National City City Council
March 21, 2023

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ30 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties x Waste
o Compliance with AB 939 shall be mandatory and shall include recycling at least 50% of solid waste; recycling of demolition debris shall be mandatory and shall include recycling at least 65% of all construction and demolition debris. This measure shall be applied during construction and operation of the proposed project. o All commercial, restaurant, and retail uses shall recycle, compost food waste and other organics, and use reusable products instead of disposable products to divert solid waste from the landfill stream.
o Recycled, regional, and rapidly renewable materials shall be used where appropriate during project construction.
x Energy
o Renewable energy design features that may be implemented are as follows:
– Implement onsite renewable energy to new buildings, unless the system cannot be built because of structural and operational constraints. (Evidence must be provided if not feasible, subject to District concurrence.)
– Install co-generation systems (i.e., combined heat and power systems) in new buildings constructed at the project site. – Ensure that, at a minimum, 6% of parking spaces are equipped with electric-vehicle charging stations.
– For all construction after 2025, ensure all construction vehicles and equipment are alternatively fueled or electrically powered, to the extent feasible and available. (GB Capital Component and Balanced Plan only)
– For all construction, use renewable diesel fuel in all heavy-duty, off-road diesel-fueled equipment. Renewable diesel must meet the most recent ASTM D975 specification for ultra-low-sulfur diesel and have a carbon intensity no greater than 50% of diesel with the lowest carbon intensity among petroleum diesel fuels sold in California. (GB Capital Component and Balanced Plan only)

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ31 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties – Construct buildings that are ZNE or, if full ZNE is infeasible, implement all feasible measures identified in the feasibility analysis. (GB Capital and Balanced Plan only)
– Incorporate renewable energy (a) on the project site, (b) within the District’s jurisdiction, or (c) within the adjacent community or member city outside of the District’s jurisdiction. Undertake other verifiable actions or activities on tidelands approved by the District, such as electrification of equipment, including vehicles and trucks; financial contribution to a future local or GHG emission reduction program on tidelands; or similar activities or actions that reduce operational GHG emissions. (GB Capital and Balanced Plan only)
o Energy-efficiency design features that exceed 2019 Title 24 California Building Energy Efficiency Standards shall be incorporated. The measures that may be implemented are as follows:
– Use only fluorescent lights, light-emitting diodes (LEDs), compact fluorescent lights, or the most energy-efficient lighting that meets required lighting standards and is commercially available. This measure also requires replacement of existing lighting on the project site if not already highly energy efficient. – Install occupancy sensors for all vending machines in new buildings at the project site.
– Install high-performance glazing with a low solar heat gain coefficient value that reduces the amount of solar heat allowed into the building, without compromising natural illumination. – Install increased insulation.
– Install cool roofs with an R value of 30 or better.
– Install sun shading devices as appropriate.
– Install high-efficiency heating, ventilating, and air conditioning systems and controls.
– Install programmable thermostats.
– Install variable frequency drives.
– Install Energy Star–rated appliances.
– Install shore power capabilities where suitable upgrades are feasible in marinas.

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ32 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties x Mobile Sources
o Implement a construction transportation demand management plan for each project component that promotes ride-sharing, vanpooling, alternate work schedules, and offsite parking with shuttles and provides subsidies for transit passes to reduce worker trips and parking demand, which provides incentives for using alternative modes of transportation instead of individual vehicles.
o Implement an operational transportation demand management plan for each project component that requires mandatory employer commuting measures, such as carpooling, transit subsidies, and vanpools, to reduce worker trips and parking demand, which provides incentives for using alternative modes of transportation instead of individual vehicles.
o Ensure that bicycle parking is included in the project design. The number of spaces shall be, at a minimum, 5% of the new
automobile parking spaces.
x Carbon Sequestration and Land Use
o Install trees and shrub planters throughout the project area as part of the landscape plan.

MMǦGHGǦ3:ComplywiththeApplicableCityCAPMeasures(City Program–DevelopmentComponent). Prior to approval of the final design plans, the project proponent/operator and/or its contractor(s) for the City Program – Development Component shall list all GHG-reducing measures from the City’s CAP and demonstrate in the plans where these measures shall be located. A report demonstrating compliance shall be submitted to the City’s Community Development Department. Buildings associated with the proposed project component shall achieve certification under the LEED program, or the Green Building Rating Systems of the Green Building Certification Institute, or achieve equivalent efficiency if it is determined that LEED certification cannot be achieved because of site factors or other reasons.

The following is a list of proposed sustainability measures from the City CAP that shall be required and incorporated into the Coastal Development Permit for the City Program – Development Component.

Timing:Prior to approval of
final design plans
Method:Demonstrate
compliance with all applicable
GHG-reducing measures from
the City’s CAP and achieve LEED
certification or equivalent
efficiency where applicable.

Implementation:Applicable Project
Proponent for Component/Operator and
Contractor(s)
MonitoringandReporting: Applicable
Project Proponent for Component
Verification: City’s Community
Development Department

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ33 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties x Incorporate energy efficiency design features that exceed 2019 Title 24 California Building Energy Efficiency Standards.
x Prioritize parking for high-occupancy vehicles as well as carpooling, vanpooling, and transit vehicles.
x Ensure that at a minimum 6% of parking spaces are equipped with electric-vehicle charging stations.
x Ensure that bicycle parking is included in the project design. The number of spaces shall be, at a minimum, 5% of the new automobile parking spaces.
x Encourage telework programs and alternative work schedules for new businesses.
x Provide financial incentives for commuters to reduce the number of vehicle trips by walking, bicycling, using public transit, and carpooling.
x Implement programs to reduce, reuse, and recycle construction and demolition waste.
x Encourage rooftop gardens for flat-roofed commercial buildings. x Pursue a pump efficiency cycling schedule.
x Adopt water efficiency principles similar to the Ahwahnee Water Principles for Resource Efficient Land Use (available at https://www.lgc.org/wordpress/docs/ahwahnee/
ahwahnee_water_principles.pdf), such as the following:
o Use compact, mixed-use, walkable, and transit-oriented community designs;
o Preserve and restore natural resources such as wetlands, floodplains, recharge zones, riparian areas, open spaces, and native habitats;
o Utilize water holding areas such as creek beds, recessed athletic fields, ponds, cisterns, and other features that serve to recharge groundwater, reduce runoff, improve water quality, and decrease flooding;
o Use low-water plantings in landscaping;
o Use permeable surfaces for hardscapes;
o Install dual plumbing that allows reuse of gray water; o Maximize use of recycled water in the project design;

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ34 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties o Use low-flow toilets, efficient clothes washers, and efficient water- using industrial equipment in new construction; and
o Maximize the use of drought-proof water supplies, such as groundwater treatment and brackish water desalination.
x Install trees and shrub planters throughout the project area as part of the landscape plan.

MMǦGHGǦ4:UseModernHarborCraftforWatersideConstruction Activities(GBCapitalComponent).Prior to commencing any waterside construction or activities, the project proponent/operator and/or its contractor(s) for the GB Capital Component shall ensure that any harbor craft, including, but not limited to, tugboats, pusher tugs, tow boats, work boats, crew boats, and supply boats for use during the duration of any in- water work, shall meet the following criteria:
x For all construction between 2020 and 2025, ensure all equipment is Tier 3 or better (cleaner);
x For all construction after 2025, ensure all equipment is alternatively fueled or electrically powered. If alternatively fueled or electrically powered equipment that emits fewer emissions than Tier 4 or better (cleaner) equipment is not available, then the project proponent shall ensure all equipment is Tier 4 or better; and
x Use renewable diesel fuel in all heavy-duty, off-road diesel-fueled equipment. Renewable diesel must meet the most recent ASTM D975 specification for ultra-low-sulfur diesel and have a carbon intensity no greater than 50% of diesel with the lowest carbon intensity among petroleum diesel fuels sold in California.

If clean harbor craft are not available within 200 miles of the project site for the duration of all dredging activities, the project proponent/operator and/or its contractor(s) for the GB Capital Component shall prioritize the use of equipment that is maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturers’ specifications. The project proponent/operator and/or its contractor(s) for the GB Capital Component shall document and submit evidence to the District’s Development Services Department (or successor department) or the City’s Community Development Department, depending upon the jurisdiction that the project component is located in, prior to commencement of waterside construction activities.

Regardless of the equipment used, the project proponent/operator Timing:Prior to waterside
construction
Method:Ensure harbor craft
meet clean emissions criteria
and submit evidence of
compliance prior to their use.
Implementation:Applicable Project
Proponent for Component/Operator
and/or Contractors
MonitoringandReporting: Applicable
Project Proponent for Component
Verification: District’s Development
Services Department and City’s
Community Development Services
Department

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ35 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties and/or its contractor(s) for each project component with waterside construction activities shall verify that all equipment has been checked by a mechanic experienced with such equipment and determined to be running in proper condition prior to admittance into the construction area. The project proponent/operator and/or its contractor(s) for each project component with waterside construction activities shall submit a report prepared by the mechanic experienced with such equipment regarding the condition of the vehicles and equipment for construction and operations to the District’s Development Services Department or the City’s Community Development Department, depending upon the jurisdiction that the project component is located in, prior to commencement of their use.
MMǦGHGǦ5:ImplementElectricHeatingandZeroǦNetǦEnergy Buildings(GBCapitalComponent,BalancedPlan,CityProgram– DevelopmentComponent). The City and the District shall require all development to meet the state’s ZNE standards, if and when adopted as part of the California Building Code. In addition, the City and the District shall encourage project developers to construct buildings that are ZNE.

Prior to issuance of any Coastal Development Permit or City-issued permit, as applicable, the project proponents/operators and/or its contractor(s) shall submit a feasibility analysis, prepared by a qualified consultant, regarding the construction of buildings as ZNE, and the project component shall implement all feasible measures identified in the feasibility analysis (e.g., electric heating). Prior to implementation of all feasible measures, this report shall be submitted to the District for review and approval for the GB Capital Component (all phases) and Balanced Plan, and submitted to the City for review and approval for the City Program – Development Component.

Timing:Prior to constriction
Method:Require development
to meet the state’s ZNE
standards if adopted, encourage
construction of ZNE buildings,
and require a feasibility and
analysis.

Implementation:Applicable Project
Proponents for Components
MonitoringandReporting: Applicable
Project Proponents for Components
Verification: District and City
MMǦGHGǦ6:ImplementaRenewableEnergyProjectOnSite,or OtherVerifiableActionsorActivitiesonTidelandsorWithin AnotherAdjacentMemberCity,orPurchasetheEquivalentGHG OffsetsfromaCARB–ApprovedRegistryoraLocallyApproved EquivalentProgram(GBCapitalComponentandBalancedPlan). A. Options for Reducing GHG Emissions.

To reach the numerical efficiency metric, each project proponent shall, in order of preference, considering availability of structures and feasibility, Timing:Prior to and during
construction
Method:Incorporate
renewable energy and
implement measures to limit
GHG emissions or purchase GHG
emissions offset credits.

Implementation:Applicable Project
Proponents for Components
MonitoringandReporting: Applicable
Project Proponents for Components
Verification: District and City

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ36 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties implement the following, which may be combined with consideration to the preference described below:

1. Incorporate renewable energy
a) On the project site;
b) Within the District’s jurisdiction; or
c) Within the adjacent community or member city outside of the District’s jurisdiction.

2. Undertake other verifiable actions or activities on tidelands approved by the District, such as electrification of equipment, including vehicles and trucks; financial contribution to a future local or GHG emission reduction program on tidelands; or similar activities or actions that reduce operational GHG emissions;

3. Purchase GHG emission offset credits that (1) are real, additional, permanent, quantifiable, verifiable, and enforceable, as specified in California Health and Safety Code Section 38562(d)(1) and (2) and further defined in CCR Title 17, Section 95802 (see below); (2) use a protocol consistent with or as stringent as CARB protocol requirements under CCR Title 17, Section 95972(a); and (3) are issued by an CARB-approved offset registry.1 For offset credits from projects outside California, the project proponent must demonstrate in writing to the satisfaction of the District that the offset project meets requirements equivalent to or stricter than California’s laws and regulations, ensuring the validity of offset credits.

For purposes of this section, the definitions are as follows:
a) “Real” means, in the context of offset projects, that GHG reductions or GHG enhancements result from a demonstrable action or set of actions and are quantified using appropriate, accurate, and conservative methodologies that account for all GHG emissions sources, GHG sinks, and GHG reservoirs within the offset project boundary and account for uncertainty and the potential for activity- shifting leakage and market-shifting leakage. [17 CCR 95802] b) “Additional” means, in the context of offset credits, GHG emission reductions or removals that exceed any GHG reduction or removals

1 Currently approved offset registries include the American Carbon Registry (ACR), Climate Action Reserve (CAR), and Verra (formerly the Verified Carbon Standard). See: https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/cc/capandtrade/offsets/registries/registries.htm.

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ37 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties otherwise required by law, regulation, or legally binding mandate, and that exceed any GHG reductions or removals that would otherwise occur in a conservative BAU scenario. [17 CCR 95802]
c) “Permanent” means, in the context of offset credits, either that GHG reductions and GHG removal enhancements are not reversible, or when GHG reductions and GHG removal enhancements may be reversible, that mechanisms are in place to replace any reversed GHG emission reductions and GHG removal enhancements to ensure that all credited reductions endure for at least 100 years. [17 CCR 95802] d) “Quantifiable” means, in the context of offset credits, the ability to accurately measure and calculate GHG reductions or GHG removal enhancements relative to a project baseline in a reliable and replicable manner for all GHG emission sources, GHG sinks, or GHG reservoirs included within the offset project boundary while accounting for uncertainty and activity-shifting leakage and market- shifting leakage. [17 CCR 95802]
e) “Verifiable” means that a non-California offset project is located in a state that has laws and regulations equivalent to or stricter as California’s with respect to ensuring the validity of offsets and an Offset Project Data Report assertion is well documented and transparent such that it lends itself to an objective review by an accredited verification body. [17 CCR 95802]
f) “Enforceable” means the authority for the offset purchaser to hold the offset provider liable and to take appropriate action if any of the above requirements are not met. [adapted from definition in 17 CCR 95802 for use in this measure] “Enforceable” also means that the offset must be backed by a legal instrument or contract that defines exclusive ownership and the legal instrument can be enforced within the legal system of the State of California.

B. Required Annual GHG Emissions Reductions:

The option(s) implemented pursuant to paragraph A above shall achieve the following required GHG reductions for the activities of the proposed project, assuming full buildout of each project component:
x Balanced Plan (only Pepper Park Expansion) = 836 MTCO 2e per year
or 4,317 MWh/year.
x GB Capital = 6,627 MTCO2e per year or 34,219 MWh/year.

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ38 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties The required reductions may be reduced by the District, based on the actual amount of development and activities associated with that development and the other adjustment provisions specified below.

C. Implementation of GHG Emissions Reduction Options.

Prior to becoming operational and annually thereafter, the District shall notify the project proponent of the option(s) available for achieving its respective annual maximum GHG required emissions reduction, as identified in paragraph B above, in the order of priority specified above, and the project proponent(s) shall:

1. Develop a renewable energy project(s) or take other verifiable actions or activities identified by the District to meet or partially meet the required amount of MTCO2e or MWh reductions specified above.
a) If the project proponent develops a renewable energy project(s), or takes other verifiable actions or activities to reduce GHG emissions, the project proponent shall submit to the District’s Planning Department (or successor department), for its review and approval, a report specifying the annual amount of MTCO2e or MWh reduction achieved by the renewable energy project(s), or actions, or activities; submit evidence that the renewable energy project(s), actions, or activities are not being used to offset GHG emissions for any other project or entity; and submit any other information requested by the District’s Planning Department (or successor department), to verify the amount of GHG emissions reduction achieved by the renewable energy project, or actions or activities (collectively, “GHG Emission Reduction Report”).
b) If the GHG Emission Reduction Report is approved by the District, a reduction to the required offsets shall be calculated by the District’s Planning Department (or successor department), and the reduction of offsets shall be transmitted to the project proponent in writing and the amount of GHG reduction shall count toward the required GHG reduction for the proposed project component (“GHG Reduction”).

