The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPlanning Comm Reports/1994/09/14 (4) City Planning Commission Agenda Item for Meeting of September 14, 1994 Page #1 1. PUBLIC HEARING: (A) PCZ-91-D - Consideration of Drezoninl! 14.23 acres located north of the terminus of Moonview Drive from RR-1 (County) to RE-P (8.37 acres) and RE- 40 (5.86 acres) - Michael Demich (B) PCS-91-02 - Consideration of tentative subdivision maD for Bonita Hills Executive Estates. Chula Vista Tract PCS-91-02 - Michael Demich A. BACKGROUND I. This item involves a prezone of 14.23 acres to the City's RE-P and RE-40 zones, and the subdivision of 8.37 acres of the 14.23 acres into 12 residential and 2 open space lots. The parcel to be subdivided is proposed to be prezoned to RE-P. Two adjoining parcels to the east owned by the Sweetwater Authority are proposed to be prezoned to RE-40. All parcels are located north of the terminus of Moonview Drive in the County of San Diego (see Exhibits A and B). 2. An Initial Study, IS-91-15, of possible adverse environmental impacts of the project was conducted by the Environmental Review Coordinator (ERC). The ERC concluded that there would be no significant environmental effects and recommends adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program (see Exhibit C). When the Coastal California Gnatcatcher was listed as threatened by the Federal Government under the provisions of the Endangered Species Act, a Section "4( d)" rule was adopted which gave local governments the ability to issue permits for limited loss of Coastal Sage Habitat for which long range construction plans are being prepared. The Project site includes areas of Coastal Sage and California Gnatcatcher habitat, and, therefore, a 4(d) Coastal Sage loss permit will be necessary for development of the project. The fmdings for this loss permit are included in the Mitigated Negative Declaration. The loss permit will be considered for issuance by the Director of Planning prior to issuance of a grading permit. B. RECOMMENDATION Adopt the attached Resolutions PCZ-9l-D and PCS-91-02 recommending that the City Council approve the proposed prezoning and Tentative Subdivision Map in accordance with the attached draft City Council Ordinance and Resolution, based on the fmdings and subject to the conditions contained therein. City Planning Commission Agenda Item for Meeting of September 14, 1994 Page #2 C. DISCUSSION I. Zoning and Land Use. Site North South East West ZONING LAND USE RR-1 (County) Vacant RR-1/RR-5 (County) Residential PC (PlaMed Comm.) Residential RR-l (County) Vacant RR-5 (County) Vacant/Residential County R-l Zoning indicates the allowance of one dwelling per 1, 2 & 4 acres, while R-5 Zoning indicates 4.3 dwellings per acre. The site is bounded by existing single family residences at the northwestern, northern and northeastern boundaries, water storage facilities at the southern boundary, an improved access road entering at the northeast boundary. Moon View Drive entering at the south central boundary, and undeveloped land at the southwestern and eastern boundaries. The project is compatible with surrounding land uses. The properties to the north, east and west of all parcels are in the County of San Diego and designated Residential-Low (0-3 du/ac), Residential 1 and Residential 5, respectively, on the Sweetwater Community Plan. The property to the south (Terra Nova) is in the City of Chula Vista and is designated Residential-Low Medium (3-6 du/ac) on the City's General Plan. 2. Existing site characteri~tics. The 8.37 acre tentative map parcel slopes to the west with an average natural slope of 15% and a maximum natural slope of 40%. The southern end of the property features a north-facing slope with disturbed vegetation which gradually drops into a drainage course with sage scrub. The terrain rises again to the north onto a barren ridge line, before dropping steeply into Bonita Valley. The 5.86 acre Sweetwater parcels are bounded on the west by the tentative map parcel, to the north by a single family residence, to the south by a parcel containing a water tank and another vacant parcel, and to the east by vacant land. Access is from Randy Lane off Bonita Road or from Moonview Drive through Terra Nova via East "H" Street. A pumping house structure sits at the east central portion of the property. City Planning Commission Agenda Item for Meeting of September 14, 1994 Page #3 Drainage from the tentative map area is to the west and flows toward the center of the project, which then follows the natural drainage course westward off-site, then northward and eventually ends up in the Sweetwater River. On the eastern boundary near the center of the site is a disturbed fill slope. The maximum elevation is 308 feet at the south end of the property, whereas the low elevation is approximately 116 feet in the extreme northwestern comer of the property. The 18.7 million gallon reinforced concrete Bonita Valley Reservoir on the Sweetwater parcels includes a pump house and a two foot earthen "blanket" placed over the concrete tank, on which sage scrub was seeded. Although these parcels are proposed for annexation concurrently with the tentative map area, they will not be developed because of the presence of gnatcatchers and sensitive habitat. 3. Proposed development. As a residential development, the homes will be custom built and, according to the applicant, will sell in the range of $300,000 to $500,000. Development must be constructed in accordance with the precise plan guidelines established as part of the prezone related to density and lot size, and RE standards. No other review other than what is necessary for the building permits will be required. 4. Prezone. The prezone will establish City zoning prior to aMexation. The subdivision map area will be prezoned RE-P, Residential Estate - Precise Plan, while the Sweetwater Authority parcels will be prezoned to RE-40, Residential Estate - 40,000 sq. ft minimum Jot size. With City zoning, the project will be subject to the standards contained in Chapter 19.22, R-E - Residential Estates Zone, and any precise plan standards established under the "P" Precise Plan modifying district. Lot sizes vary in size from the smallest of 13,168 sq. ft. (Lot 5) to the largest of 20,255 sq. ft. (Lot 10). 5. Tentative map. As noted earlier, the tentative subdivision map proposes to divide the 8.37 acres into twelve residential parcels. Lots 1 to 6 will be placed on the ridge line between Open Space Lots "A" and "B," while Lots 7 to 12 will be placed along the southern portion of the project. Lots 10 to 12 will abut the present City boundary . City Planning Commission Agenda Item for Meeting of September 14, 1994 Page #4 Because of its excessive slope, Open Space Lot "A," will not be developed. Open Space Lot "B" will also not be developed as a result of a biology study carried out under the initial study which identified several important issues (see the Mitigated Negative Declaration for IS-9l-15, Attachment "B"). Open Space Lot "B" contains the storm drain and the sewer line. The subdivision will be accessed from Moonview Drive, which is proposed to be gated. 6. AMexation. The aMexation request has been submitted by the applicant and will be considered at a later date. All three parcels are conditioned to be annexed prior to approval of the Final Map. D. ANALYSIS GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE: The subdivision and reservoir area's General Plan designation in the County of San Diego is Residential-Low (0-3 du/ac). The City of Chula Vista General Plan designation for the both parcels is Residential-Low (0-3 du/ac). The proposed prezoning to RE-P and RE-40 are consistent with these designations. ZONING ORDINANCE CONFORMANCE: The current zoning, under the County of San Diego is R-l (1 acre minimum lot size). The proposed City of Chula Vista zoning for the subdivision is RE-P (minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet). The application of the "P" modifier to this project will allow parcels of less than 20,000 sq. ft., along with the retention of the permanent open spaces, provided the overall density does not exceed the maximum allowable under the RE Zone. The Sweetwater Authority site~ will be prezoned RE-40 which requires a minimum one acre lot per dwelling. This is in keeping with the existing County zoning and General Plan designation. GRADING/LANDFORM MODIFICATION: The project conforms with the City's landform grading policies as specified in Sections 6.2 and 7.7 of the Land Use Element of the General Plan. The challenge of this particular project was the grading because of the severe slope of the terrain, and the related engineering structures necessary to adequately serve it. The grading pattern conforms to the policies mentioned above. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: The environmental analysis found the presence of coastal sage on the site and gnatcatchers in close proximity to the project. This was investigated through the Initial Study and a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been issued for IS-91-15 (Exhibit C). City Planning Commission Agenda Item for Meeting of September 14, 1994 Page #5 Development of the subdivision will result in a 1. 5 acre loss of gnatcatcher habitat (coastal sage). Under the 4(d) mitigation requirements, the applicant is required to re- vegetate the Sweetwater tank parcel (APN 592-171-61), irrigate the re-vegetated areas and fence off the parcel to ensure, to the extent possible, that domesticated animals do not threaten any nesting gnatcatchers. In addition, the applicant is required to re-vegetate any disturbed areas in Open Space Lot "B" resulting from the project, and along the bank adjacent to Street "B," and any areas disturbed as a result of grading activities adjoining the subdivision. All re-vegetated areas not within the subdivision are to be monitored for a period of five years to ensure that the native plants thrive and are capable of supporting themselves. If after five year the plants are not thriving, the Environmental Review Coordinator has the option of extending the monitoring period. CIRCULATION/ACCESS: Access to the project will be from Moonview Drive to the southeast of the project, which will be gated. Access to the project from Randy Lane off of Bonita Road will be provided but gated and restricted to emergency access only. The proposed street names for the project are: Street "A" - Moonview Drive Street "B" - Moonview Way Street "C" - Moonview Court DRAINAGE: Drainage from the site will be to the west from the center of the site. Streets "A" and "C" will drain down to approximately the center of the project in Open Space Lot "B" where it will then follow the natural drainage pattern out of the subdivision. The drainage strUl;tures will not allow a greater volume or velocity of water to surface drain off the site than does so at present. PUBLIC SERVICES/UTILITIES: A sewer line serving Lots 7 to 12 in Street "C" will flow into a line in Street "B" then to Street "A." An easement running down the lot line separating Lots 4 and 5 will take the sewer line off-site to the west. Approximately 460 feet to the west, the line turns north where, after approximately 430 more feet, it will connect to Glen Abbey Boulevard. City Planning Commission Agenda Item for Meeting of September 14, 1994 Page #6 ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A: Exhibit B: Exhibit C: Reduction of PCS-9l-02. Locator map showing the area of the prezone for PCZ-9l-D. Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program for IS-91-15. Planning Commission Resolution PCZ-91-1. Draft Ordinance No. _ Approving the Prezone. Planning Commission Resolution PCS-91-02. Draft City Council Resolution No. _ Approving the Tentative Subdivision Map. Disclosure Statement. r ;:,11 .:t.;U 1t:1; ty .- ~Hil' ~ ~ "'1' .... w. -, i,l,' . ~ I'.u, g II? 1)11 - I!:: -'!il ....;1. !Iil ~ ~ ~'III'! iD ~ hll.. I I.. 1101'1 I I) : I' I!'I' I; \1 . ! 1111 ~ I II, ~ Iii I I'Ll U JI,) . I ! i III I _.1' Iii I ih I!I! 1'1: ':111 ,Ii II II!! II id',. :\,;I'! 11 I . - h!1 I lit Ii ihl . ~ I II.: f' I .. 11 i; I'!! ,mH:i I: I!j ",U' :1.1: It III. Ii! ~!1!1 ~ ~~J~~ : · : 1,1,', ,.!i','t:',:,: it " :11: I"I:! 1"11111:' II ;! i!: ", ',Ii',II' 1,"1111 ': I.. . I 'I" II,', "I 'I "i I I. "1 1",.. i jL! I 'I:' i :ill il !,I! :I~ !!I!: 'II',': I II "Id ! d II a,~11 .. !';I.II ~ II' .' I \':" , 'II II IIII ! 111'\1\ I'll I I 'Iii'" 11-.... ill' 'II ~ Ii II! H ,I. H!i:! IIi i : II C..II II.: I ,I h I, , . '. ' "~lIi ....., ~ "II. ~ ~. ~ .: ,;,; .;,:..:.;. :: Ii :: i i i i i. I. II I' N ........ I' I ~ .1' ' H I;' _II ~, '''''. I I ~" 'I!! ,J II fi'1~ 1 "I ~ &... ~ ~ ~ ,- ~j, 1 I ~ z<;'l 0- -0) en > 'en -ow OZ~ CC t- =>I-en en<.)~ > W4:- >0:13 i=1-1\! 4:4:~ 1-1- ..J zen :! W_:; 1->.... z 04:g W..J en=> -:I: (ij<.) a: I . I ;If, I; a\ll'~ ~ g . " 'IJ . .J J! 'Iil u ~ ' I. . ~j ~ ~ =. . ~I ~. ~ ',~ ~ ' Ii; .If" . ~ ' ., v ' \ , , . \ ,I , \ \ \ ,... , ...... \ ' ... ... ... . , ... ... ... I / I / II'.) ')I"JJ'l/.f~')"'-'.t ./),.J)",/ )'),"~,."" '~~ ~.).).)' ,.'1:\' :j.IJI, , I '1'.1.; ~', J,:. " '.,;i,' ,f '.' Jt. J'V;'.J " ):. >, .,'):'''~ ~)1;'.)~.' .J, ''''''fi oJ . ~ ;. ,0/. r\-~ ~) '~J 1"J }'~ ), J . I .(,,"iI' " )''',../.)))J)) ;'..~ ' ;/1' , .1- J' ,) I ., 'I . ~ " /" ~).~., ,)'~"',,'f,l.'j'I~,.a: ".//., "j I" ).J~ t.l ,J))" '~-_f., ,;,..,.., oJ \ )!J]. ,),;,{t.}'),,~~;,~)j~:'1,1";'!f..J..' ' ,JJ}'Y. .....,.1 lJ}J,.J,I ') .,? .JI,'", UJJ ,.1" '~"'J1""Jl.f'~~U~'"'-''' . "":'IT ,I~ 1.l1~, -.,,'.' I '''\.1,' )...1'~1 I /. ,,',. ,J ,,'.5, IJ,~ .....1..~' ,,) lJ;/ ,.-J,", u~ ''''.I'~:.: 01 );'t)'~;)~~":i /<};/. 'i~")' .)'~~ .. ":J)JJ,.,;;,I't,,1 ~'''--I))....... ,~ ~ ... -;; 'a~ ~/.'r -'~" '......, :,~ ,,/.J." ) ... )1"'l~.~),,.~y,('.:.f,t'.r;. !j/;.::~\,., c.E..~ ~);:JI'J' .r."'J'-~) ~ h ,1('. . ..,~;,.\' .,1 '.J''II I..'..... ,:",(. '!:it.~!J'" ',. "~~'<.I I., J':,.').;...?J.:~.I.'J,J.... J}<I',)IJ.,> .~.,) ),,,:~,~.t,'.'I' I.:".J 'L~;~'~'I~;.,' . .').J~'I' ;rJ...,~"I, s'"' .,.1.. .~'!,... , .~. ;J I" ') I ';" I ,~~: ,~/. '''':;J') ,,- # .,' ~ ) r) ,.,.... ~ I";"'; . I "!\r,' ,., .".", \,."., . J I <J" I ..i"I"')~: ;,;j,.).. .I"~ :)\";1.'/) ).. .II'\J. ').I.J "J' ,~.. 1 )'.",~ ~ )1) t r 1: ),..:t..~,J.)) ./ ~ :;J !'" ,)~ l';J .-.;.,: ..,-j.. "r':"')': .. '~J" \'1:1' ,J) )"' ",,'" "rl ,.') ).,., J ) \"')')J')'),)~"')'J"<'" ~,j,., ~'I\ ;:..' ,. 1~1' ., j r'l \. -, j,. \ i"i'f~\~I!}t.)~~)"'tY/~:.J.;/\ ~~ ,: ,. )I~..\~ ~ '.~) ,.'j i. ~I. ..I~)'J:II J..r,J'~, ~"."f,?, ~""~) Ij.~1I.).JiJ).' .')))1) )!J I') (, ,. ~' ,),... "j '.~ ." "1-"\ )'J:,") ",.;),~.,!.I . J ,~, . J.. J '"' \, ''''),JJ..,J;t>$}J~ ~,...J ,I." " ,vI" '.y'~ ,J"',J,J ~.."" :;'j .)~) ".; ') ')! tl;'/,;."/!';"',/ ~ "'.\ J- l).~.J.1. ...~'.I~ :-,,:...1).6 ',' ))-!;~IJ f... ]"'.!.~ ,h .'i' ')1 J I ,)~ .;.,...' _';;J'~ ".,. ,/1 !".. , '.' J / ;J :.1 ' ',. . JJj; ,.\.. '.~'''''.'J1,'' :l ), d :t-'J)) ;.1) ,',1 t' .~ " 1i1' '.I()~I. r j~~ ~~:'!; I: ))J)~/;' J'II/f, ..." . ,,)1"'. ,J i . ~ J., If'~ ' . I .oj ~'...1"C \', C\;I"'''':;' . ... ~ PCZ-91-D: Areas to be annexed . ~ IPCS-91-02) I n it i a 1 Proj ect Area (Bonita His Executive Estates) EXHIBIT B Initial Project Area + Additional Project Area now proposed (Underground Reservoir located in additional area proposed) (Sweetwater Authority Parcels) RESOLUTION NO. PCZ-91-D RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL PREZONE 8.37 ACRES OF LAND TO RE-P (RESIDENTIAL ESTATE-PRECISE PLAN), AND 5.36 ACRES OF LAND TORE-40 (RESIDENTIAL ESTATES-40,OOO SQ. FT. MINIMUM LOT SIZE) WHEREAS, a duly verified application for a prezoning was filed with the Planning Department of the City of Chula Vista by Mr. Michael Anthony Demich; and WHEREAS, said application requests a prezone of 14.23 acres of land located north of the terminus of Moonview Drive from RR-l (County of San Diego) to RE-P (8.37 acres: APN 592-030-58), and RE-40 (5.36 acres: APN's 592-030-57 and 592-030-60); and WHEREAS, the development of the 8.37 acre APN 592-030-58 is the subject matter of a Tentative Subdivision Map, PCS-91-02. which is being concurrently heard with this application; and, WHEREAS, An Initial Study, IS-9l-l5, of possible adverse environmental impacts of the project was conducted by the Environmental Review Coordinator (ERC) , and the ERC concluded that there would be no significant environmental effects and recommends adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Director set the time and place for a hearing on said prezoning application and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City and its mailing to property owners within 1,000 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least twenty-one days prior to the hearing; and WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 7:00 p.m. September 14, 1994, in the Counci~ Chambers. 