HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 1993/06/02
REVISED AGENDA
JOINT SAN DIEGO COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
CITY OF CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL
PUBLIC HEARING
3:00 P.M., WEDNESDAY, JUNE 2, 1993
COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
BOARD CHAMBERS - ROOM 310
1600 PACIFIC HIGHWAY
SAN DIEGO, CA 92101
I.
ROLL CALL
. Brian Bilbray, 1st District
County Board of Supervisors
. Tim Nader, Mayor
City of Chula Vista
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE JANUARY 21,1993 MEETING
III. PUBLIC HEARING
General Plan Amendment (GPA-92-3), Prezoning (90-C), and General
Development Plan (GDP 90-3); Joint Public Hearing with the County Board of
Supervisors on the Otay Ranch Project
IV. PUBLIC COMMENT
Members of the public may address the Joint Board of Supervisors/City Council
on any subject matter under the jurisdiction of the Joint Board of
Supervisors/City Council. However, pursuant to the Brown Act, no action can be
taken by the Joint Board of Supervisors/City Council unless listed on the agenda.
V. STAFF PRESENTATION
. Background/Planning Process
. Site Analysis
. Issue - Areas based on Joint Planning Commission Public Hearings
The next Otay Ranch Joint Board of Supervisors/Chula Vista City Council public
hearing is tentatively scheduled for June 16, 1993 at 3:00 p.m. in the Chula Vista
Council Chambers.
VI. ADJOURNMENT
. County Board of Supervisors to its next meeting on June 8, 1993 at 9:00 a.m.
in the County Administration Center.
. Chula Vista City Council to its next meeting on June 8, 1993 at 6:00 p.m. in
the Council Chambers.
COMPLIANCE WITH AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA) - The Otay Ran~.\Project Office,
in complying with the American With Disabilities Act, request individuals who require special accommodation
to access, attend and/or participate in a meeting, activity or service request such accommodation at least 48
hours in advance for meetings and five days for scheduled services and activities. Please contact the Otay Ranch
Project Office for information or your request at (619) 422-7157. California Relay Service is available for the
hearing impaired.
tables:\bolsagnd.ajl
5/27/93
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
Meeting Date 6/2/93
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing: General Plan Amendment (GP A-92- 3), Prezoning (90-C),
and General Development Plan (GDP 90-3); Joint Public Hearing with the
County Board of Supervisors on the Otay Ranch Project
Director of Planning J2frl
City ManagerJ ~ ~I] (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No-X)
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
The City Council and County Board of Supervisors have scheduled a joint public hearing to
consider a proposed General Plan Amendment, General Development Plan, and Pre-zoning for
the Otay Ranch project. The following is a summary description of the proposed project,
background information on the process which was used to develop the recommendations on the
plan, and a recommended schedule for future meetings to complete Council/Board review of
the project.
RECOMMENDATION:
1) Accept the Background Report (Attachment 1) and the Joint Project Team's presentation
on the site characteristics, public participation program, the process for the Council and
Board of Supervisors deliberations on the Otay Ranch General Plan Amendment, an
overview of Plan recommendations, and the applicant's (Otay Vista Associates, L.P.,
formerly Baldwin Vista Associates, L.P.) presentation, and
2) Continue the hearing to June 16, 1993, at 3:00 p.m., in the City of Chula Vista Council
Chambers, for a presentation by the Otay Ranch Joint Project Team General Manager,
Anthony J. Lettieri, of the City of Chula Vista and County Planning Commissions'
recommendations, the applicant's proposal, public testimony, and to begin discussions
and deliberations of major issues.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION:
The City and County of San Diego Planning Commissions have held 36 joint public hearings on
the following dates: April 29, May 15,22,29, June 17, July 31, August 19, September 11, 16,
October 7, 12, 19,23,29, November 4, 12,20, December 2,9, 18,1992: January 15, 2729,
February 3, 10, 19,24, March 13, 17,24,31, Apri114, 22, May 8, 13, and May 18, 1993.
The Commissions each adopted fInal recommendations and resolutions on May 18, 1993, which
will be presented at the June 16, 1993 continued Council/Board hearing.
..J-I
Page 2, Item
Meeting Date 6/2/93
DISCUSSION:
The 23,088 acre Otay Ranch Project is located in the unincorporated area of San Diego County,
with the exception of 390 acres located in the City of San Diego adjacent to Brown Field. The
rural community of Jamul is located northeast of the project area; the southern boundary of the
project is approximately two miles north of the United States-Mexico border; the western
boundary is the Chula Vista City limits; the eastern boundary is generally State Route 94
(Campo Road).
The Otay Ranch would be developed over a 30 to 50 year period. During the course of the
planning process, various project alternatives with a range of proposed dwelling units and
projected populations were examined. The New Town Plan (original submittal) proposes 50,733
dwelling units and an estimated projected population of 150,000 persons; The City/County Staff
Recommended Project proposes 27,179 dwelling units with an estimated population of 80,000;
the Environmental Alternative proposes 9,251 dwelling units with an estimated population of 30,
000 persons; the Existing General Plan Alternative, retaining existing City of Chula Vista land
use designations on the Otay Valley Parcel, would result in a maximum yield of 20,470 dwelling
units and an estimated 62,000 population. With the No Project Alternative, the property would
remain in its present condition as rural agricultural land and undeveloped open space. The
Planning Commissions are recommending between 24,50 and 26,000 dwelling units and
70-75,000 people.
On August 1, 1989, the City of Chula Vista City Council and the County Board of Supervisors
signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOD) agreeing to jointly process a General Plan
Amendment, General Development Plan, and Zone Reclassification for the Otay Ranch
(Resolution No. 15220). The MOU established the Interjurisdictional Task Force (IJTF) which
consisted of elected and appointed representatives from the County of San Diego, the City of
Chula Vista and the City of San Diego. The IJTF's primary role was to set policy in the
development of project alternatives to be analyzed in the Program Environmental Impact Report,
to coordinate the preparation and review of Otay Ranch plans, and to formalize the relationship
between the County of San Diego and City of Chula Vista's planning efforts. The City of Chula
Vista was designated the lead agency responsible for the preparation of environmental
documentation with the County providing review services.
The Draft Program Environmental Impact Report (pEIR) was made available for public review
on July 31, 1992 for a period of 80 days. The Draft final PEIR was presented to the City and
County of San Diego Planning Commissions at their hearing of December 18, 1992.
The Council and Board of Supervisors have held joint workshops on various issues related to
the project on July 30, September 24 and 30, October 22, November 4, 18 and 24, and
December 17, 1992.
3-3-
Page 3, Item
Meeting Date 6/2/93
TIle hearing of June 2, 1993 is the publicly-advertised date. The Council and Board of
Supervisors may revise the schedule, as required, following the June 2, 1993 hearing.
Subsequent joint hearings of the Council and Board of Supervisors have been tentatively set as
follows:
Wednesday, June 16, 1993 - 3:00 to 5:00 p.m.
City Council Chambers
Wednesday, June 30, 1993 - 3:00 to 6:00 p.m.
Board Chambers
Monday, July 12, 1993
- 3;00 to 6:00 p.m.
City Council Chambers
Wednesday, July 21, 1993 - 3:00 to 6:00 p.m.
Board Chambers
Thursday, July 22, 1993 - 3:00 to 6:00 p.m.
City Council Chambers
Monday, July 26, 1993 - 3:00 to 6:00 p.m.
Board Chambers
FISCAL IMPACT: Not Applicable.
(f:\home\planning\A113.0TY)
3..g
~
~~....
O,R..,... QAnCH
ATTACHMENT 1:
BACKGROUND REPORT
JOINT
PLA"NING
PROJECT
COUNrl OF SAN DIEGO' CITI' Of CHUl.A VISTA
I. INTRODUCTION
In 1989. The Baldwin Compony submitted an initial draft General Plan Amendment ta the
City of Chula Vista and County of San Diego for Otay Ranch. This proposal wos reviewed
by the City of Chula Vista. the County of San Diego. citizen committees. technical
committees and planners from many public entities. Many environmental. facility and
planning issues were identified and analyzed. The analysis of these issues led to the
development of new and innovative planning concepts expressed through a series of
alternative plans. Each alternative plan raised additional issues which were also studied.
This issue Identification/analysis process is leading to the preparation of a recommended
City of Chula Vista General Development Plan and County of San Diego Sub-Regional
Plan which best resolves Identified issues and balances competing Interests. A General
Plan Amendment will also be processed concurrently through both jurisdictions.
II. REGIONAL CONTEXT
1. ReIaIIonship of the Project to the Region
Location: Otay Ranch Is located in southwestern San Diego County apprOximately 3,5
miles eost of downtown Chula Vista and 13 miles southeast of downtown San Diego. The
property lies between the eastern edge of the City of Chuta Vista and the western edge
of the unincorporated community of Dulzura. The rural community of Jamul lies directly
nortt'l of the project area. and the United States-Mexico Intematlonal border is 2 miles
sO'-lth of the southernmost boundary of Otay Ranch. The combined properties span a
distance of approximately 12 miles from east to west and 8.5 miles from north to south.
The 23.D88 acre Otay Ranch property is located In the unincorporated area of San Diego
County. with the exception of 390 acres In the City of San Diego adjacent to Brown Reid.
The City of Chula Vista General Plan included the western portion of Otay Ranchos part
of the Chula Vista General Plan Eastern Territories. The Local Agency Formation
Commission (WCO) designated the western portion of Otay Ranch as a special stUdy
area. In order to allow for the preparation of a comprehensive land plan before deciding
ultimate jurisdictional alignments (See Figure 1. Jurisdictional Setting Map). The 2.900-
acre areo surrounding and inCluding the Otay Lakes is owned by the City of San Diego.
For planning purposes. Otay Ranch ~as been grouped geographically to form three
parcels. the Otay Valley Parcel. the Proctor Valley Parcel and the San YSidro Mountains
Parcel (See Figure 2. Features Map).
315 Fourth Avenue, Suite A, Chula Vista, CA 91910 . (619) 422-7157. FAX: (619) 422p~Q.
)..'1
Otay Valley Parcel: The Otay Valley Parcel is the largest parcel of Otay Ranch.
comprising 9.618 acres. This area of land is bounded by Telegraph Canyon Road on the
north. Heritage Rood and the Otay Landfill Site on the west. Brown Field on the south.
and Lower Otay Lake on the east. The six 'outparcels' (property not owned by The
Baldwin Company) within the boundaries of the Otay Valley Parcel correspond to lands
dedicated to reservoirs in the Otay Water District and City of San Diego water system. a
Federal Aviation Administration airway control facility. a rock mining quarry and privately
owned parcels.
Years of dry farming have smoothed much of the terrain of the Otay Valley Parcel. which
is predominantly characterized by gently undulating ridges and eroded terraces. The
most distinctive feature on the parcel is the Otay River Valley. which traverses the
southem portion of the parcel and topographically separates most of the parcel from
Otay Meso. The Otay River floodplain ranges in width from 300 to 800 feet. with the
narrower segment located near midpoint of the parcel. The floor of the valley ranges
from 300 feet to nearly one mile in width. Salt Creek. which drains south to the Otay River
Valley. generally forms the eastern boundary of the parcel. Other tributary canyons
which feed into the Otay River Valley include Wolf. Johnson. and O'Neal canyons.
Savage Dam is located offsite. near the southern tip of Lower Otay Lake. From the river
valley floor (approximately 300 feet MSL). elevations gradually rise up to the lake surface
(490 feet MSL). Near the western boundary. Poggi Canyon bisects the northwest quarter
of the parcel. and the Otay Landfill has leveled the adjacent hillside. Another
topographic feature of the Otay Valley Parcel is Telegraph Canyon. which forms the
northern boundary of the parcel. Elevations range from 160 to 670 feet MSL on this
parcel.
Proctor Valley Parcel: The Proctor Volley Parcel comprises 7.915 acres. The Proctor
Vailey area is the northernmost portion of the Otay Ranch and is generally bounded by
Otay Lakes Road to the south. the Upper Otay Lake and San Miguel Mountains to the
west. the community of Jamul to the north. and vacant agricultural land to the east. The
four outparcels encompassed by the Proctor Valley Parcel correspand to two sections of
land owned by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). a City of San Diego reservoir
and two private holdings. Major landforms Include the Jamul and Cailahan Mountains.
West of the Jamul Mountains. the topography of Proctor Vailey generaily consists of
broad gentle hillsides. while the terrain eastward toward the Jamul Mountains becomes
increasingly rugged. Several smail. narrow drainages ore present along the eastern
edge of the vailey. A low east-west ridge line effectively divides the valley near the
upper end of the parcel. To the north of the Jamul Mountains. Proctor Valley continues
as a brood even meadow. changing to rolling hillsides to the south. South of the Jamul
Mountains is 0 large. roiling meso that overlooks Lower Otay Lake. Two large north-south
canyons cut across the meso. extending to the lake. This parcel is trle most
topographically diverse of the three parcels of the ranch. with elevations ranging from
approximately 500 feet MSL to a high point of 2.os3 feet MSL to the east at the top of
Callahan Mountain (offslte).
3"'5
Page,
San Tsiclro Mountains Parcel: The San Ysidro Mountains Parcel is comprised of 5,555 acres
located in the southeastem portion of the project area, along the northern foothills of the
Son Ysidro Mountoins and Otoy Mountain. The parcel is generally bounded by the
eastern arm of Lower Otay Lake and vacant land along Otay Lakes Rood to the north,
the main body of Lower Otay Lake to the west, land owned by the BLM and several
hundred acres of private holdings to the south. and vacant land just west of the
community of Dulzura to the east.
Terrain on the San Ysidro Mountains Parcel Is dominated by hillsides and ridgelines
extending north from the San Ysidro Mountains. In general, the area immediately south
of the lake features brooder, gentler hillsides, while the central portion contains steep
mountain slopes and the narrow drainages of Big and uttle Cedar Canyons. This series of
natural drainages extends from the mountains north, draining the site toward Jamul-
Dulzura Creek. The eastern portion of the parcel ls characterized by upper elevation
volleys, with 0 meso top, formed by moderately sloped ridgelines. In the Hubbard Springs
area, brooder volleys occur as the onsite elevations gradually drop down from the
mountains. Slopes and hillsides along the eastem property boundary serve to separate
the site from the nearby community of Dulzura. Elevations on this parcel range from 550
feet MSL to 1.550 feet MSL.
2. Project Access
Regional Access: Existing regional access to the Otay Ranch project site is provided
primarily by Interstate 805 (1-805), a north-south freeway located two miles west of the
Otay Valley Parcel. Additional north-south access will be provided by the proposed
State Route 125 (SR-125) highway. SR-125 will be located abaut four miles east of 1-805
crossing the Otay Valley Parcel. Secondary north-south access is available on Interstate
5 (1-5), aiong the Bayfront. 6 miles west of the Otay Ranch. State Route 94 (SR-94) Is an
east-west highway which provides access to the northern portions of the Otay Ranch.
State Route 54 (SR-54) between 1-5 and 1-805. and easterly to inland communities. also
provides east-west access.
Local Access: Local north-south access to the Otay Ranch site is provided by Otay Lakes
Road. Corral Canyon Road/Rutgers Avenue and Heritage Rd. East H Streettproctor
Valley Road provides access to northern portions of the Proctor Valley Parcel as it
continues northeasterly and connects to SR-94 and Jamul. To the south. Heritage Road.
La Media and Alto Rood provide access from SR-905. Local access to the site in the
east-west direction Is primarily provided by Otay Valley Road. Orange Avenue, East
Palomar Street and Telegraph Canyon Road/Otay Lakes Road. which also serves as a
continuous east-west link between 1-805 and SR-94.
Transit: The South Coast Organizations Operating Transit (SCOOD was formed In 1979 ta
govern Chula Vista Transit. SCOOT is a joint-powers agency of the City of Chula Vista
and the County of San Diego. Chuta Vista Transit (CYT), a contracted service sponsored
by the City of Chula Vista has routes which serve major areas and activity centers.
3-~
Page'
including Southwestern College. H Street. Otay Lakes Rood and Telegraph Canyon Road
(north of the Otay Valley Parcel). CVT. through the Metropolitan Transit Development
Boord (MTDB) coordinates its service with other regional agencies such as the San Diego
Trolley. San Diego Transit Corporation (SDTC). National City Transit (NCD. and Route 932
operated by Southwest Coaches. Trolley service exlsts six miles west of Otay Ranch and
CVT provides publiC transit connections to that existing service.
3. SUrrounding Land Uses
The area surrounding the project site includes Otay Mesa. central and eastern Chula
Vista. Jamul. the San YSidro Mountains. the Jamul Mountains. the Otay Lakes (See Figure
3. Surrounding Area Map). and the community of Jamul.
~~7
Page I
otay Mesa
Major existing land uses near the project site in Otay Mesa Include the Brown Field
Municipai Airport, the County of San Diego East Mesa Detention Facility, the Richard J.