2. Purchase GHG emission offsets in conformance with paragraph A(3) above in an amount sufficient to achieve the required reduction of MTCO
2e or MWh specified above, which may be decreased by the

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ39 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties amount of annual MTCO2e or MWh reduction that is achieved by any renewable energy project(s) or other verifiable action or activities if developed and/or implemented pursuant to paragraph (1) above.

The purchase of offsets to achieve the required reduction in MTCO2e or MWh shall occur as follows:
a) Each project component shall purchase offsets for its first 2 years of operation.
b) Purchase offsets at least annually thereafter, prior to becoming operational, beginning with the third year of operation, for the life of the proposed project component’s operations or until the termination of a lease agreement (for GB Capital Component only) between the District and the project proponent. The project proponent may purchase more than 1 year of operation emissions offsets, consistent with the amount of MTCO2e or MWh reduction specified above for the corresponding project component.
c) On or before the first year of operation of the respective project proponent and annually thereafter, the project proponent shall submit certificates for offsets purchased to achieve the required GHG emission reductions, including written verification by a qualified consultant approved by the District that the offsets meet the requirements for GHG emissions offset credits set forth in paragraph A(3) above, to the District’s Planning Department (or successor department).

D. Adjustments to Required GHG Emissions Reductions.

If the project proponent complies with paragraphs A(1) or A(2) above, in an amount that meets the total amount of MTCO2e or MWh reductions specified above, or complies with paragraph A(3) above and purchases the requisite offsets, or does a combination of paragraphs A(1), (2), and (3) to meet the reduction target, then nothing further shall be required under this mitigation measure.

1. Reduction of Emissions through Development of a Renewable Energy Project Requirement: Although none are identified at this time, the project proponent may be required by the District to develop a renewable energy project at any time during the life of the project (subject to future approvals and the priorities listed above) and may request a reduction of required offsets. If any reduction in offsets is

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ40 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties requested by the project proponent because of the development of a renewable energy project(s), the project proponent shall submit a GHG Emission Reduction Report for the District’s Planning Department’s (or successor department’s) review, pursuant to the process specified above in paragraph C(1) above, and required offsets shall be determined by the District and reduced.

2. Reduction of Emissions through Verifiable Actions or Activities on Tidelands Requirement: Although none are identified at this time, the project proponent may be required by the District to take other verifiable actions or activities at any time during the life of the project (subject to future approvals and the priorities listed above) and may request a reduction of required offsets. If any reduction in offsets is requested by the project proponent because of the other verifiable actions or activities on tidelands, the project proponent shall submit a GHG Emission Reduction Report for the District’s Planning Department’s (or successor department’s) review pursuant to the process specified above in paragraph C(1), and required offsets shall be determined by the District and reduced.

3. Reduction of Emissions through Purchase of Offsets: Subsequent to purchasing GHG emission offsets pursuant to paragraph C(2) above, the project proponent’s future annual purchase of offsets to achieve the GHG emissions reduction specific in paragraph B above may be adjusted if the development is less than assumed here, which is the following:
o Balanced Plan includes a 2.54 acre park.
o GB Capital Component landside features, including 134 RV sites; 40,000 square feet of dry boat storage; 60 modular cabins; 10,000- square-foot administration/recreation building; 10,000-square- foot building with restrooms, laundry facilities, and staff support services in the vicinity of the existing marina buildings; and a 4,000-square-foot maintenance building and associated
approximately 8,200-square-foot maintenance yard northeast of the proposed dry boat storage. Waterside uses include 20 moorings in Sweetwater Channel; 620-foot-long and 8-foot-wide floating dock that includes up to 30 fingers, which accommodate up to 50 boats; and a 580-foot-long and 8-foot-wide dock with two

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ41 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties 80-foot-long and 5-foot-wide gangways within the existing marina basin north of the jetty to accommodate up to 25 smaller boats.

4. The District or a District-retained consultant (at the project proponent cost) shall calculate, using the best available science, the amount of unused GHG reduction offsets, based on the actual development constructed and in operation. Any unused offsets shall be used for the next year of operation of the project component, and the project proponent shall purchase offsets in the necessary amounts (required amount less any unused offsets) for the subject year. This procedure shall be repeated on an annual basis. In the event that newly discovered information shows that an offset, previously certified as compliant pursuant to paragraph C(3)(c), does not comply with the requirements of paragraph A(3), the project proponent shall purchase an equivalent amount of replacement offsets that comply with the requirements of paragraph A(3) within 30 days of receiving notice of the noncompliance. After verification of unused and available offsets, unused offsets may replace previously compliant offsets should those offsets subsequently be determined noncompliant with paragraph A(3). At the project proponent’s written request to the District, the project proponent may waive the annual adjustment described above and purchase the required MTCO
2e or MWh offsets on at least an annual
basis.

MMǦGHGǦ7:ImplementaRenewableEnergyProjectOnSite,or OtherVerifiableActionsorActivitiesWithinNationalCityorWithin anAdjacentCommunity,orPurchasetheEquivalentGHGOffsets fromaCARB–ApprovedRegistryoraLocallyApprovedEquivalent Program(CityProgram–DevelopmentComponent).
A. Options for Reducing GHG Emissions.

To reach the numerical efficiency metric, each project proponent shall, in order of preference, considering availability of structures and feasibility, implement the following, which may be combined with consideration to the preference described below:

1. Incorporate renewable energy
a) On the project site;
b) Within the City’s jurisdiction; or
Timing:Prior to and during
construction
Method:Incorporate
renewable energy and
implement measures to limit
GHG emissions or purchase GHG
emissions offset credits. 
Implementation:Applicable Project
Proponent for Component
MonitoringandReporting: Applicable
Project Proponent for Component
Verification: City

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ42 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties c) Within the adjacent community or the city.

2. Undertake other verifiable actions or activities approved by the City, such as electrification of equipment, including vehicles and trucks; financial contribution to a future local or GHG emission reduction program within the city; or similar activities or actions that reduce operational GHG emissions;

3. Purchase GHG emission offset credits that (1) are real, additional, permanent, quantifiable, verifiable, and enforceable, as specified in California Health and Safety Code Section 38562(d)(1) and (2) and further defined in California CCR Title 17, Section 95802 (see below); (2) use a protocol consistent with or as stringent as CARB protocol requirements under CCR Title 17, Section 95972(a); and (3) are issued by an CARB-approved offset registry.2 For offset credits from projects outside California, the project proponent must demonstrate in writing to the satisfaction of the City that the offset project meets requirements equivalent to or stricter than California’s laws and regulations, ensuring the validity of offset credits.

For purposes of this section, the definitions are as follows:
a) “Real” means, in the context of offset projects, that GHG re ductions or GHG enhancements result from a demonstrable action or set of actions and are quantified using appropriate, accurate, and conservative methodologies that account for all GHG emissions sources, GHG sinks, and GHG reservoirs within the offset project boundary and account for uncertainty and the potential for activity- shifting leakage and market-shifting leakage. [17 CCR 95802] b) “Additional” means, in the co ntext of offset credits, GHG emission reductions or removals that exceed any GHG reduction or removals otherwise required by law, regulation, or legally binding mandate and that exceed any GHG reductions or removals that would otherwise occur in a conservative BAU scenario. [17 CCR 95802] c) “Permanent” means, in the context of offset credits, either that GHG reductions and GHG removal enhancements are not reversible, or when GHG reductions and GHG removal enhancements may be reversible, that mechanisms are in place to replace any reversed

2 Ibid.

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ43 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties GHG emission reductions and GHG removal enhancements to ensure that all credited reductions endure for at least 100 years. [17 CCR 95802]
d) “Quantifiable” means, in the context of offset credits, the ability to accurately measure and calculate GHG reductions or GHG removal enhancements relative to a project baseline in a reliable and replicable manner for all GHG emission sources, GHG sinks, or GHG reservoirs included within the offset project boundary while accounting for uncertainty and activity-shifting leakage and market-shifting leakage. [17 CCR 95802]
e) “Verifiable” means that a non -California offset project is located in a state that has laws and regulations equivalent to or stricter as California’s with respect to ensuring the validity of offsets and an Offset Project Data Report assertion is well documented and transparent such that it lends itself to an objective review by an accredited verification body. [17 CCR 95802]
f) “Enforceable” means the authority for the offset purchaser t o hold the offset provider liable and to take appropriate action if any of the above requirements are not met. [Adapted from definition in 17 CCR 95802 for use in this measure.] “Enforceable” also means that the offset must be backed by a legal instrument or contract that defines exclusive ownership and the legal instrument can be enforced within the legal system of the State of California.

B. Required Annual GHG Emissions Reductions:

The option(s) implemented pursuant to paragraph A above shall achieve the following required GHG reductions for the activities of the proposed project, assuming full buildout of each project component:
x City Program = 3,549 MTCO2e per year or 18,323 MWh/year.

The required reductions may be reduced by the City, based on the actual amount of development and activities associated with that development and the other adjustment provisions specified below.

C. Implementation of GHG Emissions Reduction Options.

Prior to becoming operational and annually thereafter, the City shall notify the project proponent of the option(s) available for achieving its respective annual maximum GHG required emissions reduction, as

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ44 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties identified in paragraph B above, in the order of priority specified above, and the project proponent(s) shall:

1. Develop a renewable energy project(s) or take other verifiable actions or activities identified by the City to meet or partially meet the required amount of MTCO2e or MWh reductions specified above. a) If the project proponent develops a renewable energy project (s), or takes other verifiable actions or activities to reduce GHG emissions, the project proponent shall submit to the City’s Community Development Department, for its review and
approval, a report specifying the annual amount of MTCO2e or MWh reduction achieved by the renewable energy project(s), or actions, or activities; submit evidence that the renewable energy project(s), actions, or activities are not being used to offset GHG emissions for any other project or entity; and submit any other information requested by the City’s Community Development Department to verify the amount of GHG emissions reduction achieved by the renewable energy project, or actions or activities (collectively, “GHG Emission Reduction Report”).
b) If the GHG Emission Reduction Report is approved by the City , a reduction to the required offsets shall be calculated by the City’s Community Development Department, and the reduction of
offsets shall be transmitted to the project proponent in writing and the amount of GHG reduction shall count toward the
required GHG reduction for the proposed project (“GHG
Reduction”).

2. Purchase GHG emission offsets in conformance with paragraph A(3) above in an amount sufficient to achieve the required reduction of MTCO
2e or MWh specified above, which may be decreased by the amount of annual MTCO2e or MWh reduction that is achieved by any renewable energy project(s) or other verifiable action or activities if developed and/or implemented pursuant to paragraph (1) above.

The purchase of offsets to achieve the required reduction in MTCO2e or MWh shall occur as follows:
a) Each project component shall purchase offsets for its first 2 years of operation;

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ45 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties b) Purchase offsets at least ann ually thereafter, prior to becoming operational, beginning with the third year of operation, for the life of the proposed project component’s operations or until the termination of any lease agreement between the City and the project proponent. The project proponent may purchase more than 1 year of operation emissions offsets, consistent with the amount of MTCO2e or MWh reduction specified above for the corresponding project component.
c) On or before the first year of operation of the respective p roject proponent and annually thereafter, the project proponent shall submit certificates for offsets purchased to achieve the required GHG emission reductions, including written verification by a qualified consultant approved by the City that the offsets meet the requirements for GHG emission offset credits set forth in paragraph A(3) above, to the City’s Community Development Department.

D. Adjustments to Required GHG Emissions Reductions.

If the project proponent complies with paragraphs A(1) or A(2) above, in an amount that meets the total amount of MTCO2e or MWh reductions specified above in the reduction target, or complies with paragraph A(3) above and purchases the requisite offsets, or does a combination of paragraphs A(1), (2), and (3) to meet the reduction target, then nothing further shall be required under this mitigation measure.

1. Reduction of Emissions through Development of a Renewable Energy Project Requirement: Although none are identified at this time, the project proponent may be required by the City to develop a renewable energy project at any time during the life of the project (subject to future approvals and the priorities listed above) and may request a reduction of required offsets. If any reduction in offsets is requested by the project proponent because of the development of a renewable energy project(s), the project proponent shall submit a GHG Emission Reduction Report for the City’s Community
Development Department’s review, pursuant to the process specified above in paragraph C(1) above, and required offsets shall be determined by the City and reduced.

2. Reduction of Emissions through Verifiable Actions or Activities in the City of National City Requirement: Although none are identified at

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ46 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties this time, the project proponent may be required by the City to take other verifiable actions or activities at any time during the life of the project (subject to future approvals and the priorities listed above) and may request a reduction of required offsets. If any reduction in offsets is requested by the project proponent because of the other verifiable actions or activities on tidelands, the project proponent shall submit a GHG Emission Reduction Report for the City’s Community Development Department’s review pursuant to the process specified above in paragraph C(1), and required offsets shall be determined by the City and reduced.

3. Reduction of Emissions through Purchase of Offsets: Subsequent to purchasing GHG emission offsets pursuant to paragraph C(2) above, the project proponent’s future annual purchase of offsets to achieve the GHG emissions reduction specific in paragraph B above may be adjusted if the development is less than assumed here, which is the following:
o City Program Plan includes a 150-room hotel along with 15,500 square feet of restaurant space and 12,000 square feet of retail space.

4. The City or a City-retained consultant (at the project proponent cost) shall calculate, using the best available science, the amount of unused GHG reduction offsets, based on the actual development constructed and in operation. Any unused offsets shall be used for the next year of operation of the project component, and the project proponent shall purchase offsets in the necessary amounts (required amount less any unused offsets) for the subject year. This procedure shall be repeated on an annual basis. In the event that newly discovered information shows that an offset, previously certified as compliant pursuant to paragraph C(3)(c), does not comply with the requirements of paragraph A(3), the project proponent shall purchase an equivalent amount of replacement offsets that comply with the requirements of paragraph A(3) within 30 days of receiving notice of the noncompliance. After verification of unused and available offsets, unused offsets may replace previously compliant offsets should those offsets subsequently be determined noncompliant with paragraph A(3). At the project proponent’s written request to the City, the project proponent may waive the

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ47 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties annual adjustment described above and purchase the required MTCO2e or MWh offsets on at least an annual basis.
HazardsandHazardousMaterials  
MMǦHAZǦ1:PrepareandImplementaSoilandGroundwater ManagementPlan(CityProgram–DevelopmentComponent).Prior to the City’s approval of the project grading plans and the commencement of any construction activities that would disturb the soil on the City Program – Development Component site, the project proponent shall retain a licensed Professional Geologist, Professional Engineering Geologist, or Professional Engineer with experience in contaminated site redevelopment and restoration to prepare and submit a Soil and Groundwater Management Plan to the City for review and approval. After the City’s review and approval, the project proponent shall implement the Soil and Groundwater Management Plan, which shall include the following:
x ASiteContaminationCharacterizationReport (Characterization Report) delineating the vertical and lateral extent and concentration of residual contamination from the site’s past uses throughout the City Program – Development Component construction area. The Characterization Report shall include a compilation of data based on historical records review and from prior reports and investigations and, where data gaps are found, include new soil and groundwater sampling to characterize the existing vertical and lateral extent and concentration of residual contamination. The project proponent shall coordinate with the County of San Diego Department of Health if the Characterization Report identifies contamination.
x A SoilTestingandProfilingPlan (Testing and Profiling Plan) for those materials that shall be disposed of during construction. Testing shall occur for all potential contaminants of concern, including CA T itle 22
metals, PAHs, VOCs, pesticides, PCBs, TPH, PAHs, or any other potential contaminants, as specified within the Testing and Profiling Plan. The Testing and Profiling Plan shall document compliance with CA Title 22 for proper identification and segregation of hazardous and solid waste as needed for acceptance at a CA Title 22–compliant offsite disposal facility. All excavation activities shall be actively monitored by a Registered Environmental Assessor for the potential Timing:Prior to approval of
grading plans and construction
activities
Method:Prepare and submit a
Soil and Groundwater
Management Plan to evaluate,
test, handle, and dispose of soil
and groundwater properly.

