDP/SRP) ElR 90-01 and the Chula Vista Sphere ofInfluence Update ElR 94-03 as well as their associated Findings of Fact and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Program EIR 90-0 I was certified by the Chula Vista City Council and San Diego County Board of Supervisors on October 28, 1993, and thc Sphcre of Influence Update EIR 94-03 was certified by the Chula Vista City Council on March 21, 1995, and; WHEREAS, to the extent that these findings conclude that proposed mitigation measures outlined in the Final EIR are feasible and have not been modified, superseded or withdrawn, the City of Chula Vista hereby binds itself and the Applicant and its successors in interest, to implement those measures. These findings are not merely informational or advisory, but constitute a binding set of obligations that will come into effect when the City adopts the ordinance approving the Project The adopted mitigation measures are express conditions of approval. Other requirements are referenced in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program adopted concurrently with these Findings and will be effectuated through the process of implementing the Project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION hereby adopts Final Second-Tier Environmental Impact Report EIR 95-0 I. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION recommends that the City Council adopt the attached draft City Council Ordinance approving the Project in accordance with the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the City Council. C:\PCM950lB.DOC .---.- '-_/ '...-#' Planning Commission SP A One PC District Regulations Page 3 PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA this April 10, 1996 by the following vote, to wit AYES NOES. ABSENT: ATTEST William C. Tuchscher II Chairman Nancy Ripley, Secretary Attachment Draft City Council Ordinance C\PCM950lBDOC / ::::-/ .. '-' -, ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE OTAY RANCH SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) ONE PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS (PCM 95-018) WHEREAS, an application for adoption of the Otay Ranch Sectional Planning Area (SPA) One Plan, was filed with the City of Chula Vista Planning Department in July, 1994 by The Baldwin Company ("Applicant"), and; WHEREAS, the Otay Ranch SPA One Planned Community District Re!,'lIlations are intended to ensure that the SPA One Plan is prepared in accordance with the Otay Ranch General Development Plan (GDP), to implement the City ofChula Vista General Plan for the Eastern Territories, to promote the orderly planning and long term phased development of the Otay Ranch GDP and to establish conditions which will enable the Otay Ranch SPA One to exist in harmony within the community (" Project"), and; WHEREAS, these Planned Community District Regulations are established pursuant to Title 19 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, specifically Chapter 19.48 PC Planned Community Zone, and are applicable to the Otay Ranch SPA One Land Use Plan of the SPA Plan, and; WHEREAS, the SPA One Plan project area includes all of Village Five and the portion of Village One east of Pas eo Ranchero The SPA One Plan project area is comprised of approximately 1,061.2 acres ofland located south of Telegraph Canyon Road between Paseo Ranchero and the future alignment ofSR-125. The area west of Pas eo Rancho has been excluded from the SPA One Plan due to the difficulty in master-planning a village with a major roadway, Paseo Ranchero, bisecting it. In addition, habitat in Village One, west of Pas eo Ranchero, needs further analysis, and; WHEREAS, a GDP amendment was required to process this SPA without the area west of Paseo Ranchero due to a requirement in the GDP that stated that all villages must be master-planned as a unit, and; WHEREAS, a GDP amendment was approved by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista on April 30, 1996, to allow SPA One to be processed without the area west of Pas eo Ranchero, and; WHEREAS, the SPA One Plan refines and implements the land plans, goals, objectives and policies of the Otay Ranch GDP as adopted by the Chula Vista City Council on October 28, 1993, and amended on April 30, 1996, and; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission set the time and place for hearings on said Project and notice of said hearings, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City and its mailing to property owners and tenants within 1,000 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least 10 days prior to the hearing, and; - '-" '- Ordinance No. Page 2 WHEREAS, the hearings were held at the time and place as advertised on November 8, 1995 and November 15, 1995 in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission. Said hearings were continued to March 27, 1996 and April 10, 1996 by a motion of the Planning Commission at which time, said hearings were thereafter closed, and; WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has conducted a Second-tier Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) EIR 95-01 and a Recirculated Second-tier Draft ErR, and Findings of Fact and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program have been issued to address environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the Project, and; WHEREAS, this Second-tier EIR and the Recirculated EIR incorporates, by reference, two prior EIRs: the Otay Ranch General Development Plan/Subregional Plan (GDP/SRP) EIR 90-01 and the Chula Vista Sphere ofInfluence Update EIR 94-03 as well as their associated Findings of Fact and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Program EIR 90-0 I was certified by the Chula Vista City Council and San Diego County Board of Supervisors on October 28, 1993, and the Sphere of Influence Update ErR 94-03 was certified by the Chula Vista City Council on March 21, 1995, and; WHEREAS, to the extent that these findings conclude that proposed mitigation measures outlined in the Final ErR are feasible and have not been modified, superseded or withdrawn, the City of Chula Vista hereby binds itself and the Applicant and its successors in interest, to implement those measures. These findings are not merely informational or advisory, but constitute a binding set of obligations that will come into effect when the City adopts the ordinance approving the Project The adopted mitigation measures are express conditions of approval. Other requirements are referenced in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program adopted concurrently with these Findings and will be effectuated through the process of implementing the Project NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL of the City ofChula Vista does hereby find, determine, resolve and order as follows: L PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD The proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning Commission at their public hearing on the Draft EIR and the Recirculated EIR held on November 8, 1995, November 15, 1995 and March 27, 1996, their public hearings held on this Project on November 15, 1995, March 27, 1996 and April 10, 1996 and the minutes and resolutions resulting therefrom, are hereby incorporated into the record of this proceeding. These documents, along with any documents submitted to the decision makers, shall comprise the entire record of the proceedings for any California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) claims. C:\PCM9501BDOC /C/./. '-' - Ordinance No. Page 3 II. ACTION The City Council hereby approves the ordinance adopting the Planned Community District Regulations for the Otay Ranch SPA One Plan finding that they are consistent with the City of Chula Vista General Plan and that the public necessity, convenience, general welfare and good zoning practice supports their approval and implementation. II. CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA That the City Council does hereby find that FEIR 95-0 I, the Findings of Fact, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and the Statement of Overriding Considerations are prepared in accordance with the requirements of the CEQA, the State EIR Guidelines and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City ofChula Vista. VI. This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force the thirtieth day ITom its adoption. C:\PCM9501B.DOC /. .~-'7 -. / "-'" Ordinance No. Page 4 PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City ofChula Vista, California this May 7, 1996, by the following vote YES NOES ABSENT: Shirley Horton, Mayor ATTEST: Beverly A Authelet, City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO) ss. CITY OF CHULA VISTA) I, Beverly A Authelet, City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista, California, do hereby certiJY that the foregoing Ordinance No. _ was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council at a City Council meeting held on the 7th day of May, 1996. Executed this 7th day of May, 1996. Beverly A Authelet, City Clerk C:\PCM9501B.DOC /[;2 O"T ., - ~. '-'. '- I '~J MEMORANDUM DATE: October 27, 1995 TO: Members of the Resource Conservation Commission FROM: Barbar'1 Reid, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Otay Ranch SPA I EIR At the meeting of October 23, 1995, a number of questions were asked that June Collins from Dudek & Associates stated she would respond to in writing. Responses from Dudek & Associates are attached. /S7 (\-.T ) I~ 1C1qi, I.,,; L,I _-', I '-' ~ _ MEMORANDUM TO: Barbara Reid, City of Chula Vista Anita Hayworth, Dudek & Associates.f\ \Y\ t\- October 26, 1995 FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Otay Ranch SPA One EIR The following information has been gathered and prepared in response to the issues raised in the 23 October 1995 RCC meeting regarding the Otay Ranch SPA One EIR. The issues covered by this memorandum include the following: 1) Location and mapping of a potential pond along Telegraph Canyon Road. 2) Review of mapping information for the coastal rosy boa. 3. Arroyo toad survey. 4) Data sheets for the 1995 California gnatcatcher survey and discussion of dominant plant species in relation to the target transect results for the habitat replacement master plan. 5) Additional observational information on the tricolored blackbird. 6) Performance standards for the habitat replacement master plan treatments: are they the same for all treatment types? cc: Kim Kilkenny, The Baldwin Company John Bridges, Cotton Beland and Associates, Inc. Larry Sward, Sweetwater Environmental Biologists June Collins, Dudek and Associates, Inc. /~(5 Issue 1. Location and mapping of a potential pond along Telegraph Canyon Road. The wetland delineation along Telegraph Canyon Road was reviewed on 24 October 1995, with special attention directed to a potential pond area (identified by the RCC) just south of the linear band of wetland. The review consisted of walking the entire length of the delineated wetland. It was assumed that the potential pond area identified by the RCC is the topographically well-defmed basin behind an earthen berm located approximately midway between Buena Vista and Apache Drive. Although the basin is not obvious from the road, the top of an old willow tree in the basin can be seen from Telegraph Canyon Road. The field review confirmed the accuracy of the delineation. The only partial inconsistency is on the delineation map: the entire wetland polygon is labeled as "fresh water marsh," but some of the eastern portion could be labeled freshwater marsh/southern willow scrub. This situation is mentioned in the first paragraph on page 3 of the delineation report (Appendix F9 B to the RMP) as follows: "Wetland habitat along Telegraph Canyon Road is primarily disturbed freshwater marsh, some of which appears to be the result of revegetation efforts associated with recent road improvements. This habitat is patchy and dominated by cattail (Typha sp.) and bulrush (Scirpus sp.) of varying density; a few weedy upland and wetland species also occur. Within and immediately adjacent to the marsh are small scattered patches of mule fat (Baccharis salicifolia) and a very few young willow trees (Salix sp.). The willows are found primarily in the eastern one-fourth of the channel." Another way of describing this area might be as follows: East of Otay Lakes Road, the wetland supports considerably more willow trees and represents a mosaic of freshwater marsh and small patches (less than 0.1 acre) of southern willow scrub. The potential pond area cited at the 10/23 RCC meeting is south of the linear wetland band and supports two or three large, well-spaced willow trees (at the south edge of the basin) that appear to be in poor health. The entire basin is dominated by non-natives, primarily slender wild oat (Avena barbata) and black mustard (Brassica nigra). With the exception of the .individual willows, no hydrophytic vegetation is present in the basin. Based on topography (i. e., the basin and berm), it is possible that the area supports ponded water following years of exceptional rainfall. However, as noted above, no hydrophytic vegetation or other evidence of ponded water was present either during the wetland delineation or the recent review of the delineation. The basin area does not meet any of the three criteria for jurisdictional wetland habitat, i.e., hyclrophytic vegetation, hydrology, or hydric soils. /&:/ Issue 2. R..:view of mapping information for the coastal rosy boa. There are no locations mapped for the coastal rosy boa within SPA One for any of the surveys conducted between 1988 and 1995. /cf-A: Issue 3. Arroyo toad survey. Attached are two memoranda which discuss the arroyo toad survey. The