Donovan Correctional Facility, auto salvage yards. a variety of Industrial developments,
and agricultural land.
o Brown Field Municipol Airport is one of the most significant activity centers in Otay
Mesa. The approximately 9CXJ-acre general aviation airport is located adjacent
to the southern portion of the Otay Valley Parcel. The City of San Diego owns
and operates this facility. Monthly flight operations average approximately
20,000. Otay Mesa and Brown Field are being evaluated as a potential reglonai
airport site. An Airport Master Plan and Land Use Plan for Brown Field addresses
the projected needs of the Otay Mesa Community Plan and establishes
configurations for airport facilities.
o The County's East Mesa Detention Facility Is located immediately southeast of the
Otay River portion of the site. This facility is located on a 524 acre parcel, on
opposite sides of O'Neal Canyon. East Mesa Detention Facility Phase I is currently
95% complete and will provide 764 jail cells for medium and maximum security
prisoners and a 256 bed honor camp. The East Mesa Detention Facility will
provide for 6,000 medium and maximum security prisoners at full build-out.
Access to this facility is from the south via SR-905.
o The Richard J. Donovan Correctional Facility is a state facility with 2.250 cells
housing 4,000 inmates. located on a 700 acre parcel.. Located immediately
southeast of the Otoy River portion of Otay Ranch. this facility has a development
potential of 8.000 inmates at full build-out. The state prison provides medium and
maximum security for prisoners serving sentences longer than one year.
The 20.600 acre Otay Mesa area is bounded by the Otay River Valley to the north. the
San Ysldro Mountains to the east. the United States/Mexico International Border to the
south and 1-805 to the west. Land use juridictlon over the Otoy Mesa area is about evenly
shared by the County of Son Diego (10.500 acres) and the City of Son Diego (10.100
acres). The western portion of Otay Mesa Is governed by the City of Son Diego Otay
Mesa Community Plan. The eastern portion is governed by the County of San Diego
Otay Subregional Plan. The Otoy Subregional Plan will be implemented through the Otoy
Mesa East Specific Plan. currently being drafted.
The Otay Mesa Community Plan includes the following major elements:
IJ Residential Uses: Current land use plans allocate about 2.500 acres for residential
use. resulting in a build-out population of 46.500 persons.
']-8
Page"
Q Industrial: About 6.200 acres are currently zon\..d for industrial uses, with 3,500
acres within the City and 2.700 acres in the unincorporated area.
Q Commercial: About 590 acres 'of land are'zoned commercial, with 450 acres In
the City of Son Diego and 140 In the County.
Q Border Crossing: The second border crossing between San ')Iego and Tijuana is
approximately 2,000 feet to the east of Harvest Road. It is anticipated Harvest
Road will connect to SR-905 which will be completed as a freeway leading to the
border crossing. Upon completion of the proposed SR-125 connection to SR-905
extended, the Otay Valley Parcel will be located on the direct route from 1-805 to
the border.
Chula Vista
Central Chula VIsta: Central Chula Vista is generally bounded by 1-5 and 1-805 to the
west and the east, respectively, National City's city limit to the north, and L Street to the
south. This approximately 4,040-acre area contains the city's oldest neighborhoods and
the most central activities, including administration, retail, office, and institutional uses.
Q Existing residential areas generally contain well maintained traditional single-
family homes. More recently, multi-family residential complexes and walk-up
apartments have been constructed.
Q Central Chula Vista's economy is predominantly commercial. with scattered
service-oriented office and financial uses. The area is comprised of three key
commercial districts: Chula Vista Shopping Center (Town Centre II), Broadway,
and Third Avenue (Town Centre I).
Q Rohr Industries, the SDG&E power plant and other light industrial activities are the
major industrial uses in what has historically been 0 residential and commercial
area.
Proposed Mure land uses in the area ore substantially similar to existing land uses. Major
elements of the land uses for the Central Chula Vista area are:
Q Conservation of existing single-family neighborhoods;
Q Density reduction in some residential areas;
Q Mixed use near Town Centre I;
Q Revitalization of Town Centre II and Broadway Strip; and
3-'
Page.
o Mixed residential and office between the E and H Street trolley stations.
Eastern Chula Vista: The area directly west and north of the Otay River portion of the
project site lies primarily within the Chula Vista city limits, or is within the City's Sphere of
Influence. West of the site is residential and industrial development, including the
County's Otay Landfill Site and several industrial parks. Eastem Chula Vista to the north
of the site is characterized by residential development with supporting
commercial/Industrial and public land uses. Much of the area is currently, or has recently
been, master planned to phase the residential development with other types of
supporting land uses. Other major land uses in the vicinity of the project site include
Southwestern Community College and the Community Hospital of Chuta Vista.
Developments approved or already under construction in the vicinity of the project site
are described below.
o Bonita Long Canyon is a master planned single family residential project on 650
acres located .75 miles northeast of the Otay Valley Parcel. The average density
of this project is 1.3 DUs/acre. Bonita Long Canyon is essentially bulit-out.
o Rancho Del Rey is a master planned community located east of 1-805 and
intersected by East H Street in Chula Vista. This 1.600 acre project will have over
4,000 dwelling units, with an average density of 2.5 DUs/acre. Sales and
construction are in progress.
o The EastLake development is located adjacent to the western and northern
portions of the Otay Ranch project boundary. This 3,073 acre master planned
community will Include 8,900 residential units (with an average density of 2.9
DUs/acre), 280 acres of Industrial land, and 100 acres of commercial/office uses.
Total project build-out is 20 years. The EastLake I community, which is essentially
buiit-out. consists of 2.384 dwelling units. EastLake II (Greens and Trails) consists of
4,869 units. A SPA for EastLake Greens plan has been adopted for 2,774 dwelling
units, with construction and sales underway.
o Sunbow Is a master planned development located east of 1-805 and south of
Telegraph Canyon Road. The build-out of the Sunbow project will provide 2A31
dwelling units, at an average density of 3.4 DUs/acre. The first phase consisted of
485 single family units on 100 acres along Telegraph Canyon Road. The second
SPA proposes development of 1,946 residential units.
o Salt Creek I Is a master planned community located near the Intersection of
Mure SR-125 and East H Street. This residential project has GDP and SPA approval
for 550 units. Single family homes in the first tentative map area are currently
under construction and for sale.
3"'0
Page.
o Salt Creek Ranch is a 1.200 acre master planned community located near the
intersection of Mure SR-125 and East H Street. This project SPA approval for 2,662
units.
o The ARCO/United States Olympic Training Center COTC) is located on a 154 acre
site between the Otay Valley Parcel and the Otay Lakes. When completed, the
OTC will train athletes for International competition. The site is currently under
construction.
o Rancho San Miguel is a master planned development located north of Salt Creek
Ranch and east of the tentative future SR-125 alignment. The project has a
general development plan pending before the City of Chula Vista for 1,654 units,
with an average of 2 DUs/acre.
The Eastern Territories Area Plan contains approximately 23,700 acres of primarily
unincorporated land which lies east and south of the City of Chula Vista. The planning
area is bordered by 1-805. Telegraph Canyon Road to its Intersection with the proposed
SR-125. approximately along SR-125 to SR-54. Son Miguel Mountain. the Upper and Lower
Otay Reservoirs. and the Otay Valley. Most of the land In this planning area is either
vacant or devoted to limited agriculture. Existing urban uses consist of residential
developments in scattered locations and Industrial developments along Otay Valley
Rood. An active rock quarry and crushing operation is located at the southwest base of
Rock Mountain. Otoy Landfill and an inactive hazardous waste landfill are aiso located
in the planning area.
The Chula Vista General Plan Eastern Territories contains many prominent physical
characteristics. Sweetwater Reservoir and Son Miguel Mountain on the northeastern
edge of the planning area: the foothills of the Jamul and Son Ysidro Mountains on the
eastern boundary; and the edge of Otay Mesa defines the southern boundary. The
major watercourses in the planning area are the Otoy River Valley and Salt Creek. The
Eastern Territories contain reservoirs. steep slopes. mountains. canyons. flood plains. and
other areas deemed less suitable for urban development. consisting of 11AOO acres.
Existing uses total 1.100 acres. leaving 11.200 acres of land generally deemed
developable.
The Eastern Territories Plan covers most of Otay Ranch's Otay Valley Parcel. The goal of
the Eastem Territories Plan is to promote balanced development on the broad meso tops
with the predominant character of low/medium density. The Plan would permit up to
17.083 units on 9.618 acres within Otoy Ranch's Otay Valley Parcel.
Major components of the proposed Chula Vista Eastern Territories Area Land Use Plan are
as follows:
3-1/
Page'
1:1 Circulation System: A circulation system including two river crossings. SR- 125 and
Heritage Road. SR-125 is planned to be a major north-south regional route
proposed to ultimately develop to freeway standards.
1:1 University Site: The Eastem Territories Area Plan Identifies a 170 acre university site
on an area bounded by Orange Avenue. Hunte Parkway and EastLake Parkway
within the Otay Valley Parcel.
1:1 Public Transit: The San Diego Trolley extension serves the City of Chula Vista along
1-5. An expansion of the regional transit system is planned to Include a route
parallel to. or within. SR-125 with the development of the Eastern Territories. This
transit system may Include an additional line of the San Diego Trolley. express bus
service on a separate travel lane and/or other systems as part of the regional
network.
1:1 Urban Center: A 285 acre regional shopping and office center with 34 acres of
falriy dense residential land uses.
1:1 Chula Vista Greenbelt: The Eastern Territories Includes the largest portion of the
Chula Vista Greenbelt. The Greenbelt extends east-west through the Eastern
Territories from 1-805 aiong the Otay River Valley to Salt Creek and the Otay Lakes.
Central Proctor Valley
There are approximately 397.5 acres of private ownership adjacent to the Central
Proctor Valley area of Otay Ranch. The City of San Diego owns the largest parcel
located directly adjacent to Central Proctor Valley and the Upper Otay Lake Reservoir.
Jamul
To the northeast of the Proctor Valley Parcel lies the community of Jamul and to the
northwest. Rancho San Diego. Most of the land in the vicinity of the project site to the
west and east is vacant; some of it consists of gently rolling hills used for agriculture and
grazing; and some Is more rugged. steep open space. Development is primarily
concentrated around Rancho San Diego to the north and the rural community of Jamul
to the northeast. Jamulls comprised of primarily large-lot estates. horse ranches. and
agriculture.
1:1 The majority of the area Is within the Jamul/Dulzura Subregional portion of the
County of San Diego General Plan. There are several small rural or semi-rural
communities In the Subregion. including Jamul which accommodates the
majority of the Subregion's population. The character of the Subregion Is
generally rural.
.3"~
page.
.
IJ The rural character of the area is reflected by the large lots which vary in size from
one half acre to over 20 acres. The predominant lot size is between one and two
acres.
IJ The Jamul/Dulzura Subregional Plan designations for the areas that are adjacent
to or in close proximity to the Proctor Valley Parcel are: Residential (1): 1 DUll, 2
and 4 Ac; Estate (17): 1 DU/2, 4 Ac and Multipie Rural (18): 1 DU/4, 8 and 20 Ac.
Other current and proposed land uses in the general vicinity are described below:
IJ Las Montanas Is 0 922 acre specific plan area which Includes 0 300-room hotel,
conference center, 18 hole golf course and 170 residential units.
IJ Hidden Volley is 0 1 A60 acre project containing a proposal for 421 dwelling units
on 3/4 acre lots. A specific plan amendment has recently been approved.
IJ Honey Springs is 0 previously approved specifiC plan on 2,022 acres. Proposed
plans Include appraximately 300 dwelling units.
IJ Daley Ranch is located Immediately adjacent to the Proctor Volley and Son
Ysldro Mountains Parcels to the east and north, respectively. The total ranch
holdings ore approximately 10,000 acres, most of which consist of open lands
used for cottle grazing and agriculture. The property's west boundary is at the
bottom of the steeper portions of Callahan and Jamul Mountains and Is presently
used for forming and grazing.
The County of Son Diego Jamul/Dulzura Subregional Plan designation for the portion of
the Daley Ranch adjacent to northeastern Proctor Volley Parcel boundary is Agricultural
Preserve (20), which allows for the development of 1 DU/8 Ac. The southwestern portion
of the Daley Ranch, located between the Proctor Volley Parcel and Son Ysidro
Mountains Parcel and extends along the Dulzura Creek, has 0 land use designation of
Multiple Rural Use (18): 1 DU/4, 8 and 20 ac.
San Ysldro Mountains
The area surrounding the Son YSldro Mountains Parcells primarily open space. The rural
community of Dulzura Is located east of the San YSidro Mountains Parcel. The Thousand
Trails Recreational Vehicle (RV) Pork and the Daley Quarry are located between the
Proctor Volley ana SOn Ysidro Mountains Parcels off Otay Lakes Road. Other recreational
land uses are located to the west of the Son YSidro Mountains Parcel, Including Lower
Otay Lake; the Lower Otay County Pork, located on the southern side of Lower Otay
Lake; and the Son Diego Air Sports Center, located on the eastern end of Lower Otay
Lake.
3"/9
Page'
a Dulzura: Dulzura is one of several rural communities included In the County of San
Diego Jamul/Dulzura Subregional Plan. Dulzura Is located approximately two
miles east of the San Ysidro Mountains Parcel. Dulzura is rural in character, with
residential development occurring on large-lot estates. The County land use
designation for the portions of Dulzura immediately adjacent to the eastemmost
portion of the San Ysidro Mountains Parcel is Multiple Rural Use (18), which allows
for development of 1 DU/4, 8 and 20 Ac.
a Helix/Lambron Property: An area of approximately 900 acres located within the
center of the western portion of the San Ysidro Mountains Parcel. This out-parcel,
in the ownership of Helix Land Company, has been disturbed due to grading of
roads throughout the property. The property has Multiple Rural Use (18) land use
designation within the County of San Diego Otay Subregional Plan Area.
a The Thousand Trails RV Park: The Thousand Trails RV Park Is located In Big Cedar
Canyon off Otay Lakes Road and abuts the San Ysldro Mountains Parcel of Otay
Ranch along the RV park's southern and western boundaries. The park is a
membership RV park that Includes RV camp sites, a small store, laundry facilities,
and recreational facilities such as a swimming pool, shuffleboard. horseshoes. and
a playground.
a Daley Quarry: Daley Quarry is located just east of Lower Otay Lake off the south
side of Otay Lake Road. The 27-acre quarry Is not currently In operation, but a
permit is being processed through the County of San Diego to allow for the
continuation and expansion of mining operations. The San Ysidro Mountains
Parcel abuts the quarry property on the quarry's southern boundary.
a Otay Lakes: Otay Lakes and the surrounding areas are owned by the City of San
Diego. The lakes are used for water storage and paSSive recreational activities
such as boating and fishing. Once the Olympic Training Center Facility is
completed to the west. rowing events are also planned. Other land uses located
at the southern end of Lower Otay Lake include the Lower Otay County Park and
a City of San Diego water treatment facility.
a San Diego Sports Center: The San Diego Sports Center is located on the eastern
side of Lower Otay Lake adjacent to the San YSldro Mountains Parcel. The sports
center consists of a dirt alrstrtp and supporting structures and is used for sky diving
and ultralight activities. The sports center leases the property from the City of San
Diego and operates under a Conditional Use Permit from the County of San
Diego.
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Lands
a The BLM manages two separate parcels within the northern portion of the Proctor
Valley Parcel of Otay Ranch. The large northern outparcel encompasses the
A "tf
Page.
Callahan Mountain Peak and some of the tops of side-slopes extending down
from the peak.
a The San YSidro Mountains Parcel is surrounded by the BLM administered land to
the south and southeast. This BlM land is part of the Westem Otay Mountain and
Southem Otay Mountain Wilderness Study Areas. These areas are also part of a
National Cooperative land and Wildlife Area.
a The BLM's South CC.Jst Resource Management Plan contains policies applicable
to the BLM properties in the vicinity of the Otay Ranch site.
III. OTAY RANCH PLANNING HISTORY
Early Planning - 1984 to 1989: United Enterprtses Ltd.. the prior property owner. initiated a
planning process for the Otay Ranch in 1984. by requesting County authorization to
process an application for a General Plan Amendment goveming Otay Ranch. Due to
the size and complexity of the project. and the need to work with other jurisdictions. the
County created an Informal cooperative planning process through the adoption of
Board of Supervisors Policy 1-1091. After four years of preliminary studies. in early 1989,
the Board of SuperviSOrs authorized submittal of a General Plan Amendment for the Otay
Ranch property.
In November of 1988. The Boldwin Company purchased the Otay Ranch property from
United Enterprises ltd. In April of 1989, The Baldwin Company executed a 'Statement of
Intention-2 with the City of Chula Vista, contemplating the preparation of a
Development Agreement In association with the planning of Otay Ranch. and
recognizing that the planning and development of Otay Ranch would have a
tremendous impact on Chula Vista.