Implementation:Licensed Professional
Geologist, Professional Engineering
Geologist, or Professional Engineer,
Retained by the Applicable Project
Proponent for Component
MonitoringandReporting: Applicable
Project Proponent for Component
Verification: City

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ48 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties presence of contaminated soils and for compliance with the Testing and Profiling Plan.
x A SoilDisposalPlan (Disposal Plan), which shall describe the process for excavation, stockpiling, dewatering, treating, and loading and hauling of soil from the site. This plan shall be prepared in accordance with the Testing and Profiling Plan (i.e., in accordance with CA Title 22 and DOT Title 40 CFR Part 263, California Code of Regulations Title 27), and current industry best practices for the prevention of cross contamination, spills, or releases. Measures shall include, but not be limited to, segregation into separate piles for waste profile analysis based on organic vapor, and visual and odor monitoring.
x A SiteWorkerHealthandSafetyPlan (Safety Plan) to ensure compliance with 29 CFR Part 120, Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response regulations for site workers at uncontrolled hazardous waste sites. The Safety Plan shall be based on the Characterization Report and the planned site construction activity to ensure that site workers potentially exposed to site contamination in soil are trained, equipped, and monitored during site activity. The training, equipment, and monitoring activities shall ensure that workers are not exposed to contaminants above personnel exposure limits established by Table Z, 29 CFR Part 1910.1000. The Safety Plan shall be signed by and implemented under the oversight of a California State Certified Industrial Hygienist.

MMǦHAZǦ2: PrepareandImplementaMonitoringandReporting Program(CityProgram–DevelopmentComponent).Prior to commencement of construction of the City Program – Development Component, the project proponent shall prepare a Monitoring and Reporting Program and submit it to the City for review and approval. The Monitoring and Reporting Program shall be implemented during and upon completion of construction of the City Program – Development Component. The Monitoring and Reporting Program shall document implementation of the Soil and Groundwater Management Plan, including the Testing and Profiling Plan, Disposal Plan, and Safety Plan, as required by MMǦHAZǦ1. The Monitoring and Reporting Program shall include a requirement that the project proponent submit monthly reports (starting with the first ground disturbance activities and ending at the completion Timing:Prior to construction
Method:Prepare and
implement a Monitoring and
Reporting Program and submit
monthly reports documenting
compliance.

Implementation: Applicable Project
Proponent for Component, Licensed
Professional Geologist, Professional
Engineering Geologist, or Professional
Engineer
MonitoringandReporting: Applicable
Project Proponent for Component
Verification: City

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ49 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties of ground disturbance activities) to the City, signed and certified by the licensed Professional Geologist, Professional Engineering Geologist, or Professional Engineer, as applicable, documenting compliance with the provisions of these plans and the overall Soil and Groundwater Management Plan.
MMǦHAZǦ3: PrepareandSubmitaProjectCloseoutReport(City Program–DevelopmentComponent).Within 30 days of completion of landside construction of the City Program – Development Component, the project proponent shall prepare a Project Closeout Report and submit it to the City for review and approval. The Project Closeout Report shall summarize all environmental activity at the site and document implementation of the Soil and Groundwater Management Plan, as required by MMǦHAZǦ1, and the Monitoring and Reporting Program, as required by MMǦHAZǦ2.
Timing:Within 30 days of
landslide construction
completion
Method:Prepare and submit a
Project Closeout Report
summarizing all environmental
activity and documenting
compliance with MM-HAZ-1 and
MM-HAZ-2.
Implementation:Applicable Project
Proponent for Component
MonitoringandReporting: Applicable
Project Proponent for Component
Verification: City
MMǦHAZǦ4:PrepareandImplementaSoilandGroundwater ManagementPlan (PashaRoadClosuresComponent,PashaRail ImprovementComponent,andBayshoreBikewayComponent).Prior to the District’s and the City’s, as applicable, approval of the project’s grading plans and the commencement of any construction activities that would disturb the soil, the project proponent shall retain a licensed Professional Geologist, Professional Engineering Geologist, or Professional Engineer with experience in contaminated site redevelopment and restoration, to prepare and submit a Soil and Groundwater Management Plan to the District‘s Environmental Protection Department and the City, as applicable, for review and approval. After the District’s and the City’s, as applicable, review and approval, the project proponent shall implement the Soil and Groundwater Management Plan, which shall include the following:
x ASiteContaminationCharacterizationReport (Characterization Report) delineating the vertical and lateral extent and concentration of residual contamination from the site’s past uses throughout the Pasha Road Closure Component construction area. The
Characterization Report shall include a compilation of data based on historical records review and from prior reports and investigations and, where data gaps are found, include new soil and groundwater sampling to characterize the existing vertical and lateral extent and Timing:Prior to approval of
grading plans and construction
activities
Method:Prepare and submit a
Soil and Groundwater
Management Plan to evaluate,
test, handle, and dispose of soil
and groundwater properly.
Implementation:Licensed Professional
Geologist, Professional Engineering
Geologist, or Professional Engineer,
Retained by the Applicable Project
Proponents for Components
MonitoringandReporting: Applicable
Project Proponents for Components, with
approval by the District and City
Depending on Jurisdiction
Verification: District and City

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ50 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties concentration of residual contamination. The project proponent shall coordinate with the County of San Diego Department of Health if the Characterization Report identifies contamination.
x A SoilTestingandProfilingPlan (Testing and Profiling Plan) for those materials that shall be disposed of during construction. Testing shall occur for all potential contaminants of concern, including CA Title 22 metals, PAHs, VOCs, pesticides, PCBs, TPH, PAHs, or any other potential contaminants, as specified within the Testing and Profiling Plan. The Testing and Profiling Plan shall document compliance with CA Title 22 for proper identification and segregation of hazardous and solid waste as needed for acceptance at a CA Title 22–compliant offsite disposal facility. All excavation activities shall be actively monitored by a Registered Environmental Assessor for the potential presence of contaminated soils and for compliance with the Testing and Profiling Plan.
x A SoilDisposalPlan (Disposal Plan), which shall describe the process for excavation, stockpiling, dewatering, treating, and loading and hauling of soil from the site. This plan shall be prepared in accordance with the Testing and Profiling Plan (i.e., in accordance with CA Title 22 and DOT Title 40 CFR Part 263, California Code of Regulations Title 27), and current industry best practices for the prevention of cross contamination, spills, or releases. Measures shall include, but not be limited to, segregation into separate piles for waste profile analysis based on organic vapor, and visual and odor monitoring.
x A SiteWorkerHealthandSafetyPlan (Safety Plan) to ensure compliance with 29 CFR Part 120, Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response regulations for site workers at uncontrolled hazardous waste sites. The Safety Plan shall be based on the Characterization Report and the planned site construction activity to ensure that site workers potentially exposed to site contamination in soil are trained, equipped, and monitored during site activity. The training, equipment, and monitoring activities shall ensure that workers are not exposed to contaminants above personnel exposure limits established by Table Z, 29 CFR Part 1910.1000. The Safety Plan shall be signed by and implemented under the oversight of a California State Certified Industrial Hygienist.

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ51 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties MMǦHAZǦ5: PrepareandImplementaMonitoringandReporting Program(PashaRoadClosuresComponent,PashaRail
ImprovementComponent,andBayshoreBikewayComponent).Prior to commencement of construction of the Pasha Road Closures Component,Pasha Rail Improvement Component, and Bayshore Bikeway Component, the respective project proponent shall prepare a Monitoring and Reporting Program and submit it to the District’s Environmental Protection Department and the City, as applicable, for review and approval. The Monitoring and Reporting Program shall be implemented during and upon completion of construction of the Pasha Road Closures Component, Pasha Rail Improvement Component, and Bayshore Bikeway Component. The Monitoring and Reporting Program shall document implementation of the Soil and Groundwater Management Plan, including the Testing and Profiling Plan, Disposal Plan, and Safety Plan, as required by MMǦHAZǦ4. The Monitoring and Reporting Program shall include a requirement that the project proponent submit monthly reports (starting with the first ground disturbance activities and ending at the completion of ground disturbance activities) to the District’s Development Services Department and the City, as applicable, signed and certified by the licensed Professional Geologist, Professional Engineering Geologist, or Professional Engineer, as applicable, documenting compliance with the provisions of these plans and the overall Soil and Groundwater Management Plan.

Timing:Prior to construction
Method:Prepare and
implement a Monitoring and
Reporting Program and submit
monthly reports documenting
compliance. 
Implementation:Applicable Project
Proponents for Components, Licensed
Professional Geologist, Professional
Engineering Geologist, or Professional
Engineer
MonitoringandReporting: Applicable
Project Proponents for Components
Verification: District and City
MMǦHAZǦ6: PrepareandSubmitaProjectCloseoutReport(Pasha RoadClosuresComponent,PashaRailImprovementComponent, andBayshoreBikewayComponent).Within 30 days of completion of landside construction of the Pasha Road Closures Component,Pasha Rail Improvement Component, and Bayshore Bikeway Component, the project proponent shall prepare a Project Closeout Report and submit it to the District’s Environmental Protection Department and the City, as applicable, for review and approval. The Project Closeout Report shall summarize all environmental activity at the site and document implementation of the Soil and Groundwater Management Plan, as required by MMǦHAZǦ4, and the Monitoring and Reporting Program, as required by MMǦHAZǦ5.
Timing:Within 30 days of
landslide construction
completion
Method:Prepare and submit a
Project Closeout Report
summarizing all environmental
activity and documenting
compliance with MM-HAZ-1 and
MM-HAZ-2.
Implementation:Applicable Project
Proponents for Components
MonitoringandReporting: Applicable
Project Proponents for Components
Verification: District and City

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ52 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties MMǦHAZǦ7: CoordinatewiththeDEH(CityProgram–Development Component).Prior to ground disturbing activities on the City Program – Development Component site, the project proponent for the City Program – Development Component shall coordinate with the DEH to reopen VAP Cases #H23772-005, #H36620-001, and #H23772-004 to determine if the existing conditions would be below acceptable cleanup thresholds for hotel use. If the DEH determines the onsite conditions do not meet thresholds for future hotel uses, the project proponent must comply with the requirements of the DEH to achieve remediation standards.
Timing:Prior to ground-
disturbing activities
Method:Coordinate with the
DEH to determine if existing
conditions are below cleanup
thresholds or comply with
requirements to achieve
remediations.
Implementation:Applicable Project
Proponent for Component
MonitoringandReporting: Applicable
Project Proponent for Component
Verification: City
MMǦHAZǦ8:MaintainEmergencyAccessRoadDuringConstruction (PashaRoadClosuresComponent).A temporary emergency access road shall be maintained by the project proponent at all times during construction of the Pasha Road Closures Component. The location and components, as defined per the California Fire Code, of the temporary emergency access road shall be submitted to the City Fire Marshal for review and approval prior to closure of the roadway(s) to through-traffic.

Written verification of inclusion of the temporary emergency vehicle access shall be provided to the District’s Director of Planning prior to closure of the roadway(s) to through-traffic. Said written verification can be provided via a copy of the plans that have been stamped/approved by the City Fire Marshal, or the Fire Marshal’s designee, or verification can be provided with a copy of the Fire Permit.

Timing:During construction
Method:Submit location and
components of a temporary
emergency access road for
approval and maintain
emergency access during
construction. 
Implementation:Applicable Project
Proponent for Component
MonitoringandReporting: Applicable
Project Proponent for Component
Verification: City Fire Marshal, District’s
Director of Planning
MMǦHAZǦ9:CoordinatewiththeCityFireMarshal (PashaRoad ClosuresComponent). Prior to closure of the Pasha Road Closures Component to through-traffic, the project proponent for said project component shall prepare and submit plans to the City Fire Marshal for review and approval that demonstrate compliance with applicable state and local fire code regulations related to secondary access, emergency access, and maximum dead-end road length. At a minimum, the plans shall demonstrate that the project will include the following items related to emergency vehicle access:
x An emergencyaccessroad, on the existing alignment of Tidelands Avenue between Bay Marina Drive and the 32nd Street, that has an unobstructed minimum width of 20 feet (or 26 feet when a fire hydrant is located on the emergency access road), exclusive of Timing:Prior to Pasha Road
closure
Method:Prepare and submit
road-closure plans for review
and approval that demonstrate
compliance with applicable
state and local fire code
regulations. 
Implementation:Applicable Project
Proponent for Component
MonitoringandReporting: Applicable
Project Proponent for Component
Verification: City Fire Marshal

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ53 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties shoulders or rolled curbs. The emergency access road shall be paved using an all-weather surface and shall support the imposed loads (75,000 pounds) of a fire apparatus. The emergency access road shall include official approved signs or other approved notices or markings that include the words “NO PARKING – FIRE LANE.” At all times, the emergency access road shall not be obstructed in any manner, including the parking of vehicles.
x Any entrance/exitgates to/from the Pasha Road Closures Component shall be equipped with Knox Key Switches and
Emergency Strobes to provide emergency vehicle access, including ingress and egress. A lock box (Knox Key Switch for fire and police) shall be required in conjunction with a detector/strobe switch to allow emergency vehicles to flash a vehicle-mounted strobe light towards the detector/strobe switch, which in turn overrides the system and opens the gate. The lock box and detector/strobe switch shall be placed at the front of each gate (the side of the gate that is adjacent to a public street). Any electric gate opener shall be listed in accordance with UL 325. Gates utilizing emergency strobe operation shall be designed, constructed, and installed to comply with requirements of ASTM F2200, and shall be maintained operational at all times, including but not limited to, in the event of an electrical outage. Any entrance/exist gates to/from the Pasha Road Closures Component shall maintain an unobstructed vertical clearance of a minimum of 13 feet, 6 inches.
x Firehydrants shall be located throughout the Pasha Road Closures Component site and shall be spaced no less than 400 feet apart. Fire hydrants shall be located within 400 feet of all locations that are roadway accessible (measurement starts from the nearest existing fire hydrant to the Pasha Road Closures Component site). Where a fire hydrant is located on an emergency access road, the minimum road width shall be 26 feet. All turns available for fire access and travel shall maintain a minimum radius of 28 feet.

Prior to utilization of the Pasha Road Closures Component for marine- related operations, the above-described emergency vehicle access shall be field-verified by the City Fire Marshal, or the Fire Marshal’s designee.

Written verification of inclusion of the above-described emergency vehicle access shall be provided to the District’s Director of Planning

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ54 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties prior to Pasha’s utilization of the Pasha Road Closures Component for marine-related operations. Said written verification can be provided via a copy of the plans that have been stamped/approved by the City Fire Marshal, or the Fire Marshal’s designee, or verification can be provided with a copy of the Fire Permit.
MMǦHAZǦ11:ManageMarinaWayRealignmentConditions
(BalancedPlanorGBCapitalComponent). The Marina Way Realignment proposed as part of the Balanced Plan (or GB Capital Component) shall not include traffic calming devices (e.g., speed humps), unless prior-written approval is obtained from the City Fire Marshal. Timing:Prior to construction
Method:Ensure traffic-calming
devices are not included unless
prior-written approval is
obtained.
Implementation:Applicable Project
Proponents for Components
MonitoringandReporting: Applicable
Project Proponents for Components
Verification: City Fire Marshal
LandUseandPlanning  
MMǦLUǦ2:DesignthePepperParkExpansiontoAccountforSeaǦ LevelRisethrough2050(BalancedPlan). The project proponent for the Pepper Park expansion shall design the park to accommodate water during future flooding events. Methods to accommodate water during future flooding events include, but are not limited to:
x Elevating the waterside promenades
x Regrading coastal edges and/or inland portions of the park as appropriate
x Creating living shorelines
x Ensuring that any new vegetation is salt tolerant
x Developing an operational plan to close the parking lot and move parked vehicles prior to storm events
x Including pervious surfaces such as turf, sand, and pervious concrete Moreover, the public access to Pepper Park shall be restricted during flood events.