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission and said hearing was thereafter closed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Commission fmds that the project would have no significant environmental impacts and recommends that Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Mitigation Monitoring Program for 15-91-15. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION hereby recommends that the City Council prezone 8.37 acres of land to RE-P and 5.36 acres of land to RE-40 in accordance with the attached draft City Council Ordinance and the fmdings contained therein. And that a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the owners of the property and the City Council. Resolution No. PCZ-9l-D Page No.2 PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this 14th day of September, 1994 by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: William C. Tuchscher II, Chairman ATTEST: Nancy Ripley, Secretary " F:\HOME\PLANNING\MARTlN\BONIT A \91DPC .RES ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL PREZONING 14.23 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED NORTH OF THE TERMINUS OF MOONVIEW DRIVE TO RE-P (8.37 ACRES) AND RE-40 (5.86 ACRES) WHEREAS, a duly verified application for a prezoning of property conslstmg of approximately 14.23 acres located at the northern terminus of Moonview Drive and diagrammatically presented on the area map attached hereto as Exhibits A and B was filed with the Planning Department of the City of Chula Vista on August 18, 1990 by Mr. Michael Anthony Demich; and WHEREAS, said application requests a prezone from RR-l (County of San Diego) to RE-P (8.37 acres: APN 592-030-58), and RE-40 (4.36 acres: APN 592-030-57 and 1.00 acre: APN 592-030-60); and WHEREAS, the development of the 8.37 acre APN 592-030-58 is the subject matter of a Tentative Subdivision Map, PCS-9l-02, which is being concurrently heard with this application; and, WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator conducted an Initial Study, IS-91-l5, of potential environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the project and has concluded that there would be no significant environmental impacts which could not be mitigated to level less than significant, and recommends adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program issued on IS-9l-l5; and WHEREAS, on September 12, 1994, the Resource Conservation Commission recommends approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program issued on IS-9l-l5 to the City Council by a vote of _ to _; and WHEREAS, on September 14,;1994 the Planning Commission recommends approval of the prezone (PCS-9l-D) to the City Council by a vote of _ to _; and WHEREAS, on September 14, 1994 the Planning Commission found that the project would have no significant environmental impacts and recommends adoption by the City Council of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program for IS-9l-l5; and WHEREAS, from the facts presented to the Planning Commission, the Commission has determined that the prezone is consistent with the City of Chula Vista General Plan and that public necessity, convenience, and good zoning practice support the prezoning to RE-P for APN 592-030-58 and RE-40 for APN's 592-030-57 and 592-030-60; and Ordinance No. Page No.2 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission further recommends that the City Council authorize the Director of Planning to issue a FinaI4(d) Loss Permit for the Project (CS-95-03); and WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for a hearing on said prezoning application and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and its mailing to property owners within 1,000 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least twenty-one days prior to the hearing; and WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 6:00 p.m. October 4, 1994 in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the City Council and said hearing was thereafter closed. NOW, THEREFORE the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby find, determine, and ordain as follows: SECTION 1. CEQA Finding re Previously Examined Effects. The City Council hereby finds that the Project will have no significant environmental impacts and adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Mitigation Monitoring Program issued on IS-9l-l5. SECTION 2. Incorporation of All Feasible Mitigation Measures and Alternatives. The City Council does hereby adopt and incorporate herein as conditions for all approvals herein granted all mitigation measures and alternatives, if any, which it has detennined to be feasible in the approval of the tentative subdivision map. Findings~ The City Council fmds that the prezoning is consistent with the City of Chula Vista General Plan and that the public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and good zoning practice support the prezoning to RE-P and RE-40. SECTION 3. Further, the City Council finds that the "P" Precise Plan Modifier is appropriate for Bonita Hills Executive Estates, PCS-91-01, in that the subject property is unique by virtue of its topography and access, thus requiring special handling of the development on a precise plan basis. F:\HOME\PLANNING\MARTIN\BONIT A \91OCC .ORD Ordinance No. Page No.3 Further. the City Council finds that the overall density for Bonita Hills Executive Estates is 1.43 dwelling units per acre (12 dwellings/8.37 acres), which is consistent with the General Plan Designation of Residential-Low (0-3 du/ac). SECTION 4. Prezoning. The properties are hereby prezoned RE-P (APN 592-030-58) and RE-40 (APN 593-030- 57), to wit: Residential Estate-Precise Plan, and Residential Estates-40,OOO sq. ft. minimum lot size. As related to Bonita Hills Executive Estates, PCS-91-02, parcel areas shall generally range in size as specified on the Tentative Subdivision Map so long as the overall density does not exceed 1.43 dwelling units per acre, and development of the lots shall be subject to the development standards of the RE Zone. That a copy of this ordinance be transmitted to the owners of the property. Presented by Approved as to form by Robert A. Leiter Director of Planning Bruce M. Boogaard City Attorney F:\HOME\PLANNING\MARTIN\BONIT A \91DCC .ORD RESOLUTION NO. PCS-91-02 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE TENT A TIVE MAP FOR BONITA HILLS EXECUTIVE ESTATES, CHULA VISTA TRACT 91-02 WHEREAS. a duly verified application for a tentative subdivision map was filed with the Planning Department of the City of Chula Vista by Mr. Michael Demich; and WHEREAS, said application requests subdivision of 8.37 acres of land into twelve (12) residential and two (2) open space lots located north of the terminus of Moonview Drive, currently within the County of San Diego; and WHEREAS, an Initial Study, IS-91-15, of possible adverse environmental impacts of the project was conducted by the Environmental Review Coordinator (ERC), and the ERC concluded that there would be no significant environmental effects and recommends adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Director set the time and place for a hearing on said tentative subdivision map application and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and its mailing to property owners within 1,000 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least twenty-one (21) days prior to the hearing; and WHEREAS, the hearing )Vas held at the time and place as advertised, namely 7:00 p.m. September 1~, 1994 in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission and said hearing was thereafter closed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION hereby finds that the project will have no significant environmental impacts and recommends that the City Council adopted the Negative Declaration issued on IS-91-15. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION hereby recommends that the tentative subdivision map for Bonita Hills Executive F:IHOMEIPLANNINGIMARTINIBONIT AI9I02PC.RES Estates, Chula Vista Tract PCS-91-02, be approved by the City Council subject to the findings and conditions contained in the attached draft City Council Resolution. That a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the owners of the property and the City Council. PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this 14th day of September, 1994 by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: William C. Tuchscher II, Chairman ATTEST: Nancy Ripley, Secretary F:\HOME\PLANNING\MARTIN\BONIT A\9I02PC.RES D R AFT RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCll.. APPROVING THE TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR BONITA Hll..LS EXECUTIVE EST A TES, CHULA VISTA TRACT PCS 91-02, MAKING THE NECESSARY FINDINGS AND ADOPfING THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND THE MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM FOR IS-91-15 WHEREAS, the property which is the subject matter of this resolution is identified and described on Chula Vista Tract 91-02, and is commonly known as Bonita Hills Executive Estates ("Property"), located at the northern terminus of Moonview Drive, and being within the County of San Diego (APN-592-030-58); and, WHEREAS, a duly verified application for a Tentative Subdivision Map was filed with the Planning Department of the City of Chula Vista by Michael Anthony Demich; and, WHEREAS, said application requests the subdivision of 8.37 acres into twelve (12) residential lots and two (2) open space lots; and, WHEREAS, the development of the Property is the subject matter of a Prezone, PCZ-91- D, which is being heard concurrently with this application, an Initial Study, IS-91-15, and a Coastal Sage Loss Permit, CS-95-03, which are being considered concurrently with this application, and an aMexation, ANX-94-0l, which will be heard at a later date; and, WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator conducted an Initial Study, IS-9l-15, of potential environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the project and has concluded that there would be no significant environmental impacts which could not be mitigated to level less than significant, and recommends adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program issued for IS-9l-l5; and, WHEREAS, on September 12:1994 the Resource Conservation Commission considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program for 15-91-15 and voted _ to _ to recommend adoption of same to Council; and WHEREAS, the PlaMing Commission held an advertised public hearing on said project on September 14, 1994, and voted _ to _to recommend that the City Council approve the Tentative Subdivision Map in accordance with the fmdings and conditions listed below, and recommended that Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Mitigation Monitoring Program for IS-91-15; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission further recommends that the City Council authorize the Director of PlaMing to issue a FinaI4(d) Loss Permit for the Project (CS-95-03); and Resolution No. Bonita Hills Executive Estates - PCS-9l-02 Page No.2 WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for a hearing on said application and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and its mailing to property owners within 1,000 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least ten days prior to the hearing; and WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 6:00 p.m., October 4, 1994, in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the City Council and said hearing was thereafter closed. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL fmds, determines and resolves as follows: Section 1. Adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program The City Council hereby finds that the Project will have no significant environmental impacts and adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program for IS-9l-15. Section 2. Incorporation of All Feasible Mitigation Measures. The City Council does hereby adopt and incorporate herein as conditions for all approvals herein granted all mitigation measures which it has determined to be feasible in the approval of the Tentative Subdivision Map. Section 3. Approval of the Coastal Sage Loss Permit Findings. The City Council does hereby approve the Section 4(d) Coastal Sage Take Permit Findings and authorizes the Director of Planning to issue a Final 4(d) Loss Permit for the Project (CS-95-03). Section 4. General Plan Findings--Conformance to the General Plan. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66473.5, in the Subdivision Map Act, the City Council fmds that the Tentative Subdivision Map as conditioned herein for Bonita Hills Executive Estates, Chula Vista Tract No. 91-02, is in conformance with all the various elements of the City's General Plan, based on the following: 1. The site is physically suitable for residential development and the proposal conforms to all standards established by the City for such projects. F: \HOME\PLANNING\MARTIN\BONIT A \9102CC .RES Resolution No. Bonita Hills Executive Estates - PCS-91-02 Page No.3 2. The design of the subdivision will not affect the existing improvements -- streets, sewers, etc. -- which have been designed to avoid any serious problems. 3. The project is in substantial conformance with the Chula Vista General Plan Elements as follows: a. Land Use - Based on the provisions of Section 4.1 of the Land Use Element of the General Plan pertaining to Residential Low (0-3 du/ac), this Tentative Subdivision Map is deemed to be consistent with the General Plan. b. Circulation - The project has limited access via Moonview Drive to private streets. These streets meet minimum City requirements for such streets. The project will not adversely effect the Circulation Element in that the adjoining street system was designed to handle the anticipated flow of traffic resulting from this and other area projects. c. Housing - The type of housing being proposed is large-lot, detached single-family residential structures. This project meets the goals, objectives and policies of the Housing Element in that Goals 1 and 4. General Objectives 1, 3,4 and 8, and Housing Policies 2,6,7 and 8 are implemented by this project. d. Conservation - The adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program for IS-9l-15 satisfies the goals and policies of the Conservation Element of the General Plan in that mitigation measures listed in the forgoing documents are applicable to this project. e. Park and Recreat~on, Open Space - The project is approximately one-third of a mile from- Terra Nova Park, a neighborhood park as defined in Section 4.3 of the Parks and Recreation Element, and therefore implements this General Plan element. f. Safety - The project meets the threshold standards of the Growth Management Plan. The nearest Chula Vista fire station, Station #2, is located at 80 East "J" Street. In addition, the Bonita-SuMyside Fire Protection District Station is located on Bonita Road near Acacia. Either of these stations could respond in case of an emergency in Bonita Hills Executive Estates. F:\HOME\PLANNING\MARTIN\BONIT A \9102CC .RES Resolution No. Bonita Hills Executive Estates - PCS-91-02 Page No.4 Seismic Policy of the Safety Element - The study Soil and Geologic Reconnaissance for Bonita Hills Executive Estates, a study carried out by GEOCON ,Inc., a geotechnical engineering finn, concluded that due to the project's proximity to regional active faults, including the Elsinore Fault and the San Jacinto Fault Zones, which lie approximately 41 and 62 miles to the northeast, respectively, there does not appear to be a significant risk of seismically induced liquefaction occurring on the property. Therefore, the project implements or otherwise conforms to Policy Statement 5 of Section 3.2, Seismic Policy, of the Safety Element, which states: "5. No lands shall be subdivided, developed, or filled within the City of Chula Vista in the absence of supportable, professional evidence that the proposed subdivision, development, or land fill would be geologically safe. " g. Noise - Due to the location of the project, noise attenuation is not required. h. Scenic Highway - The project is not located on any scenic highway. 