fIrst, dated 17 February 1995 su=arizes information provided by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service regarding survey protocol. The second, dated 23 June 1995, discusses the results of the arroyo toad survey, including the personnel conducting the survey, survey methodology, and the results. /13 MEMORANDUM TO: June FROM: Anita DATE: February 17, 1994 SUBJECT: Future Species Listings: the arroyo toad, a special case In the draft Procedures for Dealing with Future Species' Listings (January 23, 1995), reco=endations are made for the survey effort required for a species newly listed as threatened or endangered. Within the discussion, a special case is described for the arroyo toad (Bufo microscaphus califomicus). The arroyo toad was listed as endangered on December 19, 1994 by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. This species is a special case for two reasons: 1) it was listed after the Resource Management Plan was prepared and did not have focused surveys conducted for it, and 2) it is of extremely limited distribution and is a good example of the type of species for which ranch-wide surveys should be conducted upon being listed. The arroyo toad is restricted to riparian wetlands with near-perennial flow in southern California. Habitat requirements include sandy stream terraces adjacent to shallow pools. This species is presently restricted to small, isolated populations. In San Diego County, arroyo toads have been found on the Santa Margarita, Guejito, Sweetwater, VaIlecito, San Luis Rey, Santa Ysabel, Witch, Cottonwood, Temescal, Agua Caliente, Santa Maria, Lusardi, Pine Valley, Noble, Kitchen, Long Potrero, Upper San Diego, San Vicente, and Morena drainages. They have not been known to occur in drainages on the Otay Ranch. Habitat is currently not available in Poggi Canyon or Salt Creek. Otay River potentially contains habitat and may exhibit spring flows and permanent ponding and thus may be suitable for the arroyo toad. Discussions with Kat Brown, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service biologist, on February 17, 1995 indicate that arroyo toad surveys will not be required for Poggi Canyon or Salt Creek, however surveys should be conducted of Otay River. Although there is no currently accepted survey protocal, Ms. Brown reco=ended choosing several potentially suitable sites along Otay River and visiting them for three nights in a row. The arroyo toad may be identified by listening for its characteristic trilling call on moonless nights between dusk and midnight. Surveys should be conducted between March and May. The potentially suitable sites will be selected by visiting the river valley during daylight hours. Although the surveys for the arroyo toad will be of limited extent, they will be inclusive of all suitable areas ranch-wide. /t/;f MEMORANDUM Date: June 23, 1995 870-06 To: June Collins, Dudek & Associates, Inc. Fr: Brock Ortega, Dudek & Associates, Inc. Subject: Results of a Focused Survey for Arroyo Southwestern Toad Along the Otay River Within Otay Ranch, San Diego County, California. This memorandum documents the results of a focused survey for arroyo southwestern toad (Bufo microscaphus californicus) conducted by DUDEK along Otay River within Otay Ranch, San Diego County, California. Introduction In conformance with the Otay Ranch Resource Management Plan Procedures for Dealing with Future Species Listings, a review of previous surveys and a focused survey of habitat likely to support the endangered arroyo southwestern toad was conducted. Although the Otay River Valley is not projected to be developed, riparian restoration activities (i.e, channelization, weed eradication) might have an adverse effect on the arroyo southwestern toad if it were present. The arroyo southwestern toad (ARTO) is a small (2-3 inches), light greenish gray or tan toad with warty skin and dark spots (does not have a dorsally situated light colored line like the similar western toad [Bufo boreas]). Its vocalization is a light trill usually lasting eight to ten seconds. The ARTO is restricted to rivers that have shallow, gravelly pools adjacent to sandy terraces. Breeding occurs between late March and mid-June and eggs are laid in shallow pools with little emergent vegetation. The present known range of the ARTO includes Santa Barbara, Ventura, Los Angeles, Riverside, Orange, southwest Imperial, and San Diego counties. The ARTO is presumed to have been extirpated from San Luis Obisbo County. In 1994, only six of 22 extant populations south of Ventura County are known to contain more than a dozen adults. Most of the populations in San Diego County are located in the eastern and southeastern portions, and predominantly within or adjacent to the Cleveland National Forest, although ARTO were found historically in most drainages throughout the county. Several factors presently threaten the remaining 23% of the habitat of the ARTO including: short- and long-term changes in river hydrology, including construction of dams and water diversions; alteration of riparian wetland habitats by agriculture and development; construction of roads; site-specific damage by off- highway vehicle use; development of campgrounds and other recreational activities; over-grazing; and mining activitie.s. It also is predated by introduced sunfish, bass, mosquitofish, sculpin, gobies, and bullfrog (Federal Register 1994). Site Location and General Exio;tin2 Conditions The approximately 4 mile long study area is located in San Diego County south and east of the City of Chula Vista, and north of the City of San Diego, within the Otay River Valley. Specifically, the study 1 /i:S- area lies in the USGS 7.5 minute topographic maD, Otay Mesa quadrangle in uns2ctioned lands; T18s, R1W; sBBM. Elevations in the survey area range from approximately 140 feet above mean sea level (AMsL) in the west portion, to 300 feet AMSL in the east portion. Soils mapped for the area (Bowman 1973) include Salinas-Corralitos associations' which are moderately well drained to moderately excessively drained clays, clay loams, and loamy sands on alluvial fans. Present land uses include open space and livestock grazing. Methods A focused survey was conducted by DUDEK personnel Brock A. Ortega (BAa), Michael J. Komula (MJK), John W. Brown, Ph.D. UWB), Philip R. Behrends, Ph.D. (PRB), and Michael L. Sweesy (MLS) between 4 and 6 April 1995 (Table 1). The project area was visited on 2 April 1995 to determine potential breeding areas and survey locations. There were six survey locations distributed within the project area. During the survey, each survey location was visited for 30 minutes or more. While at each location, surveyors listened for the distinctive ARTO trilling and release calls. If a call was heard, surveyors proceeded toward the call in order to verify the species. Survey protocol