If any structures are constructed in Pepper Park, prior to construction, the project proponent shall conduct an engineering-level, site-specific assessment of the projected SLR at the site through 2050.

Additionally, the project proponent shall create an early warning system to monitor the risk of potential flooding of any structure. An early warning system should consist of protocols for obtaining information on local weather alerts and established levels at which additional action (e.g., sandbagging) will be taken. Also, the project proponent shall Timing:During design of
Pepper Park expansion
Method:Design the Pepper
Park expansion to
accommodate water during
future flooding events, conduct
site-specific assessment of the
projected SLR through 2050,
and create an early warning
system.
Implementation:Applicable Project
Proponent for Component
MonitoringandReporting: Applicable
Project Proponent for Component
Verification: Applicable Project
Proponent for Component

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ55 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties establish emergency evacuation procedures for people to relocate to higher ground on short notice. Before a large storm, deployment of sandbags or inflatable barriers shall occur if deemed necessary.

MMǦLUǦ3:ConductEngineeringǦLevel,SiteǦSpecificAssessmentof SeaǦLevelRisethrough2050(GBCapitalComponent). The project proponent for the GB Capital Component shall conduct an engineering- level, site-specific assessment of the projected SLR at the site through 2050. If the assessment projects the jetty to be temporarily inundated by 2050, the development on the jetty shall include the following:

SmartDesignDecisions–tobeincorporatedintobuildingdesignandpart ofconstruction:
x Place any mechanical and electrical equipment at least 2 feet above the design flood elevation to reduce risk of flood damage. If equipment must be placed in lower areas, elevate base or ensure assets are composed of flood damage–resistant materials. x Design water supply, sanitary sewage, and stormwater systems to minimize or eliminate infiltration of flood waters into systems and vice versa.
x Ensure that all building exterior walls are composed of materials that have an impermeable and waterproof membrane.

FutureAdaptationStrategies–tobeincorporatedintobuildingdesignand partofconstruction:
x Ensure that building foundations, if any, are capable of supporting future flood walls or temporary flood barriers.
x Design building openings (e.g., doors, windows, utility penetrations) to be capable of future retrofitting to make them watertight and resistant to flood loads.
x Design key structural elements of the jetty to allow future increases in the elevation of the jetty.

OperationalStrategies–tobeimplementedduringoperation: x Establish an early warning system to monitor the risk of potential flooding. An early warning system should consist of:
o Protocols for obtaining information on local weather alerts and established levels at which additional action (e.g., sandbagging) will be taken
Timing:Prior to GB Capital
Component construction
Method:Conduct an
engineering-level, site-specific
assessment of the projected SLR
through 2050 and implement
design components if the jetty is
projected to be inundated by
2050. 
Implementation:Applicable Project
Proponent for Component
MonitoringandReporting: Applicable
Project Proponent for Component
Verification: District and City

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ56 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties o Protocols for monitoring water levels at nearby storm gauges prior to the storm arrival, and regular checking of the water levels along the jetty as the storm progresses
x Establish emergency evacuation procedures for people to relocate to higher ground on short notice.
x Obtain backup power generators for occupiable development on the jetty and portable pumps and ensure there is sufficient fuel to operate these. Establish protocols for operating said generators and pumps during storm events or other such events.
x Before a large storm, deploy sandbags or inflatable barriers. x Before a storm, test emergency power sources and pumps and ensure there is sufficient fuel to run these, and inspect building exteriors to ensure there are no penetrations that lack flood proofing.
x Restrict public access during storms or flooding events.

Prior to issuance of the first building permit for any development on the jetty, the assessment and project plans (revised pursuant to the findings of the assessment, if the assessment projects inundation by 2050) shall be submitted to the District’s Development Services Department and the City’s building permit department for review and approval.

MMǦLUǦ4:UseUpdatedModelingandMonitoringforAdaptive Managementfor2100Scenario(BalancedPlan,GBCapital Component,PashaRoadClosuresComponent,portionofBayshore BikewayComponent). For areas of the Balanced Plan (Pepper Park and the FPR), the GB Capital Component, the Pasha Road Closures Component, and the portions of the Bayshore Bikeway Component (within the District’s jurisdiction) that are projected to be inundated in 2100, the District shall conduct ongoing monitoring of these project component sites every 5 to 10 years. If, through monitoring, the observed SLR conditions appear to be consistent with the 2100 projections identified in this EIR, a site-specific assessment shall be conducted to identify future SLR projections using the best science available at the time and identify appropriate adaptation strategies to ensure that these areas are resilient to coastal flooding and inundation from SLR. Such strategies may include a neighborhood-level effort, raising of grades, Timing:Prior to construction
Method:Conduct ongoing
monitoring every 5 to 10 years
for project component sites
projected to be inundated in
2100 and identify adaptation
strategies.

Implementation:All Project Proponents
MonitoringandReporting: All Project
Proponents
Verification: District

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ57 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties additional shoreline protection, removal or movement of assets, and conversion of impervious surfaces to pervious surfaces.

MMǦLUǦ5:UseUpdatedModelingandMonitoringforAdaptive Managementfor2100Scenario(mostofBayshoreBikeway Component).For the areas of the Bayshore Bikeway Component that are within the City’s jurisdiction, the City shall conduct ongoing monitoring of these areas every 5 to 10 years. If, through monitoring, the observed SLR conditions appear to be consistent with the 2100 projections identified in this EIR, a site-specific assessment shall be conducted to identify future SLR projections using the best science available at the time and identify appropriate adaptation strategies to ensure that these areas are resilient to coastal flooding and inundation from SLR. Such strategies may include a neighborhood-level effort, raising of grades, additional shoreline protection, or removal or movement of assets. Timing:Prior to construction
Method:Conduct ongoing
monitoring every 5 to 10 years
for project component sites
projected to be inundated in
2100 and identify adaptation
strategies. 
Implementation:Applicable Project
Proponent for Component
MonitoringandReporting: Applicable
Project Proponent for Component
Verification: Applicable Project
Proponent for Component
NoiseandVibration  
MMǦNOIǦ1: ProhibitExteriorConstructionActivitiesOutsideofthe PermittedConstructionHours(BalancedPlan,BayshoreBikeway Component,CityProgram–DevelopmentComponent,GBCapital Component,PashaRoadClosuresComponent). For the Balanced Plan, Bayshore Bikeway Component, City Program – Development Component, GB Capital Component, and Pasha Road Closures Component, the project proponent for that respective project component shall require their contractor(s) not to conduct exterior construction activities outside the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. Material or equipment deliveries and collections shall also be prohibited outside of these hours. Except for construction personnel specifically working on interior construction tasks within a completed building shell, construction personnel shall not be permitted on the job site outside of the permitted hours.

Timing:During construction
Method:Require exterior
construction activities occur
between the hours of 7:00 a.m.
to 7:00 p.m. Monday through
Friday.

Implementation:AllProject Proponents
MonitoringandReporting: All Project
Proponents
Verification: City and District
MMǦNOIǦ2: AvoidorReduceConstructionNoisefromPileDriving (CityProgram–DevelopmentComponent,GBCapitalComponent).

During all pile driving at the City Program – Development Component and GB Capital Component, the project proponent shall require its construction contractor to implement one of the following methods to reduce maximum pile-driving noise levels at the affected noise-sensitive Timing:During pile driving
Method:Reduce noise levels at
affected noise-sensitive
receptors by avoiding pile
driving or using acoustical
shroud.
Implementation:Applicable Project
Proponents for Components
MonitoringandReporting: Applicable
Project Proponents for Components
Verification: City and District

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ58 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties receptors (residences on Cleveland Avenue, the National City Adult School, and Pepper Park) to 70 dBA Lmax or less:
x Avoid impact pile driving by using quieter alternative installation methods, such as press-in piles or drilled piles (e.g., cast-in-drilled- hole, poured-in-place piles).
x Use an acoustical shroud around impact pile driving. The shroud shall be constructed of materials that provide a minimum sound transmission class (STC) of 28 (examples include sound-rated acoustical blankets).

MMǦNOIǦ3:AvoidorReduceConstructionNoisefromOther(NonǦ PileǦDriving)ConstructionActivities(BayshoreBikeway Component,GBCapitalComponent,PashaRoadClosures
Component). During all non-pile-driving construction activity at the Bayshore Bikeway Component, GB Capital Component, and the Pasha Road Closures Component, the project proponent shall require their construction contractor(s) to implement one of the following methods to reduce maximum noise levels at the affected noise-sensitive receptors (residences on Cleveland Avenue and McKinley Avenue, and Pepper Park ) to 70 dBA Lmax or less:
x Avoid operating high impact demolition equipment (hydraulic breakers, jackhammers, concrete saws) within 520 feet of the any noise-sensitive receptors and avoid operating all other mechanized construction equipment within 280 feet of the affected noise- sensitive receptors.
x Where the above-specified distances cannot be maintained, install temporary noise barrier(s) between construction activities and the noise-sensitive receptor(s). Barriers may be constructed around the site perimeter or, when construction activities are restricted to a smaller portion of the site, around that smaller portion of the site, or around any noisy stationary construction equipment such as generators or dewatering pumps. All such barriers must be at least 8 feet high and of sufficient height to break the line-of-sight between the construction equipment and the ground floor of any noise- sensitive receptor. These barriers shall be constructed in one of the following ways that the project proponent establishes, in writing and to the satisfaction of the District, shall achieve a minimum sound transmission class (STC) rating of 28:

Timing:During non-pile
driving
Method:Reduce noise levels at
affected noise-sensitive
receptors by avoiding high-
impact demolition equipment
or installing temporary noise
barriers. 
Implementation:Applicable Project
Proponents for Components
MonitoringandReporting: Applicable
Project Proponents for Components
Verification: City and District

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ59 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties o From acoustical blankets hung over or from a supporting frame.

The blankets should be firmly secured to the framework. The blankets should be overlapped by at least 4 inches at seams and taped and/or closed with hook-and-loop fasteners (i.e., Velcro®) so that no gaps exist. The blankets shall be draped to the ground to eliminate any gaps at the base of the barrier.
o From commercially available acoustical panels lined with sound- absorbing material (the sound-absorptive faces of the panels should face the construction equipment).
o From common construction materials such as plywood.
MMǦNOIǦ4:DesignandConstructtheProposedHotelat theCity Program–DevelopmentComponentSitetoAchieveanInterior NoiseLevelof45dBCNELorLessatNoiseǦSensitiveOccupied Spaces(CityProgram–DevelopmentComponent). During the architectural and engineering design, prior to the issuance of any building permits for the hotel, the project proponent for the City Program – Development Component shall retain an acoustical consultant to ensure that the building design provides adequate noise insulation to achieve the City’s interior noise standard of 45 dB CNEL, as specified in the National City General Plan Noise Element, at occupied spaces. If necessary, the consultant shall recommend design features such as, but not limited to, fresh-air supply systems (to allow windows to remain closed), sound-rated windows, or other façade upgrades. The project proponent shall submit a copy of the acoustical consultant’s report, along with evidence that all recommended design features have been incorporated into the project design, to the City’s Community Development Department for review and approval prior to hotel construction.
Timing:During project design
Method:Ensure that the
building design provides
adequate noise insulation and, if
necessary, incorporate
recommended design features.
Implementation:Applicable Project
Proponent for Component, Acoustical
Consultant
MonitoringandReporting: Applicable
Project Proponent for Component
Verification: City’s Community
Development Department
MMǦNOIǦ5:ReduceRailNoiseLevelsattheProposedGBCapitalRV Sitesto65dBCNELorLess(PashaRailComponent,GBCapital Component). The project proponent for the GB Capital Component shall design its dry boat storage so that it is enclosed and made from solid material (versus fabric, chain link fencing or similar pervious/open materials) and shall submit a noise study conducted by an acoustical consultant that analyzes the noise from the Pasha Rail Improvement Component with the enclosed dry boat storage as a buffer, demonstrating Timing:During project design
Method:Ensure dry boat
storage is enclosed and made
from solid material, submit a
noise study, and construct a
sound barrier if needed.
Implementation:Applicable Project
Proponents for Components
MonitoringandReporting: Applicable
Project Proponents for Components
Verification: District’s Development
Services Department

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ60 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties the noise levels at the proposed RV park location. The noise study shall be submitted to the District’s Development Services Department for its review 3 months after issuance of a Coastal Development Permit (CDP) for any phase of the GB Capital Component and prior to the construction of the RV park. The project proponent shall construct the dry boat storage as designed. If the noise study shows that the rail noise exposure at the proposed RV sites is at or below 65 dB CNEL, then no additional steps as specified in this mitigation measure shall be required.

If the noise study shows that noise levels are above 65 dB CNEL at the proposed RV sites, then prior to occupancy of the GB Capital RV Resort or operation of the Pasha Rail Improvement Component, whichever occurs last, a sound barrier shall be constructed to reduce the rail noise exposure at the proposed RV sites to 65 dB CNEL or less. The noise barrier shall be the equal (50/50) shared financial responsibility of the project proponents for the Pasha Rail Improvement Component and the GB Capital Component. In the event that both components are not constructed at the same time, the project proponent (Payee) of the component last constructed shall construct and pay for the entire specified noise control and the other project proponent (Reimbursee) shall reimburse the Payee 50% of the actual cost of designing, permitting, and constructing the noise control unless another payment arrangement is agreed upon between the project proponents and approved by the District. Such reimbursement shall be a condition of the CDPs for the Pasha Rail Improvement Component and the RV resort associated with the GB Capital Component. The noise barrier shall be constructed between the south side of the Pasha Rail Improvement Component and the GB Capital RV Resort. The barrier shall fully block the line-of-sight between the RV sites and a standard freight locomotive on the Pasha Rail Improvement Component site, and is anticipated to be a minimum barrier height of 16 feet relative to the finished track elevation. The barrier shall be a continuous structure without gaps or openings and shall extend from the north end of the Pasha Rail Improvement Component to Tidelands Avenue. The barrier shall be constructed of a solid material and, if necessary to meet the noise requirement, the density of 4 pounds per square foot (e.g., concrete block or concrete panels).