1. Bicycle Routes - The project is not located on any bicycle route. J. Public Buildings - No public buildings are proposed on the site. The project is required to pay RCT fees prior to the issuance of building permits. Section 5. Subdivision Map Act Findings. a. Balance of Housing ;Needs and Public Service Needs. Pursuant to Section 66412.3 of the Subdivision Map Act, the Council certifies that it has considered the effect of this approval on the housing needs of the region and has balanced those needs against the public service needs of the residents of the City and the available fiscal and environmental resources. b. Opportunities for Natural Heating and Cooling Incorporated. The configuration, orientation and topography of the site partially allows for the optimum siting of lots for passive or natural heating and cooling opportunities as required by Government Code Section 66473.1. F:\HOME\PLANNING\MARTIN\BONIT A \9102CC .RES Resolution No. Bonita Hills Executive Estates - PCS-9l-02 Page No.5 c. Finding re Suitability for Residential Development. The site is physically suitable for residential development and the proposal conforms to all standards established by the City for such projects. Section 6. Conditional Approval of Tentative Subdivision Map. The City Council does hereby approve, subject to the following conditions, the Tentative Subdivision Map for Bonita Hills Executive Estates, Chula Vista Tract 91-02. Unless otherwise specified, all Conditions and Code Requirements shall be fully completed to the City's satisfaction prior to the approval of the First Final Map. Unless otherwise specified, "dedicate" means grant the appropriate easement, rather than fee title. The Developer shall: PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1. Prior to approval of the Final Map, revise the Tentative Subdivision Map as follows: A. On the slopes between Lots I to 4, the Map states a 2: I ratio in several locations, however, the contours, as shown, are at a 3: 1 or lesser ratio and shall therefore be required to be labeled 3: 1 or 4: I, as appropriate. B. On the street frontages of all lots, the Map indicates a "4: 1 variable slope." This reference shall be changed to read "4: I maximum slope" in all instances. C. Delete reference on the map to the six foot high chain link fence separating Open Space Lots "A" and "B" from adjoining residential parcel. The Map shall instead indicate a decorative wall along the northern boundaries of Lots I, 2 and 3 with Open Space Lot "B," aJld at the top-of-slope on Lots 4 thru 9, inclusive. 2. Submit a comprehensive wall/fencing program for review and approval by the Director of Planning prior the approval of a grading plan and Final Map. Subject plan shall address the decorative wall required pursuant to Condition I.C. above. 3. If deemed necessary by the Director of Planning, submit proof that each project component complies with the City's Growth Management Element and Program and threshold standards prior to Final Map approval to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning. F:\HOME\PLANNING\MARTIN\BONIT A \9102CC.RES Resolution No. Bonita Hills Executive Estates - PCS-91-02 Page No.6 4. Submit for review and approval the landscape concept plan, including the entryway treatment to the Director of Planning prior to approval of the Final Map. The plans shall include provision for correction of anyon-site erosion problems. 5. Pay the amount of fees applicable to the project, including but not limited to: A. The Transportation and Public Facilities Development Impact Fees (DIF) prior to the issuance of any building permit. B. Signal Participation Fees. C. All applicable sewer fees, including but not limited to, sewer connection fees. D. Park Acquisition and Development (PAD) fees. The fees to be paid shall be those in effect at the time of collection. The applicant is responsible for contacting the appropriate City department to ascertain the appropriate time of payment and the amount. 6. At subminal for Final Map, file a copy of the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) applicable to the subject property with the City of Chula Vista. The CC&R's shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Map and shall include: A. Provisions for the formation of a homeowner's association (HOA) which shall assure maintenance of private facilities, including the private streets, common areas, Open Space Lots "A" and "B," and drainage systems in perpetuity. The City of Chula Vista shall be named as party to said Declaration authorizing but not requiring the City to enforce the terms and conditions of the Declaration in the same maMer as any Dwner within the subdivision as related to areas of public concern such as, but not limited to, the maintenance of common areas and the adherence to other ordinance regulations of the City. B. Prohibition of television anteMas, garage conversions, parking outside of designated areas. C. Open Space Lots A & B shall be reserved as undisturbed open space, except for construction and maintenance of required private drainage facilities in Lot B, as approved by the City. D. A statement that the subdivision shall be accessed from Moonview Drive and that Randy Lane will be used for emergency ingress and egress only. F:\HOME\PLANNING\MARTlN\BONIT A \9102CC.RES Resolution No. Bonita Hills Executive Estates - PCS-9l-02 Page No.7 E. Requirements that there shall be no deviation from the grading approved as part of the Tentative Subdivision and Final Maps. F. Requirements that Open Space Lots "A" and "B" shall remain undeveloped, and that the homeowners will abide by the Comprehensive Habitat Reclamation, Preservation and Monitoring Plan for Open Space Lots "A" and "B." G. Prohibition of vertical sheer walls/retaining walls on any residential lot. In the event a wall must be constructed on any residential lot, crib walls shall constructed and maintained with landscaping, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning. 7. Dedicate Open Space Lots "A" and "B" as private open space easements. Said dedication shall be recorded with the County Recorder and proof of said recording shall be submitted to the Director of Planning prior to issuance of any grading permit. ENVIRONMENTAL REVmW COORDINATOR 8. Submit proof that subject project is enrolled in the Natural Community Conservation Program (NCCP), to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning, prior to approval of a Final 4(d) loss permit. 9. Comply with all mitigation measures required by IS-91-15, or any addendum thereto, which are hereby incorporated herein and which shall be implemented in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. 10. Comply with all requirements of the Coastal Sage Loss Permit required by CS-95-03, or any addendum thereto, which are hereby incorporated herein and which shall be implemented in accordance with the requirements of the State of California. 11. Submit a Comprehensive Habitat Reclamation, Preservation and Monitoring Plan for APN 592-171-61 and that portion of APN 592-030-57 which will be disturbed as a result of grading activities, to the Director of Planning for review and approval prior to Final Map approval. Said Comprehensive Habitat Reclamation, Preservation and Monitoring Plan shall be implemented prior to submittal of any application for grading or building permits and shall be maintained for a five (5) year period or until such time as the re- vegetated plants are capable of surviving without the assistance of an irrigation system, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning. 12. Submit a bond for the Comprehensive Habitat Reclamation, Preservation and Monitoring Plan for APN 592-171-61 and that portion of APN 592-030-57 which will be disturbed F:\HOME\PLANNING\MARTIN\BONIT A \9102CC.RES Resolution No. BonitJI Hills Executive Estates - PCS-91-02 Page No.8 as a result of grading activities, in an amount equal to the cost and instJIllation of the plant material and irrigation piping and devices plus five years of maintenance, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning. 13. Submit a fencing program for APN 592-171-61 for review and approval by the Director of Planning prior to Final Map approval. 14. Submit a Comprehensive HabitJIt Reclamation, Preservation and Monitoring Plan for Open Space Lots "A" and "B" to the Director of Planning for review and approval prior to Final Map approval. Said Comprehensive Habitat Reclamation, Preservation and Monitoring Plan shall be implemented prior to submittal of any application for grading permits and shall be maintained in perpetuity by the Homeowners Association. SWEETW A TER AUTHORITY 15. To the satisfaction of the Sweetwater Authority ("Authority"), execute or submit the following: A. A Hold Harmless Agreement for the fill that was placed on the proposed subdivision. B. A Release of Liability Agreement and written permission for vehicular and pedestrian traffic through the Authority's easement, adjacent to the proposed subdivision, shown as that portion of Street "A" between Moonview Drive and the southeast edge of the subdivision, and that portion of Street "B" just east of Street "C." C. A Hold Harmless Agreement for the proposed security gate at the south end of the Authority's easemevt. D. An Agreement to Improve Water Facilities, to serve the proposed subdivision. Said agreement shall be presented to the City Engineer that the subdivision will be provided adequate water service and long term water storage facilities. E. A letter to the Authority from the Chula Vista Fire Department stating fire flow requirements. F. An agreement with the Authority allowing encroachment in the eight foot easement for electrical and telemetry conduit, which was approved pursuant to Resolution No. 17219, if necessary. F:\HOME\PLANNING\MARTIN\BONIT A \9102CC.RES Resolution No. Bonita Hills Executive Estates - PCS-91-02 Page No.9 16. Acquire an off-site private access easement from the Sweetwater Authority needed to serve the subdivision or provide evidence that one exists. 17. Access the site from Moonview Drive only, except that Randy Lane may be used for emergency access. 18. Install a crash gate east of Street "C" in a location satisfactory to the Sweetwater Authority and the Chula Vista Fire Department, and remove the bar gate located on the northern leg of the Sweetwater Authority access easement which connects to Randy Lane. PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT 19. Submit plans to and obtain approval of the Director of the Parks and Recreation Department for the installation of approved landscaping and a permanent irrigation system on Lot "A" of Chula Vista Tract 80-15 - Map No. 10051, from the cul-de-sac crib wall on Moonview Drive to the rear boundary of 411 Windrose Way. The landscaped area is to include all areas below existing brow chaMels. All utilities must be situated upon City property and service only existing City property. Shared systems are not permitted between Bonita Hills Executive Estates and the City. The City will assume maintenance responsibilities upon the successful installation and completion of the maintenance period. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT. ENGINEERING DIVISION Streets. Rights-of-Wav and Improvements 20. Design and construct full street improvements to meet City standards for private streets for private streets A, Band C shown on the Tentative Subdivision Map within the subdivision boundary or off-silt, as required. Said improvements shall include, but not be limited to: asphalt concrete pavement, base, concrete curb, gutter and sidewalk, sewer, drainage facilities, street lights, signs and fIre hydrants. Detailed horizontal and vertical alignment of the centerlines of said streets shall be reflected on improvement plans and said plans submitted for approval of the City Engineer. No parking shall be allowed on Streets "A" and "C" and parking will be allowed on only one side of Street "B" as shown on the Tentative Subdivision Map. 21. Construct the entrance to the subdivision at Moonview Drive as an alley type entrance per regional standard drawing G-17 with maximum curb radii of 10 feet or as approved by the City Engineer. Construct 5' wide sidewalk from subdivision boundary to existing sidewalk on the westerly side of the entrance. F:\HOME\PLANNING\MARTIN\BONIT A \9102CC .RES Resolution No. Bonita Hills Executive Estates - PCS-91-02 Page No. 10 22. Construct or provide to the specifications or satisfaction of the City Engineer the following features to the proposed controlled access entrance to the subdivision: A. Gates located to provide sufficient room to queue up without interrupting traffic on public streets. B. Turnarounds at the gates with 40 ft. minimum radius. C. Delineation of border between public street and private street by enhanced pavement. No enhanced pavement shall be located within public right-of-way. D. Emergency vehicle access. 23. Construct all sidewalks within the subdivision a minimum of 4 feet wide. 24. Include on the Final Map reciprocal private access easements over private streets, A, B, and C to be granted to subsequent owners of Lots I through 12 pursuant to Section 18.20.150 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. 25. Grant to the City on the Final Map a general access and utility easement over the private streets within the subdivision to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 26. Acquire all off site rights-of-way necessary to construct a turnaround at the north end of Moonview Drive from the Chula Vista Elementary School District and then grant same to the City, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 27. Acquire and grant to the City an off site general access and utility easement over Street .. A" within the Sweetwater Authority property needed to serve the subdivision or provide evidence that one exists. 28. Obtain approval from the County and Sweetwater Authority to construct the off site private street to serve the subdivision. 29. Notify the City at least 60 days prior to consideration of the Final Map by the City if off- site right-of-way and easements caMot be obtained as required by the Conditions of Approval (only off-site right-of-way or easements affected by Section 66462.5 of the Subdivision Map Act are covered by this condition). After said notification and prior to the approval of the Final Map: F:\HOME\PLANNING\MARTIN\BONIT A \9102CC .RES Resolution No. Bonita Hills Executive Estates - PCS-91-02 Page No. 11 A. Pay the full cost of acquiring off-site right-of-way or easements required by the conditions of approval of the Tentative Subdivision Map. B. Deposit with the City the estimated cost of acquiring said right-of-way or easements. The amount of the deposit is subject to the approval of the City Engineer. C. Prepare and submit all easement and/or right-of-way documents, plats and appraisals necessary to commence condemnation proceedings. If the developer so requests, the City may, but is not required to use its power of eminent domain to acquire right-of-way, easements or licenses needed for off-site improvements or work related to the Tentative Subdivision Map. The developer shall pay all costs, both direct and indirect incurred if said acquisition is requested. The condition to construct the related off-site improvements which fall under the purview of Section 66462.5 of the State Subdivision Map Act are waived in accordance with that section of the Act, if the City does not acquire or commence proceedings for immediate possession of the property within the l20-day time limitation specified in that section. Sewers 30. Design the sanitary sewers to meet City standards or as determined by the City Engineer. Construct manholes a maximum distance of 400' apart and 15' deep. 31. Provide paved or otherwise improved access with a minimum width of 12 feet and a maximum grade of 15% designed to an H-20 wheel load, or other loading as determined by the City Engineer, to all sanitary sewer manholes. 32. Grant to the City an easement- centered over all 8-inch sanitary sewer lines within the subject property and new off-site sewer facilities constructed to serve the subdivision. The minimum width of said sewer easements shall be 15 feet. 33. Obtain written permission from the County of San Diego to connect the proposed 8-inch sanitary sewer line to the existing sewer in Glen Abbey Blvd. 34. Pay the Spring Valley sewer cOMection fee. Grading and Drainage F:\HOME\PLANNING\MARTIN\BONIT A \9102CC.RES Resolution No. Bonita Hills Executive Estates - PCS-9l-02 Page No. 12 35. Submit and obtain approval by the City Engineer for grading plans prior to approval of the Final Map. Grade slopes to a maximum horizontal to vertical ratio of 2: 1. 36. Obtain notarized letters of permission for all off-site grading work prior to issuance of a grading permit. 37. Comply with all provisions of the NPDES in effect prior to issuance of a grading plan. An erosion and sedimentation control plan shall be required as part of said plans. 38. All on-site storm drain facilities shall be private. Extend the proposed storm drain outlets within Lot "B" as necessary to the natural flowline of the local drainage basin to which it is tributary. Limit flows to pre-development volumes and non-erosive velocities and provide erosion control to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Water 39. Present written notification to the City Engineer from Sweetwater Authority that the subdivision will be provided adequate water service and long term water storage facilities. 