Memorandum of Understanding: On August 1, 1989, the Board of Supervisors and Chuta
Vista City Council executed a Memorandum of Understanding3 formaily empowering
the Interjurisdictional Task Force (IJTF) to coordinate the preparation and review of Otay
Ranch plans to formalize the relationship between the County of San Diego and City of
Chula Vista's planning efforts (See Figure 4, Process Chart).
1 County Board of Supervisofs Policy 1-109.
2 Resolution of the City Counci of the cay of Chula VISta 'Statement of Intention' Conc:emilg the Creatiln of Clay Ranch,
4/27189.
3 Memorandum of Understanding beMen the City of Chula VISta and the County of San Diego to establish a joill planning
leam for the processing of the Clay Ranch projecl, &11/89;.
J-1.5
Page.
~
New Town Plan
.E~1r-*'tr
'TIa&:AlllfrIIli
.F~Uul."*,,
Coun~ Bolld 01
SupefYison
~
.
-
"C'
Ch.. V... <:I,
Counc:i
D
Notice 01 Preparation
CEQA
5coping
c
.
UTF Goals. Policioo
Obieclives
~
Dron Fodlilr
Imphmenlalion Plan,
Orall Resource
Uanagement Plan
1990~.... PijlOlI
PubIlc UTF
Workshop Workshop
E.port
SomiNK
~
~
~
IlrlllGlOWlh
1Ianogo...... Plan
Tratlk: Analvsi,
Wiklil. Coffldor
5''''''
Micro
--
EIR
<:Iii., AdwiaoIy ~
ViIIIgoI
Chanin,
Join!
Workshops
.
General
Development
Pion!
Subtegion.. Plan
ChtA Vis.o
General Plan
A_....
s.n OMgo
Counl)'
GlIMrol Plan
A_....
Govemmenl
SlrucCu,elSphell
This Memorandum of Understanding (See Attachment 1) sets forth a work plan for the
Joint processing and review of Otay Ranch planning documents, and adoption of
General Plan Amendments, Master Development Agreements, an Environmental Impact
Report, Service Revenue Plan, Sphere of Influence Study and Annexation Plan. The
Memorandum of Understanding creates a joint planning team and designates the City
of Chula Vista as the lead agency in supervising the preparation of the Otay Ranch
Environmental Impact Report, with the County providing review services.
Interturisdlctlonal Task Force: The Inte~urisdictional Task Force (IJTF) consists of community
representatives and elected officials from the City of Chula Vista, the County of San
Diego and the City of San Diego, as depleted below in Figure 5. The IJTF is a Joint body
whose function Is to review and make policy recommendations to the County Board of
Supervisors and Chula Vista City Council regarding Otay Ranch.
Interjurlsdlctlonal Task Force
Brian Bilbray, County Supervisor
Leonard Moore, Chula Vista City Council
George Bailey, County. Supervisor
Jerry Rindone, Chula Vista City Council
Bob Riner, San Diego City Council
Bob Tugenberg, Chula Vista Planning Commission
Frank Urtasun, County Planning Commission
Frank Scott, Public
Mark Montijo, JamuVDulzura Community Planning Group
Claudia Troisi, The Baldwin Company
Figure 5: The Otay Ranch Interjunsdlctlonal Task Force. Note: A new public
member wUI be appointed c:lJe to the resignation of Frank Scan.
Executive Cornmlltee: The Executive Committee consists of key executive staff from both
the County of San Diego and the City of Chula Vista (See Figure 6 below). This
committee provides direction to the Joint Project Team and makes recommendations to
the IJTF.
~ ..,.,
Page C
Interjurisdictional Task Force
Executive Committee
John Goss, Chula Vista City Manager
Lari Sheehan, County Deputy CAO
George Krampl, Chula Vista Deputy City Manager
Jerry Jamriska, County Deputy Planning Director
Tony Lettieri, Joint Project Team General Manager
Rgure 6: The Inte~urIsdctlonal Task Force executive Comrnlllee
Project Team: The Joint Project Team Is comprised of planning and engineering
professionals from the County of San Diego and the City of Chula Vista. assembled to
assist In the preparation. review and anaiysls of Otay Ranch planning documents (See
Figure 7 below). The team Is managed by Joint Project Team General Manager. Tony
Lettieri. The Joint Project Team also secures the services of outside planning. engineering.
financial and environmental consultants.
InterJurlsdictlonal Task Force
Joint Project Team
Joint Project Team General Manager. Tony Lettieri
County 01 San Diego Planning Professionals
City Of Chula Vista Planning and Engineering Professionals
Retained Planning, Engineering, Financial and Environmental
Consultants
Rgure 7: The Inte~urtsdctlonal Task Force Jalnt Praject T earn
Technical Commltt_: The Inte~urisdlctlonal Task Force established nine Technical
Committees to provide technical review of the Otay Ranch New Town Plan and
subsequent altematlve land use plans and analyses. These groups of professionals from
SANDAG. Caltrans. City of San Diego. County of San Diego and City of Chula Vista
developed systematic approaches to critique the various evolving plans. Technical
Committees studied and provided written reports on transportatlon.lnfrastnJcture. public
services (police and fire), servfce revenue. regional services. The nine technical
committees are depicted below in Figure 8.
.3,,18
Page.
Interjurlsdlctlonal Task Force
Technical Committees
Transportation & Service/Revenue Parks, Recreation
Transit & Open Space
I Schools I SewerlWater Regional
Services
I Biology I I Land Use I I Public Safety I
Rgure 8: Thelnte~ur1sdc!lonol Task Force Technical Committees.
Public PClItIclpatlon: Public participation has been 0 key component of the Otay Ranch
planning process. Early In the planning process. The Baldwin Company formed 11
Community Advisory Task Forces (CAlF). Over 130 citizens participated In 46 individual
sessions over 0 four month period. Soon after 0 March 1990 publiC workshop. the IJTF
created seven new citizen committees to review Otay Ranch plans. These committees
met over 0 three month period.
UTF Goals, PoUc!es. Objectives: In December of 1989. the InterJurisdlctlonal Task Force
accepted the Otay Ranch Goals. Objectives and Pollcies4. These goals. objectives and
policies provide 0 policy framework to guide review of The Baldwin Company General
Plan application. subsequent land use alternatives and the preparation of the General
Development Pion/Sub-Regional Plan.
New Town Plan: In October. 1989. The Baldwin Company submitted 0 General Plan
Amendment application to the Interjurisdlctlonal Task Force entitled the Otoy Ranch New
Town PionS. The application proposed the creation of 0 community with residential
villages. resorts. 0 commercial center. 0 research pork. 0 university site and two regional
parks. The New Town Plan calls for 15 villages built throughout the Ranch over the next
four decodes. providing approximately 49.648 new homes. related services and
employment opportunities.
March 10, 1990 Public Workshop: On Saturday. March 10. 1990. the IJTF hosted a public
workshop to explain the Otoy Ranch planning process. the status of the environmental
review. the components of the New Town Plan. and to gain publiC Input concerning the
Mure of the Ranch property. Following the IJTF workshop. seven IJTF citizen committees
were formed to review the preparation of Mure plans. The committees focused on
cultural arts/libraries. environmental/sensitive lands. housing. parks. recreation and open
4 Olay Ranc:h Goals, Objectives and Policies, Inte~uri&dlclional Task Fon:e, 12189.
5 Olay Ranc:h New Town Plan, The BaIdwi1 Company, 1001189.
~"'I'
Page.
space. traffic and roads. sewer/water/conservation. and senior/social services Issues.
Meetings were held over a three month period.
Interjurlsclictional Task Force Workshop: The Interjurlsdlctlonal Task Force conducted an
expansive. free flowing workshop on March 21. 1990 to more precisely define Otay
Ranch planning goals. Issues and priorities in response to the proposed New Town Plan.
public comments and professional analysis. Discussions centered on the following key
lssues6:
Q SR - 125: Higher Intensity development should be concentrated along the SR-
125 corridor.
Cl Mass Transit: High priority Is given to mass transit. Including strategic use of
density to promote a successful transit system.
Cl Intensities: Higher intensities near transit corridors may be acceptable to
support mass transit.
Cl Eastern Urban Center: The Eastern Urban Center should be highly focused
and may contain Intense land uses.
Cl Resort Center: A destination resort should be considered within the Otay
Ranch.
Cl Campus Style Industrial: Land should be Included on the Otay Valley Parcel
for research and industrial uses.
Project Team Land Use A1tematlves: On June 21. 1990. IJTF staff released the .Project
Team Land Use Alternatives: which included four alternative land use plans: the Project
Team Alternative (PTA). the Low Density Alternative. the Environmental Alternative and
the Fourth Alternative? The plans represent the Joint Project Team's critique of the New
Town Plan, and efforts to illustrate alternative Interpretations of the accepted Goals and
Objectives.
Planning Expert SemInar: In August of 1990. the Interjurisdlctlonal Task Force sponsored a
seminar with national land planning experts to critique the alternative Otay Ranch
planning concepts. The woikshop discussion emphasiZed the following facility-related
planning themes8:
Cl EmphasiZe non-motoriZed pathways which stress walking, cycling and mass
transit.
6 l~ictionaJ Task Force Public Worbhop Report: 3/21190.
7 Projed Team Land Use AIlematives, Clay Ranch Joint Project Team, 6/21190 .
8 Expert 58milar M81erials end Summery: 8/11190.
3 "'0
Page 41
\
Q Build incrementally and be careful to recognize the role of the market place.
Don't require facilities and services or the build-out of land uses before market
demand exists.
Q Basic infrastructure should be built concurrent with need. Schools are the basic
infrastructure which define neighborhood character and boundaries. Cultural
facilities create bridges of goodwill and opportunity. Village centers should use
public facilities as the catalyst to create 0 sense of place.
Q Look to new flexible and non-traditional planning and building standards to make
Otay Ranch unique.
Clllzen CommItt_ Combine: In September 1990. following reiease of the Project Team
Land Use Alternatives. the IJTF combined the Baldwin Citizen Advisory Task Forces and
IJTF Committees to form the Governing Committee. The purpose of this committee is to
oversee the progress of Its three subcommittees and attempt to resolve any conflicts.
The Governing Committee Is comprised of 011 Natural Resources, Infrastructure and
Human Resources Subcommittee members as depicted In Figure 9 below.
Interjurlsdlctlonal Task Force
Citizen Committees
Governing
Committee
I I
Natural Resources Human Resources Infrastructure
Subcommittee Subcommittee Subcommittee
Rgure 9: The Inte~urlsdc~onal TaskForce Citizen Committees.
Between September 1990 and December 1991, the Goveming Committee and It's three
Subcommittees met 54 times to review a variety of documents which emerged through
the planning process. Including the Initial general plan proposal. various altematlve land
use plans. draft Implementation plans. and 16 Issue papers prepared between August
1990 and October 1991.
The Governing Committee authored a series of recommendations for consideration by
the Interjurisdlctional Task Force.9
9 Report 10 the Intllljurisdiclional Task Fort:e, OIay Ranch CIlzen AdviscryConvnillee, Nov. 199010 Nov. 1991.
3 .. ~I
Page.
1990 Issue Papers: The Interjurisdictional Task Force directed Project Team staff to
prepare 'Issue Papers'l 0 to identify key issues and explore alternatives to resolve conflicts.
This set of Issue papers was prepared during the summer of 1990. and accepted by the
Interjurisdlctlonal Task Force in late summer and early fall. Issue papers addressed the
following topics:
Q North/South Transit Corridor: Include a north/south transit corridor which
generally follows the SR-125 alignment through the Otay Ranch and extends
easte~y Into the heart of the Eastern Urban Center.
Q East/West Transit Corridor: Provide for an east/west transit corridor.
Q Otay Valley Road and Paseo Ranchero Alignments: Extend Otay Valley
Road southerly of Rock Mountain immediately exiting the valley on the north side.
Paseo Ranchero. at Its southern extremity. should cross the Otay River Valley at
the approximate location of the current river crossing. and extend southerly to the
current location of Otay Valley Road/Heritage Road (north-south segment).
Q South Dam Road: Delete South Dam Road and configure land uses so that a
Mure road connection remains feasible.
Q Proctor Valley Road Alignment: Align Proctor Valley Road as shown In the
County General Plan. except that the most easterly portion will swing further to
the south to Intersect SR-94.
Q Millar Ranch Road: Include Millar Ranch Road In the final land use plan as a
major public road.
Q Eastern Urban Center Location: Locate the Eastern Urban Center east of
SR-125 and south of Orange Avenue.
Q Eastern Urban Center Land Use Intensity: Eastern Urban Center (EUC)
residential intensities should range from 2-story townhomes to high-rise apartments
and condominiums. Commercial development should be comprised of a
regional mall and specialty retail shops at the base of office buildings. Business
hatels and office development should be planned. Public uses such as a civic
center. cultural center. park and ride facilities. parks. transit stations. schools and
child care facilities should also be Included In the EUC.
Q Character of Village Commercial Centers: The village commercial
centers on the Otay Valley Parcel should: include all neighborhood and
community commercial uses; be located away from major circulation element
roads; Include higher Intensity residential development In close proximity to the
10 NorWSouth Transit Corridor (9/5190); EastIWesI Trans~ Corridor( 9/5190); Clay Valley Road and Paseo Ranchero
Aignmenl (BI3O/9O); South Dam Road (BI3O/9O); Prcc:lor Valley Road AignmenI (&'31190); Milar Ranch Road .
(BI3O/9O); Eastern Urban Center Location (10/10190); Eeslem Urben Center Land Uee 1M2I9O); Intell8ily Character of
ViIage Commercial Centers (10115190); and Road Interchangee on SR-125 (10117190); Wiler Availabilly( 10117190).
!"'12.
Page.
village center; and mix commercial uses with civic. residential. employment and
recreational uses in on environment which allows transit users. pedestrians.
bicyclists and automobile drivers equal and easy access to and within each
village center.
Cl Rood Interchanges on SR-125: Include four SR-125 interchanges (not
counting Telegraph Canyon Rood).
Q Water Availability: Proceed with processing and approval of the General
Plan Amendment. while cooperating with water agencies to identify long-term
permanent water supplies.
Phase One Progress Plan: In July 1990. the IJTF directed the Joint Project Team to work
with the applicant to prepare additional land use plan alternatives for the Otay Ranch
property. The IJTF appointed 0 planning team consisting of members of County stoff.
Chula Vista City stoff. the property owner and retained planning consultants to meld the
best elements of the previously prepared land use plans. taking Into consideration the
adopted IJTF Goals and Objectives. biological constraints and comments from the
various technical and community groups. As 0 result. the Phase One Progress Plan was
presented to the IJTF in February 1991.
1991 Issue Papers: Preparation of the Phase One Progress Plan raised new Issues which
required additional study and analysis. This set of Issue papers addressed the following
toplcsll:
o
Otay Ranch Village Character Issue Paper: Discusses the circulation. land use
and design criteria which provide diversity. character and 0 pedestrian
orientation to 0 village. while providing continuity within Otoy Ranch.
o
Otoy Volley Regional Pork Issue Paper: Defines the planning 'edge' of the Otay
Volley Regional Pork and Open Space and discusses how active and passive
park uses should be sited.
Q
Development Around Lower Otay Lake Reservoir: Discusses where
development should be allowed on the land surrounding Lower Otoy Lake. This
Issue paper addresses economic viability of development. compatibility of land
uses. access. sense of community. visibility and resource sensitivity.
Q
Roods Crossing Otay Volley Issue Paper: Addresses how best to accommodate
regional traffic demand. while minimizing the impact of the rood crossings on the
Otoy Volley's sensitive resources and proposed Regional Parle The Project Team
11
Vilage Character
Olay Valley Regional Peril
Development Around Lower Clay Lake Reeervoir
Olay River Valley Crossings
Centllll Proctor Valley Land Use Intensiies
University Site
3 ".2~
Page.
proposes three transportation corridors (Paseo Ranchero, La Media, SR-125). Alta
Road should be shown as a potential additional transportation corridor.
Q Central Proctor Valley Issue Paper: Discusses the appropriate community
character for Central Proctor Valley, taking Into consideration land uses and
densities. Alternatives land uses for Central Proctor Valley are analyzed,
considering resource sensitivity. type of transition. character of development,
components of intensity and elements of development.
Additionally, the Joint Project Team prepared a comprehensive analysis of all the
environmental resources on the property12. The report analyzed and categorized the
resources to create a reference guide to assist the Interjurisdictional Task Force.
Phase Two Progr_ Plan
In March 1992. the Project Team completed the iand use map for the Phase Two Progress
Plan. This plan reflects the analysis and conclusions contained In the 1991 issue papers.