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ61 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties MMǦNOIǦ6: DesignandConstructtheHotelsat theGBCapital ComponenttoAchieveanInteriorNoiseLevelof45dBCNELorLess atNoiseǦSensitiveOccupiedSpaces(GBCapitalComponent). During the architectural and engineering design, prior to the issuance of any building permits for the hotels, the project proponent for the GB Capital Component shall retain an acoustical consultant to ensure that the project design provides adequate noise insulation to achieve the City’s interior noise standard of 45 dB CNEL, as specified in the National City General Plan Noise Element, at occupied spaces. If necessary, the consultant shall recommend design features such as, but not limited to, fresh-air supply systems (to allow windows to remain closed), sound- rated windows, or other façade upgrades. The project proponent shall submit a copy of the acoustical consultant’s report, along with evidence that all recommended design features have been incorporated into the project design, to the District’s Development Services Department for review and approval prior to construction of any hotel. Timing:During project design
Method:Ensure that the
building design provides
adequate noise insulation and, if
necessary, incorporate
recommended design features.
Implementation:Applicable Project
Proponent for Component, Acoustical
Consultant
MonitoringandReporting: Applicable
Project Proponent for Component
Verification: District’s Development
Services Department
MMǦNOIǦ7: DesignandInstallAllOnsiteMechanicalEquipmentat theCityProgram–DevelopmentComponentSitetoComplywith the City’sNoiseOrdinance(CityProgram–DevelopmentComponent). During the architectural and engineering design phase, prior to the issuance of any building permits for the City Program – Development Component, the project proponent for the City Program – Development Component shall retain an acoustical consultant to evaluate the design and provide recommendations, as necessary, to ensure that all aspects of this project component, including mechanical equipment and other onsite stationary sources (e.g., trash compactors, loading docks), are designed and will be installed to comply with the City’s Noise Ordinance (Municipal Code Chapter 12.06). Such recommendations may include, but are not limited to, changes in equipment locations; sound power limits or specifications; rooftop parapet walls; acoustic absorption materials, louvers, screens, or enclosures; or intake and exhaust silencers. The project proponent shall submit a copy of the acoustical consultant’s report, along with evidence that all recommended design features have been incorporated into the project design, to the City’s Community Development Department for review and approval prior to hotel construction.
Timing:During project design
Method:Ensure that all aspects
of the City Program –
Development Component,
including mechanical
equipment, comply with the
City’s Noise Ordinance and, if
necessary, incorporate
recommended design features.
Implementation:Applicable Project
Proponent for Component, Acoustical
Consultant
MonitoringandReporting: Applicable
Project Proponent for Component
Verification: City’s Community
Development Department

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ62 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties MMǦNOIǦ8: DesignandOperatetheProposedDryBoatStorage FacilitytoComplywiththeCity’sNoiseOrdinanceattheAdjacent ProposedRVResort(GBCapitalComponent).During the architectural and engineering design phase for the dry boat storage facility, prior to the issuance of any building permits for such, the project proponent for the GB Capital Component shall retain an acoustical consultant to evaluate the design and provide recommendations, as necessary, to ensure that operation of the dry boat storage facility will comply with the City’s Noise Ordinance (Municipal Code Chapter 12.06.020) at the adjacent RV sites during the sensitive evening and nighttime hours of 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. (i.e., 65 dBA Leq between 7 p.m. and 10 p.m., and 60 dBA Leq between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m.). Noise control techniques may include, but are not limited to, restricting hours of operation to daytime hours (7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.), selecting quieter equipment (when commercially available), or installing additional noise barriers to screen the facility from the RV resort. The project proponent shall submit a copy of the acoustical consultant’s report, along with evidence that all design features have been incorporated into the project design (to ensure that operation of the dry boat storage facility would comply with the City Noise Ordinance at the adjacent RV sites during the sensitive evening and nighttime hours), to the District’s Development Services Department for review and approval prior to commencement of construction of the dry boat storage facility. The project proponent shall implement the noise control techniques.

Timing:During project design
Method:Ensure dry boat
storage complies with the City’s
Noise Ordinance and, if
necessary, incorporate
recommended design features.
Implementation:Applicable Project
Proponent for Component
MonitoringandReporting: Applicable
Project Proponent for Component
Verification: District’s Development
Services Department
MMǦNOIǦ9: RegulateOrganizedEventsatPepperPark,IncludingUse oftheProposedAmphitheater(BalancedPlan). Organized events at Pepper Park shall be properly regulated for noise control. Per Section

8.02 of the District’s Port Code, any event with over 25 attendees shall obtain a permit from the District. As further stipulated by Section 8.02 of the Port Code, each “permit shall be subject to the requirements regarding noise…as contained in the Municipal Code of the particular City in which the park is located.” Therefore, any event for which noise generating activities will occur at the amphitheater will be subject to the City’s Noise Ordinance. Although the City’s Noise Ordinance indicates that daytime and nighttime noise standards would be 65 and 60 dBA Leq(h), respectively, at the GB Capital Component visitor accommodations (RV resort and hotels), the City’s Noise Ordinance also includes Timing:During project
operation
Method:Regulate organized
events through the use of
permits and notify adjacent
tenants of large events. 
Implementation:Applicable Project
Proponent for Component
MonitoringandReporting: Applicable
Project Proponent for Component
Verification: District and City

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ63 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties exceptions for these noise standards; the exceptions are on a case-by- case basis and include temporary noise exceedances for organized events (e.g., parades, concerts). Further, as part of the District’s permitting process for organized events that are proposed to have amplified sounds (e.g., concerts), the District shall coordinate with the City, and if the City requires a maximum decibel level limit or hours in which all noise needs to cease, that information shall be added to the District permit for that organized event. In addition, the District shall coordinate notification to adjacent tenants of upcoming organized large events, and the permittee of the organized event shall coordinate with the same tenants within 2 weeks of the organized event.
MMǦNOIǦ10: AvoidorReduceGroundborneVibrationfromPile Driving(GBCapitalComponent). Where feasible, the project proponent for the GB Capital Component shall require its construction contractor(s) to avoid pile driving within a 32-foot buffer zone of existing buildings at the Pier 32 Marina. If piling cannot be avoided within this distance, the following shall be implemented:
x Alternative installation methods shall be used, such as press-in piles or drilled piles (e.g., cast-in-drilled-hole, poured-in-place piles). x The following steps shall be taken to protect buildings within 32 feet of pile-driving locations:
o The project proponent/contractor shall retain a qualified structural or geotechnical engineer to conduct preconstruction surveys of neighboring structures (including photographing and/or videotaping) to document existing building conditions for future comparison if any vibration-related damage is suspected or results from construction-related activities; and
o Based on review of the specific buildings involved, the structural/geotechnical engineer may provide updated vibration thresholds and buffer distances for potentially affected buildings; and
o Monitoring shall be conducted during construction to check for vibration-related damage during pile driving; such monitoring shall include vibration measurements obtained inside or outside of the buildings or other tests and observations deemed necessary; and
Timing:During pile driving
activities
Method:Avoid pile driving
within the 32-foot buffer zone
of existing buildings or
implement measures to avoid or
reduce vibration. 
Implementation:Applicable Project
Proponent for Component
MonitoringandReporting:

Applicable
Project Proponent for Component
Verification: City and District

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ64 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties o The person(s) conducting the monitoring shall have the authority to issue a stop work order to the pile-driving contractor if excessive vibration levels are measured or other observations occur that indicate potential building damage may occur; in the event of such an occurrence, the monitor shall notify the project proponent (GB Capital) and the District; and
o If any damage to existing buildings is determined to occur as a result of pile driving at the GB Capital Component, the project proponent shall be financially responsible for the necessary repairs, structural or cosmetic, to return the damaged building to its pre-existing state.
MMǦNOIǦ11: AvoidorReduceGroundborneVibrationfromBikeway Construction(BayshoreBikewayComponent). During all construction activity at the Bayshore Bikeway Component, the project proponent shall require its construction contractor(s) to observe the following buffer zones to reduce groundborne vibration at nearby at nearby residences to

0.04 in/sec or less:
x Avoid the use of hydraulic breakers within 130 feet of residential buildings.
x Avoid vibratory compaction within 115 feet of residential buildings. x Avoid the use of heavy earthmoving equipment within 55 feet of residential buildings.

If the listed buffer distances cannot be maintained, impacts can be reduced to less than significant by using alternative equipment that avoids or reduces high vibration levels at the source. Jackhammers (manually held and operated, not mounted to any other construction equipment) may be used in place of other breakers, non-vibratory rollers may be used in place of vibratory roller, and smaller earthmovers (Bobcat, skid steer, etc.) may be used instead of full size heavy earthmoving equipment.

Timing:During construction
Method:Observe buffer zones
to reduce groundborne
vibration or use alternative
equipment that avoids or
reduces high vibration levels. 
Implementation:Applicable Project
Proponent for Component
MonitoringandReporting: Applicable
Project Proponent for Component
Verification: City and District
Transportation,Circulation,andParking  
MMǦTRAǦ1: ImplementTDMandVMTReductionMeasures(GB CapitalComponent,CityProgram–DevelopmentComponent). To reduce VMT generated by employee trips, the project proponent (GB Capital and City) shall implement the following TDM and VMT reduction Timing:During project
operation
Method:Implement a
Mandatory Employer Commute
Implementation:Applicable Project
Proponents for Components

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ65 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties measure from the SANDAG Mobility Management Toolbox, using the VMT Reduction Calculator Tool (SANDAG 2019b), starting the first day of project operations for the GB Capital Component and City Program – Development Component.
x Mandatory Employer Commute Program – The employer for the GB Capital Component and City Program – Development Component shall offer and pay for an employer commute-trip reduction program, which may include a carpool program, transit subsidy passes, or a vanpool program. Implementing these measures could result in a 2.6% reduction in the project’s employee VMT.

Program to reduce TDM and
VMT. 
MonitoringandReporting: Applicable
Project Proponents for Components
Verification: District and City
MMǦTRAǦ3:ImplementTrafficControlMeasuresDuring
Construction(BalancedPlan,GBCapitalComponent,PashaRail ImprovementComponent,PashaRoadClosuresComponent,
BayshoreBikewayComponent,andCityProgram–Development Component). For any project components that temporarily require partial and/or full roadway closures during construction, the project proponent [requiring the partial or full roadway closure(s)] shall require its contractor to plan, use, place, and maintain traffic control devices while in use at the construction site to ensure that adequate emergency access is provided throughout the duration of the road closure. If construction activities require blocking of a traffic lane(s), the project proponent shall require its contractor to use a flashing arrow board during daytime hours; however, a solar flashing arrow board shall be required for any nighttime construction that requires the closure of any traffic lanes. In certain lane closures, the use of high-level warning flags, along with other devices, is acceptable if installed in accordance with the provisions set forth in the Caltrans CaliforniaManualonUniformTraffic ControlDevices(Caltrans 2018). The City shall verify the proper use of traffic control devices for the Bayshore Bikeway Component, City Program – Development Component, and potentially the GB Capital Component if the proposed roadway is a City street, while the District shall verify the proper use of traffic control devices for the Balanced Plan, Pasha Rail Improvement Component, Pasha Road Closures Component, and potentially the GB Capital Component if the proposed roadway is a District street.

Timing:During project
construction
Method:Implement traffic
control measures during partial
and/or full roadway closures
and maintain lane requirements
throughout the duration.
Implementation:AllProject Proponents
MonitoringandReporting: All Project
Proponents
Verification: District and City

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ66 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties In addition to traffic control measures, the project proponent shall require its contractor to maintain the following traffic lane requirements throughout the duration of the partial or full road closure:

1. For two-way streets (e.g., a four-lane roadway), a minimum of one lane shall be provided in each direction.

2. The minimum width of a traffic lane shall be 10 feet. The lane shall be clear of obstructions, including traffic cones or delineators.

Emergency vehicle access may require a traffic lane of up to 14 feet wide.

3. A separate left- or right-turn lane shall be proved if there is an existing left- or right-turn lane.

4. Complete closure of a roadway shall not be permitted without a valid Special Traffic Permit (STP) or a City-approved traffic routing plan.

This includes a plan that allows one lane to be used for two directions of traffic (i.e., two-way flag control). An STP is required to use two-way flag control.

5. If work occurs at or within 100 feet of an intersection on a two-way street, an STP is required to prohibit left turns at the intersection.

This requirement applies where two lanes are reduced to one and through vehicles cannot physically pass a left-turning vehicle.

6. If needed, room for a traffic lane(s) may be made available by temporarily prohibiting parking. Traffic lanes must be at least 10 feet wide and provide a sufficient transition before the lane begins and after the lane ends.

To ensure that the traffic lanes provided are adequate and continuous, only one contractor at a time shall be allowed to work on any one block.

If a second contractor is planning to work on a block that has a contractor, or on an adjacent block, then the second contractor shall obtain an STP before starting any work. Moreover, a contractor shall not be allowed to work within a block of a project that is under City contract without receiving approval from the Resident Engineer for the subject contract, obtaining an STP, and notifying the City Fire Department and City Police Department.

Flagging personnel shall be required when workers or equipment will temporarily block a traffic lane that is used for access into and out of a construction site. Flagging personnel shall ensure that traffic congestion

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ67 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties and permanently blocked roads do not occur. The following shall apply to the flagging personnel required during project construction:

1. Flaggers must be properly equipped with a Type II vest (daytime) or Type III vest (nighttime) and a sign paddle.

2. Flaggers must be certified and have their certification card at all times.

3. A minimum of two flaggers shall be required when one lane is to be used for two directions of traffic (i.e., two-way flag control).

4. Police officers may be hired to provide flag control.

A construction TDM plan shall be prepared by the respective project proponent for each project component and implemented during construction activities. The TDM plan shall be submitted by the respective project proponent to the City or District, depending on the jurisdiction where the project component is located, for review and approval prior to construction. The TDM plan shall incorporate various TDM strategies to reduce congestion during construction and may include, but is not limited to, the following:
x Implementation of a ride-sharing program to encourage carpooling among workers.
x Adjusting work schedules so workers do not access the site during the peak hours.
x Providing offsite parking locations for workers outside of the area, with shuttle services to bring them onsite.
x Providing subsidized transit passes for construction workers.

MMǦTRAǦ5: RequireOffsiteParking,ShuttleTransportation,and IncentivesforTransitUseforConstructionWorkersandWayfinding SignageforVisitors(BalancedPlan,GBCapitalComponent,Pasha RailImprovementComponent,PashaRoadClosuresComponent, BayshoreBikewayComponent,andCityProgram–Development Component).Prior to the commencement of construction activity, the project proponent for each component shall provide an offsite parking location for construction workers and a shuttle service from the offsite parking location to the project site and back. For project components within the District’s jurisdiction, the designated offsite parking location shall be approved by the District’s Development Services Department (Balanced Plan, GB Capital Component, Pasha Rail Improvement Timing:Prior to construction
Method:Provide offsite
parking, shuttle transportation,
and incentives for transit use
and provide signage to direct
visitors to available parking if
onsite parking is displaced.
Implementation:AllProject Proponents
MonitoringandReporting: All Project
Proponents
Verification: District and City

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ68 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties Component, and Pasha Road Closures Component). For project components within the City’s jurisdiction, the designated offsite parking location shall be approved by the City. In addition, the project proponent shall provide incentives for construction workers to use public transit.

Workers who cannot commute by transit and must use personal vehicles shall be required to park at the offsite parking facility. The parking requirements for the workers shall be detailed in their contract with the project proponent. Moreover, during the construction phase, some public parking shall remain open, to the extent feasible, through the phasing of construction. If onsite public parking is displaced, the project proponent shall provide conspicuous signage to direct visitors to available parking facilities throughout the duration of the construction that displaced the public parking to maintain public coastal access.
MMǦTRAǦ6:ReconfigureLotQtoAccommodate590StripedParking Spaces(PashaRoadClosuresComponent). Prior to implementation of the Pasha Road Closures Component, the project proponent shall restripe Lot Q (located on the southwest corner of Bay Marina Drive and Tidelands Avenue) to provide additional parking for employees and offset the loss of 249 parking spaces. Upon completion of this restriping, there would be 590 parking spaces in Lot Q; this would accommodate the 574 existing NCMT employees. Once completed, evidence indicating completion of the restriping shall be provided by the project proponent for the Pasha Road Closures Component to the District’s Development Services Department. Pasha shall require its employees to use Lot Q and allow other employees at NCMT to use the parking lot.
Timing:Prior to construction
Method:Restripe Lot Q to
provide additional parking.
Implementation:Applicable Project
Proponent for Component
MonitoringandReporting: Applicable
Project Proponent for Component
Verification: District’s Development
Services Department
MMǦTRAǦ7:Accommodate23AdditionalFlexParkingSpacesatthe PepperParkParkingLot(BalancedPlan).Prior to issuance of the Coastal Development Permit for Pepper Park (Balanced Plan), the District shall accommodate an additional 23 parking spaces, for a total of 116 parking spaces at Pepper Park. The additional 23 spaces shall be designed to be flex spaces that can be used as either an active area of the park or parking for public uses and coastal access within the project area.