followed those established by the UsFWs (March 7, 1995), DATE PERSONNEl MOON PHASE TIME TEMPERATURE WIND SPEED CLOUD COVER 4 April BAO. MIK. IWB Quarter 1930-2300 hrs SS-SO"F 0-3 mph 100"%' 5 April BAO, MJK. PRB, Quarter 2000-2300 hrs SB-4B"F 0-3 mph 7()..40"lo IWB 6 April BAO. MIK. MLS Quarter 1930-2301 hrs SB-S1"F Omph 40"%' Table 1. Flashlights, binoculars (1 Ox50 power), camera with flash, and resource books were available for use by surveyors. The survey was completed under favorable conditions: cloudy to partly cloudy skies; air temperatures of 56-48 degrees Fahrenheit; occasional light breezes; and quarter moon or less. Re<ults The study area is mostly a disturbed riparian scrub community. Dominant plants include tamarisk (Tamarix aphylla), mule fat (Baccharis salicifolia), willows (Salix sp.), eucalyptus (Eucalyptus g/obulus and E. camaldulensis), broom baccharis (Baccharis sarathroides), and cattails (Typha latifolia). The eastern third of the study area was burned in the summer of 1994 and has the charred remains of many trees and shrubs. Water flows via a series of small creeks and streams over cobbly to clayey ground within the study area. Ponding exists ih many areas and is subject to large algae blooms. No ARTO were detected during the surveys. Aquatic and semi-aquatic species detected during the surveys include Pacific treefrog (Hyla regilla), bullfrog (Bufo catesbeiana), sunfish (Lepomis sp.), mosquitofish (Gambusia affinis), and crayfish (Cambarus sp.) (Table 2). Aquatic species observed during a 1993 arroyo toad survey include African clawed frog (Xenopus laevis), southwestern pond turtle (C/emmys marmorata pallida), and two-striped garter snake (Thamnophis hammondii hammondiiJ (Dudek and Associates, Inc. 1993 - sDG&E Pipeline 2000 Project). 2 /0r:; Table :2 Location ......i.. Number Observed 1 - aofore Gato Pacific treefrOR many; adultsltadpoles 2 - 0.25 mile east of Rate Pacific treefro. many; adultsltadpolo, 3 - 1 Sf river crossimt Pacific treefroe many; adultYiadpoles 3 - 1st river crossinlit bullfrOIr detected one once 4.2nd river crossin'lit none 5 - Pond, Pacific treefrog many; adults/tadpoles 5 - Pond, bullfro. deteaed one twice. two once 5 - Ponds sunfish 2 6 - End near dam Pacific treefrolit many; adult.Yradpoles 6 - End near dam bullfrog 3 + adults; tadpoles 6 - End near dam mosQuitofisn 100+ 6 - End near dam crayfish lots Conclusion No ARTO were detected in the Otay River Valley during the focused surveys and there are no previous recent records. Based on these results, the arroyo toad would not be affected by future land development or restoration activities in the valley. Management activities which might enhance the opportunities for ARTO translocation to the river valley include: bullfrog, African clawed frog, crayfish, and mosquitofish control programs; creation of more suitable ARTO habitat by eliminating tamarix and allowing a near perennial flow of water from ihe Otay Lakes dam; limiting pesticide and herbicide use within the valley; limiting cattle access points to the river; and introducing ARTO into the river valley. 3 /(/; 1 f I \ .?= ~~ - , , I , ( ., d.J' /: I 0-./ . - - /:. ~ . '" P:/ N ! '.;. ,<I' / 0'; .- , . . j i j ~. z'\, - ~ 0 " < " ~ . w < . < " ~~" f/) \ '" z o i= <t u o ... > w > a: ::> '" c .. o t- z a: w t- '" W ;: J: t- ::> c '" o > o a: a: .. on '" '" ~ ,i. J: U z <t a: > .. t- o w '" i3C'? '" ~ /~q- Issue 4. Data sheets for ilie 1995 California gnatcatcher survey and discussion or dominant plant species in relation to the target transect results for the habitat replacement master plan. The attached field data sheets for the 1995 California gnatcatcher survey and the habitat restoration master plan polygon analysis for the slope along Poggi Canyon indicate the dominant plant species within the CSS and MSS habitat. Most of the plant species listed on the forms are also found on the target transect data sheets for the habitat replacement master plan (Target Transects 7 and 8). Those plant species not found on the target transects are typical CSS/MSS species and are included in the plant palettes for CSS and MSS habitats (Tables 4 and 5 of the Habitat Replacement Master Plan). The target transects for the habitat replacement master plan were chosen for their overall high quality as defmed by a dominance of native species, lack of non-native species (as much as possible), high vegetative cover, presence of sensitive species, and the "classical" appearance of the habitat as found in "pristine" locations. The locations of the target transects were selected to be near or in the same area as the restoration sites. The target transects are not meant to be reproduced exactly by the habitat replacement treatments, but rather, to serve as a guide for the plant species composition and habitat structure within a localized area. The presence of non-native species within a target transect does not mean that the habitat replacement activities will include planting non-native species. Although target transects may miss the presence of some plant species, the plant palette is designed to fulfill the full range of CSS and MSS species and thus replace the habitat to a high quality habitat suitable for occupation by gnatcatchers, cactus wrens, and other CSS/MSS species. ~l ,.,... /CALlFORNIA Co 'ATCATC.'ID1t'CACI'U - . ... / PROJECT:~ 'SpA- \ CLIENT: ~J \~ #: Page \ of~ - Investigator Anirt Start Stop Date I k 7 (9 ? Tune Dq,'O t> 1:JC) 0 , . 'S4" Co J C Alignment Temp Region/Location uJe/.)+- S"PA / Wind I-~ 3- <0 . Aerial photo # Cloud cover I{)~u q9~o Site visit # I Precipitition 0 o (I"'-().u ~ ~'\ Sighting #: I Number of individuals: d, Species: ~AGij) CA WR Sex: female male @ Age: ~d~Ji juvenile fledglipg Vegetation type: C"'.::>c, Dominant Shrub % Relative Cover Average Height 1: f-r " 50 In-. (1/1~ 2: .:To~.()k . 30 /,5 3: o. ~o)J)- dO .5rn , u Shrub Cover In~o Slope =t:Jo Aspect L..J Elevation 350 Sighting #: d. Number of individuals: ~ Species: \fAGB> CA WR Sex: female male ~ Age:~uMuvenile fledglipg . Vegetation type: c.sS . Dominant Shrub % Relative Cover Average Height 1: A y '+f/\',\;. '710....- 40 1.2- m 2: -. \ 4-0 I. ""2- ....1 ("Jlon0- :e;- . G r'. ;;<0 ;L 3: \! '(').J.i) \\(', 5,'{\\-1)\1~ u Shrub Cover ((0'10 Slope doO Aspect S Elevation .350 Sighting #: @ Number of individuals: I Species: CAGN~W~ Sex: female~ pair' Age:~ juvenile fledglipg Vegetation type: ('r\ S 5 Dominant Shrub % Relative Cover Average Height 1: !') ~ ~G'- '?O ~ .7'5 rY1 2: ~o~DI?~ 4:() 1.5 3: ~ J N:;.u"'!Vvl1N -' 7-,0 :;.1. 3~~ Shrub Cover 30~D Slope :2.::1J'D Aspect 5 Elevation WREN SURVEY \. TCA TCHERlCACfUS VREN SURVEY #: CLIENT: tigator ate , Alignment Region/Location Ama1 photo # Site visit # TlUle Temp Wind Cloud cover Precipitition I f:2.1fCf~ /..) oJ-.L-.A j) Sighting #; (j) Number of individuals: ;) Sex: female male -Q Age:~ juvenile fledglirg Vegetation type: 'j! 0", S sic SS , Dominant Shrub % Relative Cover 1: ,)~oh~ ~ .dQ ~ 2: CA ~eUu:" ~ 5D 3: 0 (Y\-O~" \ 0 . . Shrub Cover SO ")0 Slope /50 Aspect S Sighting #: @ Number of individuals: "2- Sex: female male ~ . Age:@juvenile fledglirg Vegetation type; csS Dominant Shrub lI,..../v, ~r, 1: 2: 3: ; e--"c 0."