IV. MAJOR PARALLEL POUCY DOCUMENTS
Facility Implementation Plans: In July, 1991. The Baldwin Company released the Otay
Ranch Facility Implementation Plan report. Twenty-two facilities are reviewed (See Figure
10 below). Several of the report.s chapters represent summaries of more complete and
Indepth analyses which have been previously prepared and reviewed by publiC
agencies. The purpose of the Facility Implementation Plan report was to provide an
Integrated and comprehensive analysis of the publiC facilities necessary to serve the
Otay Ranch, and how and when they will be provided.
Each of the 22 facility Implementation plans reviews applicable pUbliC goals, objectives
and policies and recommends policies to govern the implementation of an Otay Ranch
General Plan. The implementation plans also evaluate the existing facilities which serve
the Otay Ranch Project Area and surrounding communities. The plans analyze the
demand for new facilities necessary to serve the build-out of the proposed Otay Ranch
New Town Plan. Finally, each Implementation plan identifies and recommends specific
facilities, preferred financing mechanisms, phasing schedules and processing
requirements.
12 Otay RancIl Resooo:e Sensitivity Analysis, Joint Projed T sam, 6/12/91.
3..,,,
Page.
Otay Ranch
Public Facility Implementation Plans
Public Facilities
Drainage Facil~ies
Sewerage Facilities
Integrated Solid Waste Management
Transportation System Facilities
Urban Run-off Facil~ies
Water Facilities
Water Reclamation Facilities
Social Facilities
Arts and Cu~ural Facilities
Cemetery Facilities
Child Care Facilities
Hee.~h and Medical Facilities
ReligioUS and Benevolent Facilities
Social and Senior SelVioes Facilities
Community Facilities
Animal Control Facilities
Civic Facilities
Correctional Facilities
Fire Protection and Emergency Facilities
Justioe Facilities
Law Enforcement Facilities
Lbrary Facilities
Parks and Recreation Facilities
School Facilities
Agure 10: Olay Ranch Public Foclily Implementotton Plans
Growth Management Report: The Otoy Ranch Growth Management Report serves as an
umbrella document that provides an overall perspective and direction for the
development of the community of Otay Ranch. The report Identifies growth related
Issues and plans. creates goals. objectives and policies designed to complement exlsting
plans and solve Identified Issues and concems. and establishes performance thresholds
and Implementation measures. The report summarizes population, economic and
housing growth history and forecasts In the San Diego region and the South County
subregion and reviews the growth policies of the City of Chula Vista. the County of San
Diego and regional policies pending before the San Diego Associations of Govemments.
The report recommends a series of Implementation measures. Including annual threshold
compliance reporttng. SPA processing requirements and a vUlage phasing plan.
Resource Management Plan: The Resource Management Plan Is Intended to achieve
two goals: to provide long term protection. enhancement and management of sensitive
resources; and to create an open space system that will serve as a living museum by
providing new opportunities for research and education about the South County's
natural heritage. The plan accomplishes these goals by:
3..~1
page.
IJ Setting aside about 11.000 acres as part of a permanent resource management
reserve.
IJ Establishing policies to protect and restore natural habitat and species of
concem.
IJ Providing for the orderly transfer of ownership to a Preserve Manager.
IJ Establishing research programs.
IJ Establishing educational and interpretative programs.
IJ Controlling publiC access to ensure achievement of the preservation
goals.
IJ Providing for long term funding to assure effective habitat protection.
Service Revenue Plan: An initial draft of an Otay Ranch Service-Revenue Plan was
completed In November of 1990. This phase Involves a "macro' analysis of three
altematlve land use plans. the New Town Plan. the Project Team Altemative and a low
density land use plan altematlve. The purpose of the analysis Is to clearly define and
compare the estimated service cost and revenue charactertsttcs of the three alternattves
on a net fiscal Impact basis. The second phase of the service revenue plan. the micro
analysis. will address the fiscal issues In greater detail. with regard to the Phase Two
Progress Plan. The report will outline municipal and regional service and Infrastructure
responsibilities. and how they will be financed including capital outlay. maintenance.
and operational costs. A publiC facilities finance plan and fiscal Impact report will be
Included In this micro analysis to be conducted In 1992.
Envlronmentalll'l'lPClCt Report: The draft EIR Is scheduled to be released for public review
during the summer of 1992. according to the tentative IJTF schedule. The environmental
review process was Initiated In October. 1989. As determined In the Memorandum of
Understanding. the City of Chula Vista acts as the lead agency in supervising EIR
preparation. The County of San Diego prOvides review services.
General Plan Amencment.
The Otay Ranch GDP/SRP will be accompanied by general plan amendments for both
the City of Chula Vista and the County of San Diego. The purpose of these documents Is
to ensure that the Otay Ranch GDP/SRP and the affected general plans are Intemally
consistent.
j-J.j,
Page.
CERTIFICATE OF PUBLICATION
r;::- ....
'1"-
, '\'.'
~!
:rno\Yl~1fP
r.!AY 2 5 1993 U
LETTIERI-McINTYRE AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
1551 FOURTH AVENUE, SUITE 430
SAN DIEGO, CA 92101-3152
ATTN: MARY MAY
IN THE MATTER OF NO.
Otay Ranch Project
. I, Thomas D. Kelleher, am a citizen of the United States and a resident
of the county aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not n
party to or interested in the above- enti tIed matter. I am the prind pal
clerk of the San Diego DailyTranscri pe, a newspaper of genernl ci rcul ati on,
printed and published daily, except Saturday. and Sundays, in the City
of San Diego, County of San Diego and which newspaper has been
acljudged a newspaper of genera I circulation by the Superior Court ofthe
County of San Diego, State of California, under the date of Janunry 23.
1909, Decree No. 14894; and the
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
is a true and correct copy of which the annexed is 11 printed copy and WQS
published in said newspaper on the following date(.), to wit:
MAY 21
I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true nnd correct.
Dated at San Diego, California this 21 st day of MAY
93
,19_.
~.6~
(Signature)
"
,
NOTice OF PUBLIC HI!ARING ! CITY OF CHULA VISTA PROPOSED GENERAL \
'..' .. SAN DIEGO COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS PLAN AMENDMENT, GENERAL OEVELOPMEN'r ,
~>AND CITVOF CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCil .' PLAN AND PFI,OPOSED PREZONINQ : ,'-
j" "j I
NOTICE; IS t-lEREBY GIVEN thelth. San Diego County Boatd of Super. 1. Amendments to Incorporate Into the General Plan tne 23,08S-acre'
1iIllOfS and City ot Chula Vista Council will hold continued Joint public h..'. Olay Ranch Project as1oUows: . ,j
Ingsto consider the Olay RancnProJec:t. The Board and Council wllle.ch . Vision Statamant text description of land usa '.Iatianshlpsln the,
consider the project, Ihe County and City Planning CommluJone recom- Eastern Urban Center .1118. . I
mendaUon. and public tesllmony and taka action on lhe below listed . Land Use Element text and maps adding land use designations,
discreUonary aClions. The Joint public ~arings wtll recommence June 2, Identifying new landforms, city "galeway" locations, scenic roadways and
1993 al 3:00 p.m. at the County Administration Building, 1600 Paclflc oj)en spac. areas, and revising the general localion 01 j)rOj)osed university. I
Highway, Room 310, and may ~ continued to oth.r date., tlm.s and . Circulation Elemenllext and maps revising the traffic circulation
plac.s, _ nsc...ary. Any pe...on may appear and be h..rd by It,. Board sy.tem, Bicycle Plan and Public Tran.it Plan. .' ; 'n., '>, I
and Council. - - ,'c ,-,' ~,>~ .;,:. '. : . Public FaclllUes Element text and maps mexhfylng water, .waste.
':Th. 23.08e.8cre Otay Ranch I. located In the unincorporated area 01' water and drainage flood control plans. . .__. ", I' /, .,_.' """~ l'" .. " .',"
San Diego County, with tha exception ot 390 acres located In the City of . Growth Ma;nagemenl Elemenl text and map.. ',.-1 '--,.._.~"_' "
San Diego adJac.nt to Brown Field. The rural community at Jamul I. '. R.creatlon E,lemenl le.l<t and map adding p~oposed p!rk loca.
located north...t ot the project area; the southam boundary of th. project. ~ tlona. ;.'-1,' ,,;. ~. ',,'..,.. _...:., ..... ,;: ." '.
la approximately 2 mil.. north of the Unlted $18te.M.x1co border; tn. . ",-1.','." EUlem Terrlto.wl Am Plan Identltyfng new.landforml, open
western boundary Is the Chula Vista CIty limits; the ...tem boundary Ie .lp8ce I)reserve objectIves, potenllaltranait corridors, revising the general
generally State Roule 94 (Campo Road). 'The project area I, shown on the.~:; location of a proposed unl....raIty, community park location.. and n.w de--
maponth.te\I.....atd.ofthl.notIca. c." '.. ,.. ';...~.II-:.Uvelopm.nta....anorth,.lIOUth.nd.astoftheLow.rOtayRa.ervolrand
...The Otay Ranch Project would be developed owr a 30-.10 5O-h..r within Proctor Valley." ',-,:" ')'~, '~-'1" ':':':' " ':'::':'~:::'. '. ',.: ::.. __:
perfod. A rang. of dw.Ulng units and projected population '- a..oclat~ 2. Adopllon of a G.neral D....elopm.nt Plan which 1r\(:ludes among
with ....rlou. proj.ct alternatives. The New Town Plan (original submlttal) Olhera the followlng documenta for the Otay Ranch Project" ......~ ..,~..."
prapoaq QO,733 qweUlng units and projected population of -,49,810 per- ~ ,. ..." R.aource Manag.ment Plan" :.1--,. ~,',"'::5;;';.~~:: :.->::',....., ~.:
80M; th..County/City Staff Aecomm~ed Project propos.. 27,179 ServleeIReven~Plan V't -':t _"'':', ",)_."z""t'~,r, Io"'''''~
dwalll~g units with Ilssoclal8d populaUon of 79,634.. the Envlronmenlal AS-.. .- vmaoe Phasing PlmA:r" ~ . ~.'i"::' ::-~"'_;'l: ~. ...,;., '.:I':"-..:.\.. .......... .
t.rn.lIve propQMI 9,251 clweUlng units with. projected ~ulallon of. . FacilltylmQl.menlallonPlana ~... ',~.i -:~~:,~,':,,~,.~,,-::,'.~;J_
28,883 persona; lh. Exlallng a.n.ral Pl.n A1temaUve, retalrung e)datlng 3. Prazoning of tn. .ntlre 23,OS8-acr. Olay Ranch to PC (Planned
Land U$.e de.IgI'\8Uons, would r.sult In a maximum yield ot 20.470 dwelling Community) :zone, to be effective only upon future annexation Inlo the City
unita and 62.486 population. ,With Ihe No Prot.:t Alt.rnatlve, Iha prop.rty of Chut. Vista. The Planning CommlMion reaervea the right to recommend
would remain In lis present condition." rural ,agrlcultural.lan~ llnd that the property not be re:zoned, or that It be placed In any oth.r more
undeveloped open apace.. . ~"',." :.;S )" ,~ ;: -.:; ,oJ ~.J ..o' " . restrictlv. :zone.a described in Tille 19 of IheChula Vista Municipal Code.
---~,- .----.. ~-_... -..,,-----...~ ., '_._"'--'~-" A mar. d.tailed dellCripllon of tn." plans and :zone changes Is on file at
COUNTYOFSANDIEOOPROPOSEDOENERALPLAN ..."1......: the foJlowlng locatione' , . _, ". '.' .~ c.
I..; ;:rAMENDMENT,ADOPTION OF ASSOCIATED DOCUMENTS :',~~:J Chula Vista PubUc UbrarY "_:,,,.,~ .~ : ~ 1.. ."7 . ,.::'~~, "~'_?; .
''', ~ AND PROP09ED ZON! RECLASSIF,ICATIONS "';-I~-d,,;,:~.'<~:; 36S"F'Street. Chu/.aVlsta ". .,~ . :','';'.;..~, ",::" ,,-.:~: ..~ ...;..
~:;,t. Am.ndmente to the County of San Diego General Plan as foll0W8: .~~:,,: Bonita Sunnyside County Ubrary .:-' :' .: ':.." . ':::.... ~ ..:,::". J.,,~:-._
". Regional land Use Map amendmenteconalsUng ofth.followlng~ ..';' ..15047 Centra/Avenue Bonita ....,1', ",-:.r:"" .': ': .'r7 ,:1.._...
," Expanslonofthe Current Urban D.velopm.ntAr.a {CUD~;;~; ea.. de Oro County Ub~ary ,.,.~. . "~.I"-<"'>O: !.(-'."'".-I'~, :.,~~; '-'.
~;..'~ Reduction of the future Urban Development Area. (Fu,q~l.... .' 9629 Campo Road, Suit. 1., Spring Valley .______..______
ExpanslonoftheSpeciaIStudyAr.a(SSA);,~ ~.:'::.;':~~-:==:.:'_' Spring Vlllley County Library . . .-:..:: .~;... _' __ .__.
Reduction of 11'1. Country Town (CT) of Jamul; ....: ,~:. :,...' :,'.' 1043 Elk.lton Soulevard, Spring Valley
:'::'~; . .R.duction of the Rural oe...e1opment Area (RDA); . ~ . .,. Rural Fire Prot.ction Diatrict '';'..,'' _ .~....,.,~...,"~''l '."lr',~<>~""
",.~.-- - R.ductlon of th. Esta.'. Dev.lopm.nIAr~ (EDA); and'/' "...,v~ 'f . 13910 Lyons Vall.y Road, 'A, Jamul, . '1'.', "...,;..~t...,",...~~.~'
----.--. Expansion Qf the ErMronmentally Constrained Ar.a (ECA). ,- San Diego Main PubliC Ubrary. ." ~~. .:. ,:~.:" ,.... "'7. ~ .
. . Regional Land Use EI.ment Te:Jd: amendments COnSIStlnjg of the, ,820 ESIt..t, San Diego _"'~;j -:',. _'" ..~'.-:";~~~'~,;:' .'_ ~f
addlllonofaSpecialSludyAreaforthear8;8oftheOlayRanchProectthat Otharlnformat!on .....,.';,.:.. ',~ ,'~ . .
Is outside of the CoUl~~ Wat.r Aulhonty boundary llnd o'!1.r minor; In addition, prior to final action, the County of San DIego Soard of Super.
amendments. , . : "'~':"'~;;~"':~': ;:. " ,~. .., . ",., .'. ,~.. "..' .,~.,' : vI.ora.nd the City 01 Chula VIsta CIty Council will COnsid.r the adequacy
. ..:..' '~~,":.::Proposed chang.. to the boundary between the OtllY Plannmg and certlfication of the Final Program EIR and adopllOO$ or CEOA Fin-
Atea, the Jamul/Dulzura Planning Area and City of Chula Vlsta. '''-.v-.,-.~',.> dlnga, a Mitlgation Monitoring Program and a Stat.menl of Ov.rriding
'~...: .,.. .'OlaY Subregional Plan Text and Map amendmente consisting 0' Consk:leraUona for the project., The Final Program EIR and other environ-
the addition of the. Olay Ranch General Development Plan sa Volume 2, mental docum.nts are available to the public at the above stated locations.
changes to AesourceConservallon.Ateaa and amendm~nts to certal.n la~dj' The Olay Ranch Project Is a large and complex propoaal.. Members of
use designations..... (i, ~!t.. 'll"'.~~'C','C..~.~~"l!'i'O ~bI~..s',' , , ' the public ll... encouraged 10 review or request copies of any document as.