Following the completion of the Pepper Park expansion (including the 23 spaces), the District shall prepare a study that determines the actual (i.e., on-the-ground) demand for parking at the newly expanded park. If the results of the study demonstrate that the amount of parking can be Timing:Prior to construction
and during project operation
Method:Accommodate an
additional 23 flex parking
spaces at Pepper Park and
prepare a study to determine
actual parking demand. 
Implementation:Applicable Project
Proponent for Component
MonitoringandReporting: Applicable
Project Proponent for Component
Verification: District

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ69 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties reduced, the District will reduce the number of parking spaces to the actual on-the-ground demand identified in the study (but no more than a reduction of 23 spaces).
UtilitiesandServiceSystems  
MMǦUTILǦ1:PrepareUtilityInfrastructureStudy(BalancedPlan,GB CapitalComponent,andCityProgram–DevelopmentComponent). Prior to the issuance of the building permits for the Balanced Plan, GB Capital Component, and City Program – Development Component, the respective project proponent shall prepare a utility infrastructure study and submit the study to the District’s Development Services Department (Balanced Plan and GB Capital Component only) and the City’s Community Development Department (GB Capital Component and City Program – Development Component only) for review and approval. The utility infrastructure study shall identify the capacity of existing utilities, the ability of those utilities to serve the project proponent’s project component, any necessary utility improvements that would be needed to serve project proponent’s project component, and alternative locations and best management practices (BMPs), if necessary, to meet the standards described as follows: avoidance of sensitive habitat and species, construction BMPs related to ground disturbance such as daily watering in high-dust areas and use of a stabilized construction entrance to reduce offsite tracking, a soil and groundwater management plan pursuant to MMǦHAZǦ1 and MMǦHAZǦ4, including recommendations on pipe materials based on Sweetwater Authority Design Standards, if disturbed areas may be subject to contamination, a soil disposal plan (if applicable), a traffic management plan if roadways will need temporary closures, consistency with the City’s Noise Ordinance, and avoidance of historical, archaeological, tribal cultural, and paleontological resources.

The project proponent shall implement any and all new utility improvements or upgrades identified in the utility infrastructure study.

Timing:Prior to construction
Method:Prepare and submit a
utility infrastructure study and
implement any and all new
utility improvements or
upgrades identified. 
Implementation:Applicable Project
Proponents for Components
MonitoringandReporting: Applicable
Project Proponents for Components
Verification: District’s Development
Services Department and the City’s
Community Development Department
MMǦUTILǦ2:ImplementWaterConservationMeasures(Balanced Plan,GBCapitalComponent,andCityProgram–Development Component). The project proponent for the respective project component shall incorporate and implement water-efficient design measures into its individual project component. Water-efficient design measures shall at a minimum, include:

Timing:Prior to construction
Method:Incorporate and
implement water-efficient
design measures. 
Implementation:Applicable Project
Proponents for Components
MonitoringandReporting: Applicable
Project Proponents for Components
Verification: District and City

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ70 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties x Implement indoor water reduction measures, including high- efficiency toilets, high-efficiency urinals, low-flow faucets, and low- flow showers (as applicable).
x Install only drought-tolerant landscaping and perform any landscaping watering through a drip system or low-flow irrigation devices.
x Install cisterns above or below ground that shall collect and store runoff from rooftops and other impervious surfaces.
x Install water-efficient water coolers and equipment and monitor cooling tower and boiler water chemistry to minimize mineral buildup in the system and maximize the number of times water can be recycled through the system.
x Limit the use of turf and, in Pepper Park, limit the use of turf to activity fields.
x Educate employees on water conservation measures on an annual basis and post water conservation stickers, signs, and posters in bathrooms, kitchens, cafeterias, conference rooms, and other places where employees congregate.
MMǦUTILǦ3:UpsizetheExistingBayMarinaDrivePipelineand InstallNewPipelineAlongtheProposedRoadRealignmenttoMeet ProjectFireFlowDemands(GBCapitalComponentandCity Program–DevelopmentComponent). Prior to occupancy and operation of the proposed City Program – Development Component or the four-story 81-room hotel to be operated under Phase 2 of the GB Capital Component, whichever occurs first, the project proponent for that project component (Payee) shall upsize the existing 12-inch PVC pipeline on Bay Marina Drive between the intersection of Harrison Avenue and Cleveland Avenue to a 16-inch PVC pipeline. In addition, the Payee shall install approximately 1,500 linear feet of 16-inch main pipeline along Marina Way and upsize approximately 1,700 linear feet of the existing 12-inch PVC pipeline with 16-inch pipeline. Design, permitting, and construction of the new pipelines shall be coordinated with the City Fire Marshal and SWA.

Prior to occupancy and operation of the project component that is constructed second (i.e., the GB Capital Component if the City Program – Development Component is constructed first, or the City Program – Timing:Prior to project
operation
Method:Upsize the existing 12-
inch PVC pipeline on Bay
Marine Drive to a 16-inch
pipeline and install and upsize
pipeline on Marina Way. 
Implementation:Applicable Project
Proponents for Components
MonitoringandReporting: Applicable
Project Proponents for Components
Verification: District and City

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ71 September2022 
MitigationMeasures TimingandMethods ResponsibleParties Development Component if the GB Capital Component is constructed first), the project proponent for that project component (Reimbursee) shall reimburse the Payee 50% of the actual cost of designing, permitting, and constructing the new pipelines. Such reimbursement shall be a condition of the Coastal Development Permits for the City Program – Development Component or the four-story 81-room hotel to be operated under Phase 2 of the GB Capital Component.
MMǦUTILǦ4:IssuePaymentforCity’sSewerCapacityFee(Balanced Plan,GBCapitalComponent,andCityProgram–Development Component).Prior to the issuance of the respective building permits for the Balanced Plan, GB Capital Component, and City Program – Development Component, the respective project proponent shall pay the City’s established sewer capacity fee.
Timing:Prior to construction
Method:Pay the City’s
established sewer capacity fee.
Implementation:Applicable Project
Proponents for Components
MonitoringandReporting: Applicable
Project Proponents for Components
Verification: City
MMǦUTILǦ5:ConfirmWaterSupplyAvailabilityforRecreationalor OrnamentalWaterFeature(BalancedPlan,CityProgram– DevelopmentComponent,andGBCapitalComponent).Prior to construction of any recreational or ornamental water feature, if it is determined that there is a low water supply, then the feature shall not be constructed until water supply is secured or there is an alternative design that incorporates low water use.
Timing:Prior to construction
Method:Ensure features are
constructed only if water supply
is secured. 
Implementation:Applicable Project
Proponents for Components
MonitoringandReporting: Applicable
Project Proponents for Components
Verification: District and City
MMǦUTILǦ6:ConfirmWaterSupplyAvailabilityforDevelopment ProjectComponentsPriortoIssuanceofBuildingPermits(Balanced Plan,CityProgram–DevelopmentComponent,andGBCapital Component).Water availability shall be confirmed by SWA prior to issuance of building permits. The confirmation of water availability shall be provided in written form by SWA. If SWA indicates there is not sufficient water supply to serve the project, the scale of the project shall be reduced to a level that is serviceable by SWA or use recycled water. Timing:Prior to construction
Method:Confirm water supply
availability, reduce project scale
to a level that is serviceable, or
use recycled water. 
Implementation:Applicable Project
Proponents for Components
MonitoringandReporting: Applicable
Project Proponents for Components
Verification: District and SWA
AB = Assembly Bill; BAU = business-as-usual; BMP = best management practice; CA Title 22 = California Code of Regulations, Title 22; CAP = Climate Action Plan; CARB = California Air Resources Board; CCC = California Coastal Commission; CCR = California Code of Regulations; CDFW = California Department of Fish and Wildlife; CDP = Coastal Development Permit; CFGC = California Fish and Game Code; CFR = Code of Federal Regulations; CNEL = Community Noise Equivalent Level; CO = carbon monoxide; CRMDP = Cultural Resources Monitoring and Discovery Plan; CWA = Clean Water Act; dB = decibel; dBA = A-weighted decibel; DEH = Department of Environmental Health; DOT = Department of Transportation; EPA = U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; ESA = environmentally sensitive area; FPR = first point of rest; GHG = greenhouse gas; HDSAP = Harbor District Specific Area Plan; HMMP = Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan; in/sec = inches per second; KOP = key observation point; LCP = Local Coastal Program; LEED = Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design; Leq = equivalent sound level; Leq(h) = hourly equivalent sound level; Lmax = maximum sound level; LUC = Land Use Code; MBTA = Migratory Bird Treaty Act; MTCO2e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent; MWh = megawatt-

SanDiegoUnifiedPortDistrict

MitigationMonitoringandReportingProgram


NationalCityBayfrontProjectsandPlanAmendments
FinalEnvironmentalImpactReport MMRPͲ72 September2022 
hour; NCMT = National City Marine Terminal; NMFS = National Marine Fisheries Service; NOX = nitrogen oxides; PAH = polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbon; PCB = polychlorinated biphenyl; PM10 = particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter; PM2.5 = particulate matter 2.5 microns or less in diameter; PMP = Port Master Plan; PVC = polyvinylchloride; RAQS = Regional Air Quality Strategy; RV = recreational vehicle; RWQCB = Regional Water Quality Control Board; SANDAG = San Diego Association of Governments; SDAPCD = San Diego Air Pollution Control District; SIP = State Implementation Plan; SLR = sea-level rise; SOI = Secretary of the Interior; STC = sound transmission class; STP = Special Traffic Permit; SWA = Sweetwater Authority; TDM = Transportation Demand Management; TPH = total petroleum hydrocarbons; USACE = U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; USFWS = U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; VAP = Voluntary Action Program; VMT = vehicle miles traveled; VOC = volatile organic compound; ZNE = zero net energy

RESOLUTION NO. 2023-

RESOLUTION OF THE CI TY COUNCIL OF THE CI TY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA,

ACCEPTING THE FINDIN GS OF THE BAL ANCED PLAN ENVIRONME NTAL IMPACT

REPORT AND ADOPTING BY REFE RENCE THE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM.

WHEREAS, the City of National City (City) and the San Diego Unified Port District (District) worked cooperatively to prepare the National City Balanced Plan (Project), a multi - jurisdictional plan for various public infrastructure improvements and increased access and visitor serving uses along the City’s and District’s waterfront; and,

WHEREAS, for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the District was designated as the Lead Agency and the City the Responsible Agency for preparation of the National City Balanced Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR); and

WHEREAS, the District certified the EIR, adopted findings and approved a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) at a duly noticed public hearing held on November 16, 2022; and

WHEREAS, as the Responsible Agency, the City must consider all significant environmental impacts analyzed in the EIR, adopt CEQA findings based substantial evidence, and approve a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP); and

WHEREAS, the Planning Co mmission of the City of National City, fully considered the environmental impacts, adopted Statements of Overriding Considerations, and appropriate mitigation measures found in the certified EIR; and

WHEREAS, at a duly advertised public hearing held on M arch 6, 2023, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council of the City of National City make findings and accept the EIR and adopt the MMRP; and

WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of National City, California, considered said acceptance and adoption at a duly advertised public hearing held on March 21. 2023, at which time the City Council considered evidence; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing the City Council considered the staff report provided for Case File No. 2022-26 LCPA, which is m aintained by the City and incorporated herein by reference; along with any other evidence presented at said hearing; and

WHEREAS, this action is taken pursuant to all applicable procedures required by State law and City law; and

WHEREAS, the action here by taken is found to be essential for the preservation of the public health, safety and general welfare.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE, AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1: That the evidence presented to the City Council at the public hearing held on March 21, 2023, support the following findings:

1. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15050 and 15051, the City is a “Responsible Agency” for the project.

2. The Final EIR was prepared in compliance with CEQA statute and Guidelines.

3. The City has independently reviewed and analyzed the Final EIR, considered all substantial evidence, public comments, public testimony, and the District’s responses to public comments, and the City’s analysis of the EI R, MMRP, and related documents reflect the independent judgment of the City.

4. The District found and determined that the proposed Balanced Plan project is approved despite the existence of certain significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR and, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091. The City Council makes and accepts the findings with respect to each significant environmental effect as set forth in the Findings of Fact, appended hereto as Exhibit "A", which are hereby incorporated herein fully by this reference and made a part of the City’s administrative record herein and declares that it considered all relevant and substantial evidence described in connection with each such findings.

5. An MMRP has been prepared by skilled and independent professionals for the project and approved by the District. The City Council adopt s the mitigation measures applicable to the City’s portions of the Project or made a condition of approval of the Project. The MMRP is incorporated by reference herein as Exhibit “B” and is considered part of the Record of Proceedings for the Project.

6. The MMRP designates responsibility and anticipated timing for the implementation of mitigation measures. The City will serve as the MM RP Coordinator for those mitigation measures applicable to the City’s jurisdiction.

7. In determining whether the Project has a significant impact on the environment, and in adopting these Findings pursuant to Section 21081 of CEQA, the City has based its decision on substantial evidence and has complied with CEQA Sections 21081.5 and 21082.2 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15901(b) and all other relevant provisions of CEQA.

8. The impacts of the Project have been analyzed to the extent feasible at the time of certification of the Final EIR.

9. The City has made no decisions that constitute an irretrievable commitment of resources toward the Project prior to certification of the Final EIR, nor has the City previously committed to a definite course of action with respect to the Project.

10. The City Council finds that pursuant to CEQA Section 21081(a) , that the adverse changes to the environment have been fully mitigated or have been determined to have overriding benefits to the City that outweigh those impacts.

11. Copies of all the documents incorporated by reference in the Draft EIR and/or Final EIR are and have been available upon request at all times to any member of the public at the offices of the City, custodian of record for such documents or other materials.

12. Having rece ived, reviewed, and considered all information and documents in the administrative record, the City Council conditions the Project and approves the Project consistent with the Findings herein.

Section 2: The City Council has considered the EIR and finds on the basis of the whole of the administrative record that the Final EIR reflects the City’s in dependent judgment and analysis.

Section 3: Based on the Findings of Fact set forth above, the City Council accepts the Findings of Fact and the Statement of Overriding Consideration contained in the Final EIR and adopts the MMRP for the mitigation measures applicable to the City’s portions of the Project.

Section 4: That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution and enter it inot the book of original Resolutions.

PASSED and ADOPTED this 21st day of March, 2023.

__________________________
Ron Morrison, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Shelley Chapel, MMC, Interim City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________
Barry J. Schultz, City Attorney

AGENDA REPORT

Department: Planning
Prepared by: Martin Reeder, AICP – Planning Manager
Meeting Date: Tuesday, March 21, 2023
Approved by: Brad Raulston, City Manager

SUBJECT:

Approval of Amendment to City’s Local Coastal P rogram reflecting jurisdictional boundary changes affected by the Port of SD - National City Balanced Plan and expansion of the Bayshore Bikeway

RECOMMENDATION:

Adopt the Resolution entitled, “Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City , California, Approving a Local Coastal Program (L CP) Amendment to Reflect Jurisdictional Boundary Changes Affected by the Port of San Diego’s National City Balanced Plan and Expansion of the Bayshore Bikeway.

BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE PRIOR ACTION:

The Planning Commission recommended approval of the Amendment.

EXPLANATION:

Executive Summary
The City of National City (City), in conjunction with the San Diego Unified Port District (District), GB Capital Holdings (GB Capital), and Pasha Automotive Services (Pasha) have been working together to propose a mixed -use recreational and maritime indust rial project that includes both landside and waterside development components on approximately 58 landside acres and 19 waterside acres in the City’s waterfront area. This project is collectively referred to as the “Balanced Plan” and is intended to be mut ually beneficial to the region and is geographically located within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City and the District. The LCPA includes changes to the text and updated maps to reflect adoption of the Balanced Plan. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the Amendment to the City Council.