40. Upgrade and/or construct new water facilities as required by Sweetwater Authority and the City Fire Department to provide adequate water service and fire flows. Agreements 41. Hold the City harmless from any liability for erosion, siltation or increase flow of drainage resulting from this project. 42. Defend, indemnify and hold h!lrmless the City and its agents, officers and employees, from any claim, action or proceeding against the City, or its agents, officers or employees to attack, set aside, void or aMul any approval by the City, including approval by its Planning Commission, City Council or any approval by its agents, officers, or employees with retard to this subdivision pursuant to Section 66499.37 of the Map Act provided the City promptly notifies the subdivider of any claim, action or proceeding and on the further condition that the City fully cooperates in the defense. ODen SDace 43. Request aMexation into Open Space District No. 11 and deposit $3,000 with the City to process the aMexation. F:\HOME\PLANNING\MARTIN\BONIT A \9102CC.RES Resolution No. Bonita Hills Executive Estates - PCS-91-02 Page No. 13 44. Open Space Lots A and B within the subdivision shall be privately owned and maintained by the homeowners of this development. Miscellaneous 45. Vacate the easement for slope and drainage facilities within Lots 6 and 7. 46. AMex the site from the County of San Diego to the City of Chula Vista prior to approval of the Final Map. 47. Tie the boundary of the subdivision to the California System - Zone VI (1983). 48. Provide the City with the Final Map in a digital format such as (DXF) graphic file. Submit this Computer Aided Design (CAD) copy of the Final Map in accordance with the guidelines for Digital Submittal issued by the City Engineer. Code Reauirements 49. Comply with all applicable sections of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. Preparation of the Final Map and all plans shall be in accordance with the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act and the City of Chula Vista Subdivision Ordinance and Subdivision Manual. 50. Underground all utilities within the subdivision in accordance with Municipal Code requirements. 51. Pay the following fees in accordance with the City Code and Council Policy: A. The Transportation and Public Facilities Development Impact Fees prior to the issuance of any building- permit. B. Signal Participation Fees. C. All applicable sewer fees, including but not limited to sewer cOMection fees. D. Interim Pre-SRI25 Impact Fee (effective January I, 1995) Pay the amount of said fees in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. Failing any of which conditions, or failing the continued maintenance of same as the condition may require, this conditional approval and any entitlement accruing hereunder, shall, following a public hearing by the City Council at which the Applicant or his successor in interest is given F:\HOME\PLANNING\MARTIN\BONIT A \9102CC.RES Resolution No. Bonita Hills Executive Estates - PCS-91-02 Page No. 14 notice and the opportunity to appear and be heard with regard thereto, be terminated or modified by the City Council. Section 7. CEQA Findings. The City Council hereby finds that the Project will have no new effects that were not examined in the Mitigated Negative Declaration for IS-9l-15 as of the date of the application for the initial study. a. Section 8. Adoption of Findings - The Council does hereby approve, accept as its own, and incorporate as if set forth full herein, and make each and every one of the CEQA Findings as found in the Mitigated Negative Declaration for IS-9l-l5. b. Adoption of Mitigation Monitoring Program - As required by the Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, City Council hereby adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ("Program") incorporated herein by reference as if set forth in full for Mitigated Negative Declaration for IS-91-15. The City Council finds that the Program is designed to ensure that during the project implementation and operation, the Applicant and other responsible parties implement the project components and comply with the feasible mitigation measures identified in the Findings and in the Program. Notice of Determination. City Council directs the Environmental Review Coordinator to post a Notice of Determination and file the same with the County Clerk. That a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the owners of the property and the City Council. Presented by Approved as to form by Robert A. Leiter Director of Planning Bruce M. Boogaard City Attorney F:\HOME\PLANNING\MARTIN\BONIT A \9102CC.RES CITY OF CHULA VISTA PARTY DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ') Statement of disclosure of certain ownership interests, payments, or campaign contributions, on all matters which will require discretionary action on the part of the City Council, Planning Commission, 'and all other official bodies. The following information must be disclosed: 1. List the names of all persons having a contract, or P7ro osal. l'BJ &sfIt:::P.._liPlt=.IJ Bi~P mJCJl.AEL &'flf;. H financial interest in the application, bid, Jr;" (ffiTCJ...i'FE 1=1 fYlEf( HMDIEA If real property is involved, list the names of all persons having any ownership interest. 8 MI~ ItS APr,v~ 2. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list. the names of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership interest in the partnership. ft1/CJJlJEL ~lIltH- ~S''?o EI fI1~ fl.MlJf/? p~ APt1<~FFr=. ~'" ~~ 3. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a non-profit organization or a trust, list the names of any person serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust. 4. Have you or any person named in (1) above had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City staff, Boards, Commissions, Committees and' Council within the past twelve months? Yes_ NoX- If yes, please indicate person(s) 5. Have you and/or your offi cers or jlgents, in the aggregate, contri buted more than $1,000 to a Councilmember {n ~e current or preceding election period? Yes No ~ If yes, state which Councilmember(s): Person is defined as: "Any individual, firm, copartnership, joint venture, association, soci a 1 c1 ub, fraternal organi zati on, corporati on, estate, trust, receiver, syndi cate, thi s and any other county, ci ty and county, ci ty, muni ci pali ty, di stri ct or other 'political subdivision, or any other group or combination acting as a unit." (NOTE: Attach additional pages as Date: ~ - al- 90 necessary.) ~ ~~9c~ractor/~~ WPC 0701 P A-110 ~n Pri nt or type .. AAJ7;-iJIJ f:' D~M'C-J.I name of contractor/applicant EXHIBIT C Mitigated Negative Declaratio PROJECT NAME: Bonita Hills Executive Estates PROJECT LOCATION: North of the Terminus of Moonview Drive ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.: APN: 592-030-58,592-030-57 and 592-030-60 PROJECT APPLICANT: Michael Anthony Demich CASE NO: IS-91-l5 DATE: August 26, 1994 ' A. Proiect Setting The proposed project consists of the annexation, prezoning and processing of a tentative subdivision map on a 8.37 acre parcel currently located in the County of San Diego to the City of Chula Vista and the annexation and prezoning of adjoining 5.86 acre parcels owned by the Sweetwater Authority. The tentative subdivision map proposes to divide the 8.37 acre property into 12 single family lots and two open space lots, The 8.37 acre site consists primarily of a rectangular tract of land abutting the Bonita Valley Reservoir on the west. north of the terminus of Moonview Drive, The 5:86 acre parcel to the east contains the 18,7 million gallon concrete Bonita Valley Reservoir covered with a two foot earthen "blanket" over the concrete tank on which sage scrub was seeded. Although this parcel is proposed for annexation concurrently with the tentative map area, it will not be developed because of the 18.7 million because of the presence of gnatcatchers and habitat. The southern end of the subdivision property features a north-facing slopes with disturbed vegetation which gradually drops into a drainage with sage scrub. The terrain rises again to the north onto a barren ridgeline, before dropping steeply. into Bonita Valley, On the eastern boundary near the center of the site is a disturbed fill slope abutting a buried reservoir. The high elevation is 308 feet at the south end of the property, on a hillside below the existing water tank while the low elevation is approximately 116 feet in the extreme northwestern corner of the property on a steep slope overlooking Bonita Valley, B. Proiect DescriDtion The proposed project is an annexation to the City of Chula Vista and prezoning of approximately eight acres and subdivision of the site mto 14 lots in addition to the annexation and prezoning of 5.86 acres owned by the Sweetwater Authority. Twelve of the subdivision lots will be for development of custom homes, two of the' lots will be dedicated open space for protection of sensitive environmental resources, Site access will be via Moonview Drive which will be gated at the entrance to the site. ~{~ -.- ........_~_. - - city of chula vista planning department atY OF environmental review ..ctlon CHULA VISTA The area of the tentative map is bounded by eXlstmg single family residences at the northeastern and southwestern corners, water storage facilities at the eastern and southern portions, a partially improved road at the northwest boundaries, Moon View Drive at the southeastern corner, and undeveloped land at the remaining boundaries. The Sweetwater parcels are bounded on the west by the tentative map parcel, to the north by a single family residence, to the south partly by a parcel containing a water tank and another vacant parcel. and 10 the east by vacant land. Access is from Randy Lane off of Bonita Road or from Moonview Drive through Terra Nova via East "R" Street. A pumping house structure sits at the east central portion of the property. The property to the north, east and west of both parcels is in the County of San Diego and designated Residential-Low (0-3 du/ac), Residential I and Residential 5, respectively, on the Sweetwater Community Plan. The property to the south (Terra Nova) is in the City of Chula Vista and is designated Residential-Low Medium (3-6 du/ac) on the City's General Plan. Zoning for the property to the north, east and west is RR-I (to the north and east) and RS-4 (to east and west). Terra Nova is zoned PC (Planned Community) by the City of Chula Vista. The approximate areas for Lots I to 12 have been partly cleared. To mitigate the "taking" of coastal sage, the applicant is to conditioned to vegetate any disturbed areas and the parcel immediately to the south containing the water tank. This will also include irrigation. All revegetated areas are to be monitored for a period of five years to ensure that native plants develop into thriving plants capable of supporting themselves. The City of Chula Vista has posted a notice of proposal to issue a 4 (d) Coastal Sage Scrub Loss Permit in accordance with the Endangered Species Act and the mitigation plans and fmdings for that permit are attached as part of this mitigated negative declaration. C. Compatibility with Zoning and Plans The project site's General Plan designation in the County of San Diego is Residential-Low (0-3 du/ac). The proposed City of Chula Vista General Plan designation for the site is Residential-Low (0-3 du/ac). The current zoning, under the County of San Diego is RR-I (1 acre minimum lot size). The proposed City of Chula Vista zoning is RE- P for the subdivision and RE-40 for the Sweetwater sites. D. Identification of Environmental Effects An initial study conducted by the City of Chula Vista (including the attached Environmental Checklist Form) determined that the proposed project could have one or more significant environmental effects. Subsequent revisions in the project design and/or specific mitigation measures will be implemented to reduce these effects to a level below significant. With project revisions and/or mitigation, no significant environmental effects will occur, and the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report will not be required. This Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with Section 15070 of the State CEQA C:\NANCY\\DEMICHJS\ Page 2 Guidelines. Specific mitigation measures are set forth in the Mitigation Monitoring Program which is attached as Attachment "A". The following impacts are those that were determined to be potentially significant and are required to be mitigated to a level below significant. A discussion of each of these potentially significant but mitigatable impacts from the proposed project follows. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Existinl! Conditions: A biological survey was performed on the 8.37-acre Bonita Hills Executive Estate site to identify sensitive biological resources and constraints for future development of the site. The Biological Assessment for the site is on file in the City of Chula Vista Planning Department. The survey revealed that the site is utilized by both Coastal Cactus Wrens and the California Gnatcatcher. The former inhabits sage scrub and cactus near the ravine along the western fenceline, and territories extend off-site into higher quality habitat immediately west. The gnatcatchers were noted at the same locale; as well as in sage scrub now growing on the eastern boundary of the site and further into the earthen seal for the reservoir. Two easements of 1.21 and 1.50 acres, which represent approximately 30 % of the area of the tentative subdivision map is proposed as dedicated biological open space to protect these sensitive birds and their habitat. Two plants of limited sensitivity were noted: several California Adolphia grow near the ravine along the western boundary, and eight San Diego Viguiera occur further upslope to the north. Habitat quality varies widely on the property, with disturbed grasslands in the south and north, and fair to good quality Diegan Sage Scrub covering much of the canyon's flanks in the center of the property . Two vegetation types were present on the property: Diegan Sage Scrub and a very disturbed Annual Grassland. Shrub diversity at the Bonita Hills site is relatively limited. The more diverse sage scrub is concentrated near the drainage along the western boundary. Unusual for the region is the high incidence of California Encelia, which although a common plant, is rarely the dominant cover. Also occurring is Coastal Sagebrush, Lemonadeberry in the more mesic canyon bottom, Flat-top Buckwheat, Spanish Bayonet and Black Sage. Near the western boundary, by the drainage, grows some Jojoba, Coast Cholla, and further upslope San Diego Viguiera in limited numbers. The understory is relatively limited. Native elements include the late-flowering San Diego Want Chicory, Bicolored Cudweed, Ocean Locoweed and California Filago. At one artificially moist locale, along the southern boundary, near an irrigated residential yard, is one Arroyo Willow and a Great Marsh Evening Primrose. No other wetland species were seen on the property. The disturbed AMual GrasslandlDisturbed habitat includes an abundance of the noxious Tecolote and Wild Mustard. The overall quality of this grassland is considered poor. Much of the grassland habitat in the south may have been created during construction of the adjacent buried reservoir. Grassy areas on the ridge line in the north are likely the result of peripheral residential disturbance. C:\NANCY\\DEMICH.IS\ Page 3 Of the species of plants that were recorded on the site, thirty-seven are non-native invasive elements. None of these additional species is expected to be listed as sensitive. The Diegan Sage Scrub and AMual Grassland are habitat types for wildlife on the site. A small canyon with a few large shrubs at the western end of the property is kept moist by suburban runoff. This is an attractive area for animal-life in an otherwise arid environment.. Two sensitive species of birds were observed utilizing the available sage scrub habitat, Coast Cactus Wren and California Gnatcatcher. No amphibian were observed. Only one species of reptile were observed. Fifteen species of birds were observed on the site. Most of the species were associated with the natural sage scrub habitat. As many as six Coastal Cactus Wrens were observed. One pair of California Gnatcatchers utilize this property. No nesting activity was detected, but the quality of the available sage scrub habitat is rather good. A separate single gnatcatcher was seen and heard briefly to the northeast of this property along Randy Lane, indicating their presence there as well. Another pair of gnatcatchers uses the revegetated sage scrub covering the adjacent underground reservoir and the small tract of sage scrub in the southeast (south of Moonview Drive). Desert Cottontail was observed. Coyote was detected from its scat. California