.. JamuVDulzura Subregional Plan Text and, M~p amencl~ta; aoclatedwith lhe E1R or the fI8ted dlacretlonary aellon. by contaCtIng the
eoNlsllng ot a reference to the Olay Ranch Project. reVlslons' to certain ;ColJnty o.pllrtment of Planning and Land U.. 5201 Ruffin Road, Suite B,
poUcles .10. Insure. consistency wIth'.~ Olay R.anch .P..roJ8cI,.chaI1gN to [' S.n DIego, CA 92123; City of Cnula Vista 'Planning cepartm ent, 276
Aesourre,9C?ns6!,,*Uon Ar!.s ~ ~~ments~certa.ln !.~nd ~ d~sI~.. Fourth Avenue, Chula ~sta, CA. 91910; or the OtIIy Ranch PrC?le~~~.
natlona.~~~ ,.>;,!/. ~"',,:~t"t'~' ".'1>'-,.....,.., ", .' "", . nlngOfflee,315FOIJrthAvenue.SufteA,ChulaVlata,CA91910... ...'...., _
'1... \,VaUe de Oro and Sw.etw.ter Plan Te:Jd: am.ndments conalsUng . . It you wish to challeng. the action. at the CIty OfChula Vista or COunty ot
;;, ~S1ons to circulation exhibits to Incorporate .road,<7~I~~~.~ ,~~g~~. f San Diego on thia project In COUItt you rNy be.flmllad lQ raising only those
conalatent with Ihe Otay Ranch ProJifct. I - ..... ~~.... . ., '.. .....' 1. 'uues you Or' aomeona else raised In written corre~ondenc. dell....red to
-"Clrculallon Elem.nt.Map,am.ndment. Sheets 8 and 9. coneJsllng .. the Olay Ranch Project Planning OfIIce prICN'to Public !"fearinga, cu raI~
of propoe8d cl'\anges to varloua road classifications and I~ the Blcycl. !;le-; .1 the PubliC Hearlngll described in thia nolle.. ,_'7<><" ..... , . - "
menl.1\1 +:.,1 " ;:~,.r,.i~~. . ';;, ~ ~ '~.....;) ...'1';.';), ~ ',1U.c : If you ha.... any quellllona regarding this maller, please contact the Clay
~.lo,R8Creatlon Elem.nt,Text and Map amendments conSIsting ot Ranch Project Planning OfftceaI422.7157. 'rri.,....:1..,""'l~;\. ,.. "
propoa&d r.visionslo exjstl~ pat!' alles a~.~~_~~!~~.2!e..~~~~.-:\o Dated: May 17,1993 ; ',1l~~ ,.", " ':'""}',,-f .~:-;....::..... ~; ,...._:..:
site.., {F\,;'lW~,,:J :. ." ., 'fl Project Number. . County: GPA92..04,R92-Q03 _ ~.;,"",'~ ~..,));
. Conservatlon Element Text and Map amendments conMtln.g. Of~l l~~<".~I51:.';o ~.~......~"7t ,,'C1ty:GPAIp-3,PCZso.:c.andGDP90-3 ,~I'l'
revlalons 10 .xlsting R.source ConaervaUon Areaa (RCA) and the llddltion .. ~... :;,',.. ~.( ',=..:;..~ ~":;--"".-J.'" 'G ,~,...,., _;""'!"II~ "., ".:-
ofoneRCA. -r~.":'.".; i' !) ;:\,.q":l~1 ,COMPUANCEWITHAM!:AICANSWITHDISABIUTlESACT(ADA)
.. Public. FaCility Element am.ndment consisting oL~,nges.,~_~..\1 . .":11'~ ....,J;l r;'.~~ctl ~=:a :-11'!1- ........~..;'l"-:'O ~:'t1J'\F.....'7P~... ~~::'.
empUng Otay Rllnch !rom Policy 1.1.2 on page XH-4-18. ~. ,........- -, - The City of Chula Vista. In complying with the AmerIcan With Disabilities!
. 2. .p.doplion of the following .saoclated documents tor the OIay Ranch Act, requesllndlvlduals who requlr. special accommOdation to aceesa,..t.~
Project by Board Policy: ; '~"""v:~. _.... __ 0'\ -. "~w.:t''''~ -i';"" tend and/or PlIrticipal. In. City me.ting. activity or ..rvi~ request such I
. . Resource Management Plan . ServioelA....~nU8 PlanJUJ''j.l'!t'-;r-. - .ccommodatlon .tl.... forty-eight hours: In, advance lor meetings and fivel
'1 . Villag. Phaslno Plan ,. Facility ImplemenlallOO Plana '/I r. ~ r- d.ys In .Ovence fOf' ~duled sftrvices and a..-tMtles. Plea" contact the I
t .13. Zone reel.salflcallona conSISting of propouls reclassifying the OIay Olay Ranch Project Planning Omce for InformaUon or your requ.sl at -4221
Ranch property according ~ .~~~~ plan. . ." .' 't.5:;... t a 7157, Ca/1for':"ia R.lay ~~c. IS aval~ for lh;! ~~~ng l"..'~i~ed~ . -..: _
'......'~ ;f......~....$.>".---y~~~) __ _" _._ . _ _
~}l :"-f~ L- '-' -~--< \ ;J'.'l'."-Ll ',:'..,Ol/..Jm I....) ~Dit...c.q ,t,
:../:}t.1'}~ -=-~.~f~\....rj.....;;"':.~~...... ~~'tf.'l:~~ ~t.~~.~. ...... .. -"::;j.-:- "'=:"':''''.~'
.~~};::~":j :- ::' ~..-" :;,:>.. t..'..Jr'\ - t T~A:i ~:>.~ j t., ,.-..~.~ . 6<~":., I
I 0,. ~'~1l~ . .~. ,,:,,< Jl' -"':\ f i' :-j ..'- -', I
}~}:~!:;;;&~i0i~~~:~t:;~ '-.---. ..~o,~..~. ~ c~: .11
l.~~2.~.f ;...~tSQy A.RD EI ~J~~ .,,:~.~. ;.,
t":.:....:,~. Ie j
,...~'tN.~
r:j<!t"i.'i
~".;'<' ~
t%.""i:Jl
~ --:.s.~ If\' . ~':i~~' '."/
'\. !:'l'~~ ."'-.:;!?;':"
-'-:--:"7.1:"0. -"!}G~:
tl."'i..-ti': .s .",JJ ... . ~~ ',~ -',' I'
o ..t";:;;, ;, :':'J'."', & ~..:.~ ~
','. Sa.. .,-..(-,:~: .....~ ,..'r- If~
.{~~,'_~'l1".w.::O .
".:'16.;~.:'~'~'-'~~.~~
. .',. ..' t
.,
..
--
".... .~
~,~ ~.,~.:.~:~;t~~~\~~'~"t~1
, ~ ,.ulxiCo . ~
,';.~~:l~~-.:;:~;:r:~" .,,_,==:
-f"--." ._...--~~
.,..' ~ 1
,:..'
,.
.."" ....,..,.,":
. ,
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 2, 1993
MINUTE ORDER NO. 6
SUBJECT: Noticed public Hearing:
Joint Hearing with the Chula vista city council on
General plan Amendment 92-04, otay Ranch project, and
Reclassification R92-003; otay and JamuI/Dulzura
subregional Planning Areas
CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER RECOMMENDATION:
Accept the Background Report (Attachment 1) and the Joint project
Team's presentation on the site characteristics, public
participation program, the process for the Board and Chula vista
city Council deliberations on the Otay Ranch General Plan
Amendment, an overview of Plan recommendations, and the applicant's
(otay vista Associates, formerly Baldwin vista Associates, L.P.)
presentation.
Continue the hearing to June 16, 1993, at 3:00 p.m., in the city of
Chula vista Council Chambers for a presentation by the Otay Ranch
Joint Project Team Manager, Anthony Lettieri, of the County and
city of Chula vista Planning Commissions' recommendations, the
applicant's recommendations, public testimony, and to begin
discussions and deliberations of major issues.
PRESENT:
county of San Diego:
Supervisors Bilbray, Jacob, and Slater;
supervisors williams and MacDonald being absent.
city of Chula vista:
Mayor Tim Nader; councilmembers Fox, Horton, Moore, and Rindone.
DOCUMENTS:
Chief Administrative Officer's Report, Board of Supervisors'
Document No. 755764.
Slides displayed by Anthony Lettieri, Joint Project Team Manager,
Board of Supervisors' Document No. 756023, Exhibit No.1.
DISCUSSION SUMMARY:
Supervisor Bilbray and Tim Nader, Mayor, Chula vista, provided
opening remarks regarding the nature of the project.
Greg Smith, Baldwin Company, commented that probably 90 percent of
the people agree with 90 percent of the Plan, judging by an
analysis of the votes by both Planning commissions. He reviewed
No.6 (otay Ranch Project)
6/2/93
ACG
Page 1 of 4 Pages
1.J..ld ;;to "/1 (, /93 :if -1
the history of the planning process and the innovation of the
village concept, the resource management plan, and facility plans.
Anthony Lettieri, Joint Project Team Manager, orally presented the
background report and the Joint Project Team's presentation on the
site characteristics, public participation program, and the process
for the Board and Chula vista city council deliberations on the
Otay Ranch General Plan Amendment, and an overview of the Plan
recommendations. He defined the planning process; the site
features of the property; and the planning analysis involving
staff, the Interjurisdictional Task Force and Planning Commission,
and their goals and objectives, with the aid of various slides,
Board of Supervisors' Document No. 756023, Exhibit 1, and Board of
supervisors' Document No. 755764. He also defined various
supporting documents: resource management plan, facility
implementation plan, village phasing plan, and the service revenue
plan (fiscal impact analysis). He highlighted the major issues
identified by the Planning Commissions.
Robert Kelly, "Open-spacers," stated a concern regarding becoming
land locked from their property, and requested an appointment with
the Chula vista City Attorney to voice concerns.
Daniel Tarr, Valle de Oro Community Planning Group, requested a
copy of the binder containing Community Planning Group
recommendations, and stated they would be prepared to discuss their
differences on June 16. On behalf of the Group, he requested the
status of negotiations with the Ogden Environmental consultant and
the other deposit accounts. It was advised that both the City and
county deposits were current and were being closely monitored.
Patricia Gerrodette, Land Use Committee Chair, sierra club, stated
that the Environmental Impact Report has information missing, which
ultimately affects decisions. She stated that the wildlife
corridor studies focus on key species and, by not including smaller
animals such as amphibians and reptiles, there is a flaw in the
studies.
Supervisor Jacob asked if the Board would meet with the Council
before the land use decision-making phase. Mr. Lettieri explained
that each body acts independently, the county will be amending its
General Plan, the City will be amending its General Plan and
adopting a General Development Plan.
Supervisor Bilbray pointed out that the project must remain
flexible, considering the present unstable economic climate. Mr.
Lettieri noted that is why there are mechanisms that provide for
annual review and the necessary reserves.
No. 6 (Otay Ranch Project)
6/2/93
ACG
Page 2 of 4 Pages
supervisor Slater noted there was a distinction between
land use decisions and sewer, involving water
health/safety and sanitation decisions.
zoning and
quality,
Supervisor Jacob asked when the fiscal model would be available for
analysis. Mr. Lettieri responded that he hoped it would be given
to the County by the end of the month, as it needed further review.
Councilmember Rindone asked for clarification regarding who was in
support of the road north of otay Lakes being moved. Mr. Lettieri
noted that both Planning Commissions and the applicant were in
support.
councilmember Moore asked if the recommendation included what
happened to traffic once it crossed otay Valley. Mr. Lettieri
stated the recommendation was at a policy level, the location of
the road was deferred to the East otay Mesa Planning process in
order to coordinate with that circulation system.
councilmember Moore requested that a comprehensive explanation be
provided regarding the definition and requirements of a Program
Environmental Impact Report. Mr. Lettieri noted that the request
would be relayed to the attorneys.
Supervisor Jacob asked whether city and county legal counsels had
reviewed the environmental documents. Deputy county Counsel
advised that there had been involvement from inception of the
Planning commission proceedings, the hearings had been attended,
and he was aware of the issues; however, the extensive
Environmental Impact Report documents had not been reviewed.
Supervisor Jacob stated that, before making a decision whether the
document was complete and in compliance, she wanted to be sure it
was reviewed by legal counsel and professional staff.
ACTION:
Evidence being on file that due and proper notice of the hearing
had been given as required by law; there being no motion and no
objection, the Board continued the public hearing to June 16, 1993,
at 3:00 p.m.
No. 6 (otay Ranch project)
6/2/93
ACG
Page 3 of 4 Pages
state of California)
county of San Diego)n
I hereby certify that
copy of the Original
supervisors.
the foregoing is a full,
entered in the Minutes
true and correct
of the Board of
ARLINE S. HULTSCH
Assistant Clerk of the Board of
supervisors
By
~/~
A ir C. Gomez, eputy
No. 6 (Otay Ranch Project)
6/2/93
ACG
Page 4 of 4 Pages
COUNTY OF BAN DIEGO
REGULAR MEETING OF BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
THURSDAY, JANUARY 21, 1993
MINUTE ORDER NO. 1
SUBJECT: Joint Workshop with city of Chula Vista Concerning otay
Ranch Project
PRESENT:
County of San Diego:
Supervisors Bilbray, Jacob, Slater, and MacDonald;
supervisor williams being absent.
city of Chula vista:
councilmembers Rindone, Horton, and Moore;
Mayor Tim Nader and Councilmember Bob Fox being absent.
SPEAKERS:
None.
DISCUSSION SUMMARY:
Anthony Lettieri reported that this meeting is the last in a
series of workshops held by the Planning commission and Board of
supervisors/Chula vista city council,. the purpose of which has
been to identify issues and raise qUestions preparatory to
hearings which will follow the Planning commission's
recommendations on the project. He stated that the purpose of
today's workshop is to address all issues concerning water supply
to otay Ranch.
Dexter Wilson, of Wilson Engineering, distinguished the three
parcels of land which comprise the otay Ranch: 1) the Western
Parcel, which is totally contained within the boundaries of the
otay Water District, the San Diego county Water Authority and the
Metropolitan Water District; 2) the Northern Parcel, which is
partially contained within the three agencies; and 3) the
Southern Parcel, which lies outside of the three agencies. He
explained that areas within the Otay Water District require
annexation to the Water Authority and the Metropolitan Water
District. He reported that the Metropolitan Water District
embodies five percent of statewide water use.
No. 1 (otay Ranch Project)
1/21/93
MDB
Page 1 of 4 pages
various programs and strategies designed to augment water supply
by the Metropolitan Water District were examined by its Area
superintendent, George Buchanan. He spoke of:
+ a transfer system in the Delta area to allow full capacity
to be transferred into the state system;
+ the purchase of water from farmers in the Central Valley
area;
+ conservation, which the Metropolitan Water District
encourages even in periods of excess water;
+ reclamation projects, which the Metropolitan Water District
will help finance within its service area if the agency can
demonstrate that their project will indeed reduce imported
water demands;
+ development of ground water basins to maximize ground water
basin usage; and
+ a desalination process and a planned desalination plant,
projects on which the Metropolitan Water District is moving
forward despite significant environmental issues.
He reported that the Metropolitan Water District desalination
process is expected to cost half that of reverse osmesis; and
that fewer but larger plants are being considered to ease siting
and environmental problems. He stated that the District is also
developing a large new reservoir in the Hemet area which will
double the surface capacity of reservoirs in Southern California,
and handle drought and emergency demands in case of an
earthquake. Councilman Rindone noted that the Metropolitan Water
District services a population of 15.'5 million, serving over 60
percent of California with a little under five percent of total
available water.
Gordon Hess, of the San Diego County Water Authority, stated that
the County Water Authority takes 28 to 30 percent of the supplies
delivered by the Metropolitan Water District, and receives 90
percent of the water used in San Diego County through the
Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. He reported
that water use in San Diego County breaks down as follows: 20 ,
percent goes to agriculture; 50 percent to residential use; and
30 percent goes to industrial and municipal use. He projected
that meeting future water demands and increasing reliability of
the present system require the following:
+ a complete state water project for the transfer of water
through the Delta;
+ reclamation, in the hope of developing 50,000 acre feet of
reclaimed water by 2010; .
+ an aggressive conservation program, which would include such
items as use of low flush toilets;
+ development of additional local groundwater supplies;
+ development of a seawater desalination plant; and
+ systems for transfers and exchanges.
Mr. Hess added that under its Capital Improvements Program, the
County Water Authority will be building a new pipeline from Lake
Skinner to the lower otay reservoir; and additional emergency
storage is being developed for relief 'in drought years or should
No. 1 (otay Ranch Project)
1/21/93
MDB
Page 2 of 4 pages
there be a natural disaster. He noted that by the year 2000, the
average monthly water bill will rise from $20 to $30 due to the
costs of essential capital improvements.
otay Water District General Manager, Keith Lewinger, summarized
the role of the otay Water District. He stated that the otay
Water District has been identified in the Environmental Impact
Report as the preferred provider to the otay Ranch, and is trying
to develop an emergency storage program adequate to sustain a
ten-day outage of the County Water Authority system. He outlined
the measures being taken by the otay Water District to ensure
that the water gets stretched as far as possible. These include:
+ demanding installation of dual distribution systems in all
new development in the otay Water District;
+ working to expedite the otay River treatment plant;
+ using a landscape irrigation program wherein landscapers are
allocated a supply of water, and penalized if their use
exceeds the allocation; and
+ looking at groundwater development possibilities in the otay
River Valley, with an intent to use minimally treated water
as an irrigation supply.
He explained that new development is required to pay for
facilities needed to supply water to the otay Ranch, whereas
existing customers are not required to do so.
Councilman Rindone questioned the statewide apportionment of
water, and requested a memo clarifying what portion goes to
residential use, and what portion goes to municipal and
industrial use.
supervisor Jacob questioned each agency regarding sufficiency of
water supply to existing residents. Mr. Buchanan stated that,
while not encouraging annexation, the Metropolitan Water
District, through a variety of systems already in place and those
planned for incorporation, can reliably service its area. He
added that Metropolitan is encouraging agriculture to reduce its
consumption, and is working with agriculture and government
agencies to balance both residential and agricultural needs.