Balanced Plan Proposal
The City of National City (City), in conjunction with the San Diego Unified Port District (District), GB Capital Holdings (GB Capital), District tenants, and Pasha Automotive Services (Pasha) have been working together to propose a mixed -use recreational and maritime industrial project that includes both landside and waterside development components on approximately 58 landside acres and 19 waterside acres in the City’s waterfront area. This project is collectively referred to as the “Balanced Plan” and is intended to be mutually beneficial to the region. It is geographically located within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City and the District.

Specifically, the Balanced Plan includes the following main components within the City’s jurisdiction, which are addressed in detail later in this section:
 Amendments to the City’s LCP that would include changes to the City’s and District’s jurisdictional boundaries due to District land purchases; changes to subarea boundaries; and proposed changes to land use, specific plan, and zone designations subject to future City Council action.
 Removal of approximately 12.4 acres within the Balanced Plan area, located mostly on the GB Capital site east of the mean high tide line and owned in fee by the District, from the City’s General Plan, LCP, and Land Use Code (LUC) to reflect changes in jurisdictional authority.
 Construction and operation of a new segment of the Bayshore Bikeway, in coordination with the District’s portion of the Bayshore Bikeway.

A resolution authorizing approval of the LCP amendments is included in Attachment 4.

Zone Change
The City Program proposes future zoning changes for five vacant City -owned parcels located north of Bay Marina Drive. See Attachment 4. The City currently owns seven parcels that comprise two complete blocks between Bay Marina Drive to the south, West 23rd Street to the north, Harrison Avenue (vacated) to the west, and I-5 to the east. The City also owns Parcel 7 adjacent to the railroad tracks, which contains the National City Santa Fe Depot and includes the historic train station and several historic rail cars on display.

The City proposes to rezone Parcels 1, 2, 3, 5, and 6 from MM (Medium Manufacturing) to CT (Tourist Commercial) which could allow these parcels to be developed with hotel, restaurant, retail, and/or s ome combination of tourist/visitor -serving commercial uses. The CT zone currently allows a floor area ratio (FAR) of up to 1.0 (1.0 multiplied by the lot size), with no height limit; however, as part of the Balanced Plan, the FAR will increase to 2.0 (twice the lot size). The maximum allowable development with a FAR of 2.0 would be approximately 254,782 square feet of floor area. The proposed 2.0 FAR would allow for the development of desired land uses that require substantial floor areas, such as hotels, w hich would be of economic benefit to the City and provide opportunities for increased public access to the City’s marina area.

Development standards, such as the parking requirement and landscaping, would be based on the specific uses permitted in the CT z one at such time as future development is proposed.

Parcels 4 and 7 are currently zoned CT and will remain so. No other City land use changes or development are currently proposed as part of the Balanced Plan. While this proposed zoning change is described in the LCP text, the implementation of this zoning change will be subject to future City action.

City/District Boundary Adjustment
The Balanced Plan proposes the removal of approximately 12.4 acres of land area within the Balanced Plan area, located mostly on the current GB Capital leasehold east of the mean high tide line and on land now owned in fee by the District. This land will b e removed from the LCP, City’s General Plan, and LUC will be added to the District’s PMP to reflect changes in jurisdictional authority. These changes will clarify the jurisdictional boundary between the City and the District and will be reflected on all City zoning and General Plan Maps. These lands are not currently regulated by the Port Master Plan and this jurisdictional amendment will ensure consistency with

the California Coastal Act and the Public Trust Doctrine. The District will amend its PMP map accordingly. See Attachment 3.

Bayshore Bikeway
As a major goal of the City’s original LCP submission, the Bayshore Bikeway is now being realized. The Bayshore Bikeway Segment 5 is generally located on a combination of existing roadways including Bay Mar ina Drive, Marina Way (formerly Harrison Avenue), Cleveland Avenue, McKinley Avenue, West 19th Street, Tidelands Avenue, West 14th Street, and Civic Center Drive. Most of the Bayshore Bikeway component is located within the City’s jurisdiction and the sou thernmost portion is located within the District’s jurisdiction. A small portion of the bikeway encroaches into the 100 -foot buffer around the Sweetwater Marsh. Protection of the marsh will be assured through the adoption of Mitigation Measures Bio-1, Bio-3, Bio-4 and Bio-5 contained in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), which is part of in the Port of San Diego’s Balanced Plan EIR1. City consultants are also coordinating with the California Coastal Commission and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife regarding details of marsh protection measures. These are also included in the MMRP. This new section of the Bayshore Bikeway is an important component of the 24 -mile Bayshore Bikeway that circumnavigates San Diego Bay. The City i s currently updating its Bicycle Master Plan to include the new Bayshore Bikeway segment.

Harbor District Specific Area Plan (HDSAP)
The HDSAP is the area roughly south of Bay Marina Drive between Paradise Marsh and the National City Marine Terminal and was adopted by the City Council on July 28, 1998 and certified by the Coastal Commission on November 5, 1998. At that time, the HDSAP was intended to be a resource-based, environmental implementation plan to establish site-specific conservation and development standards in the OSR (Open Space Reserve), CT (Tourist Commercial), MM (Medium Manufacturing), and OS (Open Space) districts. No land use changes or specific development were included. Since 1998, the HDSAP has been implemented and is no longer relevant, given the changes in jurisdictional boundaries between the District and the City.

Therefore, the HDSAP will be replaced by the Balanced Plan.

Balanced Plan Components within the District’s Jurisdiction The Balanced Plan also includes a number of development components located within the jurisdiction of the District which are integral to the overall development and economic benefit of the wa terfront and marina area. The District’s Balanced Plan components are provided for informational purposes only and are not subject to any discretionary action by the City. Proposed changes within the District’s jurisdiction include the following.  Changes to land and water use designations in the District’s Port Master Plan (PMP).  Construction and operation of a recreational vehicle (RV) park, modular cabins, dry boat storage, an expanded marina, and up to four hotels, primarily within the District’s jurisdiction within lands leased to GB Capital.
 The expansion of Pepper Park from 5.2 acres to 7.7 acres to increase park space and

1 https://portofsandiego.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=5938482&GUID=9FB18B0D- 0E4C-4058-B5E3-67FE3ADD0148 (see 1. 2022-0360A Draft Resolution)

recreational opportunities for the community.
 Construction and operation of a rail connector track and storage track within the District’s jurisdiction to serve the Pasha Group’s maritime operations at the National City Marine Terminal.
 Closure of Tidelands Avenue between Bay Marina Drive and 32nd Street, as well as West 28th Street between Tidelands Avenue and Quay Avenue, within the District’s and City’s jurisdictions, and re-designation of the area to Marine -Related Industrial in the District’s PMP.
 Construction and operation of Segment 5 of the Bayshore Bikeway within the District’s jurisdiction in coordination with the bikeway sections located within the City’s jurisdiction.  PMP Amendment (PMPA) to clarify jurisdictional land use authority, re -designate land uses, and balance commercial and maritime uses.

Phased LCP Update Program
The LCP was originally certified by the Coastal Commission in 1988 and the Implementation Plan was first certified in 1990; both were last amended in 1997. The City is aware that these important documents are out of date and need to be updated. The purpose of the Balanced Plan described in this report was to implement many years of negotiation with the District, GB Capital, and Pasha to identify mutually beneficial land uses to optimize recreational, maritime, and commercial uses within the National City Marina District.

Through agreement with the Coastal Commission, the City will be embarking on a three -part phased and comprehensive LCP update. These three phases are:

1. Balanced Plan LCP Amendment as described herein.

2. Targeted amendments to the LCP to update General Plan and Zoning Code references, strengthen coastal resilience, and lay the groundwork for a comprehensive LCP update.

The scope of work would include LCP Amendments to the LCP Land Use Plan (LUP) including the zoning change previously described and updates to the Implementation Plan (IP). The City has received grant funding from the Coastal Commission to undertake these tasks which are already underway.

3. Comprehensive LCP Amendment. This third phase would be a comprehensive update to the LCP, which was last amended in 1997. City staff will be applying for substantial Coastal Commission grant funding to pay for the effort, which is expected to begin in late 2023 to 2024.

Local Coastal Program Consistency
Section 18.16.020 of the Land Use Code states that the purpose of the CT zone is to provide areas catering specifically to the needs of the automobile -oriented trade, such as transient accommodation and services, certain special retail outlets, and commerc ial amusement enterprises. Within the Coastal Zone, the purpose of the CT zone is to further accommodate tourist commercial, recreational and open space uses, consistent with the description of the LCP’s Tourist Commercial designation and consistent with t he policies of the Local Coastal Program, Land Use Plan, and the California Coastal Act. Therefore, the proposed rezoning of the City - owned properties from MM to CT is consistent with the LCP.

Summary
The proposed Balanced Plan project will provide additional commercial opportunities for the City and the San Diego County region and generate revenue for the City through transient occupancy, sales and property tax. Further it will increase visitor-serving uses, public access and recreational activity in the City’s waterfront. The project will produce new full and part time jobs and will help meet the City’s revenue generation needs for the General Fund, which funds essential services throughout the City.

FINANCIAL STATEMENT:

There is no budgetary impact at this time, but as described in the summary above, the project will have a positive impact in future years.

RELATED CITY COUNCIL 2020-2025 STRATEGIC PLAN GOAL:

Balanced Budget and Economic Development

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

This is a project under CEQA and requires full environmental review and the preparation of an environmental impact report. CCR 15362. The Balanced Plan Environmental Impact Report was certified by the San Diego Unified Port District in November 2022.

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:

Agenda Report posted within 72 hours of meeting date and time in accordance with Brown Act.

ORDINANCE:

Not Applicable

EXHIBITS:

1. Local Coastal Program (Land Use Plan) strikethrough/underline

2. City Owned Parcels to be rezoned

3. City/District Boundary Adjustment Map

4. Resolution

1 NATIONAL CITY LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM

LAND USE PLAN
Prepared By
George S. Nolte & Associates, 1981,
And updated by the City of National City, 1988
Adopted by City Council Resolution No. 15,614
May 10, 1988
Amended by:

Resolution No. 91-60, April 2, 1991
Resolution No. 93 -26, March 2, 1993
Resolution No. 96-145, September 10, 1996
Resolution No. 96-177, December 17, 1996
Resolution No. 97-53, May 6, 1997
Certified by the California Coastal Commission
April 14, 1988
July 16, 1991
June 10, 1993
July 10, 1997
This document was prepared with financial assistance from the Office of Coastal Zone Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, under the provisions of the Federal Coastal Zone Managemen t Act of 1972, as amended, and from the California Coastal Commission under the provisions of the Coastal Act of 1976.

EXHIBIT 1

2 TABLE OF CONTENTS

P A G E
Executive Summary I. i

CHAPTER
I. The Coastal Act 1
II. National City 65
III. Public Access (Public Access Component) 1210
IV. Recreation 2015
V. Marsh Preservation 2720
VI. Visual Resources 3728
VII. Industrial Development 4131
VIII. Environmental Hazards 4434

REFERENCES

Appendix I California Coastal Act - Chapter 3 Policies

Appendix II Biological Resour ces of Paradise Marsh (RECON)

Appendix III Schedule of Parking Requirements

Appendix IV City Standards for Building Aesthetics and Materials, Height, Signing and Landscaping.

3 LIST OF FIGURES

P A G E
1 Land Use Plan xiii
2 Political Jurisdictions 7
3 Subareas – National City Coastal Zone 11
4 Public Access 19
1 Political Jurisdictions Map iv
2 Land Use Map v
3 Balanced Plan Map viii
4 City Owned Parcels Existing and Proposed Zoning Map ix 5 Public Access Map xii
6 Sub-Areas Map 9

REFERENCES

Appendix I California Coastal Act - Chapter 3 Policies

Appendix II Biological Resour ces of Paradise Marsh (RECON)

Appendix III Schedule of Parking Requirements

Appendix IV City Standards for Building Aesthetics and Materials, Height, Signing and Landscaping.

i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

BACKGROUND

Local control over land use in the coastal zone was significantly modified with the passage of the California Coastal Zone Conservation Act by the voters of Calif ornia in November, 1972.

Proposition 20 set forth a distinct role for the State in coast al land use matters, and created the California Coastal Zone Conservation Commission and six Regiona l Coastal Commissions. The mandated mission of the Coastal Commission was to prepare a statewide comprehensive plan for the "orderly, long-range conservation and the management of the coast", and to regulate development while the plan was being prepared. Preparation of the Coastal Plan commenced in 1973, and it was submitted to the state legislature in December , 1975. Based upon the Coastal Plan and the Commission’s experience of the preceding years, the California legislature passed the California Coastal Act in August, 1976.Public access, resource protection, and protection of maritime related industries in the Ccoastal Zzone waswere significantly enhanced with the passage of the California Coastal Zone Conservation Act by the voters o f California in November,November 1972. Subsequent required cChanges to the Act now includes environmental justice and climate change as impacts to be mitigated. The City of National City and its Coastal Zone is an area where the community has long been impacted by toxic air pollutants that are largely attributed to portmaritime industrial- related operations. The community has had few opportunities to access the bay and yet is the most impacted by airborne pollutants. From 2007 to 2022 the Port of San Diego, the City of National City, the community, and Por t tenants worked collectively to develop a balanced plan that would serve as the basis offor creating enhanced public access and recreational opportunities wh ile protecting maritime - related industries. In Nov ember. 2022 the Port of San Diego certified the Balanced Plan Environmental Imp act Rreport, which and forwarded to the Coastal Commiss ion a Port Master Plan Amendmen t that reflected theseveral land use changes towithin the Port Master Plan. As a consequence ofBecause of that action the City is now amending itsthe LCPLocal Coastal Plan portion of its Local Coastal Program (LCP) (LCPA) to reflect the approval of the Balanced Plan. The Balanced Plan L o c a l C o a s t a l P l a n Amendment (LCPA) is the first phase of a multi-phased LCPA process which will update the entire LCP to reflect changes in the Coastal Act, update backgr ound information , and make necessary corrections throughout the document. The City intends to provide the California Coastal Commission ( Commission) with a comprehensive LCP update , now estimated for fiscal year 2023/2024.

The City’s 2022 LCPA is in keeping with tThe declaration of the state legislature in adopting the Coastal Act of 1976 was that the coastal zoneCoastal Zone is a distinct and valuable resource of vital and enduring interest to all people. The basic objectives of the Coastal Act are to achieve the following:

"Protect, maintain, and where feasible, enhance and restore the overall quality of the Coastal Zonecoastal zone environment and its natural and man-made resources.

ii

"Assure orderly, balanced util ization and conservation of Coastal Zone coastal zone resources taking into account the social and economic needs of the people of the state.

"Maximize public access to and along the coast and maximize pub lic recreational opportunities in the Coastal Zone coastal zone consistent with sound resource conservation principles and constitutionally protected rights of private property owners.

" A s s u r e p r i o r i t y f o r c o a s t a l - d e pendent and coastal related deve lopment over other development on the coast. (Amended by Cal. Stats. 1979, Ch. 1090)

"Encourage state and local initiatives and cooperation in preparing procedures to implement coordinated planning and developm ent of mutually beneficial use s, including educational uses, in the Coastal Zonecoastal zone.”

In 2015 the Commission adopted a Sea Level Rise policy that con siders new development applications that may be adversely impacted from the effects of climate change. AndU unlike many coastal cities, National City does not have many residential developmentproperties within its Coastal Zone jurisdiction. Most of the area is zoned Medium Manufacturing, which does not permit new residential construction Accordingly, methods and mitigation measures that would typically include retreat policies, development exclusion zones, and minimizing the armoring of the coastline have little application to the City. However, areas that are near the Sweetwater Marsh area, that have not been previously developed, may include the requirementbe required to increase the elevations of any new building , or other appropriate mitigation measures descri bed in the Balanced Plan Final Environmental Impact Report of 2022.