Ground Squirrel burrows were found, and they undoubtedly occur on-site, particularly within the disturbed terrain. Potential Environmental ImDacts: Both the Riversidian phase and the Diegan phase of Coastal Sage Scrub have been severely reduced in total acreage over the last century. Along with the extensive reduction in sage scrub has come a piecemeal fragmentation of larger tracts of such habitat. Isolation into small parcels devoid of viable linkages to other similar lands has undercut the value of such lands. Substantial redesign has eliminated initial significant biological impacts. Several adverse biological impacts will result from the proposed l2-lot split. . Loss of 1.5 acres of Diegan Sage Scrub. This habitat is severely declining in the Bonita region due to urban development and its conservation is a focus of regional planning for both Chula Vista and San Diego County. This highest quality sage scrub is situated in proposed open space B. Impacted sage scrub is of lesser or degraded quality. . The loss of eight San Diego Viguiera are not considered biologically significant. C;\NANCY\\DEMICH.IS\ Page 4 CULTURAL RESOURCES Existinl! Conditions: An Archaeological/Historical Assessment was prepared for the project site to determine if any significant cultural resources were present. The entire Cultural Resource Survey is on file in the City of Chula Vista Planning Department. Record searches were conducted at the San Diego Museum of Man and the South Coastal Information Center at San Diego State University to identify previously recorded archaeological sites within one mile of the site. No sites were recorded on the project site, however, the record searches indicated that ten prehistoric sites have been recorded within one mile of the property. All sites are located along ridge tops overlooking either side drainages or the Sweetwater River. In 1981, the project site was part of a larger survey for Sweetwater Authority for the Bonita Valley Reservoir Site. As a result of the 1981 investigation, no cultural resources were recorded. The 1981 study concluded that the area had been a working farm for over thirty years. Historic maps and aerial photographs do not reveal any pre-1942 farmsteads or activities on the site, although they do reveal the farm activities mentioned in the 1981 report, occurring on the knoll top by 1944. Although, according to the 1981 study, debris related to farming was found on the site, none of it was determined to be significant. No mitigation was required at that time. The entire site was again surveyed for the current study in September, 1992. No prehistoric or historic resources were located. Sprinkler heads were noted through the property suggesting the possibility of past farming activities. Miscellaneous trash, asphalt and cement chunks and pieces of road gravel were noted primarily along the road. A small, abandoned area, likely the remnants of a worker's camp containing trash and a wooden platform, was located in the southwest area. It was determined to be non-significant. and therefore, no mitigation is necessary. SOILS Existinl! Conditions: A Soil and Geologic Reconnaissance was to prepared by Geocon,Inc. to provide preliminary geotechnical information relative to the development of the proposed subdivision. The Geocon, Inc. study is on file in the City of Chula Vista Planning Department. Two geologic formations and two surficial deposits were encountered during the recormaissance. The geologic formations consisted of Oligocene-aged Otay Formation and Pliocene-aged San Diego Foundation. The surficial deposits consisted of fill and topsoil. The Oligocene-aged Otay Formation is located near the northern portion of the site. The Otay Formation does have contact with the younger (overlying) San Diego Formation within the open space area of Open Space Lot "A". The formation generally consists of dense sandstone and claystones. Due to the formation being located only within the open space area it should not be encountered during grading for the proposed development. The San Diego Formation (Tsd) is a dense, tan/light gray, silty, fme-grained (with some gravel) associated with the San Diego Formation which appears to be the predominant formation underlying C:\NANCY\\DEMICHJS\ Page 5 the site. Excavation within this unit will likely require moderate to heavy efforts with conventional heavy-duty grading equipment. Localized cemented zones, if encountered, may require a very heavy effort. The San Diego Formation should provide suitable foundation engineering characteristics for proposed structures in either an undisturbed or properly compacted condition. Cut slopes and compacted fill slopes constructed at 2: I (horizontal:vertical) or flatter should generally be stable. These soils, when used to construct fill slopes, are very susceptible to surficial erosion and should be properly planted to reduce the potential for erosion. Topsoils consisting of silty to slightly clayey, fme sands were observed overlying the formational units and were visually classified as relatively "low" - expansive with observed thicknesses of approximately I to 2 feet (where exposed) and may be as thick as 3 feet in some locations. Due to the generally loose, unconsolidated nature of the topsoil, it should be removed and recompacted prior to placing fill or structural loads. There is a fill slope, on the site, associated with the underground reservoir east of the project site. Where fills are proposed above the existing reservoir ftll soils, these areas may require subsurface investigation (trenches, etc) where structural improvements are considered. Other minor fills were noted on, or adjacent to, the site. These soils will require additional investigation where improvements are proposed. It is anticipated that the above-mentioned fills were derived from soils similar to those previously discussed. No evidence of landslides was found in previous reports or photographs and none were observed on the site. No groundwater or seeps were observed during the reconnaissance. The site is not located on any known active or potentially active fault trace. The Coronado Banks Fault, which is considered to be active, lies approximately 18 miles west of the site. The Rose Canyon Fault is located approximately 8 miles from the site and is the closest active fault to the site. The site is located within the La Nacion Fault zone with the nearest splay approximately 1,600 feet to the west. Regional active faults include the Elsinore Fault and the San Jacinto Fault zones, which 'lie approximately 41 and 62 miles to the northeast, respectively. In an event of a major earthquake on these or other faults in the southern California region, the site could be subjected to moderate to severe ground shaking. With respect to this hazard, this site is comparable to others in the general vicinity. Due to the high density of prevailing formational soils at the site, anticipated remedial grading of the surficial soils, and the lack of a permanent near-surface groundwater table, there does not appear to be a significant risk of seismically induced liquefaction occurring on the property. Mitie:ation Measures: Conclusion: No significant soil or geologic conditions have been observed or are known to exist which would preclude development of the property. Provided the mitigation recommendations in the Geologic Reconnaissance are adhered to there will be no significant impact related to geology or soils. C:\NANCY\\DEMICH,IS\ Page 6 DRAINAGE/HYDROLOGY Existinl!: Conditions: Due to the topography of the site, drainage is considered to be a potentially significant impact. A Drainage Study was prepared for the site and is on file in the City of Chula Vista Planning Department. The subject property is dominated by a saddle located in the center portion of the property between two knolls located on the northern and southern extremes of the project. The proposed northern six lots would be developed on the descending ridgeline of the northern knoll. The southern six lots would be located on the northern side of the southern knoll. The central saddle descends to a canyon and natural drainage course to the west. The northern 150 feet of the property is steep in grade and would not be disturbed by the proposed project. Due to the site's location in close proximity to hilltops, very little offsite land (approximately 1.1 acres) contribute to the study area's drainage basins. In a natural condition. only property to the east would naturally drain towards the project. However, the drainage generated offsite to the east of the site is collected in the Sweetwater Authority storm drain system and directed to the northeast away from site. The drainage study area consists of two well-defmed drainage areas. The area to the north of the ridgeline of the northern knoll encompasses approximately 2.1 acres and generates 4.27 cubic feet/second (cfs) of run-off in a lOO-year storm. This water exits the project site in an even sheetflow down the steep slope descending to the north of the site. The second existing drainage area encompasses the majority of the project site which is located south of the ridge line of the northern knoll, along with a small area off-site on the slope of the southern knoll and portions of the canyon banks to the west. This basin generates an existing 18.14 cubic feet/second (cfs) of run-off in a 100 year storm which is concentrated offsite into the flowline of the small canyon descending westerly from the central project site area. A portion of the access road abutting the central portion of the site along its eastern boundary is part of the proposed subdivision, however, it has not been included in the Drainage Study since the road is already developed and its drainage is collected in the storm drainage system developed as part of the underground reservoir. No change in this drainage is proposed as part of the proposed project. Pronosed Develoned Drainal!:e: The developed drainage analysis is based on proposed site improvements as shown on the tentative map for the project Chula Vista Tract Map No. 91-2 dated March 3, 1993. The drainage basin areas following site development will remain basically the same as in the existing condition (see Figure I). There would be little change in Drainage Area B. For the three lots proposed on the north side of proposed Street "COO, the rearyards would sheet drain to the north and the frontyards would drain south to the street. Though there will be a small increase in Drainage Area B, it will be offset by Page 7 C:\NANCY\\DEMICH.IS\ the increased time of concentration due to the shallow slope of the proposed pad. Therefore, although there will be a slight increase in drainage, it does not constitute a significant impact. Figure I _ Drainage Basin after Development Drainage Area A will be impacted due to the construction of a surface collection and underground drainage conveyance. system for the proposed development. Some run-off from portions of Area A will be conveyed in a different manner than in the existing condition. Drainage Subareas AI' A2' A" A. and As, will be directed to the underground storm drain system with its outlet in Lot B. Drainage Subareas A. and A7 will be collected at the rear of the graded pads. directed to the rip rap energy dissipators to be located on the north side of these lots, from which they will drain into the western canyon. The Drainage Study concludes that there will be a slightly lower quantity of runoff after development than in the existing condition, due to the drainage improvements that are proposed. This reduction is due to the larger time of concentration caused by the change in landform and increased time for the drainage to be routed in the street curb and gutter system prior to release in the underground storm drains. Erosion/Sedimentation: There is minimal erosion currently from the site due to dense vegetation on the canyon slopes and the sheetflow nature of the existing drainage pattern. In the developed condition, all of the drainage subareas of Area A except for As will be concentrated, and thus increasing its erosive possibilities. Drainage Subareas Al through A. and A. and A7 have a total quantity of approximately 9.05 cfs. If this quantity were released directly in a concentrated condition on the canyon sideslopes, the slopes could erode and cause downstream siltation. This can be eliminated by extending the storm drains to the flowline of the existing canyon and reducing the outlet velocities. The extension of the storm drains to the flowline along with the proposed installation of rip rap and splashwalls would mitigate the impact of the increased drainage from the proposed development. WATER OUALITY /EROSION: Due to the topography of the site, sedimentation could be a significant short- and long-term impact. The long-term impact related to drainage has been addressed in the drainage section above with appropriate mitigation measures recommended. Erosion and sedimentation impacts during the grading and construction period would be short-term, especially after storm events, and would be potentially significant. These impacts would occur only if adequate erosion control measures are not applied during and after the earthwork stage when disturbed soil is left temporarily unprotected. Long term erosion may occur from exposure of graded land if the area is not adequately landscaped soon after grading. These impacts are also considered to be potentially significant. The applicant will be required to comply with the General National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit issued to San Diego County by the State Water Resources Control Board Page 8 C:\NANCY\\DEMICH.IS\ for grading and construction activities. Individual projects fall under the General Permit issued to San Diego County by filing a Notice of Intent (NOI), including a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), with the State Water Resources Control Board prior to commencing grading activities. The SWPPP also addresses runoff from the site after construction to ensure that the future runoff is in compliance with the NPDES. Implementation of the recommerided mitigation measures will mitigate the impact of sedimentation to less than significant. E. Mitigation necessarv to avoid significant effects Specific project mitigation measures are required to reduce potentially significant environmental impacts identified in the initial study for this project to a level below significant. Mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project design and have been made conditions of project approval, as well as requirements of the attached Mitigation Monitoring Program (Attachment "A"). BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Two dedicated open spaces are recommended, and have been incorporated into the tentative map, which will include 1.2 acres of the higher quality Diegan Sage Scrub on-site in Area A, and protect habitat for both the Coastal Cactus Wren and the California Gnatcatcher. The California Adolphia will also be protected within these areas. The western open space (Area B) is 1.5 acres and is contiguous with high quality cactus wren and gnatcatcher habitat off- site to the west. It also links the revegetated lands of the reservoir with this sage scrub- dominated habitat (separated only by the existing paved road). Lot A covers a steep north- facing slope with grassland habitat. Specific mitigation measures to avoid specific significant biological impacts are as follows: I. No clearance of vegetation or other forms of habitat and soil disturbance shall occur within the dedicated open space areas (Lots A and B), with the exception of the construction of the sewage pipes and storm drainage pipe. In such case, disturbance shall be at the minimum required to accommodate construction. 2. 0.3 acre of disturbed grassland Diegan Sage Scrub in Lot B shall be revegetated in accordance with the recommendations in the Pacific Southwest Biological Services Assessment for the project dated September 4, 1992. Artemisia californica. Encelia californica. Eriogonumfasciculatum. Diplacus puniceus, and Salvia mellifera should be the principal shrubby components of this revegetation. A three-year monitoring plan shall be implemented to ensure the successful establishment of this scrub. The 0.3 acre constitutes the entire area within Area B mapped as grassland. 