Answering for the otay Water District, Mr. Lewinger stated that
their job is to do their best to ensure that projected demands
are met, but cautioned that they are almost totally reliant on
others for their water supply. He guaranteed the existence of
facilities to provide adequate fire protection. He stated that
should something happen to the water supply system in the
Metropolitan Water District or the County Water Authority, the
otay Water District would resume control of the number of new
meters allowed to connect to their system in order to ensure that
demand does not outstrip supply. Supervisor Bilbray expressed
the hope that such an action would be in coordination with land
use decisions, to ensure that meters go where there is
the most socio-economic benefit and least environmental impact.
No. 1 (otay Ranch Project)
1/21/93
MDB
Page 3 of 4 pages
Mr. Hess reported that the stated goal of the San Diego County
Water Authority is to prevent shortages in excess of 12 percent
in any critically dry year. He stated that legislation is
beginning to require conservation on the part of agriculture, and
capital facilities are going into place to expedite delivery. He
added that additional storage facilities will be in place in
about the year 2000.
Mr. Lettieri presented a brief status report on the Joint
Planning Workshops. He stated that the Planning commission
completed its workshops on December 9, 1992, followed by second
phase hearings. On January 15, 1993, they were presented all of
the materials on this Project, and now have everything needed to
reach a decision. He reported that hearings are scheduled for
the 27th and the 29th of January, with a focus on public input.
From then on, he added, the Project has been broken down into
three major areas: environmental resources; land use (transit
and circulation); and capital facilities (fiscal aspect).
Hearings are expected to be completed in the month of February.
supervisor Bilbray stated that the issues of traffic, air
quality, and socio-economic impacts on the surrounding community
are the major barriers to getting the Otay Ranch Project
approved. He cautioned that the reality of the final phaseout
must be considered; and an attempt must be made to balance
fairness, equal access, and quality of life while staying within
existing California law. .
State of california)
county of San Diego)"
I hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true and correct
copy of the Original entered in the Minutes of the Board of
supervisors.
ARLINE HULTSCH
Assistant Clerk of the Board of
supervisors
By ~ 5d~
Mary . Ballard, Deputy
No. 1 (Otay Ranch Project)
1/21/93
MDB
page 4 of 4 pages
Fo,<, ,/O~ I(
F /L E S
OTAY RANCH PROJECT
JOINT BOARD/COUNCIL HEARING
UST OF SUDES
JUNE 2, 1993
1. Vicinity Map
2. View North from Rock Mountain
3. View North from Rock Mountain
4. View West across Wolf Canyon & River Valley
5. View West across Wolf Canyon/ Close Up
6. Otay River Valley looking southwest
7. Otay River Valley
8. Otay River Valley
9. East side of Salt Creek
10. North side looking east
11. North side looking southwest
12. Peninsula looking north
13. Peninsula looking east
14. North side looking east
15. North side looking east
16. Proctor Valley looking south
17. Proctor Valley looking south
18. Proctor Valley looking north
19. Proctor Valley looking northeast toward Regional Wildlife Corridor
20. Proctor Valley looking south
J: \project\215\slides
'~')
OH-l:
OH-2:
OH-3:
OH-4:
OH-5:
OH-6 :
OH-7 :
OH-8:
OH-9:
~
OH-lO:
OH-ll:
OH-12:
OH-l3:
OH-14:
OH-15:
OH-16:
OH-17:
OH-18:
OH-19:
OH-20:
OH-2l:
OH-22:
OH-23:
OH-24:
OH-25:
OH-26:
OH-27:
OH-28:
OH-29:
OH-30:
Oh-3l:
OH-32:
OH-33:
OH-34:
OH-35:
OH-36:
OH-37:
OH-38:
OH-39:
OH-40:
OH-4l:
OH-42:
OH-43:
OH-44:
OH-45:
OH-46:
OH-47:
OH-48:
OH-49:
OH-50:
OH-5l:
OH-52:
OH-53:
OH-54:
OH-55:
OH-56:
/'
, \
, )
OTAY RANCH PROJECT
JOINT BOARD/COUNCIL HEARINGS
EXHIBITS
Otay Ranch Regional Vicinity Map
Organization Chart
Baldwin New Town Plan Map
Chula Vista General Plan Map
County Existing Land Use Designations Map
Otay Ranch Goals, Objectives, and Policies
Otay Ranch - The Planning Process
Otay Ranch - Open Space Fundamentals
Otay Ranch Facility Goals, Objectives, Policies, and Standards
Relationship of Planning Documents
Otay Ranch Surrounding Land Uses/City and County Open Space
Otay Valley Parcel Surrounding land Uses/Open Space
San Ysidro Parcel Surrounding Land Uses/Open Space
Jamul Parcel Surrounding Land Uses/Open Space
The Lakes Surrounding Land Uses/Open Space
Resource Sensitivity Analysis Map
Otay Valley Parcel: Resource Sensitivity Analysis
San Ysidro Parcel: Resource Sensitivity Analysis
Jamul Parcel: Resource Sensitivity Analysis
Resource Sensitivity Analysis Study Area Summary
Central Proctor Valley Issue Paper Outline
Development Around the Lakes Issue Paper Outline
Otay Ranch City/County Recommended Plan Map
Otay Valley Parcel: City/County Recommended Plan Map
San Ysidro Parcel: City/County Recommended Plan Map
Jamul Parcel: City/County Recommended Plan Map
The Lakes: City/County Recommended Plan Map
Central Proctor Valley: City/County Recommended Plan Map
Village #1 Map
Village #2 Map
Village #3 Map
Village #4 Map
Village #5 Map
Village #6 Map
Village #7 Map
Village #8 Map
Village #9 Map
Village #10 Map
Village #11 Map
Village #12 (Eastern Urban Center) Map
Eastern Urban Center: Open Space/Transit Corridors
Chula Vista General Plan Greenbelt/Open Space Network
Otay Ranch Facility Implementation Plans Listing
Otay Ranch Service/Revenue Plan Summary (3 pages)
Otay Valley Parcel Phasing Plan Map
Otay Valley Parcel Phasing Plan Table
Eastern Parcels Phasing Plan Map
Eastern Parcels Phasing Plan Table
RMP Phase I Items
RMP Phase II Status
Summary of Major Issues
Summary of Major Issues
Summary of Major Issues
Summary of Major Issues
Summary of Major Issues
Summary of Major Issues
Summary of Major Issues
CEQA
Otay Valley Parcel
The Lakes
Central Proctor Valley
J amul
San Ysidro
GDP/RMP Text
-
I
-
-
c
)
,
'\
,)
c;
County of San DI.go
William /Ieah,. [
DepU(v Direc;or I
Aunt Ewing.
Regional Planner
CJuUlhl1 SlIipe.
Smlior Plmmer
I
COUNTyiOF S~N DIEGO
BOARD Of SUPERVISORS
,
COUNTY
rl-ANNING
coMMISSION
CITY OF CHULA \ STA
CITY CO UNCI
I
CITY
PLANNING
COMMISSION,
.Joint
Tc,,'hnical
Alhison
Committet.'s
INTERJURISDICTlONAL TASK FORCE
tucvraw -It,:
:.);:,',:,:.\",: ;:>,::,,'_':'t"','.U::1;:':j",;,';
, ..... ,.'"~"' ",,"
-~_~o1l:"::nlr
, City MaJItJ6'r':
I
t1~J
wi $htehml.'.
ejJl,tyCAO '
Citizen
A(hison
~--- C()rnmitt~e
\/(]}'>!.lln>/ fltJ/roll, ('hair
[ CITY 1 COUNTY JOINT PLANNING PROJECT TEAM
EIR
. DouK Reid,
" Cicy Envirotlmetllf1!
Review Coordinlilor
Ogdtft E,w;tonmental
I
('ublic Agency
ElR Unit.
Review
General Ml:lnll~l'r
Joint PlallniuR
Pmject Team
An/hom'.!. l.clIiel'i, .l/e oJ)
J.eftieri-~I('{ntyre & Anodlltes. fill'.
Trame
EnglM.rlng
Conl!iultalit
i' rvJct!Rl'\'t>RU(,
Consultanl
! ./;;11 A{orri,lfot1
Rolph Anderson
! alid A,fJociatn
Dan A farum
JUK
~g'd J
Richard Rudolph, Afs;Slmf City Attorney
Jfilliam Taylor, Deputy C~lmty Counsel
';""'. '., ;'.. .
'''''1il.;. ,Thorn, as, 4pedaj Co,m.el
Retny & l1wnjas
Plun:;iiing Consultant
Joll" SIIIlarJ
REF
)
'-"
------,
City ~f Chul. VI,ta
R~erll.eite';
Directpr of I'lmufi"g
i
DrAme Baud,
SeJTor Pfamrer
sl(4,t! Thomas,
Sr. O;vil HnKillcer
O,!',nll/al"""d (,h,,,(
.Joint City / CO\l"(~ Planning
1'0'. Otay I~anch
011-2
~ - - I:
. i I I; I ~
I., i Ii i I M
9 vmi i -fitill ,1\11\'
c ~ ~; H i Illlllll!1 Ii IIII ~ i I
i i 11~iIMflrl~I~!I,
'"
I
-
C
-~-- -~~ - --- - -- -- --- - - - ~ --
~.
~ Ii-
, ~~,.
i~i itt
,a >,
\p i!
~~~
I
i ~.__..
l
\
\
\
-
"
:.!
jl
~
-C,._ ')', "
. -- ~--i- ,- -p
<; ,,'" ~ 1
;~i>'.
J .
~
"
,7
1
.1
I
I
~m' ._
'1
II
'I
'I
/
-r
I
-
-
o
0 ~ .
:. '1
.,
il i ~ , ,;
Hi , -.:
1 II I I e.
, ,
~ ~ : :
"
~I~;. :l i , H
.. ~ 1) 1 , ,
~I "E~ .';f, ,1', ,
'l.. ~ ;- I I I I II I I - HI !
J 1: , I , , , ,
u , . -
~
~~"d
:~ ~
,~
,
"
\
,--)
i
\
,
'j
"
00--'0,-,
Jl
p"
.-
L._n~' ,n n,',
j .",^' '0
\ '
--. " ' p'~~
. - ...,......
f ~. ,
,;!
i
I
I
I
~
i
,
1
l
~
J
,
I
\, ~~,,;/
._,cry
\..J ~
I-,,_,,--:-n-'
.-,.-'
...--'
J
j ";n;:;:;':';"'
,
)
..J
Ci
D
~.Jr:
//'~.:/r:
"'-J.'-S.-::tT
"
,
..
l e::.J-
"'-
~~~'co~."lr
,-.11., .. .'. 0 .
- - Rcsillcntial
L 6 J (7.3 Dwelling Unit::.
--- per Acre)
. (iencrallnduslridl
-- Estate
r 17l (1~Owelljllg Unit
-- ptr2-4A~:.)
. Mullipl~ Rural Use
(J Dwelling Unil p~r
4-6-20 Actes)
. Intensive Agrindlure
(1 [)welling Unit per
2+8 Acre~)
,
. Publi.dScmi Publit:
E - EI-ementary School
. AS - Animal Sheller
I "".jlmpact SelLSilive
~ IIlh+Uing Unit pt'f
4-&-20jAcreSI
Olay Ranch
County of San Oiego
Existin Lapd Use Designatipns
"
~.
I
-)
011-5
~
I
-
5
Otm, R::lnch
-'
(Joals/Obl~ctr\i ~s/Pol ici~s
J
. Housing & Community Development
. Economic Development
~
. Higher Education
. Open Space
· Conservation
· Public/Community Facilities
"'
· Circulation/Transportation
Policies for Each to Guide Planning
~
I-
I
c
/",
i
. Baldwin Proposal for Otay Ranch
. New Town Plan
. Public Participation Process
-.:,
. Iterative Plannin2: Process
~
II Otav Ranch Firsts
~
- Cooperati\(~
- Inte~jurisdictional Planning
... Village Concept
- Resource \Ianagement Plan
- Otay Valley Regional Park
- Facility Implementation Plans
- Service Re\ enue Plan
II Balance Conflictin2: Interests
~
:x:l
I
-
^
'-'
Otav Ranch
.,
Open Space Fundamentals
~
. Otay River Valley
. Wolf Canyon
. Salt Creek
. The Lakes
. Jamul Mountain
· San Y sidro Mountain
· Greenbelt Connections
· Wildlife Corridors
)
,,-
J
I,ITF Goals
Ohjectives &
Policies
New
Town
Plan
Land
(Ise
Plans
Facility
Plans &
nl\ll'
Village
I'hasing
Plan
Service
nevenne
I'hHl
Govf'rnment
Slrnctnre
I'lnn
AllI'l'native Plans
EIH
Hf'ar'ings
Gencrall'lan Facility Goals, Facility & Facili!) &
GeU('fill Uc\'clupmcnt Facility Objectives, Facility Service Sen'ire
Demand Policies and I'!lllsing
Plan/S"hl'c~i",,"1 PIli" St;lIIdards Financing I'rovider
011-9
\
i
i
I
r
I
I
I
~ Ranch
Sunuun~ land U~/City
and Coupty Open Space
".ti'
',..
-.:, ,~
I 'I' 11 j......I~ ~I b
11 I I \ -'.
III '
[' '"J
"l J
L_I-
'"
; I
I r-'
'"
[d''"1lfIl'L
)
18
,~,
18
III
I ~ : I
I
18
'liV..~,- -'--
, "
.,,/)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
[
I
I
I
I
011-10
r
\......,...
.1
/
r
u t;nrOF-
CHULA VIS;fA
GP CC \.___\,
-' l.......",' \ \ l ~:'.,
.___\ .~ 'i_ ,J i'l'fll,.~
,,~-..; ....~': i ": r~<{ 1
flMlClloor; flf ,- .'.-' "'='t':-. .
."';,,';..:":::.:'" v '1",
,.,!
'-
, ':),,'"
,1 BOIIIT A lONO ~;<- \.;.;
, . \ C"':'C""'YI~~YOtl
~ ',;, ... ',N
~, /
/;1;
,"
18
;
[I'::::
ILM I
I
I
,
~r^l( rmSOIl
22
/lIIOWllflfIO
; ~.
r"""""
. ~ r I,'
'[
21
'..
21
" '" '1
r~C',IOIA".\[S^
,-.1-...,
..JF
011-11
" .-'
J
'-1,',
_.~-
COUNTY OF . <
SAN ~~UGROA SRA
JAMUL-DU
'~~~\~i~9 n"\
k~ ~-+--23~h-l(A
.Ii'~ '. "S~;:J r;
, ""1 ~:rj\~i 'c;,
(.':, t"
t.~ ~~~~::a .
" --'-- :
n - i
,
I,
"
,,,' ~.CI:"""
;'
1,
":
'~
OUNTY OF
AN DIEGO
AYSRA
'.~~~'
\~:i;r-
,,~}{~,
,lM
'.'."~_.,
;'~~'~:;,::.r::~:
~,~,~~,,;.~~~~.
(34)
elM ,
I
I
) ," \):~ (:J.~'
,"~c' )
~, ' ", J
"j" ,
1I0llEY ~~~~t,,~ /_ ,j.-:' .
';::::'~"~..r....,, _/ \ ~~_ _~. ~
,
20 18
I 'TYO~
09
SAN EGO 'SRA
JAMUlf'D ZUR
I
I
I
, lj
,-1.. _L<I1'12
r<1
-
I
-
""'
'-'
/--
.
GJ-
1
17
JAMl
18
@
,
I
/
I
\_--"
:1
"
:1,
~.~
, '~:
1
~,~--
011-1-1
If)
'T
-
-
o
/
\
,
!
-----~;_...~.-...
~'---"''''~-'' "
~~r:_.:rt{'~C:~-:- ~,".
~, ,\ V(. ",..' .
"
~.\
t: ..\"...~:;..,.~.'_...._
"
f"-.__.
. }r-"'-~~r'f-. ~:; ~ '__ /~
" 41, " ,', ,j, "
U-""-=C':;'~
'-,.r:"-'1 l":~/r ,'."<'i":..-"'-
!,. .~ "~>(Ii,','
'I - ~".it'. _ ,1__/._... ~
-~\r{;;';.::/l~ K~:~_~~-
".' '}. ~<l~. .~\:~:
I_\.J:"""~",,~,%::~._
-'~
,
~':,i~g:~l\
,
.
'.',
"
'. ~. J
;., ~"":}~;--l,i " :~ ~~ 2:..;~::.c~;
~~""f' ,,'~,---- ,
----:: ,.". ,'1,.
"-"- -, -. "'1
'.....~.,~ ~.-
,
t:
.::
,
..
,
, ,
..:......-..~_.-
'<\....