\.. " " % Relative Cover 5"0 3D ,;;;n Jt..'1.'-c.cYL-t~ . Shrub Cover '7 D 1~ 30D Aspect S-J.. L0 Slope Sighting #; Sex: female male pair . Vegetation type: Dominant Shrub Number of individuals: Age: adult juvenile fledglirg % Relative Cover 1: 2: 3.' ~ (. ". - . Aspect S~b Cover .F. ~.. . ~.,~ .--.~}.~: <.. ':'",. '..., Slope Page Start ;;2 of -Q.. Stop Species: ~A~ CA WR Average Height /,2 frJ / ,5 Elevation 350 Species: ~ CA WR Average Height / m 07-3rn IS Elevation LhZ) Species: CAGN CA WR Average Height Elevation /1/ CALIFORNIA \ .~ATCATCHERlCACfl ~ WREN.SURVEY PROJECT: np0 ~ffi-\ #: CLIENT: ~JQ"'\wi'n Page --L. of~ Investigator ~ Start Stop Date TlIDe n<;S'\'5 1J3D Alignment Temp 51c Io?-o Region/Location Fa..ot FncD Wind 0-\ /- 3 Aerial photo # Cloud cover .;:) D 0-;0 0 Site visit # I Pred pi tition 0 0 Sighting #: I Number of individuals: .;( Species: CAGN €A V0. Sex: female male@ Age:~~ju~enile fledglipg Vegetation type: 015S , Dominant Shrub % Relative Cover Average Height 1: () ~~(: J ~^ 6- 40 ,75m - D U 50 2: \ " \0 &. [.25 3: Qf> <M.~I;. '" 10 e::; Shrub Cover '7 rj'7" Slope doD Aspect '5 Elevation 4-1./D Sighting #: '2 Number of individuals: I Species: CAGN ~A WR) Sex: femal~ pair Age: ~~juvenile fledglipg Vegetation type: r'Y1 S S Dominant Shrub % Relative Cover Average Height 1: ,~ ,()fo~ 00 1yv\ 2: o .- (J'v:'YJ ~"AC,- 3n 1m . ) 3: \..t.u (' (^- \n 71'V\ (j Shrub Cover 5:./'7" Slope 4d Aspect S Elevation 440 C);\n.~ :.o.,d7,.,. ""'" 1''''' 7rf57,." ~ '-' CAGN~ Sighting #: :) Number of individuals: I Species: '7 Age: @ juvenile fledglipg Sex: female. male" pair' Vegetation type: mS~ Dominant Shrub % Relative Cover Average Height 1: () ~ ~( ~.t-'f'V- ~n ,7e:; VV1 2: \n , DI?()... 5D I ...J-' ;x{lo 3: ~o. \ II} 7010 . ,/', Shrub Cover Slope 2-D!) Aspect S Elevation 't'fa \ -. ---- . ~ CALIFORNIA C "A TCA TCHERlCAcrur- \VREN SURVEY ,/ PROJECT: ntr..... S Q.p. \ #: CLIENT:_MJ A"'''' (1\ \ . Page 2- of 'L... - Investigator ~~,~ Start Stop Date' 1/ 7JD 1'1 .;- Tlffie Alignment I Temp Region/Location ' (!Ad-' P/I.J'). Wind Aerial photo # Cloud cover Site visit # I Precipitition Sighting '" ~ Number of individuals: I Species: CAGN€0z Sex: female al pair Age: ~juvenile fledgl41g Vegetation type: Yf\ ~ 'S Dominant Shrub % Relative Cover Average Height 1: ':"'(:)\0\-:;0-- 00 1m 2: O~ (YWI.; ~ 30 / .... ..I " !~h/. 75 3: - 1.1 \J UJ, .... M \-f IfY\MI Go :20 (j I Shrub Co~re'A.M ~D"')o 0 "- 4-JD ~~e L';?;'O Aspect ~ Elevation 10, Sighting #: ~ ~ Number of individuals: Species: CAGN CAWR Sex: female male pair Age: adult juvenile fledglipg Vegetation type: Dominant Shrub % Relative Cover Average Height 1: 2: 3: Shrub Cover Slope Aspect Elevation Sighting #: Number of individuals: Species: CAGN CAWR Sex: female mal:" pair' Age: adult juvenile fledglipg Vegetation type: Dominant Shrub % Relative Cover Average Height 1: 2: .3: A' . .' '1 ..... i "/.., . Shrub Cover - Aspect Elevation , '.,- Slope .,;..... : 'L. h.... , .'" .- -.,-_." . ,... . ii, ';"" f' -. . CALIFORNIA "-'NA TCA TCHERlCACIT" WREN SURVEY . . C?T A V --.-. ~l::.;- - PROJECT: -:jA I #: CLIENT: ". ~-;:;,.'~.~ ~ - ":'.~- + - . - - _"i - ," ~ - - ~A. Page ' - -.'G- ~. ... - of- Investigator BJ1-<' Start Stop Date &/h1 /~( Tune Or.!.o /1(;0 , 5'0'" t.,,' Alignment Temp Region/Location <;c (>I>NI) Wind 0 ~ Aerial pboto # Cloud cover ~d<.i e.l0Ar Site visit # 2- Precipitition ""'-'..... '^oM Sighting #: I Number of individuals: ;2. Species: c9\GN):A WR Sex: female male~ Age: ~J0juVenile fledgli~g Vegetation type: C~:S E~minant Shrub % Relative Cover Average Height 1: ( Mi,:... Co. \ , 50 ,.) "'- 2: J"f'vJ,^ Ifa I (A.- 3: (j P,)^t,tc ~ ro \.~r,,- , 0 , IIVI Shrub Cover (".ot, Slope zef Aspect SLJ Elevation 42.-)' Sighting #: 2- Number of individuals: Z. Species: @:>CAWR Sex: female male @y Age: @juvenile fledgli~g . Vegetation type: Mss Dominant Shrub % Relative Cover Average Height 1: .)"0 J~6" 3D I .v 2: o . er.I:4rtc 3.0 1,)\1\. 3: ft r .to..:....;, "'- lal . 10 f rv, fJ-soo )J tI (pO J Shrub Cover 70 '1,.., Slope Aspect Elevation Sighting #: 3 Number of individuals: J.-. Species: CAGi:) CA WR Sex: female male @' Age: ~ juvenile fledgli~g Vegetation type: r.. 5'5 DEminant Shrub % Relative Cover Average Height 1: A( ~u,\Q U. \ gO /5tr.. 2: 0"'i'v,,, 2.0 . S' "^ ~3: ~'Y()rf()' . .' . S- 1.5y.,..., ~ . /1:; ,. - . ,~." ~ t;hiub tov~~_~0 - Slope zoo . Aspect :s Elevation fltO' . './ ..:.... '.::..'!"':';'" ,; , ~:;~";~"-) -. . CALIFORNIA ( fA TCA TCHER/CACfV \VREN SURVEY err A V - sP Jr , #: CLIENT: Page ~ of~ Start Stop Investigator 1(, A--o Date (0 R1 'q) Alignment Region/Location -:sf: B.C..A), Aerial photo # Site visit # J- Sighting #: 1./ Number of individuals: L Sex: female male @ Age: @P juvenile fledgli~g Vegetation type: C :s 5 Dominant Shrub 1: A-r\...MIS:"" 2: () pro r if.:r~ \ . 3: (,.~.l,c Shrub Cover tLo to Sighting #: Sex: female male pair Vegetation type: . Dominant Shrub 1: 2: 3: Shrub Cover Sighting #: Sex: female male pair . Vegetation type: Dominant Shrub 1: 2: 3: . . Shrub Cover f:!<:;::~>~-~.~'~:' ;-:.. '_ ; 4 " ... ..- --- ";"-' .~~ "'>,. Tune Temp Wind Cloud cover Precipitition .CAWR % Relative Cover '2...c> ,0 3,/) Average ',5 '" , "" I ~ Height - Slope zs~ IN Elevation -,';",'; ..-~~- , _~,t.:l '3~o . .,~ -' Aspect Number of individuals: Age: adult juvenile fledgli~g Species: CAGN CA WR .' % Relative Cover Average Height Slope Aspect Elevation Number of individuals: Age: adult juvenile fledgli~g Species: CAGN CAWR % Relative Cover Average Height -.' . .... .....--.,.~ . -'. - :~:;~:- )-/:~~.~: / Elevation ..' .~ ~ Slope . Aspect c': -tj~~~;';;~~-'$~$f: ~~- ~ ,~ ~: ',-+: ~":~ ~ .~- - ;.: .., ~b ~ ~ .:\'~,~~' ~ ~ w~ ~ V Ifl \ \ I ,z/W '17q, , . ,,\~ \\v )\\\\\~f v'l, ,1)( 'IIL"\\\'I/ . .-~~~ ~v /' ~)')))}\' ~,) J ( J c< ;rr ~\..v ~ ~./^~ ~~~, ~17((u ,~' /" \( ~ '/ldl 7~~. i\~{I'~(\'--%), ~\\ ,...... '/. a ) ,\:' ,. t -'://I'M ?-:=~?52 ~t 1/ "', '/ '11;2 r(( ~ ~ '( , ~//r ~ 1 R' ., ( /~ ilL "" ..! \ \. .-"., , rJ.E//) (' -~ '" 0 ~ 'I' /;/) , \'- ~ J~l (L r~. 0 If J rI. '( ^ /' .....::::--'\\ \ \ ..;; ,t7/~ ;,-; -=..,. \ v;, 1] (,,-" \~~ ~ . . :(t;;: 'n1 J 'v .'-" .,,,~ ~ ) 'n \V," ~ ,V, ~ ( \j?Vk~ ) . i ' , '7/ "" ,..." ,~.., :,. W 8 I I;:) ),0;::::" ~'I'fu..!~ .M. ( 1~ ~ -~) III 'I . ~ i\...<.;;, ~~(~ ~ Il . !::;" . \' ~?J v 7" -' ..l".<......"II;i - , _ ( ~~ ' cr.. =:" f \ ~ I A 0- ',!. 7 ___ '. ......... ~ ~>--s. ---,"'. .) f.' ~ . ) '" ,\~: ..J J I ",~ -~~:..... ',/ ~ / \ \j , \ j/L~ ., ',1"- . '. w-~r~-,J ~\ \ ~D~ ~,,~. ~):~ 18 .' / h'&"-c;:J n"7~ "J) I: .. ,,,;':;" c; ~ ~ -, . __.:'J..., ~'C___, I -:-!