3. Prior to consideration of any final subdivision or parcel map, issuance of a grading permit, or issuance of a building permit for any portion of the project site, proof of an incidental take permit under Section 7, Section lOa of the Endangered Species Act or any other form of approval by the US Fish & Wildlife Service, relative to the California Gnatcatcher or Coastal Sage Scrub, shall be provided to the Environmental C:\NANCY\\DEMICH.lS\ Page 9 Review Section of the Planning Department. If such permit is not required, written verification to that effect from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service shall be provided. Any project redesign required in obtaining a Section 7 or lOa permit may require reconsideration by the appropriate City decisionmaking body. CULTURAL RESOURCES No significant impacts were identified, therefore, no mitigation is necessary. SOILS 4. All recommendations of the Soil and Geologic Reconnaissance prepared for the Bonita Hills Executive Estates by Geocon Incorporated, dated December, 1992, shall be adhered to. 5. A 20- to 30-foot high near vertical slope within the central drainage at the western boundary may experience additional erosion. Consideration should be given in the design process for future slope relation within the immediate area. 6. All future geotechnical subsurface investigation for the site should include review of the fill compaction report for the underground water reservoir at the eastern boundary. 7. The topsoils overlying the formational units will require remedial grading in the form of removal and recompaction in areas of proposed improvement. A subsurface investigation and laboratory testing will be required to determine actual depths of removals. 8. Existing fills in areas of proposed improvement should be evaluated during future investigations. 9. Excavations within the on-site soils should generally be possible with moderate to heavy efforts with conventional heavy-duty grading equipment. Localized cemented zone, if encountered, may require a very heavy effort. 10. Deleterious materials encountered during grading, such as tree roots, should be excavated and disposed of off site. II. Cut and f1l1 slopes planned at inclinations of 2: I (horizontal:vertical) or flatter with maximum heights of 13 feet should generally be stable against deep-seated failure. 12. Cut and fill slopes will be provided with an erosion-resistant ground cover and an adequately designed and maintained irrigation system as soon as practical to reduce the erosion potential. Constructed slopes should be designed with appropriate drainage systems; water will not be allowed to discharge over the top of slopes. C:\NANCY\\DEMICH.IS\ Page 10 13. In general, the prevailing soil conditions in either a dense undisturbed or properly compacted condition are suitable for the support of conventional isolated and continuous spread footings. It is anticipated that "very low" expansive soils will be encountered or will be placed as fIll in the areas influencing future foundations. Foundation design, including an allowable soil bearing pressure and estimated settlements, should be incorporated within future geotechnical studies. 14. Prior to the fmalization of the grading and improvement plans, a detailed soil and geologic investigation addressing the proposed development shall be performed. DRAINAGE/HYDROLOGY 15. All drainage improvements shown on Tentative Map 91-2 dated March 2, 1993, including rip rap velocity dissipators at outlet locations on the banks of the existing slopes, shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 16. Storm drains shall be extended to the flow line of the canyon. Outlets and energy dissipators shall be designed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. WATER OUALITY/EROSION: 17. The developer shall prepare an erosion and sedimentation control plan, in compliance with the NPDES permit issued to San Diego County, for the proposed development to address the impacts of short-term construction and grading activity. Said plan shall be incorporated into the project's grading and construction plans and shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. 18. The project shall comply with the provisions of the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) Order Number 92-08-DWQ, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit Number CAS 000002, Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRS) for Discharges of Storm Water Runoff Associated with Construction Activity including the preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. 19. All graded slopes shall be properly planted to reduce the potential for erosion. Landscape plans shall be subject to approval of the Planning Director prior to issuance of grading permits. Page 11 C:\NANCY\\DEMICH.IS\ F. Consultation 1. Individuals and Organizations City of Chula Vista: Marilyn R. F. Ponseggi, Planning Consultant Barbara Reid, Planning Roger Daoust, Engineering Cliff Swanson. Engineering Hal Rosenberg, Engineering Bob Sennett, Planning Martin Miller, Planning Ken Larsen, Director of Building & Housing Carol Gove, Fire Marshal MaryJane Diosdada, Crime Prevention Marty Schmidt, Parks & Recreation Dept. Rich Rudolf, Assistant City Attorney Chula Vista City School District: Kate Shurson Sweetwater Union High School District: Tom Silva Applicant's Agent: Michael Anthony Demich 2. Documents Chula Vista General Plan (1989) and EIR (1989) Title 19. Chula Vista Municipal Code Biological Assessment of the Proposed Bonita Hills Estates, City of Chula Vis t a, California, prepared by Pacific Southwest Biological Services, Inc., September 4, 1992, revised March 16, 1993 (Appendix "A") Cultural Resources Survey of the Proposed 8.9 acre Demich Subdivision Chula ViR Tract #91-2. Chula Vista, California, prepared by Roth and Associates, September, 1992 (Appendix "B") Soil and Geologic Reconnaissance for Bonita Hills Executive Estates, Chula Vista, California, prepared by Geocon, Inc., December. 1992 (Appendix "C") Drainage Study for Bonita Hills Executive Estates, prepared by Xinos Enterprises, Inc., March 31. 1993 (Appendix "D") C:\NANCY\\DEMICH.IS\ Page 12 3. Initial Studv This envirorunental determination is based on the attached Initial Study as well as any comments on the Initial Study and this Mitigated Negative Declaration, and reflects the independent judgement of the City of Chula Vista. Further information regarding the envirorunental review of the project is available from the Chula Vista Planning Department, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910. J EN 6 (Rev. 5/93) C:\NANCY\\DEMICH.IS\ Page 13 Case No. IS 91-15 APPENDIX I ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM (To Be Completed By Lead Agency) Background I. Name of Proponent: Michael Anthony Demich 2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: 3356 Glen Abbev Boulevard. Chula Vista. California 92010. (619) 427-5005 3. Date of Checklist: AUl!Ilst 26. 1994 4. Name of Proposal: Bonita Hills Executive Estates 5. Initial Study Number: IS-91-15 Environmental Impacts 1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: YES MAYBE NO a. Unstable earth conditions or changes in geologic substructures? 0 . 0 b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil? 0 . 0 c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? 0 0 . d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? 0 0 . e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? 0 . 0 f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands. or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? 0 0 . C:\NANCY\\DEM1CH.IS\ Page 14 g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud slides, ground failure, or similar hazards? o o . Conunents: Potential geological impacts are addressed in the Soils section of the Negative Declaration. The Geological Reconnaissance prepared for the site concludes that if the mitigation measures reconunended in the Report are incorporated into the project the impact is mitigated to a level of less than significant. Any potential impact due to erosion is discussed and mitigated in the Drainage/Hydrology section of the Mitigated Negative Declaration. YES MAYBE NO 0 0 . 0 0 . 2. Air. Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? b. The creation of objectionable odors? c. Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? o o . Conunents: Deterioration of regional air quality would not result from the proposed subdivision. The number of vehicle trips anticipated from the development are minimal as are potential emissions. 3. Water. Will the Proposal result in: YES MAYBE NO a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? o o . b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns. or the rate and amount of surface runoff? o . o c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? o o . d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? o o . e. Discharge into surface waters, or any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? o o . Page 15 C:\NANCY\\DEMICH.lS\ f. g. h. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? o o . Change in the quantity of ground waters. either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? o o . Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? o o . I. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? o o . Comments: Mitigation measures related to erosion and water quality have been included in the Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study. Additional drainage improvements have been designed into the project. Landscaping must meet all City requirements regarding slope protection and water conservation. 4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: YES MAYBE NO a. Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of plants (including trees. shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)? o . o b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? o . o c. Introduction of new species of plants into into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? o o . d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? o o . Comments: Potential biological impacts are addressed in the Biological Resources section of the Negative Declaration. The Biological Assessment prepared for the site concludes that if the mitigation measures recommended in the Report are incorporated into the project, in addition to the mitigation measure already incorporated into the project, the impact is mitigated to a level of less than significant. Page 16 C:\NANCY\\DEMICH.lS\ 5. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: YES MAYBE NO a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms or insects)? 0 . 0 b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? 0 . 0 c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? 0 0 . d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? 0 . 0 Comments: Potential biological impacts are addressed in the Biological Resources section of the Negative Declaration. The Biological Assessment prepared for the site concludes that if the mitigation measures recommended in the Report are incorporated into the project, in addition to the mitigation measure already incorporated into the project, the impact is mitigated to a level of less than significant. The mitigation measures include a requirement for obtaining project approval from the U. S. Department of Fish and Wildlife due to the presence of Gnatcatchers (recently listed as Threatened by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) and Diego Sage Scrub on the site and the issuance of a 4 (d) Coastal Sage Scrub (CSS) loss permit in accordance with the Endangered Species Act. 6. Noise. Will the proposal result in: YES MAYBE NO a. Increases in existing noise levels? o o . b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? o o . Comments: Noise levels will not change as a result of the proposed project. YES MAYBE NO 7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? o o . Comments: The proposed subdivision will not produce any significant light or glare. C:\NANCY\\DEMICH.IS\ Page 17 YES MAYBE NO 8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? 0 0 . Comments: The proposed subdivision's density is compatible with the City's General Plan for the adjacent area and the existing County Sweetwater Community Plan's land use designations and Zoning for both parcels are equivalent to the Chula Vista's Plan density and zoning. Annexation, prezoning and a General Plan Amendment are part of the project. 9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: YES MAYBE NO a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? o o . Comments: The proposed subdivision would not cause a change or increase in the rate of natural resource consumption. 10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve: YES MAYBE NO a. A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? 0 0 . b. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? 0 0 . Comments: The proposed park improvements would not cause a risk of upset in the City. The project will not release toxic or hazardous material into the environment during upset conditions. 11. Population. Will the proposal alter the location distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population or an area? YES MAYBE NO D D . Comments : Although the project does involve the future construction of single family homes, the twelve homes proposed do not represent a significant increase in the population. C:\NANCY\\DEMICH,IS\ Page 18 12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? YES MAYBE NO o 0 . Comments: The proposed subdivision will create twelve new single family homes. 13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: YES MAYBE NO a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? 0 0 . b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? 0 0 . c. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? 0 0 . d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? 0 0 . e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? 0 0 . f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles. bicyclists or pedestrians? 0 0 . g. A "large project" under the Congestion Management Program? (An equivalent of 2400 or more average daily vehicle trips or 200 or more peak-hour vehicle trips). 0 0 . Comments : The minimum number of trips that will be generated by the development of 12 single family dwellings will not have a significant impact on traffic. No road segments will be adversely impacted by these additional homes. 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: YES MAYBE NO a. Fire protection? 0 0 . b. Police protection? 0 0 . c. Schools? 0 0 . d. Parks or other recreational facilities? 0 0 . C:\NANCY\\DEMICH.IS\ Page 19 e. Libraries? D D . f. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? D D . g. Other governmental services? D D . Comments : The Fire and Police Departments can provide an adequate level of fire protection for the proposed subdivision without an increase in equipment or personnel. The proposed Bonita Hills Estates has been annexed to the Sweetwater Union High School District's Community Facilities District No. 5 which will mitigate any impact this future development may have had on school facilities. Adequate park, recreational and library facilities are existing in the immediate area to serve the slight population increase from the proposed development. 15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: YES MAYBE NO a. Use of substantial amount of fuel or energy? D D . b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources or energy. or require the development of new sources of energy? D D . Comments: The proposed subdivision will not have any impact on energy or fuel consumption. 16. Thresholds. Will the proposal adversely impact the City's Threshold Standards? YES D MAYBE D NO . Comments: As described below, the proposed project does not adversely impact any of the seven Threshold Standards. A. Fire/EMS The Threshold Standards requires that fire and medical units must be able to respond to calls within 7 minutes or less in 85 % of the cases and within 5 minutes or less in 75 % of the cases. The City of Chula Vista has indicated that this threshold standard will be met, since the nearest fire station is 3 1/2 miles away and would be associated with a 6 minute response time. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standard. B. Police The Threshold Standards require that police units must respond to 84 % of Priority I calls within 7 minutes or less and maintain an average response time to all Priority Page 20 C,INANCYIIDEMICH.ISI 1 calls of 4.5 minutes or less. Police units must respond to 62.10% of Priority 2 calls within 7 minutes or less and maintain an average response time to all Priority 2 calls of 7 minutes or less. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standard. C. Traffic The Threshold Standards require that all intersections must operate at a Level of Service (LOS) "C" or better, with the exception that Level of Service (LOS) "D" may occur during the peak two hours of the day at signalized intersections. Intersections west of 1-805 are not to operate at a LOS below their 1987 LOS. No intersection may reach LOS "E'" or "F" during the average weekday peak hour. Intersections of arterials with freeway ramps are exempted from this Standard. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standard. East "H" Street is currently over capacity. However, implementation of this project will not significantly impact existing conditions since only 130 average daily trips will be generated from the proposed subdivision. D. Parks/Recreation The Threshold Standard for Parks and Recreation is 3 acres/l ,000 population. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standard. E. Drainage The Threshold Standards require that storm water flows and volumes not exceed City Engineering Standards. Individual projects will provide necessary improvements consistent with the Drainage Master Planes) and City Engineering Standards. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standard. A drainage study was prepared for the proposed project which is discussed in detail in the "Drainage" section of the Initial Study/Negative Declaration. F. Sewer The Threshold Standards require that sewage flows and volumes not exceed City Engineering Standards. Individual projects will provide necessary improvements consistent with Sewer Master Planes) and City Engineering Standards. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standard. The project site is proposed to be annexed from the County of San Diego to the City of Chula Vista. The City Engineer will require sewer service to be approved by the County of San Diego as a condition on the subdivision map. Agreements will be required to be entered into with the County by the Applicant/City for perpetual provision of sewer service and easements to the subdivision as a condition of approval on the tentative map. C:\NANCY\\DEMICH.IS\ Page 2t G. Water The Threshold Standards require that adequate storage, treatment, and transmission facilities are constructed concurrently with planned growth and that water quality standards are not jeopardized during growth and construction. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standard. Applicants may also be required to participate in whatever water conservation or fee off-set program the City of Chula Vista has in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: YES MAYBE NO a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health? o o . b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? o o . Comments: The proposed subdivision would not have an adverse impact on human health or safety. No hazardous or unsafe conditions are associated with the project. 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in: YES MAYBE NO a. The obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? 0 o . b. The destruction, or modification of a scenic route? 0 o . Comments: There are no scenic highways in the vicinity of the site that will be affected by the future development of homes on the site. 19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? YES MAYBE NO o 0 . Comments: No recreational facilities will be directly impacted by the proposed project. Less than fifty new residential units would be developed and therefore, no additional parkland dedication is required in accordance with City thresholds. Park fees will be required at the time building permits are issued in accordance with City ordinances. C: \NANCY\ \DEMICH .1S\ Page 22 20. Cultural Resources. YES MAYBE NO a. Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction or a prehistoric or historic archaeological site? 0 . 0 b. Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure, or object? 0 . . c. Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? 0 . 0 d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? 0 0 . e. Is the area identified on the City's General Plan EIR as an area of high potential for archeological resources? 0 0 . Comments: A Cultural Resources analysis has been prepared for the project and is discussed in detail in the Negative Declaration/Initial Study. No significant historic or pre-historic sites were located on the property. 21. Paleontological Resources. Will the proposal result in the YES MAYBE NO alteration of or the destruction of paleontological resources? 0 0 . Comments: There is no evidence of paleontological resources on the project site. 22. Mandatory Findings of Significance. YES MAYBE NO a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant animal or eliminate important examples or the major periods of California history or prehistory? 0 0 . C:\NANCY\\DEMICH.lS\ Page 23 Comments: Mitigation measures have been identified to reduce the impact to the Gnatcatcher and Diegan Sage Scrub on the site to a level of less than significant. Open Space areas have been included in the design of the tentative map and approval of the project by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will be required as a condition of approval of the Tentative Map. b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term goals to the disadvantage of long- term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief. definitive period of time, while long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) . o o Comments: All significant impacts related to the site have been mitigated to below a level of significance. The proposed subdivision does not propose long-term risks to health and safety. The proposed project does not have any interim use of the site while awaiting ultimate development. c. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small. but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) . o o Comments: There are no significant cumulative impacts associated with the project. d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? o . o Comments: All significant impacts have been mitigated to a level of less than significant. C:\NANCY\\DEMICH.IS\ Page 24 MEMORANDUM July 9, 1993 File No. YS-457 TO: Marilyn ponseggi, FROM: Samir M. Nuhaily, Environmental Consultant Civil Enginee~J SUBJECT: Drainage Study for Bonita Hills Executive Estates, received April 1, 1993 This memorandum is in response to your telephone discussion this morning with Kirk Ammerman, Assistant Engineer II, with respect to the subject drainage study. We reviewed this study in early April and found that it adequately addresses our concerns as expressed in Item 1.e. of the Initial Study Review, and as reiterated in our previous memorandums dated August 25, 1992 and October 19, 1992. If you should have any questions regarding the above, please contact me at 691-5173 or Roger L. Daoust, Senior Civil Engineer, at 691-5259. KPA/kpa cc: Roger L. Daoust, Senior Civil Engineer William A. Ullrich, Senior Civil Engineer Gena Franco, Civil Engineer [A:YS-457.003] r ~ ROUTING FORM R~C12J\I~O Mn ~CEJVED MAY 0 4 1992 PLANNING DE~T.. DATE: May 1, 1992 1."9/ ,. PLANNING Ken Llrson, Buftding I Housing , John Lippitt, Engineering fEIR On1Y} Cliff Swanson, Engineering EIR on1y _ Hal Rosenberg, Engineering EIR only Roger Daoust, Engineering (IS/3, EIR/2) . Richard Rudolf, Assistant City Attorney (EIR on1y) Clrol Gove, Fire Department Marty Schmidt, Parks I Recreation Keith Hawkins, Police Department [ -. I - ~ Ed Batchelder rt.~lXl>>~~~_, Advance Pllnning Bob Sennett, City Landscape Architect Bob Leiter, Planning Director Chula Vista Elementary School District, Ktte Shurson Sweetwater Union H.S. District, Tom Silva (IS I ElR) Other Sweetwater Authority TO: FROM: Marilyn Ponseggi Environmenta1 Section SUBJECT: (!!J Application for Ini~ial Study (15- 91-15 If A- 501 /DP 794 ) D Checkprint Draft ElR (20 days)(ElR- /fB- lOP ) 0 Review of a Draft EIR (EIR- /FB- /DP ) 0 Review of Environmental Review Record FC- /ERR- ) . The project cons,1sts of: Resubmittal of PCS-9l-D2, now call s Executive Estates (formely called oonview Estates 13 proposed custom single family ho 9ated entrance. Locltion: End of Moonview Drive off of Smoky Circle P1.lse review the document Ind forward to ~ Iny comments you have by Mav 8. 1992 . COIIIIIents. Please he adviser. that the property \'lhich conprise the proposed r:(\r;i~~ 11ills Estates 'r.as h~er, ~nl1exer: tq the S\lcet\:ater Un~o~, ~:ig~ School ~i~t:-ict's Cor:;munl,ty Faci'lities Di.strict r'o.~. This action bas r.11~lga~er. th~ fin~l~l~"ted s~c?n:a~y is sci,ool ir:1pacts this pro,fect \/iJl have on ];he dlstrlct. roo aadl _lonal nlltlgatlor, necCSSa ( /~ Thlas . 1 va fssistant Director of Planning .' - 13 - Case No. IS-Cf-J5 H. FIRE DEPARTMENT 1. What is the distance to the nearest fire sta!1on and yhat is the Fire Depart:rnen. t~mjlted reaction time? -3/f;::;L kVIL Py. ,( I}{A . Will the Fire Department be able to provide an adequate level of fire protection for t proposed facility without an increase in equipment or personnel? 2. 3. Remarks Fm r~fH4 ) Datf,ligjr; ~ -- -.- - -- ! . ~ _:. -S if/ _. (.i; I ). I/IJ(, /qO /rf<'-C ql-o.-:z.. <' CIIUl.!' "i!'.,If, tll~r. DIY^':P~!.NT nU~I.'.U uf fI"f PfilVENIIU~: P~I:.li ~~n;':~~!~l:'rlC;r~ :~:;U I --_._----_. -- -- ----- , (t l'.ddrEJ~!i.{IL{Hf.ll.t.tJt./~~:J pl.)II Itlc I,J. Typ", ConSer. . _. (I: ',:I:"'.,ii(;/{u.' Ilu"::J{'/~!i'o. ) ': ' . ~ J ; . t!! ! \.. 't' ;~l:. :1'1 nj' j ('c, 1\ I Ii:,.. r,t....,;J -----.- _._-- -.- The tol1u:.;inU lis.... (1-I~" n'J. np(':'.J~',;I'~l.: ii';_;'.l.jr~ l,11 ;-':'ltJt~~. \.I'I'J UI;li~s.iuH:,. PR:JVI DE A~:O SHW ill I !'Lr,::; L1tj)t.id.L/lA~ ~ !!~J4:Ll::'-t'L~=---'~J6i;D:-~,_'i1Xl(fi.!{~,-__-.,,___ ~__I(J.)..{f.(!ifL' r) _iu(~dtt\.__ _-_= .1../-0 'i :1LLC!. .>( tA_:::.)_.rl1~:i '5.4~!:~;>_:)?i :p/ ~- .- I2U).f.!:ic1Ji;-...1. {~plJA_'{;'(':L_. fL/:!..\!:{<' :~{1~/.L :!~.LL'2 /~' A /t'>.zit~J) .- /j J 'd ') I. ( ('t /. j~' I (, i' ." 111" ' /.J .i. ()' --.-'~{; l!.!J. t~/~;_L:t.1 lL).(_~ , . -~,.;(2-'-,('~y-!1;Jl.LiL.~U,,"__(b.LdL~j.!'_,-, L.~JL. ' ~fJL. 1:.:.J!U:.! -~ \'{ ; ((!j ( .LfLC it.c'.- L;.!J/(J-!.:J J}( ./{d:tf....LfJl.._._ , . J ,Jrf".A I ~ {I !} c) ... --.i2f.L._(.jAJ1ic~~~~Ct{{f:-2'~ J _. (L?!/LL,!_.____________________..m. .?L ._~, "'-cL.5. "r-sr:--~-...,< \ .~-'L~:l '-<. ~c..!.,Q-(~_~.~i-~-.::..~_~.~i:.!::...~ l <{ iOG......~_~.~.~E"._ 1_{?,'l"",,-- d" i~L",L~_':!-r -L"'-.J1....K""!r_.:r_~~Q.I..!.'.1...:.. .__________._..._ " __G...'.---F ~ ~, .!. <.:::..1:-' "- (_\:., ~ ..:'~.....:i{'!' '!>~::" :i-'l__;S.L'_'.to~ i.v,. !L.h_~...J:.!!I-I...l!.!.!_ _._.___ >or;: ~'r (). '" '1 '( ~ <; "(,, .., "'- w.~~!:..~__\;.h~h.'1: ~~.~~ p.~,,-..2S _c-_~_:;;:....._ .e.V7: ~V'\.'r t...,,, lL..E...1.? _~~~\:.~~~~ :><::~.r_~__~.H t:".-'--~~~tf.13"-.__ n. '> "\,,""- ['. c\ ~.L~-~!-'" "t..Q.5__S .~... -S._,::"\< ".R.s_:_ .__ .___.__ _.__.__ ___ __ _. , 1 ~~d....f.L..c.~..x.l'-L.k."..:.-~---- _.___ ...___ .---- 5//9/9~ I - ~-------. -- . '- -$WPJ~~~a{~_ '-~ ~- -----.------.-------------------. "' -.--.. --_. -----__.. 0- ____.__ ______ _n.._______ _____._________ ..~. -- rP\3-29 ,/S-LfS7 G. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Case No. ~S-cH-15 1. Drainaae I. Is the project site within I flood plain? ~C>. If SO, stlte which FEMA FloodwlY Frequency Boundary IJ/A. I b. What is the 10clt1on Ind description of existing on-site drainage flcnities? ~. ~,i~~'= 1.;'..t~~V::;,; ~v~~ ~o GvItE> 11j!SrS ;l. (.I.EAO!oV><, . .- CoJJ rc I ~ II 3(~ur"'I<~) #V~JZ.ITY P1lc>P'~).NJ.D. Sv~E' FI.oH TO c",'.WoolS. Are they adequate to" serve the project? LIt>. If not, explain briefly. ....X>I:>'n"..u.l.. 't>IZ.4.-,.'LL", RCIL..lrlfSt:; ""'LL. 13;;;. -tZF=1f11J11lED It:> (!ololvE:Y ~Uf.1Dl:::''''' F2DM ~.J::"I"C.. "!he 1ZF-1~'Tle>oJ. . or:: ~f: ~1~71IoJ" ItoJ~n.. What is the location and description of existing ~ff-site drainage facilities? DtJr",....t-e- 'I'r> 11Y"A.!- "...tYt>/J~ c. d. lo~ Vf~ :u ~~ c.~~ ASo... \Its-A;. e. Are they adequate to serve the proj If not, ex~lain briefly. iv . . s;~ 0,", J. ..-&._ .DVb c:.C\.-t C61.~ _1 oUJ\o'\ E .......~I r 2 . J ran s D 0 i"t a tTIff\.. ~ l..<..J _ doy.ru.' a. What roads lrovide primary access to the project? E~ "ft II S'TC2.fO.eT"" _f-fIDt:>E/J 1I1i:;n!. ~rllE. ~ b. What is the estimated number of one-way auto trips to be generated by the project (per day)? /30 A:m- c. What is the ADT and estimated level project completion? Before A.D.T. ~ "H"9T.- !>O.'ND U Wl>1W vr.:::n.. 'DrZ. -1.J1oI14lWA./ L.O.S. EEA4)r "14"~. - LoS "!!!" If,z::oE:.IJ v'~ 1;:2 ~-lhJI:..uDI4hJ of service before and after After Z:A~"Utl9'r.- 5'0.570 J.I.,'C'f)f;"1J 1t1~~ ~.-Ih4./4..J~WN .t;A"i1r II H I' So"'. - LoS" ~ " U/1:>r)r:;.J..lI,/4:;ndr. ];:IR. -IJ1J/J::.Nr.WN If the A.D. T. or L.O.S. 15 unknown or not applicable, explain briefly. '~/O CL>W.I~ Nor AVA''-' ".& R:JIIZ. ~11:>l>Bol V/~n. ~vE. d. Are the primary access roads adequate to serve the project? If not, explain briefly. ~"H" GrJ2J;:'"/&"r' IS t'..L..IlZI"e. 'TZ-Y rJlA#J2- f\-APAc...trY_ I-IDw~~~. IMPJ,.E.M,rAlTz.rIDW DF ~Qn:::.,.--r WIl.""- . Nor S'~A.!Ir:='I/"AI.'~Y IMPAGr ,::'x/"rwl:, ~-DAlb"T*701J'. WPC 9459P -14- Ys- ifs-r Case No. 'I~-qf-l5" e. Are there any intersections at or near the point that w11l result in an unacceptable Level of Service (LOS)? No. 1'1ZOJ'Ecr W/u.. ~()r If so, identify: Location Al,/A IfAVE. fi:.1&I4IJ:ICNJ7'" 'MP,4GT, Cumul at he L.O.S. ",-fA. f. Is there any dedication required? y~. If so, please specify. ...., c.cx.-1:>E-.::...... &o1JT1+ OF ~P'--- D ~1V',t.;rE. 5fGu~rrY t:J.-n::. Am.rCAI.tr 6UA.U- osrAII..J PJZl)~ ~r&.W-T"~Y 1,..1 CUt--PE:-Sl.-C ~t::>"T"Iff;N ~/&.ATJ:; Tt> 'me GrTY of CoHo""" VIST,IS. . g. Is there any street widening required? YE?;;. If so, please specify. ~JJoS~I"'..,..,ol.J ~ ~l.-~~ c;.oc.1TH OF' f'1ZDf'tiG.E1:> PlttVA~ ':::'''''G()~~ GoA.T5. &'/'0'''' ~II'S f:'~l)114Eb f>~F- CVDS-/3, h. Are there any other street improvements required? y~~. If so, please specify the general nature of .the necessary improvements. CV/tS.G.<JTTliZf2.: f,1DE-wAU:,.. A.c. RllIlEMEI--lT) ; ~EI<:r L.I~IIJ~ IN '"T7+E: "P12PP~T> CVL--l:>E-~c. 9'YrrH o,...~ ~1'> ~VA~ 5;Fc.v~trY t:..A~. IN A'Db ,,.../tJN,\ r:::r2IVATE" ~Er IMP'fZot/EM~. Tb 3. Soils a. Are there any anticipated adverse geotechnical conditions on the project site? VNfl+loW1J. .. b. If yes, specify these conditions. ~ c. Is a so11s report necessJry? YEG. (/'1BO fZEFbTZ:r F?::a. Sw~~-rwA71!!rz.. Al/f1io!Z.lr"Y If> /Jor ~()R='ltAEIJ1"'. SoIt..6 ~ McX.r AZ:>2:>~$ land Form p/zoPOf,e:b '])E;VEL-DP/vfEN{;) a. What is the average natural slope of the site? I~~ b. What is the maximum natural slope of the site? tfo% 5. Noise 4. Are there any traffic-related noise levels impacting the site that are significant enough to justify that a noise analysis be required of the applicant? AlD. 6. Waste Generation How much solid and liquid (sewage) waste w11l be generated by the proposed project per day? Solid 3/~ /.S./nAY . ~iauid 3#5' GA".....,/Day What is the location . and size of existing sewer lines on or downstream from the site? ~"YCP IbWN(lr1Z.J::~M 11.1 ,.;, ~J,f A-BBEY ~VL.""'VARl). WHIGH It; IN 77+E (!.,oVloJry t:F!;AN '1>tEr-.~ , Are they adequate to serve the proposed projec~? UAl~D~At. ~/S ~/^'f: IS IN c.J)V"'r-f t>F GAfJ X>/Et:to. WPC 9459P -15- . . Ys- '157 " Case No. j:5-Cfr-rs 7. Remark.s Please identify and discuss any remaining potentia' adverse impacts, mitigation measures. or other 1ssues.~\ ;:~Mt:~;;, ~LJU> )';!;,~~Ei'!Z.IFIEt> "6ECAvSF. TH-EY ATZE 1IJ 71IE. t!L;VN />oJ"&:f). (% Sl!:RvlC4;; Musr BE I4PP1iEbv~ RY -nlE o,uJJ'TY i!>t= ~ l>/C/-4? Al.::1UFI::M~~ ~~~~~Z;~~7c~^'~~r;:~;:::~V~~:U8~;,,~t:~'f~~~1 M.....y S.;;: fQ&~t.JIPI::"7> "'T'?') l}R.77A..114 AAI AI.RD.E.~. ".IY-I'!;T1Z~f/rul ~PHlr I': 'DEVEt..DPMEAlr- 'J)1577/~ .t;' ACPE'S t51t! MDfICJ;;. 5:/I~ Date , WPC 94S9P -16- . . -13(a)- Case No. 15- q~- /5 H-l. PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT 1. Are existing neighborhood and community parks near the project adequate to serve the population increase resulting from this proj ect? Neighborhood ~ Community parks~C) 2. If not, are parkland dedications or other mitigation proposed as part of the project adequate to serve the population in~rease? Neighborhood \~ \~ ~~ l Community parks V> ~I 'I 3. Does this project exceed the Parks and Recreation Thresholds established by City Council policies? \-.Lv ~~~~ Parks and Recreation Director or Representative 5.