",
.,
..c
/,
"
i ~ \
, '
J
.
,
,
"
/.
'.
.
;.
,:It ~_,.
J,:'
__ J
..
'-'~-
.,.~'
-~\,
_...-----
-,
,
.'-u"'.,
~
"c""'-_U'''z~
\0.;, I '.~"
lie ,."
j
:s
I
-
-
'"'
'-'
.1,
.-)
./.
,..-1-
_'t,.,
---;:;:;.......
"",;,..."",<;.".
/
~,
..
J-;.<- 't
/
-~
-:
,
--.~
-~---:
\~
,
\
--
.
L..
.
t
,
I
.
.
.
7
,.
.- -~-!
~
v
t~~1 \0
"
~
.
.>
o
L
,.
i
'c,
_.-7.'~
-.',';\
r:->~?~t:: "J~, -
~ -_:~<-,.~'f).. Y\ ....
~-:::Y'>~~r~:~:::\ ~ ~_
"'t. fc,
i ~jj~['~t~r~~:: , ,. ,
' , /- ,,,.0..:-',
.;. /. "'-.: l1-L
.--:'/"""'" ~', -~,
I <"~~~ '. ~"fts:;::...:;.~.;-::> .:.
'~;~1;;"~
"" ~' :."
,.~~
. ,
~~"
t)
-....~
'~'r
f'-/
~"^.
rt.-
I
I
L,
~-~
ii~~'
~, .;
;;~ j~
-S~'l
"
---I
\
--:-:-.-~
"
I
I
I
'.
.1
,:=;
~, '..
:. ~.
"
II!iJ
iill
:;:~ :......J
()
, .........
-'-
j
,--,._,
c'
e'
"'
"
"
-0.'.
,
,.
,~-
~
,.Ji._
J
..
1
-- - ----. -i-, '.
,,";-'
;,-.7:-::;
-.
.'
"
/'"',
) ---
/
-",---
,
,
,
,
'.,
-.--:.:::--:=.
<
-~~~-d~'
c.,,,,,,,,.:
. ."
.~
,
.:.......:.~.:::~_..
z
c.....
"
~
:..,.-,,,
r--
I
-
C
-~~
z
z
,
~.
,
--------~----
--.-""";.u, _
.
,
,
--'"-'-.
~ ~ --
.- . -:~,- "
ti"'~q.. <.
I ~_ :E
;}
.,
"
_U~_.:-
...--,
v.
.:..._..
'.;~-
?
rr'.~,
, . :c?7~:~: .,!.!~ ~J'r?~~~,
u"'___::--=". -.J~" ____,:"j '<,_~_- ~._~ \.'
';;-~~,,> .... .,. .~"
~~';;~~._;~-~-~ :C~:'!@'~~'~':',
...., "-";':_-;"j:t"'_, );~~-~ ,_,/1"_.,
,"''',:' '. ';'i~~"
" ~-' ~-L,.
' . ~;.-- . -- ~.- .r<:~>>!<
-'''-:f!'~- ' !J':'" di.~l,"''' I
"' '. .-c-' /-'., , )~r ,."'7
>:~~r~ ,,_,
;-s:..
"
z
';c,
-: l_~}
..
;1 ::~
;~ H
..
mll~~
~
r~,-.~'f
u"
1.
-
~~
X
I
-
-
""'
'-'
~
;
,
'- .........
~~-
, .
:~:l'~'c;-.,;;, i .
.,' -,- ,',', .....
~ . (,~, '}, \
, _. ',I>
- --- '\"'\
. '\C,
r---~'':-~_j\\'':::'.
..J-' ,~ --~~-""""'~'
'=_::n__'{_~~,,,t~!}L__"
-~ ..........~'...'r-.- f'-"".:'.. --I \--1
"rr::" \0'" -"
.' '\J: "-;--4
. : '''..''00''
. "''''''.''''.
'''''Flo.Oo<,,"
I )
\.,
r ~-1'n
,.
~J
=~
;;--
"'<-'
;r.f.
"
;:~t~'-'''~/
"
~
'------..J
"'''''.u'_~'_
,.,..J..~..~..N'H
'-
,
"
"
!~
.)7'
~.
C\
I
-
c
area acreage:
CRITERIA
r. BIOLOClICAL HABrrATS
I. Lo...Iol' , ,. ..,.-......._
EVALUATION
,
.r.,-..
2. VetMI pool iDdicomr......?
3. "- of "bl.. line"_1
.. Diveniry of....,
5. Lo...I 01 ~, 1
71 ~ 1"':-oIVi.pi.n---.2J. ' .0...,._'_
1 r r .. ei~ L ~1lIo. "' to 1 . .' ............
2 p.,."" tn.. of FOI'OCIIIll8II ,":"":..1 -,5 P"V'.1 ...., of 1ft.......
~......otCali{omia,,~ . L~13.:":.,.-oi- ..
2~. I." ......"1 . p' 2, T .,......._. .. .
No.
YeI. Tritutary to &ower Olay ROIeI'VOir.
U>w.
IfitjL
7. "-'. ,Q.Df...1
,..,--- .......
\0IIII1
No.
Ya.-LQwW-OtiIi,- "--= ....JM..- I>k
V.. 0.." LoUo .......
~.
10. CoGtiruiIy of_
II. EXTREME SLOPES
opo_:lSlI?
...- .~ ~
3. Sa,. . wid:t . _ ....& ":Judiorm?
No.
NIA
N/A
J.~"'''''' ,-,-
o
,
v...
lV. FLOODPLAlN
l. E....-.,.. . -. . I..,.. -.. plaia?
V. VISUAL RESOUaC5S
I. 0._..._......,__ ..........jo<rid,..... Iu....
ViiiIiiIiiy'from ..ioba! or ~,lUbiic..... or ri~_. H;gh (rom o;,;y LaIa. R.......-...or.
3. _oIurriqucYioaal f......... Low.
N..
CLASSlFICA TION
~ocIeN. ~ ....:vity
DESCRIPTION
Site bouodery definN weIfenl limits of study areI. SisiflClMt vomaI pool resource. elti. adjlcoat to aoutbom bouadary aDd CoutaI. Self ScnIb ... .....
Af\JAT VC'JC'
P'~~
" I ....J~1.:)
J,_J
~. s._!..... pool... c_ .~ acnb ............
. W__.....ldhc.._.od.
I
['
N
I
--
'-'
N
I
c
(",'
('l
I
(";
!'4'
~,.~, I
~
c
~.
.:..,.; .:~ i.-." ,
i~~:~t=~::i:~~"::~::_-"?;~i~ c~~Jj:L,
1 ''', I. .....
r f,~.:
!
c
1
"'.. ".;,.,)--'
'''::'~~;.~<",.;;.,'
>',_""J""W!-
"
...JjL-.
,..
ilt
H,
:m
ltH
: ~.....
'-";0
~
1
..:.J
J
":':fy,
~i.-:- .,
cc;.~
c .'~
i
'6~--
~.5:
~
, :.. -:'-~"
~~~,.. -~" ,-
@0CjJ
c
..
.'
.'
/
::;,.-,.. ':::::.:t::;:_
~. ,:,"'~,' ~.,-;- ,<'''i:~~:~::- ,:~~
j..L.J.....lL....___..._.:....--=--..------,;--_:___
,
,
I
I
';J,'t.
I
, .
, ' I
! ; !
1..iKJuGfi000
";;':/1
. ;'
. i-f-'
L
~~,' ,
f~
'r~.~,-,.""
I'C' ",<,0' "
''jF_ ~J./I
i~ 'd'
r'::~./,<
~/,.,
&~'~";'~-'s' .'
,~', "
f:~"~<
'-,'-"', , __ '4
I,::,;;..~ '_;-....._
,..~~~ ............
~.,~~~ ."~~~- .....
~..= ," 'ii\'\~
c;""-JJ.,rf',~
--," :';.......
: '- . ~,
::-Cb-=~:;,_ '<
<"
'-~.. ~ , 'f~-:.-
.'r...:-;c :;.- ~
"
1 ~ , .
, . II -<;'_:...-;..:"\ :
- ~ "~~I_-..-~-:---- ___
",," l
.
,
" -,'-'
,
_~""i
.~ ....'
"C;,-
.-{ ~.':-
J~~.~
"'.' j'~."
,.
.......
"'.'
._,_.
.~'J..;...~~.:.
. ,-.---' ,:. ,-,- '?A;_.:r,~" .-.".~",--- >~
. ~ ,,' .~~: ~- ..;'~ ".'r'; .."r-......
. \. \ '._~~- ~' .." .....".:..T
1"::;;i;~ _'--,,\r?--~..;_~ i
-~~J~~~~.::;;-:3+~~ ~
,,"-~'~~,' ,-~: ~'- "J,..OZ,:'I. '.
~
/
__~L...______
"""'n....:'" N~'
~~-'---~::j..~1r;-~~ ...:___u....,'"..~"
'''''/
~,,,...."'..:I /'"''
~
~-~---!
.-~
.
~.
o
---+-<
/
..
.it- ,;-.....,
,
"
,--,
r
, ~-'-' "~
,k~. .-
:~,/
,.
"
.--b1~
~. ,
~ ~+- -~>;' '.
" -
.<.~
.-' !'
-
,
,
,
,
,
-j
,
"
/'.'
.:
.::--... ........._~
-r
~/ I
'1
--.....,
~
N
I
-
-
o
o
o
0'
G'
-~
;'j
~
,
1
,
j
i
j
I
I
1
i
I
1
I
I
i
I
1
!
J
,
.1
.'1
.,
....l-~~
~f- ~_ J
~: -./-~~ ;. 1:
~l----_
..
;....-
-" \.,. '"';:i.:~~:;.:
,
,
--_I
,
,
_-d
I
~--
~
. ,
,
- ,
~<
.;~
..,~
--~
,
,
~
I
I
I
I
....-'-~..,
-::~t~,
-'...
-'--
.'
...~.,..~.
C'-(
?I
,
<
Ie
~)
-._--------------
C3~'''.'
=
r":'::~f
",,-,-'
-~-.
"'T
N
I
I
,
I."
/
\
\
I
c
--~,---
o
C ~~-,-6-~
c-;~;;
<
"Co
"
-~
, Z
,-'
---(,.~
~
"a~,n"
..:::~
c_/"-
, ,-'.--~-.....-,
,."" '1\1.1
I'~ ,
~
';
-.
:\
,:\--
u,
N
I
-
:=:
'-'
--------
r
:.........~_/
c
lrnll ~'f~:-r .....,If-/~/ ""\~,..
l)'[;: ....I\~ ~ /""iJIi"
! 1 ,..-....., ..-'" /.~~ ~ I / /:1-'
~ I _. v -, r-- '( ~;_~ ~ ...."n
,,~h\~\""~ ~'r:v.,;i,:\:) _"':J<;':-
I '),.\~I -- "-.r...J ~/hr! -./..._--..., ~
~ !.I -~yr-.......[ /l /~"...:...~ ' -. - \~_
t"c\ ~,.--::-&t. .~_//
.. ;:=,: \" ~\. \ev;;: '" 'J "':'--70" r ~ .. ';.-
"I~\' Clr-./ I~- ,...... I~ ,,--- -
~::-t0."",::r \ ~--=:::\';:18:~ ?-~-
;,~;,-;~~Sl~r~~~~s~-"_ -~-
~~. .. ...:~~\~~~~~~o
J0) .~~d'&"h' ~
~'>T,>~~iX> ~V/~Jr' - _r \t -)10."::' ~ ~?'
\/~I\\\ ---.-::...~.--~"" F'/"1'I~~~\'<\ <.. ~-
p\'_::::-~:J~J(I/'r(liL:t'v- C~ ~\"""'\~"~
cd( ~\~ ;J~~7_-{\C::~./;"~ ",
:::v !r;-.-"''\..~-:.J~ ____~__ 1 -:::~?~-_'.::...~~,
'M.( \\.::~.--I' '-' ~- I".....-",I;jll/~\\, -'~--~~(~
c "j\"-./.r'"'_A L" j'\~,,-, -
-"'_ ~ ,~, '''_ .\ ,-,/....;/! '-J->....'>'<'\- '~,~<>::::/
_ ' ::::., ::-~.";:'- /''/, ~r:-::j,\ -::::-_. ,_- ...
,- '-- r:+~'----r-'"\~./
".'<<~ ~/f)-:'-"-:'-' ~ ---...J -----
~ ,.!......~-&~--.:.,~~
I _ '.- ,',~,~,
I'~~-~-,
\.~..Jr<:~-
~-~f';.M~.".
~
.'f"f",
"....--.. ._,---~--,' ,- ,.
-c.r-
I"~
'_. -. f/1'7.':'
.. _~J'
- ~----J! ./ ~~
/,'.
~, ~
-~
'24'-----,
"
~1~.-
)
-.;..,.
-I
!
.~~,~"
..---:.l!..
,..::..,'
,
...'
< '
~"'''.--'
I
-'~
\
j
~
,
K
.
, '
I ,~.
,
I~
, ~~
:.' /
~<
~
\
'-.-
~
z,----'
.,..
-...;.;;
N
I
,r )
"-,
;:
(~7:0o~;J~: .~
7 ;:7),J (' "\ 0 1 ~ / <
! ./ I ( i /<".-1 f 1. JJ ~ i
) \ " i. ....---/,) 5 '1 \_/
/_~~_~ (~.L: ~
~O::.,? i L.::;,.~~~-~t.=~t!:;T: 71=::---
,0 ~,,-cV~. .y'r";&\*'" ".' .... '
_~~~ .j\. ._; .._>-' -\ \..L/ / g\\...7~~l;"-'--"?
/\ ,.......''-_____../ ~\.../ 1"_
,../ ""'/'1 ,~\ / I
A'
.
~
~
,
/?
. //11
" ~ '-..bI' i
\~ - I~I
,-- -</;
~- - (
0)~~!
/,ID~
(/......--.----.."
l\\\ ',.
~-:::?-.
-.".
~~$,;'/
;
o
,
/- - -.I ~ ;.-r:;
(.,-
.---~~
-------,----~ "
>-
-
,
7,/,/
,/
'"
"
'--\,~~f
-)
. -
N
I
-
""" i
!,'-------""
. /
, ,
,,/ /\
'1\ '......
~
is
.---" 'XJ
,__/ ~ ~:l;'
/ ",
---/ (". \
//
~
.._._-la::._
~-
-,7--
,00
/
--.L.,:~ . r-
7:)
N
I
-
c
Scenic Corridor
Create Slope and Landscape
Utilize Landform Grading
Open Space
Create Slope and Landscape
Transit Right-ot-Way
Reservation with Stop
at Village Core
Bike Link to
Southwest College
Design for Compatibility
with Sunbow
Open space
Preserve Slope
and Enhance
Habitat
75.foot Average
Buffer Along
Arteria Is
/
u
~
Connection with Village 2
for Golf carts and Bicycles
- ----
_."F~ --~-:.-
Open Space
Preserve Slope and
Enhance Habitat
Scenic Corridor
Landscape Treatment
Open Space
Preserve Slope and Habitat
Exhib" 39 ViJaqe One Land Use Map
<
=
g
'"
--;
'"
o
r-
!!J
0..
c:
8l
;::
~
~
or
cr
=
!::
'I
'-
75-foot Average
Buffer Along
Arterials
Scenic Corridor
Create Slope and Landscape
Utilize Landform Grading
Phase in Conjunction with
the Phase Out of Landfill
, , \\
/~~
75-foot Average
Buffer Along
Arterials
Preserve Sensitive
Habitat and Slope
Consider Adjacent Sunbow
and Landfill Uses
Open Space
Linkage to EUC
Preserve as
Open Space
"
"
"
\,
'\
Wildlife Corridor
coun;i~11 :
~L~~~<
Design Residential
Areas to Maximize
Views Into WolI Canyon
Focus Lower Density
Along WolI Canyon Edge ,
Utilize Landforll1 Grading
Adjacent to Wolf Canyon'
011-29
~
?i
I
-
o
Wildlife Corridor .
Utilize Landform Grading
Techniques Along Wolf Canyon
Connection with Industrial
(Planning Area 18-B)
75-foot Average
Buffer Along Arterials
Connect to
Existing Industrial
.
Provide Trail Links
to Otay Va1tey
Otay
Valley
Road
-;:::- ~.
20
~TE---
75-foot Average
Buffer Along Arterials
Orient Residential Uses
Toward Canyon
Consider Otay Valley Park
in Design of Residential Uses
~
ExhibR 43 Village Three Land Use Map
;:;:;
I
-
-
c
Utilize Landform Grading
Techniques Along
Wolf Canyon
Half-acre Lots Adjacent to
Wolf Canyon with Remainder
A.v.erag.e 10,000 sq. fL 101s.
75-foot Average
. Buffer Along Arterials
Open Space and Preserve
Rock Outcropplngs
~
Preserve as Open
Space Amenity
Provide Trail
Connections to
EUC and Otay
River Valley
Provide for Compatibility
with Village-S--.