---" '/.!\\"_~ .,~~ !I.~~~ \. - -:> . !,'-'- .~'\~~\~\\~../ '( ~; ~~~ ~)I )il \ ) 1DLi... ,~- ~/\, \' : It'" ,-=! l\ ~~-' ~l( \ "-,.,,..J J-~ .'.' ~ ,,\~ ~\ ~ ~6 ~ ~ ......IV ~~.. ( . "0 }~r(, :,,~, __~~ "1~, "'~I~//I(r( % ~(< ~P->,.. r??J~!). ~--=-::: --- ~- , 'i\, If . ~ :l ~ ~~ . I~ 7.i;' ~. c:- '(~ I ~ ~.)~ ~ /((l ;,' ~ ,I.. . ) ~~&JiJ..I~~,~& .~ \.~;- '. :~l~' U ~~"-~(3' ~ J ~~. . ..... :':', /1(( ( '/'\ ~/ I \ J . """'. . . ',. _.._. ':-' 1 .. _, ~ i ~J-" ":~ ',;: 'C' ' ..' I :<i':'t;-':ry:"!. ~~"ll ~ ~ B:. ,..~\;t,:\ ~. . . . - , ,... ~.:. ~~.i;;~.::";io,-:-'. ~ ...~ ~'-.: ,~. :c~~~;<''''oo ~;~~'~'~/~!:5 c -:s:~-:r~. 0 ~ .'~'!i-1t~:':'Jr;:t:~~':r:t.'~~"':~1~.!~ . k"?:~.~ '3 ..~ a. 0.1 .... :: '! ~ ~ ~ -; 0:1 ~.~ 'Ii ~.~ ~ a ~ ~ i~~&.~ ::r-: .~f~'~~~ \-: ~a ~ ~"'~_ ......... ._" . CALIFORNIA r~A TCA TCHERlCACIrn WREN SURVEY - PROJECT: OTA V -S?A ( #: CLIENT: -. . - " . -L ofL - .- - Page .- Investigator 8A-U Start Stop , Date 7 r:e\ tj)' Tune /"),00 11.00 Alignment Temp YAOI=-- ~D"F Region/Location N+ w haNi Wind o-~ "1'''' o-5""'P" Aerial photo 4/ Cloud cover loo'fs, bot^ Site visit 4/ Precipitition VW1\-<'" Y1~ Sighting #: Number of individuals: Species: CAGN CAWR Sex: female male pair Age: adult juvenile fledgl41g Vegetation type: Dominant Shrub % Relative Cover Average Height 1: 2: 3: '":" Shrub Cover Slope Aspect Elevation . :_'._;~:;' ---::~ '. Sighting #: Number of individuals: Species: CAGN CAWR Sex: female male pair Age: adult juvenile fledgli~g Vegetation type: Dominant Shrub % Relative Cover Average Height 1: 2: 3: Shrub Cover Slope Aspect Elevation Sighting #: Number of individuals: Species: CAGN CAWR Sex: female male pair . Age: adult juvenile fledgli~g Vegetation type: Dominant Shrub % Relative Cover Average Height 1: 2: . . - 3: . .:::',~': ...... . '.Jo, , -'f':~' . . .. .. c Elev~tion "'"", . Shrub Cover - .. .. .. Slope . ,. Aspect / . -'~?c::.:. .' -. .~ " -c',.~~'2_'~.:; ~ ;j_~. :?;; . _. ~.~~~~-.. ':~==-ii.~':2~: -.~:!: , ," ~ . . ...-.,..::..,," _."~':.., i . "'._'-~.- r, V,I ,\ '? ') ~ 1'tIt; L! t"'o<" ').\\.a:: :, i . I I I r ~% I · · c~~_ \)A~\\~1I~~ r\' . )~~')j1 ;7;~ I L).,~ Il...V /,;vI )&;~ \\ ''''''; LJ I -0' 1\ {\ "'< " I t,tl . '" ^-7 V^~Jl'':::' '" ~l \ a 'I tJ -<i Uj ~o ) . .' ~/g~ '~. --"./~}r. II ....:. .... '.s t ~...;:; > ~ f ~ ':;". ~~ '!} ~,L.1i " ~~ %'-~ ' . II ~ 'f.') "\\1\"", l -/ , .' 0 " . ~ I '<,,,,,,,, ("'" \'))~", i ~ ~r;," ~ . "?l, ')"~ 'l'~ ~ J' ~'5 II \' ~~ ~~ '" . \ j, ....... Ij", l' _, ~ \\:: .~ . {-::c.'/: ,,," /.. I '" 1 / 11 -"" ~'\ ')\~ ~ ~ "yy ) "'(;( I '" ~= w.; '" t'-,. ,'C' -. . ( , ,',I I \: """ ~ >S..<. " ~, I, ~ ,\\" '~ \, i\\\(?~f~~~ j \(:'~ \. ~~ I ~J "'k,78',,;e;!( ~~ ,~ : " ,'" ~, <:.~\..,' "-.:. ~ I" ):5]." ..\ ' . .~~~ I~W\ " 0 !~"" ~ '!2 ;.01. r .' ,,~~ - ,,"'-. \ '" )-)2" h ,,~ J ,J) 7,,,".. 2: , ..c: OJ' II =- _"",*,Y:,." \' I, ~:f I ," ~ " /" . , .. ) . ~ ~ ~ 'l \)f1~~r, ~ .pt i-\ ~;. I . -"'~ . f!j. f"'-~ ~,,' 'r . / l2::r " .~~ ~ - I", . '~I ... , r. .~ _ _ ~ ',,~ \( :~ ,_ , ;; ,;-&" ,"""" ~i c;,.. "'- hll~:, _ '. ' · ~.. =.~ ~,i' . >'~~ ~ %:ij; 1\ .... ~~:.i ,10 . ~ .1:"", -.c' , '. . ) ~., rfJrfJ ~ ' ,~, 'J. ,- .., '" .' "0, \\> i'~((, =-c>JL - -"". '. _ :'L . . . :': ~ ''S:>'1''D.2, ' '. =-..;. :"'<' '. ". "3 i~{. . ' "-4, "T' '- . . "" ~ ''-,,0 . _ = " ", ..' \. ""'" '., ......,.. .. ,,"'- ..,,,>, """ . . "''''L> '" '",. < .~_. < < "~:'r"".~", '<.;;!-~<. .... .. .'.:J.ic "3 ~<) 'tQ r-: ".~ '. _ , .. '_ h, ., '. . "0' ~.~ ~. . '.' .. · ",~ .. - -. r__, '_ ~ , \.;.'~~, ~~.' ~}: '~~O: ~ ~ ~ ;c -~ ':J -e '~fo ~ _~ _ _. ~ . (too ~ <I; ~+~y.,... ~ ~ _ '" .. -.......:: . riI.... ,w ~. _ <4 r-:~Q 't';t.) <. _ . ',' T'3~< .... .~~c~Q~~ . ... '> '> - .. .~ eo · t;=~ ~ .. i!i !L , '" 'j ct 0 - ~ ':I: '" ~ -J.. Q..J ~ QL ::c! v DO :t- ... ... ~ ~u.. .... '2 -t _ :IE ~ ~ -_cl "" ~ 0 '"t <' v It ct"_ .... OIU~V-:r...J - -Jc. .J /1C/ , , . CALIFORNIA <. IATCATCHERlCACfU WREN SURVEY :PROJECT: ()fA Y - 5'? A #: CLIENT: Investigator :b.4-D Date I:; p~~ IQ" Alignment Region/Location ,:5>vH..ro'\ C:>~<<!, Aerial photo # Site visit # Page of 2- Start Stop 12.= (.7Df o (L) Yo IN .'<.. T1IIle 6& <. 0 Temp 1,'2. OF Wind 0 Cloud cover (00 Po Precipitition 1M M- Sighting #: I Number of individuals: Z Sex: female male~ Age: ~ juvenile fledgli;1g Vegetation type: C Y 'S Dominant Shrub 1: /I"....."".,,;" c~l. 2: \0)<>1.oc. 3: ()e. ~ro\l~r" % Relative Cover J() <10 10 Shrub Cover 7D ~ Sighting #: 2- Sex: female male pair Vegetation type: fl'JS Dominant Shrub 1: 0 ~r-o\"4.-u 2: ArtQ"lS""- c..,( 3: j~DGu Shrub Cover ~ % Slope 20' Aspect Number of individuals: 2.. Age: adult juvenile fledgli;1g. % Relative Cover LJo <::0 10 " Slope 2fJ Aspect Sighting #: 3 Number of individuals: ~ Sex: female @+ I@Y' Age: ~ juvenile fledgli;1g Vegetation type: C 5 'S Dominant Shrub 1: ,A(kM'''C< C;/ 2: . at froli0o 3: -,. ';'JO~ll . '.' .".J .... .. '~:;":~~~~"'~~f~4<~~~~ ;.~~' :;'~ ~::. : ,. ,ShrUb Cover: r; () 4>, % Relative Cover '/0 !.O 2-D . . . Slope 'Zo. Aspect .. :~~._~~~;;j_~'_ c~ C~'.:.:._~" ;~J_X€.'. ."-,"0" Species: CAWR Average Height { ,.., I .... I Or ,5w 1/00 .~~~ .~- Elevation Species: , CAWR . Average Height I.)M /.<; M ,)"" ..:so..} Elevation <i",u . CAWR Species: , N\(>.k + f";(" s Height ;4C 1 ~- - - 7~'!f~~~ . ...,-. ~ . -' .,' . -.,,-M."'''':''t, ,,- .. .' .r"':.";f'~ . ..; Elevation ,: '"' "I;. -. ,- '......-.. :--- .. . - - .,' c.; .:' ,.... ::: ~ .. ' '~'.c ;,.:-.,--, ._.,..llJ.;...:jI,-....,..... -- >-,;',-.;. ;;"-:~:':." ':.'r"LO't."___:_::'<: Average 1.5M. /,)""- , ,; ;{ / CALIFORNIA ( ~A TCA TCBER/CACTIJ. WREN SURVEY / PROJECT: ()TA y -SPA I - #: CLIENT: Y'_--:....f.. . ., Page 2- /;:2.. .. - 0-- . Investigator j1,.4-<) Start Stop "oS-; -- Date I') 1<.b /<7'1 ~ Tune Alignment Temp Region/Location 5Oui/" B"",d. Wind Aerial photo # Cloud cover Site visit # Precipitition Sighting #: '" Number of individuals: I Species: @ CAWR Sex: c(e"'m~ male pair Age: adult juvenile fledglip.g Vegetation type: .c~J Dominant Shrub % Relative Cover Average Height 1: J~ J.., '^,,;o 'to ''''' ,,'t...: . o'.ro\~ 30 I.. \ ~ ",.... :: 2: "-'~ 3: . . I:, 20 I" .iI j.~o c... " 'Ii-~'~ ,; ,.' 7o?, "fYJo Shrub Cover Slope Aspect w Elevation &'0 ~_ .".........~ Sighting #: Number of individuals: Species: CAGN ..,.-~~. CA WR ''''''p __ .-.;"~ ;:t~ Sex: female male Age: adult juvenile fledglip.g - :~:;:?-;~~~ pair " - Vegetation type: - .;. \Y5.~~ . __,~r. Height . .-,. , Dominant Shrub % Relative Cover Average ,r.' , - - 1: 2: 3: Shrub Cover Slope Aspect Elevation Sighting #:. , Number of individuals: Species: CAGN CAWR ,. :.;. " , ,.~ Sex:'-femal~': male pair Age: adult juvenile fledglipg .. ,. - '". j Vegetation type: - f --. ,. ...*.:.... . -'\cD~ominant Shrub % Relative Cover Average Height (C. , 1.~"""""-'-. .- ... . -',- . ,. - ;;t2;t~;~ ',-,.~ '. ' ~~ .' - ~""<'~..~, ;". ""'1Iiit.t~lh.:..'.' ~ '~ . ~~:.--~3. yo 0j .~~. .~. .~.