~_q~ Date September 9, 1994 NOTICE OF PROPOSAL TO ISSUE A 4(d) COASTAL SAGE SCRUB (CSS) LOSS PERMIT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT FOR BONITA HILLS EXECUTIVE ESTATES (pCS-91-02) CASE NO.: CS 95-03 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA'S INTENT TO ISSUE A 4(d) COASTAL SAGE SCRUB LOSS PERMIT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT. NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN OF THE AVAILABILITY OF THE DRAFT FINDINGS SUPPORTING ISSUANCE OF THE PERMIT IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION l7.30.053(D) OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE. FINDINGS PER SECTION 17.30.054(D) OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE One and one-half acres of Diegan Sage Scrub will be permanently eliminated by site grading and development. Two dedicated open spaces are recommended for retention and have been incorporated into the tentative map, (see attached biology report) which will include 1.2 acres of the higher quality Diegan Sage Scrub on site in Open Space Lot "A", and protect habitat for both the Coastal Cactus Wren and the California Gnatcatcher. The California Adolphia will also be protected within these areas. The western open space on site area (Open Space Lot "B") is 1.5 acres and is contiguous with high quality cactus wren and gnatcatcher habitat off-site to the west. It also links the revegetated lands of the reservoir with this sage scrub-dominated habitat (separated only by the existing paved road.) The following [mdings have been made based on the information contained in the Final Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Report Program (MMRP) for Bonita Hills Executive Estates on September 1, 1994. Findings: 1. The habitat loss, as proposed for issuance under the 4( d) Loss Permit, is consistent with the "interim loss criteria" in the November, 1993 State Natural Community Conservation Program (NCCP) Conservation Guidelines (as specified in items a. through d. below) and, if a subregional interim take process is established in a form approved by the City of Chula Vista at the time of the issuance of the Loss Permit, consistent with such approved subregional interim loss process. 4(d) Loss Permit Draft Findings Bonita Hills Executive Estates Page 1 a. The habitat loss, under the Loss Permit as proposed by the Director for issuance, will not on the date of issuance, when considered cumulatively with all other loss of CSS occurring since March 21, 1993, exceed 5% by acreage of the then existing CSS within the region. The regional CSS loss acreages are as follows:' San Diego Region initial allowable CSS loss Cumulative Regional CSS loss since March 21, 1993 Additional Chula Vista Loss (CS-95-01) Total Loss Remaining allowable CSS loss Loss allowed by this permit Remaining allowable regional CSS loss 11,371.9 ac. 0.8 ac. 256.0 ac. 256.8 ac. 11,115.1 ac. 1.5 ac. 11,113.6 ac. The NCCP Conservation Guidelines have indicated that a 5% loss of CSS is acceptable during the preparation of a NCCP or its equivalent (Le. MSCP Plan). The proposed habitat loss does not cumulatively exceed the 5% guidelines. The loss of 1. 5 acres of CSS combined with current losses of sage scrub within the San Diego Region do not exceed 5 % of the existing sage scrub habitat. b. The proposed Project is bordered to the north, and south by residential development, at the eastern and also at the southern portions by water storage facilities and a partially improved road at the northwest boundary. Moon View Drive borders the property at the southeastern comer, and undeveloped land is located west of the property. The habitat being impacted is of a degraded quality. The highest quality coastal sage is being preserved on-site. The target species do occur on the portion of the site which is not proposed for development. The project area is not dense DCSS and is not in close proximity to a Higher Value DCSS, or part of a critical corridor. The Project site is already isolated by existing development and will become further isolated by future development. c. The habitat loss, under the Loss Permit as proposed by the Director for issuance, will not preclude or prevent the preparation of the subregional NCCP. The site is not a crucial habitat link, but is rather at the periphery of already approved or constructed development. The Core Biological Resource Areas (see the City of San Diego Multiple Species Conservation Program, 1994) which is still being fInalized are located well south of the project along the Otay River Valley. This site is not considered a high priority preservation area because of the existing adjacent development which result in high edge effect (Le., intrusion by humans, pets, weedy plant species) and habitat fragmentation or part of a 1 These CSS loss acreages will be reconfirmed with SANDAG prior to the finalizauon of this loss permit. 4(d) Loss Permit Draft Findings Bonita Hills Executive Estates Page 2 significant wildlife corridor. For these reasons, the site is not considered important in the preparation of the City of Chula Vista's open space planning efforts or NCCP planning efforts. d. The habitat loss, under the Loss Permit as proposed by the Director for issuance, has been minimized and mitigated in accordance with Section 4.3 ("Interim Mitigation") of the "Southern California Coastal Sage Scrub Natural Communities Conservation Planning Process Guidelines," dated 11/5/93, and thereafter, to the maximum extent practicable. Two dedicated biological open spaces are recommended which will include 1.2 acres of the higher quality Diegan Sage Scrub on-site in Open Space Lot "B", and protect habitat for both the Coastal Cactus Wren and the California Gnatcatcher (see Attachment 2). The California Adolphia will also be protected within these areas. This western open space is 1.5 acres and is contiguous with high quality cactus wren and gnatcatcher habitat off-site to the west. It also links the revegetated lands of the reservoir with this sage scrub-dominated habitat (separated only by the existing paved road.) In addition the following on-site and off-site mitigation measures are proposed: . No clearance of vegetation or other forms of habitat and soil disturbance shall occur within the dedicated open space areas (Lots A and B), with the exception of the construction of the sewage pipes and storm drainage pipe. In such case, disturbance shall be at the minimum required to accommodate construction. . 0.3 acre of disturbed grassland Diegan Sage Scrub in Lot B shall be revegetated in accordance with the recommendations in the Pacific Southwest Biological Services Assessment for the project dated September 4, 1992. Artemisia californica, Encelia califonica, Eriogonum fasciculatum, Diplacus puniceus and Salvia meJlifera should be the principal shrubby components of this re-vegetation. A five-year monitoring plan shall be implemented to ensure the successful establishment of this scrub. The 0.3 acre constitutes the entire area within Area B mapped as grassland. Open Space Lots "A" and "B" will be maintained in a natural state by the homeowners association in perpetuity. . The Sweetwater tank parcel located immediately to the south will also be revegetated as part of this project. 2. The habitat loss will not appreciably reduce the likelihood of the survival and recovery of the Coastal California Gnatcatcher (Potiaptila Californica Californica). 4(d) Loss Permit Draft Findings Bonita Hills Executive Estates Page 3 As is noted in Finding Number One above, the area of habitat loss meets the "interim loss criteria" in the November 1993 State Natural Community Conservation Program (NCCP) Conservation Guidelines. Therefore, the project site does not have high habitat potential for a long-term conservation area. On -site mitigation through the preservation of higher value habitat will increase the likelihood of the long-term success of regional open space planning efforts. Due to these reasons, the proposed habitat loss would not appreciably reduce the survival or recovery of any listed species, including the gnatcatcher. 3. The habitat loss is incidental to otherwise lawful activities. The project is completing CEQA review simultaneously and will meet all local, State, and Federal requirements. 4. Proposed mitigation is consistent with NCCP Process Guidelines requirements. The NCCP Process Guidelines identify several options for mitigating impacts to CSS. These options include acquisition of habitat, dedication of land, management agreements, restoration, etc. The dedication and long-term preservation of 2.7 acres on-site through a mitigation monitoring program consistent with the NCCP Process Guidelines. In accordance with the provisions of Section 17.30.054(F) of the City of Chula Vista Municipal Code, the USFWS in consultation with the CDFG, are requested to review the Draft 4(d) Loss Permit and Draft Findings for consistency with the NCCP Conservation Guidelines and submit comments to the City of Chula Vista Director of Planning within thirty days of the date of this notice. Further, in accordance with Section 17.30.054(F) of the City of Chula Vista Municipal Code, the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) is requested to verify that the proposed 4(d) Loss Permit does not exceed the maximum permitted habitat loss for the subregion and notify the Director of Planning for the City of Chula Vista, within fifteen days of the date of notice, of that verification. Comments and/or regarding the Draft 4(d) Loss Permit for Bonita Hills Executive Estates should be directed to Douglas D. Reid, Environmental Review Coordinator at (619) 691-5101 or to Planning Department, City of Chula Vista, P. O. Box 1087, Chula Vista, CA 91912. P~f:~ j,r Director of Planning RALlDDR:br 4(d) Loss Permit Draft Findings Bonita Hills Executive Estates Page 4 Distribution List: City of Chula Vista Mayor and Councilmembers U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service California Department of Fish & Game SANDAG County of San Diego (b:\4dpermit.bhe) 4(d) Loss Permit Draft Findings Bonita Hills Executive Estates Page 5 Mitigation Measures (To be completed by the Applicant) I, as owner/owner in escrow' /y!ICI-I--M1. Print name l)6tfI'i Ie H or I, consultant or agent' Signature ~itigation measures required to avoid significant impacts. ,) q, 't"~L/ Date C:\NANCY\\DEMICH.lS\ Page 25 Determination (To be completed by the Lead Agency. Check one box only.) On the basis of this initial evaluation: o I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. . I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. o I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. o/Q?,/q>j Date 'If acting for a corporation, include capacity and company name. C:\NANCY\\DEMICH.lS\ Page 26 Case No. IS 91-15 APPENDIX II DE MINIMIS FEE DETERMINATION (Chapter 1706, Statutes of 1990 - AB 3158) o It is hereby found that this project involves no potential for any adverse effect, either individually or cumulatively on wildlife resources and that a "Certificate of Fee Exemption" shall be prepared for this project. . It is hereby found that this project could potentially impact wildlife, individually or cumulatively and therefore fee in accordance with Section 711.4 (d) of the Fish and Game Code shall be paid to the County Clerk. ~,3/1i Date Page 27 C:\NANCY\\DEMICH.IS\ MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING CHECKLIST PROJECT NAME: Bonita Hills Executive Estates IS NO.: 91-15 Issue Area BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Specific project mitigation measures are required to reduce potentially significant environmental impacts identified in the Initial Study for this project to a level below significant. Mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project design and have been made conditions of project approval, as well as requirements of the attached Mitigation Monitoring Program (Attachment "A"). In addition to the proposed two dedicated open spaced. which have been incorporated into the tentative map, the applicant must also refrain from clearing vegetation within the dedicated open space areas. with the exception of some public improvements construction and must revegetate areas of disturbed Diegan Sage Scrub in Lot B. Once revegetation has been completed, a three-year monitoring plan shall be implemented to ensure the successful establishment of this scrub. The developer shall also provide proof of an incidental take permit under Section 7, Section lOa of the Endangered Species Act relative to the California Gnatcatcher or Coastal Sage Scrub. Proiect Phase (Proiect Design: Construction: Post Construction) Prior to grading operations, during grading operations, and post grading after the revegetation plan has been implemented. Responsible Part or Agencv Engineering Department, Planning Department, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Verification of Completion: Person: Date: Comments: C:\NANCY\\OEMICH.IS\ Page 28 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING CHECKLIST PROJECT NAME: Bonita Hills Executive Estates IS NO.: 91-15 Issue Area SOILS Specific project mitigation measures are required to reduce potentially significant environmental impacts identified in the Initial Study for this project to a level below significant. Mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project design and have been made conditions of project approval, as well as requirements of the attached Mitigation Monitoring Program (Attachment "A"). All recommendations of the Soil and Geologic Reconnaissance prepared for the Bonita Hills Executive Estates by Geocon Incorporated. dated December, 1992, shall be adhered to. These recommendations pertain to the design process for future slope relation within the immediate area; future geotechnical subsurface investigation for the site regarding fill compaction for the underground water reservoir; remedial grading, recompaction and subsurface investigation and laboratory testing; re-evaluation of existing fills; disposal of deleterious materials encountered during grading; design of cut and fill slopes; use of erosion-resistant ground cover, adequate irrigation and drainage control for cut and fill slopes and additional geological investigation to be performed prior to completing grading and improvement plans. Proiect Phase (Proiect Design: Construction: Post Construction) Prior to grading operations and during grading operations. ResDonsible Part or Agencv Engineering Department Verification of ComDletion: Person: Date: Comments : MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING CHECKLIST PROJECT NAME: Bonita Hills Executive Estates C:\NANCY\\DEMICH.IS\ Page 29 IS NO.: 91-15 Issue Area DRAINAGE/HYDROLOGY Specific project mitigation measures are required to reduce potentially significant environmental impacts identified in the Initial Study for this project to a level below significant. Mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project design and have been made conditions of project approval. as well as requirements of the attached Mitigation Monitoring Program (Attachment "A"). In addition to the proposed drainage improvements shown on Tentative Map 91-2 dated March 2, 1993, the applicant shall also extend the storm drains to the flow line of the canyon. Proiect Phase (Proiect Desil!n: Construction: Post Construction) Prior to grading operations and during grading operations. Responsible Part or Al!encv Engineering Department Verification of Completion: Person: Date: Comments: Page 30 C:\NANCY\\DEMICH.IS\ MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING CHECKLIST PROJECT NAME: Bonita Hills Executive Estates IS NO.: 91-15 Issue Area WATER OUALITY/EROSION: Specific project mitigation measures are required to reduce potentially significant environmental impacts identified in the Initial Study for this project to a level below significant. Mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project design and have been made conditions of project approval, as well as requirements of the attached Mitigation Monitoring Program (Attachment "A"). An erosion and sedimentation control plan, in compliance with NPDES will be prepared subject to approval of the City Engineer and the project shall comply with NPDES for discharges of storm water runoff, etc. Sedimentation shall be controlled by properly planting all graded slopes. Proiect Phase (Proiect Design: Construction: Post Construction) Prior to grading and during grading operations. Responsible Part or Agencv Engineering Department and Planning Department Verification of Completion: Person: Date: Comments: C:\NANCY\\DEMICH.IS\ Page 31 ATTACHMENT "A" Mitigation Monitoring Program IS 91-15 This Mitigation Monitoring Program is prepared for the Bonita Hills Executive Estates Tentative Map. The legislation requires public agencies to ensure that adequate mitigation measures are implemented and monitored on Mitigated Negative Declarations, such as IS 91-15. AB 3180 requires monitoring of potentially significant and/or significant environmental impacts. The mitigation monitoring program for this project ensures adequate implementation of mitigation for the following potentially significant impacts: biological resources, soils, drainage/hydrology, and water quality/erosion. Due to the nature of the environmental issues identified, the Mitigation Compliance Coordinator (MCC), shall be the Environmental Review Coordinator (ERC) for the City of Chula Vista. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that the conditions of the Mitigation Monitoring Program are met to the satisfaction of the ERC. Compliance with the mitigation measures specified in Mitigated Negative Declaration 91-15 shall be provided to the ERC prior to the issuance of any permits by the City of Chula Vista. The ERC will thus provide the ultimate verification that the mitigation measures have been accomplished. C:\NANCY\\DEMICH.IS\ Page 32