75-foot Average
Buffer Along
Arterials
Wildlife Corridor-
Limited Development
Time Development with
Quarry Closure
Lower Density Development to
Preserve Rock Outcroppings
Study Road Alignment to
Minimize Biological Impacts
- )
ExhiM 45 Village Four Land Use Map
N
r<l
I
-
^
'-'
Open Space
Scenic Corridor
Secondary Parks In
Village Neighborhoods
75-loot Average
Buffer Along
Arterials
Locate Village Core
at Highest Elevation
~
,
-~"
'~w
~"
Potential Park
Screened ILandscaped
Reservoir Site Edge
)
Transit Right-aI-Way
Reservation with Stop
at Village Core
Open Space Scenic Corridor
Create Slope and Habitat
Exhib~ 47 Vmage Rve Land Use Map
Buffer and Land Use Design
to Minimize Freeway Impacts
separate Core
Irom EUC Uses
~
Open Space
Scenic Corridor
Some Complementary -
Relationship with
village 2
~-::::-~-
r')
r')
I
-
-
,...,
'-'
75-loot Average
Buffer Along
Arterials
Transit Right-ol-way
Reservation with Stop
at Village Core
)
Exhibtt 49 Village Six Land Use Map
..,.
cr,
I
-
i5
Transition Densities from
EUC/SR125 to Lower Intensities
75-foot Average
BUffer Along Arterials
Open Space
Provide Regional Open Space
Linkage from Wolf Canyon to EUC
Average 200-foot
Width Across Village
~
Eastern
Urban
-eelll~r
...
Locate Schools
Adjacent to Open
Space Linkages
Coordinate Mixed Use
Area with Village 4
75-foot Average
Buffer Along Arterials
,)
Exhibit 51 Village Seven Land Use Map
\C
r<',
I
.....
-
,....
'-'
75-toot Average
Buffer Along Arterials
Transit Right-ot-Way Reservation
witf1-Stop at ViJlageCore
sign Northern Areas tor
Compatibility with Adjacent
Land Use ot EUC
Utilize Landform
Grading Techniques
Preserve Habitat
,,:'--
Buffer and Land
Use Design
to Minimize
Freeway Impacts
~
Transition to Lower
Density Uses
Towar<lOtay
Valley Regional Park
75-foot Averag_e
Design to Maximize Views and
Minimize Regional Park Impacts
Open Space
Scenic Corridor
~1lJ<t O!l Village Nine Land Use Map
~-
.foot Average
Buffer Along
Arterials
Provide Connection to Regional
Greenbelt in Village 11
r-
r".
I
-
C
Grade Community Park in
Association with Road
Minimize Impacts to Salt Creek
Provide Trail Connections
to Salt Creek
Park Is Subject to Study
for University Site
~'
'11 , .
/" ii -~!)J-::T\
p.)7, ;',-",,/~ il"./ -'11
'C'~~
\.r""'12i~
2 /~\ -; ~~c:J
'" /~ -
. 'i'~"L/
'::::-J/ '" 8
3JL,)'V-
~
75-foot Average --,..
Buffer Along
Arterials
Open Space
Scenic Corridor
Utilize Landform Grading
on Edges of Salt Creek
Pedestrian Linkages
to Regional Park
()
\.,
Exhibit 57 Village Ten Land Use Map
75-foot Average
Buffer Along Arterials
Salt Creek Open
Space Subject
to Study for
University Site
(
, ,
~.
~
6'
""
ID
;:;;
ii>
<0
'"
m
<D
<
'"
"
~
"'-
c
8:
;::
-l!l
i
75-fool Average l
Buffer Along Artr rials
,"
II
'J
Open Space/Scenic Corridor
Utilize Lan~form Grading on
Edges of Sail Creek
75-foot Average
Buffer Along Arterials
I
Provide Linkage 10
Jr. High School
Link High School
10 Open Space
Regional Trail
75-foot Average
Buffer Along Arlerlals
Intensify Edge Uses In Proximity
to EUC and Freeway Commercial
Regional Greenbelt - 200 foot
Average width within Village
011-38
75-1001 Average
Buller Along Arterials
-
Buller Edge
0\
<'1
I
-
6
Reserve Right-ol-Way
lor Transit
Provide lor Multi-Modal
Park and Ride Facility
(;?~
-..
Buffer/Allow For
Visual Access
to EUC and
Freewav
Commercial
) 75-loot Average
_/
Buffer Along Arterials
Exhibrt 61 Village Twelve EUC Land Use Map
75-loot Average
BuffeJ ~lonQArterials
Provide lor Complementary
Relationship with Core 01
Village 10
200-loot average
width within Village
R 0 A 0 ~
, .
>
,
r
.
C > >
< ,
- -
Transit
Station
~
::=>
"T
I
-
-
o
-..J -. -.,-.- ..-
I
....
....
Residential
Residential
o
<
o
.
lResidential
'Regional
Transit
:)
o
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
Eastern Urban Center
(Replaces Fig 14-2)
......,
~
~,,)
~ ~.,.;.."I;.-c;. ,....-1..,-, ,..-' , l
OTAY RANCH
City of Chura Vista
!h---l
--hi
~7
1-
-
o
,",0"0 ,
\
\
,
I
,
L. .-------' '
~ I
I
,
,
I
-~
.__h--1 ---
I '
c
,
f
/
/
Q
.-/
<~ I'c,"':l~/
~ ~ i-'
, L
,
uJ
,_...1
I
1-'
L.
.-,
, ,
I ,
---I
L__-, ~hl
,
,
~
h_____.J
, I --
'1 I
Olay Valley ___
Regional Park
~ G:eenbelU
~ O;::en Space
GENERAL PL.A.N AMENDMENT
General Plan Greenbelt/
Open Space Network
(Modifies Fig 1-5 and 5-4)
r, 0 :-:00 =<1
~--
N
~
I
-
-
o
(~
\
Otav Ranch
.
Facility Implementation Plans
Public Facilities
. Drainage
. Sewerage
. Integrated Solid Waste Management
~ ~
. Transportation System
. Urban Run-ofT
. Water
. Water Reclamation
"""",
~
Social Facilities
. Arts and Cultural
. Cemetery
.
. Child Care
. Health and Medical
. Religious and Benevolent
. Social and Senior Services
Community Facilities
. Animal Control
. Civic
. Correctional
. Fire Protection and Emergencv
~ .
· Justice
· Law Enforcement
. Library
· Parks and Recreation
· School
~
I
-
^
'-'
/-
\,
Gtav Ranch
'"
S,.-..:,... R<~' "nue DI,~..... \,."..........m"'r.
, \:-1 "I~~' J ~ VI,;, 1 1 lall ~Ull1 lla v
.,
Overall (City and County) Impact
. The cumulative City and County general fund net impact
is $164 million positive, including County capital and
~ rents/leases ($24 million - City and $140 million -
County), and $186 million positive. excluding County
capital and rents/leases ($24 million - City and $162
million County).
. Cumulative 2:eneral fund revenues total $770 million.
'-
. The tiscal surplus represents a gross margin of
approximately 24%.
C",
...,.
I
-
-
o
Otay Ranch
Senice/Revenue Plan Summary
County Impact
. A positive fiscal impact for the County's general fund
ranging from $548.000 in year 1994 to $8.359,000 in year
2023, excluding capital rents and leases. The County
general fund ranges from $521.000 in 1994 to 7,193.000
'- ~
in 2023, including capital rents and leases.
~
· The county road fund results in a positive net-impact in
all study hears ranging from $20,000 in 1994 to
$1,321,000 in 2023.
· The County Library District incurs a positive net impact for
1994 through 2014 and turns negative thereafter with a
cumulative ~positive impact of $ f 69.000 over the 30 year
period. and turns negative ($10.000) per year thereafter.
· The County Flood Control results in a posttive net impact
in all studv vears ranging form a low of $9.000 in 1994 to
~ ~ '-- '--
a high of$197.000 in 2023.
~
~,
-r
I
-
:=:
'-'
(
~
!i:
,
Gtav Ranch
01
Service/Revenue Plan Summan.
City Impact
. A negative fiscal impact for the City's General Fund from
negative ($63.000) in year 1996 to negative J$778,000) in
_ year 2009. Negatives are anticipated to be eliminated
throwrh a revenue sharing agreement with the County and!
or Reserve Fund payments by the developer. as described
in the policy section of this report.
. The City's general fund incurs a positive net fiscal impact
in 1994 and 1995 and from the vear 2010 through 2023
"' ~
ranging from $33.000 in 1995 to $3.264.000 in 2019.
~ ~
. When the City's gas tax revenues are considered. the
"' ~
negative impact and duration of deficit is reduced
accordingly from negative ($778,000) to a bigh of negative
($377.000) in year 2009.
I
First Western Phase
Second Western
Phase
Third Western
Phase
Otay Ranc~
Otay Valley Parcel
Phases
Fourth Western
Phase
.'J
Oll--t~
:;:
I
-
o
(
I
I
I
K
I:;
!
il
__---'___,J
.
Vill e 5
Vill e 1
Phase Total
2,564
3,019
5,583
7359
8.841
16,200
~
Vill e 2
Vill e6
Vill e 3
~
2,205
1,991
799
6.610
5721
2,436
Third Eastern Phase
1,669 4740
669 2.019
1--
Fourth Eastern Phase
Villa e 10
Villa 8_
vm. e9
EVe
1,090
t427. .
. 1 548
2.500
3.312
.4
4425
6.375
I )
Second Eastern
Phase
Otay Ranch
Eastern Parcel
.
Phases I
~
First Eastern
Phase
C2J
. '
. )17..;\
.. n'" ..1
.:~:::J
.. .. ....j
:
Third Eastern Phase
OII--t6
-
I
"\
First Eastern Phase
Central Proctor Valle 1,712 5 381
Resort (13) 2,438 6886
Phase Total 4,] 50 ] 2,267
Second Eastern Phase
JalllLJ I 16/19 410 1 312
San Y sidra West ] 50 1,350 3990
Phase Total 1,760 5,302
Third Eastern Phase
San Y sidro East 17) 287 9]7
Phase Total 287 9]7
011--17
I
Otay Ranch
RMP Program and Phasing Sunlmary
ase I RMP - Completed and Submitted as a Part of the General Plan Amendent
. Identiry sensitive resources
.. 1 dent i 1\ a conccptual preserve boundary
.. Designthc preserve to Illa\imi/.e protection or Illultiple spccies and resources
.. I denti ry nccessary R rvl P studies and research
II !:stablish cOIll/)rchcnsive, coordinated resource protection, enhancement. and
restoration po ICles
IlII Identiry permitted uses and guidelines 1\)1" locating sucl1uscs within the Pn:scrve
II Identiry the qualirications, responsibilities. and selection process 1\1I'the Preserve
(hvner/M,lIlagcr
. Identil)' the content or relllaining phase or RMP
. Identil\ order or conveyance or parcels to the Preserve
.. hmllulate R M P Illlplementation Prograllls t\Jr:
III! (.Ii!1\'('.\"(/IICC lif (/C/'C(/gc Iii I'/'c.lc/'I'C 11/(/II(/gC/'
. f?C.llill/'CC lJJ'liICcI/lill, cllh(//1CeIl/CIII. (/lId /'CSIIi/'(/liOIl
III 1-11 /I( /11/ g
'" 1\ /lilll!lil'lllg Ihc Cf/eCII\'CIICSS lifl?/1 / I) /1I111/cII/Clllal/l!1I
OIl--t~
(\
\....-)
il~
--:S
Otay Rahch
RMP Program and Phasing Summary
Phase 2 RMP - Completed and Submitted with the
First SPA Plan or Specific Plan for Otay Ranch
OII--l9
r-
-
c. )
l..,
if)
I
-.
-.
o
OTAY.RANCH
SUMMARY OF MAJOR ISSUES
ISSUE
A.I DOES THE EIR ADEQUATELY ADDRESS THE IMPACTS OF THE
PROPOSED PROJECT UNDER CEOA?
A.2 DOES THE RMP ADEQUATELY PROTECT ONSITE RESOURCES AND IS
IT THE EQUIVALENT OF THE COUNTY RPD?
~..
'W'i
:' I
"j
If)
I
-
-
C
OTAY RANCH
SUMMARY OF MAJOR ISSUES
I
ISSUE
B.1
SHOULD VILLAGE 3 DEVELOP RESIDENTIALLY OR INDUSTRIALLY?
B.2
How MANY ROADS SHOULD CROSS THE RIVER VALLEY TO OTAY
MESA?
B.3 SHOULD TRANSIT VILLAGE CORE DENSITIES BE INCREASED FROM
14.5 DulAC?
B.4 SHOULD DEVELOPMENT ON OTAY VALLEY PARCEL BE TIED TO
TRANSIT FUNDING ASSURANCE?
B.5 WHAT AREA SHOULD BE DESIGNATED FOR POTENTIAL UNIVERSITY
SITE?
B.6 WHAT SHOULD CONTROL THE PHASING OF THE UNIVERSITY SITE
DESIGNATION?
B.7 SHOULD SALT CREEK REMAIN AS A SITE FOR POTENTIAL
UNIVERSITY USE?
B.8 EASTLAKE LANDSWAP AREA:
,-
I
o
~
I
~
E
OlAY RANCH
SUMMARY OF MAJOR ISSUES
ISSUE
C.1 SHOULD THE AREA SOUTH AND EAST OF LOWER OTAY LAKE BE
DEVELOPED (VILLAGE 15)?
C.2 WHAT SHOULD BE DEVELOPED NORTH OF LOWER OTAY LAKE
~ (VILLAGE 13)?
(
~
, ,
. )
'--'
'"
If)
I
-
-
o
OTAY RANCH
SUMMARY OF MAJOR ISSUES
ISSUE
0.1 PRESERVE AREA: SHOULD CENTRAL PROCTOR VALLEY PRESERVE
AREA BE ENLARGED?
0.2 DEVELOPMENT DENSITIES: SHOULD CENTRAL PROCTOR VALLEY
INCLUDE A VILLAGE CORE AND ASSOCIATED URBAN DENSITIES?
0.3 SHOULD PROCTOR VALLEY ROAD BE CLASSIFIED !-LANE MAJOR
ROAD?
0.4 SHOULD CENTRAL PROCTOR VALLEY BE SEWERED?
0.5 SHOULD THE JAMUL/DuLZURA COMMUNITY PLAN TEXT BE AMENDED
TO DELETE THE REQUIREMENT THAT MILLAR RANCH ROAD BE A
PRIVATE ROAD?
0.6 SHOULD THE URBAN LIMIT LINE (ULL) BE EXTENDED TO INCLUDE
THE DEVELOPMENT AREAS WEST OF THE WILDLIFE CORRIDOR, IN
THE "UPSIDE DOWN L"?
r
i.
~
C)
OlAY RANCH
SUMMARY OF MAJOR ISSUES
ISSUE
E.! SHOULD SEWER BE PERMITTED IN PLANNING AREAS 16 AND 191
(
~
(" \
\...~../
C
l
..
c
OlAY RANCH
SUMMARY OF MAJOR ISSUES
ISSUE
F.l WHAT AREAS SHOULD BE DEVELOPED?
F.2 SHOULD SEWER BE EXTENDED TO PLANNING AREA 171
(-\
t
OlAY RANCH
SUMMARY OF MAJOR ISSUES
G.1 SHOULD THE ERRATA SHEET CONTAINING GDP/SP TEXT AND RMP
TEXT AMENDMENTS BE ACCEPTED?
G.2 SHOULD THE GDP/SP TEXT RE: UNIVERSITY USES IN SALT CREEK
,
1,1; BE AMENDED? (SEE ISSUE B-7) ~
(-~,
L)
.
G.3 SHOULD THE GDP/SP TEXT BE AMENDED TO LIMIT DEVELOPMENT
PURSUANT TO TRANSIT FUNDING ASSURANCE? (SEE ISSUE B-4)
NOTICE OF A SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF CHULA VISTA AND THE SAN DIEGO COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of
Chula vista will meet on June 2, 1993 at the County Board Chambers,
Room 310, 1600 Pacific Highway, San Diego, CA, from 3:00 p.m. -
5:00p.m..
SAID PURPOSE OF THE MEETING is for staff presentation on
background/planning process, site analysis, and issue - areas based
on joint Planning commission public hearings on otay Ranch.
DATED: May 26, 1993
Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk
"\ declare un~er penalty of perjury that I am
em'Jlo';e~ by t:-,e City of Chula Vista in the
ad"ice' of t:-,e City Clerk and that I posted
this A;3cnJa/Nolice on the Bulletin Board at
the Pu:Olic 0; rvie s Building and..atj,ty1HaI~
~-, '~7} ..
DATED: " '__ J' SIGNED !/' ,/ .~