~ . ~~,~~~:.. , t . ~'.'fi "} Ie ; ',"." . -.~.;: ;,. . - "J'1k ' -;".., :.~';f;- ", - "r. __ ;ShIUb~COy'er~- ~ Slope; Aspect - ... Elevation / - -~-~ , .. - .., ~~ -.... , . - 0\ r-; -iW, JoT...... ...;: J'-: . ...- ~ ,.......''-'.,.-.,-I< _ -. ~ _ <> -.......,. .r-... .' ~"~). ..v- <:= -~ -,~ if- "'""~ .. . .~~'<-~~ .;--...,~ ~,'5.~:i .'. ~ ".i! Ie;!;: . :~~o... .. .. . ... .~~.~ .. . .~.. -?""3~~"'!;:~.i~4 ^ . "-'~C""d~;..~...!1~". " .. ~ -?1.-...~..",.. .,,~~v ' ~"'if.c.'i~~~~..~~~~~~",VU .......t\.a:~~ ":)"' ~~1~ttJ.. < ~ , E,A-V (<=!qr)' ~A TCA TCHERlCACfL WREN SURVEY Sf A - I #: CLIENT: TIme 0 7 (JO Temp ~ OfD' Wind (') Cloud cover ~ Lj Precipitition V\<) M. Sighting #: Number of individuals: 2- Sex: female male @ Age: ~ juvenile fledgli~g Vegetation type: C. :; :; Dominant Shrub - ...... t. ~fCALlFORNIA t . ~ ~1f.R9JECT: 01,4 V - . ~~> 1 ~., iff hlvestigator ,. Date 1& R~ ~.. Alignment . . Region/Location ~r-Il...u.... f3...~ Aerial pboto # Site visit # 1: Pw--..k J...." '\ I" G-1. 2: R-~.tv) 3: :J'Jol--J<< Shrub Cover r ~() 70 Sighting #: Sex: female male pair Vegetation type: Dominant Shrub 1: 2: 3: Shrub Cover Sighting #: Sex: female male pair' Vegeta~ion type: .Dominant Shrub 1: :......;: ~.r\- 2 -~~.:A..i.__~ ;,..-. . . . ~?3' :~';~-J' ~> ~'..oJi.",,,,,. . {it;~~_=:,J,"",_. - J ..:5-.;'". iShrub Cover ~~~~~-' ,;: . ' ~-;~ -.... % Relative Cover .!So 4-0 10 Slope I c> . Aspect IN Number of individuals: Age: adult juvenile fledgli~g % Relative Cover . Slope Aspect Number of individuals: Age: adult juvenile fledglipg % Relative Cover . Slope . ~~',> .. Aspect .. -, ,w:;'..... . , .. Page Start of- Stop tr IJ 0 ~ ~SO 0-<' ""ph 20/0 c. {evJo , W)^e Species: @r CAWR Average Height j ,S IV\ 2. .s ^" \"'- -~-"- .~ "t, -.' . . Elevation <lco ':';::~ , - - ... Species: . CAGN CA WR -': .....,.,.._-'........... ... -"'.:: - - ; ". ~.:-'.~ "~"'""'-- Average Height Elevation Species: CAGN CA WR Average Height" ,'. . _' 'f '. ,", '~:.-~ , _ .. ~z.:~~~ " _.,~-"fl1:'",~ ..n. ' . . ... ~-. . ~ Ele~~ti~ ; . - - ~ ..~,~; ":,f-..:'-;;_"- W ~I;: -1,".'-"'D:\'I:)\\\~ t\. ,/1. '/ ~ I~. <<'I.. I r:i1n '- 'A ~<~)I..\'0 'I . (/1 'f,ll: ),' I" ~,.,'1 ~'" '':71' II 1,- JI~", II< ~':: ['h, =.),1) , ,. ,\\."GI7 I, ~/'a " (3" / t . I'--? I ~ J I ~,\h "\\"'" ~0~ ~ \, ~)c\I' 1\ ))\\~ I \. :S':::7 Y:i1, · >"fliiJVIJ/II/ ~')jl ~ "",r I\~"" ~ I AI ~ 8\':;1. . ~JJ!J~ J; '~h~'- ~ ~~~(~c;~ ) 1Jfl'//} -:~- {,-- ",-", It 1/. ' (~...... \ ~I\\\"", >~~(( ~ iJ 17~ ~. \:11), . ~ 11 v;, QJ \1\,\~~~ '-~ '" I L~ "-7 I !': 0 "II' jI) , :7'I~' ~ <Ji! I l """<' 1 ~ hi .. ~ ' , (; '" ='" r \\ '~" \ · ~ ~ ~ } \J i;;!, ). I ' I~, 'IC . 'S / ~ W ~~ ..J ,\ ~ )~~ . ),11\\\ ~ " .. ,."" "'., " "-.""\\'~ -i".B' ~\' ,,/11, '2 I 1 I ~ >s) ~;\' ""< C'" -~ . {\ , . J<, ( I \ ,,! . \ "'~, ,\);", '" \. "II "r;h . 0 If '~ . r:; 0 Wt:~~J~ '~ \,1\ '.,;' .-~~ \ ''f~' 0 ~ Ii ( I{it.' . '- "~;:J;'V /. 'du~J~ '@R1t c ~ ~)~-~] .' /nt~1;'~ ~W\1~~~~\ ~ I~~~J '5,,-~~ "I . ~!&;~\I , = r. " )')~' ~. ~,:lIl.lj v !.~~/'J ~~ ~'\\t\i i~~" '~II. !- ~~" '~"0p;t((J 'sh(~;, 'U \1 ~ .. ~~\\i J;). )'1 \.. ....,p ~11 ~'8 '~~\)J I .' 'J, ~'" ~.. .., ~~ . ' · '" - ~ /'i) , " , , " ..~ -- ~~~)~ ~ ~.~ ~v " ". J'" .~. . _" ., _ . '"'.. "" ~ I , ~~ " ~\ "11 .' r C, . "-'<'-' =. )\~" U .lI~~'-~(3!v"~~J ," ~, ':.I..~. ~:;"~:.' . " ~'rCl..\ " " , -= ". .. '. r~' ~I'~) II_.,-,,_. .. .... ." . 1 . _ . . . . ..,-~ .. -!j',:: . '. . ' . .;. '.-. " - . . '.. .,$.~ ~ j ~ I'" -'. . ",";. . _'..s ""^ ;:;...... .., ..' \.>> - -^.......,." - ~. .', ,-<'~ 4" w.v- ~ ~~_~< ....,. , ~~.....~.C/ ox ~ I:: 4" _ , ~ ~ ti'l..... _ L-. 1. ...._ '1ft "',",... '..J. " -...::' i'~ .~\'::':;.'" ~~_ . . I ("l . 0\'1..- \ , (,01 v - 5 "), PO:5d'" = "Do- 'bo~ ". Sb $ PPr I = L s OTA Y RANCH REVEGETATION INFORMATION DATA SHEET POLYGON NUMBER /'1", Requires Jubpivision ~.... Slope " Aspect ......1\'1 JJr-., v'fr-. "/S'oll.fype Sb Date of Survey '2. -'-01 - '1 r Surveyor i)ih Access (quality and direction) - 4WD ~ 2WD Dr~ All Weather Road - Pavement River Crossing JJ,S. '1-6-1' ~0.1 Habitat type ~/p~"""" - )/JJ(.L Percent Native Shrub Cover ( Dominant shrubs 0030'00. ~.~ ..kJ ..,\,~.. 0-10% = 1 11-30% = 2 31-60% = 3 > 60% = 4 Percent Exotic Cover Dominant weeds tI t.C-o~. .. \.,10.""-....4-..,. ~ 'ie^~" \ ~~rs..: Percent Bare Ground ~ ' ~ _.. 1 ..~r Cryptogrammic soil present lot. Eroded Soils (circle one) @ no soil erosion 1 - eroded soil without rills 2 - eroded soil with small rilIs 3 - eroded soil with major riI1s 4 - eroded soil with "canyons" Percent area of polygon effected 1/A Evidence of other disturbance Agriculture pi ,w;"! Grazing ...1Ik tr.,1r , I P,t' . . '."U Mining Sensitive Wildlife Species Species present within polygon (field).AI".;". tn'JCJ Species present within polygon (lab) Species present adjacent to polygon (field) (bN.CAJA..It.j;r~ ,bl1tJj,J,~ Species present adjacent to polygon (lab) Where . Sensitive Plant Species Species present within polygon (field) l-.. C;;:ru'~;P4f nr~~nt within Dolygon (lab) // --- I' , _, j,( '-" I ~ . . OTAY RANCH REVEGETATION INFORMATION DATA SHEET POLYGON NUMBER 14t. Requires subdivision ^-, Slope "r'b Aspect ~..cr Soil Type 1)A' Date of Survey 'Z-..~ _0\ < Surveyor 1> ~ Access (quality and direction) - 4WD 1Nf.J,. 2WD >y All Weather Road Pavement River Crossing Habitat type , -;$ Percent Native Shrub Cover ~ Dominant shrubs 11>>..1. "t., ~ 6,4.<".1. Cf-oA ",k'1 ;; ..\.(,_' .~\.""'l ~.I1....P~....H_U. . 61..u.rfd.l rJ W 4f1..fff!' ~,..".\.. v,..., 'f- ~.~'" 0-10% = 1 11-30% = 2 31-60% = 3 > 60% = 4 Percent Exotic Cover Dominant weeds "3 Percent Bare Ground \ Cryptogrammic soil present }.J;. Erod~oiIs (circle one) o no soil erosion _ eroded soil without ril\s 2 . eroded soil with small ril\s 3 - eroded soil with major ril\s 4 - eroded soil with "canyons" Percent area of polygon effected fJ(A , Evidence of other disturbance Agriculture Gnzing itS" C ...-Hlt ~r.;(~ . (..Lv. ../'P....J J.../..J Mining Sensitive Wildlife Species Species present within polygon (field) cAW"'- . fl,l. S( :'''' o-IA Species present within polygon (lab) Species present adjacent to polygon (field) clt\.oJ~ Species present adjacent to polygon (lab) Where +() $OoI~ Sensitive Plant Species Species present within polygon (field) ~I'I!,. 't_____ ft", h. '\ 4~ OTAY RANCH REVEGETATION Il\TfORMATION DATA SHEET POLYGON NUMBER )<1 " Requires subdivision No Slope -z.,V Aspect ~.+u" Soil Type L S Date of Survey ,-z.~ -1') Surveyor EA-o Access (quality and direction) - 4WD ,..1. 2WD dr. All Weather Road NF Pavement River Crossing Habitat type L5~ Percent Native Shrub Cover ~ Dominant shrubs ,\o~.'- ~,4...".I. J6 "'" Mlic..... ~~".. ~..,',' " .., ,net I.,. . 0-10% = 1 11-30% = 2 31-60% = 3 > 60./. = 4 Percent Exotic Cover 3 Dominant weeds ~.... ." ~\.... ,~. I-I"',.....nt: _rf...ri Percent Bare Ground . \ Cryptogrammic soil present I' " Eroded Soils (circle one) to) no soil erosion y_ eroded soil without rills 2 - eroded soil with small rills 3 - eroded soil with major rills 4 - eroded soil with "canyons" Percent area of polygon effected 0 Evidence of other disturbance Agriculture Grazing ~~-r Mining' Sensitive Wildlife Species Species present within polygon (field) c.., riA Species present within polygon (lab) Species present adjacent to polygon (field) Species present adjacent to polygon (lab) Where Sensitive Plant Species Species present withUl polygon (field) _ 1-.._...... 11~ h' /~l . , OTAY RANCH REVEGETATION INFORMATION DATA SHEET POLYGON NUMBER I~ A Requires subdivisio~ ... Slope ,C; Aspect ~"'~L Soil Type L-S Date of Survey '_7 -\ -q ... Surveyor 1'; A-D Access (quality and direction) . 4WD ......t..!,- 2WD ~N All Weather Road Pavement River Crossing , CfIV ..... Habitat type ~ss Id.""'~ , Percent Native Shrub Cover Dominant shrubs '3 ~''''._i,. ...... i~\..G' 0-10% = 1 11-30% = 2 31-60% = 3 > 60% = 4 Ofu"\.'.... 1'htW-" iToJ.I.A wJ,...1<~- ~s:..,.~;c.. Percent Exotic Cover Dominant weeds 3 ..r6~1""" . NN ~r&.,.r /NoI... . bl..l. .."J..rJ, Percent Bare Ground \ ..I~ ".A 1. ~ ,.I,. Cryptogrammic soil present ~ Eroded Soils (circle one) @;l no soil erosion 1 - eroded soil without rills 2 - eroded soil with small rills 3 - eroded soil with major rills 4 - eroded soil with "canyons" Percent area of polygon effected () Evidence of other disturbance Agriculture I/W- Grazing ~L ~.il\ Mining: ~ I \'#A.~' . fit'" wi'I fr".p..t;.... Sensitive Wildlife Species Species present within polygon (field) (~w"-. ~IV. Species present within polygon (lab) Species present adjacent to polygon (field) cA4JJ ,. ul.. Species present adjacent to polygon (lab) Where Sensitive Plant Species Species present within polygon (field) M..... c:..........:_ ......._...... -ri~...;" nnJvcrnn (lab) /c;!ff/ . . OTA Y RAt"J'CH REVEGETATION INFORM.ATION DATA SHEET POLYGON/NUMBER U e Requires subdivision 1\0 Slope \ ') Aspect ~~<f" Soil Type LS Date of Survey z./~+-f'~ Surveyor B..u Access (quality and direction) - 4WD ~ 2WD Jr~ All Weather Road ~w Pavement River Crossing Habitat type "'s~/b.:rs I Percent Native Shrub Cover ~ Dominant shrubs ~.- "f"l.~ :r..~"" 2J.~ ,..\"'~ " ~f<~ :ak_:." ..r~ .,.1. 0-10% = 1 11-30% = 2 31-60% = 3 > 60% = 4 Percent Exotic Cover '3 Dominant weeds (r.J.." '-HI (I, ".ff- f' 1.1..1. _f.,.^) $,,;...... .....11, ~ ~ I . - > Percent Bare Ground 'Z. Cryptogrammic soil present .... Erode<!.-&.oiIs (circle one) Q!) no soil erosion 1 - eroded soil without rills 2 - eroded soil with small rilIs 3 - eroded soil with major riUs 4 - eroded soil with "canyons" Percent area of polygon effected 0 Evidence of other disturbance Agriculture Iv'> Gnzing cJr<. L: I { . ~i( ( Mining : w ./ i'r"-- 41.1 A!~..!.J ..-1,.,+ Sensitive Wildlife Species Species present within polygon (field) c.,4 wl1. ,C'+""; Species present within polygon (lab) Species present adjacent to polygon (field) IAw~ Species present adjacent to polygon (lab) Where Sensitive Plant Species Species present within polygon (field) ~ __ f1_L'\ /CC , / . , Issue 5. Additional o!:servational information on the tricolorea blackbird. A large flock (approximately 1000) of tricolored blackbirds was observed during the California gnatcatcher survey in 1995. They were observed perched in trees and within the channel near the entrance road to the ranch in Poggi Canyon. The birds were not observed to be nesting in Poggi Canyon but were foraging randomly in the bottom of Poggi Canyon. The species requires large areas of freshwater marsh vegetated with cattails or tuIes for a suitable breeding site. The tricolored blackbird is an opportunistic bird in its foraging behavior. It will forage on agriculture fields, lawns, golfcourses, and along lalceshores. Although most of the agriculture areas within SPA One will be lost, no wetlands will be impacted and there will be over 11,000 acres of preserve area within which they may forage. Therefore, there should be no conflict between the 1 ()() % preservation criterion for the tricolored blackbird in the RMP and the loss of the area where the blackbirds were observed foraging within SPA One. /tc Issue 6. Performance standards for the habitat replacement master plan treatments: are they the same for all treatment types? The performance standards for the habitat replacement activities, outlined on pages 29 and 30 of the Habitat Replacement Master Plan, apply to all of the treatment types discussed in sections 5.1 through 5.4. /c!/ , , THE L_. Y OF CHULA VISTA DISCLOSURE, ATEMENT You are required to file a Statement of Disclosure of certain ownen;hip or financial interests, payments. or campaign contributions, on all matten; which will require discretionary action on the part of the City Council, Planning Commission, and all other official bodies. The following information must be disclosed: 1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the property which is the subject of the application or the contract, e.g., owner, applicant, contractor, subcontractor, material supplier. 'Jt.E CUJIf Fan::;h, LoP., a Califc:rnia Limits:] Far:tJe.sbip U1i ts: &rt:eqri.93S, L.P. Eala..rin BJilCb:s, a Gliifa:nia ct:q::cratim Smi th Gregory T. Tiger rEJelq:rrent 'l\;O, a Califa:n:ia Limi te:J PaI:rErS1ip S N M s, Ltd. Partnership 2. If any person' identified pursuant to (I) above is a corporation or partnen;hip, list the names of all individuals OVol1ing more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership interest in the partnen;hip. .:'arES P. Eald.<in AlfrEd E. Pala..rin 3. If any person' identified pursuant to (I) above is non-profit organization or a trust, list the names of any person serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust. ~IA 4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of the City staff, Boards. Commissions. Committees, and Council within the past twelve months? Yes_ No~ If yes, please indicate pen;on(s): 5. Please identifY each and every person, including any agents, employees, consultants, or independent contractors who you have assigned to represent you before the City in this mailer. Kiw Jctn Ki1ka1ny Panie fU1te: TirrothY J. 0' Q:ajy JarES Pala.rln Ka'1t Adn Alfred Pala.rln 6. Have you and/or your officers or agents. in the aggregate, contributed more than $1,000 to a Councilmember in the current or preceding election period? Yes_ NoL If yes, state whi~h Councilmember(s): . . . (NOTE: Attach additional pages as necessary) . . . ractor/applicant Date:~I94 Kim Jdln KilkernY Print or type name of contractor/applicant .. pusan is defined as: "An}' indi~'idua.4 finn, co-parrnership, jou,' \'e!JIUTC, associatioll, social club, frou:mal orgonizarion, corporation, esune, 0'IlSt., receiver, syndiCO!(" this alld am otha cou,,~.. ciry alld COUll")', cUy mUlIicipaliry, disrric, or Olha polilical subdi,'isim, or allY Ol}W group or combillarion acting as 0 uni?f,,-f