In 2019 the Coastal Commission adopted an Environmental Justice Policy that recognizes that marginalized populations have been subjected to discriminatory land use practices that have precluded access to affordable recreational assets along the co astline. These communities have also been disproportionately impacted by pollution. The City of National City is an environmental justice community with its resid ents long subjected to toxic ai r pollutants from Port District operations and a lack of access to lower cost recreational faci lities along the bay. In large part, the Balanced Plan project is directed at expanded access to the bay, providing affordable recreational amenities, and creating well-paying jobs. While there is much work to be done , the Balanced Plan provides the framework addressing the goals of the Commission’s Environmental Justice Policy.

The implementation of the Coastal Act is predicated upon the in volvement of local government.

The Act declares that "to achieve maximum responsiveness to local conditions, accountability and public accessibility, it is necessary to rely heavily on local government and local land use planning procedures and enforcement." To this end, the Act directs each local government within the coastal zone to prepare a Local Coastal Program (LCP). An LCP consists of a local government’s land use plans, zoning ordinances, zoning district maps, and impleme nting actions which implement the provisions and policies of the Coastal Act at the local level.

iii

During preparation of a Local Coastal program, local government s should coordinate planning with affected local, regional, sta te, and federal agencies, and provide the maximum opportunity for public participation. Under the Coastal Act, the responsibility for ensuring meaningful public participation rests with both the Coastal Commission and local government; however, the local government retains the primary responsibility for involving the public in the actual planning process.

After the LCP has been reviewe d and approved by the local gover nment, it is then submitted to the State Coastal Commission for review. In certifying the lan d use plan, the Commission must find that the plan conforms to Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act, and contains the required public access component. The zoning and implementing ordinances are then rev iewed to determine conformance with the approved land use plan. Once the land use plan and implementing ordinances have been certified, the review authority for new de velopment within the Coastal Zonecoastal zone will revert from the Coastal Commission to local government. The local government in issuing coastal development permits must then mak e the finding that the development is in conformity with the approved LCP.

The Ccoastal Zzone of National City includes all the area west of I-5, and a small area east of I-5 south of 30th Street. However, the Coastal Zone coastal zone is controlled by three separate governmental agencies: the San Diego Unified Port District, the United States Navy, and the City of National City. The Port District has jurisdiction over all of the state tidelands bayward of the adjudicated mean high tide line, approximately 250 acres of lan d area and any property acquired by the Port and approved by the State Lands Commission (. . See Figure 1). The Port District's jurisdiction also includes an isolated parcel of tidelands whic h is located in the salt flats south of Chula Vista that is connected to National City by a 300-foot wide corridor through San Diego Bay.

The Port District submitted its Master Plan to the Coastal Comm ission, and it was conditionally approved in October, 1980. The plan and has been amended several times since then. Under the jurisdiction of the United States Navy is approximately 300 acr es and 8,300 lineal feet of bay frontage. Federal lands are under the jurisdiction of the Fede ral Coastal Zone Management Act, which states that military lands shall comply with coastal plan ning to the extent that national security is not imperiled. The Coastal Zone coastal zone area over which National City retains jurisdiction totals approximately 575 acres, and is bounded by the U.S. Navy lands to the north, and the Chula Vista Bayfront to the south.

The purpose of the Land Use Plan of National City's Local Coastal Program (LCP) contains is to provide technical background information, policy recommendations, and a land use plan map (.See Figure 2). The substantive areas of discussion, as directed by the work p rogram approved by the Coastal Commission, are public access, recreation, marsh preservation, visual resources, industrial development, and environmental hazards. The City’s LCP is now revised to include a new section of a plan prepared in conjunction with the San Diego Unified Port District (District) referred herein as the Balanced Plan. The Balanced Plan essentially replaces th e City’s Harbor District Area Specific Area Plan (HDSAP) due to the fact that the HDSAP has been implemented and no longer relevant given the changes in jurisdictional boundaries between the District and the City. The Balanced Plan preserves all applicable HDSAP public access and, resource protection policies.

Each of the above issue areas is discussed and evaluated as to existing conditions and existing planning and zoning regulations. This discussion is then followed by a more in-depth analysis of

iv

planning issues and their applicability to Coastal Act policies and Coastal Commission guidelines.

Each discussion category is concluded with appropriate policy recommendations.

iv

v

iv

A listing of those recommendations is presented in the “POLICY RECOMMENDATION” section on page xbelow:

THE BALANCED PLAN

OVERVIEW
The City of National City (City), in conjunction with the San Diego Unified Port District (District), GB Capital Holdings (GB Capital), District tenants, and Pasha Automotive Services (Pasha) have been working together to propose a mixed- use recreational and maritim e industrial project that includes both landside and waterside development components on approximately 58 landside acres and 19 waterside acres in the City’s waterfront area. This proj ect is collectively referred to as the “Balanced Plan” and is intended to be mutually beneficial to th e region. It is geographically located within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City and the District.

Specifically, the Balanced Plan includes the following main com ponents within the City’s jurisdiction, which are addressed in detail later in this section:
 Amendments to the City’s LCP, General Plan, and Land Use Code ( , LUC), that would include changes to the City’s and District ’s jurisdictional boundaries due to District land purchases; changes to subarea boundaries; and changes to land use, specific plan, and zone designations
 Removal of approximately 12.4 acres within the Balanced Plan area, located mostly on the GB Capital site east of the mean high tide line and owned in fe e by the District, from the City’s General Plan, LCP, and LUC to reflect changes in land use and jurisdictional authority.
 Construction and operation of a new segment of the Bayshore Bikeway  Supplant the Harbor District Sp ecific Area Plan (HDSAP) and inc orporate applicable HDSAP components into the City’s Amended LCP.

The Balanced Plan also includes a number of development compone nts located within the jurisdiction of the District which are integral to the overall development of the waterfront and marina area. However, as a func tion of State law under the Unif ied Port District Act (“Act”) the City has no land use authority over lands acquired by the Distr ict and as a result are no longer addressed in the City’s LCP. Per the requirements of the Act an d the California Coastal Act, all District development components ar e addressed in the District’s Port Master Plan Amendment.

Changes within the District’s jurisdiction include the following and are presented for informational purposes:
 Changes to land and water use designations in the District’s Port Master Plan (PMP).  Construction and operation of a r ecreational vehicle (RV) park, modular cabins, dry boat storage, an expanded marina, and up to four hotels, primarily w ithin the District’s jurisdiction within lands leased to GB Capital.
 The expansion of Pepper Park from 5.2 a c r e s t o 7.7 acres to increase park space and

v

recreational opportunities for the community.
 Construction and operation of a rail connector track and storage track within the District’s jurisdiction to serve the Pasha Group’s maritime operations at the National City Marine Terminal.
 Closure of Tidelands Avenue between Bay Marina Drive and 32nd Street, as well as West 28th Street between Tidelands Avenue and Quay Avenue, within the District’s and City’s jurisdictions, and re-designation of the area to Marine-Related Industrial in the Dis trict’s PMP.
 Construction and operation of Seg ment 5 of the Bayshore Bikeway within the District’s jurisdiction in coordination with the bikeway sections located in the City’s jurisdiction.  Construction and operation of hot el, restaurant, retail, and/or a combination of tourist/visitor serving commercial development north of Bay Marina Drive  PMP Amendment (PMPA) to clarify jurisdictional land use authori ty, re-designate land uses, and balance commercial and maritime uses.

HARBOR DISTRICT SPECIFIC AREA PLAN (HDSAP)

The HDSAP was adopted by the City Council on July 28, 1998 and was certified by California Coastal Commission November 5, 1998. At that time, the HDSAP was intended to be a resource- based, environmental implementation plan to establish site-specific conservation and development standards in the OSR (Open Space Reserve), CT (Tourist Commerci al), MM (Medium IndustrialManufacturing), and OS (Open Space) districts. No land use changes or specif ic development were included, however. Since 1998, the HDSAP has b een implemented and no longer relevant given the changes in jurisdictional boundaries between the District and the City and, hence, the HDSAP will be replaced by the Balance Plan in the following manner:
 The Balanced Plan includes the removal of approximately 12.4 acres located mostly on the GB Capital site east of the mean high tide line and owned in fe e by the District (Subareas B-1 and B-2). Because this land is no longer in the City’s jurisdiction, it is eliminated from the City’s General Plan, LCP, and LUC to reflect changes jurisdictional authority.  HDSAP Subarea A, approximately 8.3 acres, , has already been developed with the Marina Best Weste rn Gateway project, consistent with the HDSAP.  HDSAP Subarea B-3 is being utilized as a buffer to the Paradise Marsh, public access, the Bayshore Bikeway, and for utility corridor, including large SDG&E transmission towers.

Additionally, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has an easement providing a ccess to the Paradise Marsh and the D Street Fill, located just south of the site. , ;  HDSAP Subarea C proposed the Harrison Avenue Public Access Corridor which has been completed.
 HDSAP Subarea D, a 3,500-foot-long segment of filled land , which lies between the I-5 freeway and the Paradise Marsh, has been restored with native landscaping, consistent with the HDSAP.
 The Paradise Marsh unit of the Sweetwater Marsh National Wildli fe Refuge is federally owned, operated, and managed and is no longer under National City Coastal Development authority.

vi

 In 2008, Pier 32 Marina, entirely located within the District’s jurisdiction, opened to the public and provided increased public access and public views to the water, consistent with the HDSAP.

BALANCED PLAN-CITY PROGRAM
Land Use Changes
The City Program is an integral component of the overall Balanc ed Plan. Development on the Balanced Plan City Program would not be subject to the Public Trust, bu t it would be within the California Coastal Zone and the City's LCP area. As previously discussed, the City Program would require amendments to the City's General Plan, LUC , and LCP and would replace the HDSAP.

The general components of the Balanced Plan are shown in Figure 3. Balanced Plan components that are within the jurisdiction of the Port District are show for illustrative purposes only.

The City Program proposes a m e n dm e n t s t o t he C i t y ' s G e n e r a l P l a n , L C P , a n d LU C f o r s e v e n City=owned parcels located north of Bay Marina Drive. See Figur e 4. Parcels 1 through 6 are owned by the City and compose two complete blocks between Bay M arina Drive to the south, West 23rd Street to the north, Marina Way (formerly Harrison Avenue) to the west, and I-5 to the east. The City proposes to rezone Parcels 1, 2, 3, 5 ,and 6 fro m MM (Medium Industrial) to CT which could allow these parcels to be developed with hotel, res taurant, retail, and/or some combination of tourist-/visitor-serving commercial uses. The CT zone currently allows a floor area ratio (FAR) of up to 1.0, with no height limit; however, as part of the Balanced Plan, the FAR will increase to 2.0. The maximum allowable development with a FAR of 2.0 would be approximately 254,782 square feet of floor area. The proposed 2.0 FAR would a llow for the development of desired land uses that require s ubstantial floor areas such as hotels which would be of economic benefit to the City and provide opportunities for increased public access to the City’s marina area.

Development standards such as the parking requirement and lands caping would be based on the specific uses permitted in the CT zone at such time as future development is proposed.

Additionally, there are two easements along the wetlands; one is owned by SDG&E and the other provides access to the US Fish and Wildlife Service Refuge and is operated by the Service. These easements are located directly east of the Pier 32 Marina and a cross the Sweetwater Channel and terminating at the wildlife ref uge may. With the removal of the South Bay Power Plant in Chula Vista, the SDG&E easement area may provide additional recreatio n opportunities under and enhance opportunities to meet the goals of the Balanced Plan. This area could serve as parking or overnight accommodations or other development that would enhanc e the marina environment.

Such uses would be required, as part of the CEQA environmental review process, to fully mitigate any biological impacts to adjoining habitats or to protect other coastal resources.

The remaining Parcels 4 and 7 are currently zoned CT and will remain so. Parcel 7 (approximately

1.2 acres), owned by the City and leased to the San Diego Railway Association, is at the northwest corner of Bay Marina Drive and Ma rina Way. The historic Santa Fe Rail Depot is on this parcel, and no new development is proposed on this parcel. No other Cit y land use changes or

vii

development are currently proposed as part of the Balanced Plan.

City/District Jurisdictional Changes
The Balanced Plan proposes the removal of approximately 12.4 ac res within the Balanced Plan area, located mostly on the current day GB Capital leasehold ea st of the mean high tide line and on land now owned in fee by the District, from the City’s Gener al Plan, LCP, and LUC to reflect changes in land use and jurisdic tional authority. This change will clarify the jurisdictional boundary between the City and the District and will be reflecte d on all City zoning and General Plan Maps. These lands are not currently regulated by the PMP and this jurisdictional amendment will ensure consistency with the California Coastal Act, Public T r u s t D o c t r i n e , a n d A c t . T h e District will amend its PMP map accordingly.

Bayshore Bikeway
As a major goal of the City’s original LCP submission, the Bays hore Bikeway is now being realized. The Bayshore Bikeway Segment 5 is generally located o n a combination of existing roadways, including Bay Marina Drive, Marina Way (formerly Har rison Avenue), Cleveland Avenue, McKinley Avenue, West 19th Street, Tidelands Avenue, W est 14th Street, and Civic Center Drive. Most of the Bayshore Bikeway Component is located within the City’s jurisdiction, and the southernmost portion is located within Distr ict jurisdiction. This new sect ion of the Bayshore Bikeway is an important component of the 24-mile Bayshore Bikeway that circumnavigates San Diego Bay.

i

ii

iii

POLICY RECOMMENDATION

PUBLIC ACCESS

1. New public shoreline accessways shall be designated to and along Paradise Marsh and the Sweetwater River Channel as generally shown in See Figure 5.

2. Public accessways to or near the water as designated in Condition Number One shall be provided in conjunction with new development and protected thro ugh public access easements or other suitable means of conveyance.

3. In the event that new development is not forthcoming, it is the City’s policy to seek the assistance of the Coastal Conservancy, or other appropriate age ncy, to acquire, plan, and finance public shoreline access.

4. The precise location, design and identification of public accessways shall be consistent, to the maximum degree feasible, with the coastal access standards prepared jointly by the Coastal Commission and the Coastal Conservancy.

5. As indicated in the General Plan, it is the City’s policy that the Bay Route Bikeway (now the Bayshore Bikeway) be extended southerly from 24th StreetBay Marina Drive and Harrison StreetAvenue to the Paradise Marsh and boat launching ramp areas and across Sweetwater River Channel to the C hula Vista Bayfront. It is al so the City’s policy that additional nature trails and bicy cle trails be developed adjace nt to the Paradise Marsh to connect to the Bay Route Bikeway and Sweetwater River Flood Con trol Channel Trail System.

6. Alternative modes of access to N ational City’s Bayfront shall b e actively encouraged.

Specifically, the trail systems proposed as a part of the Army Corps’ Sweetwater River Flood Control Channel project, wh ich would provide linkage from National City’s Bayfront to inland areas, are supported.

7. All new development shall incorporate adequate on-site parking to accommodate the parking demand generated. The number of required parking space s for new development shall be determined during the implementation phase of the Loca l Coastal Program, but shall be, at a minimum, consiste n t w i t h t h e s c h e d u l e o f p a r k i n g requirements of the Municipal Code (Appendix III).

8. Marina DriveWay, Aa new access road formerly known as Harrison Avenue , located westerly and parallel to the Paradise Marsh would extends southerly from the vicinity of Bay Marina Drive Harrison Avenue at 24th StreetBay Marina Drive to the National City Boat Launching Facilities and future marine orientedPier 32 Marina , which includes a variety of, commercial and /or recreational uses. A buffer shall be provided maintained between the roadway and the marsh. A Specific Plan shall be prepared to The Balanced Plan identifiesy desirable continued buffering between the marsh and roadway, located in the upland area west of Paradise Marsh. It will should also proposes landscaping or other

iv

design elements to provide visual linkage and identity for the Paradise Marsh area and appropriate visual separation from the industrial area to the west and freeway to the east.

9. 9. New development shall not interfere with desirable public ac cess that may exist or be established by public use on or across private property, i.e. prescriptive rights. Desirable public access shall include access to natural or constructed coastal, recreational resources, except where necessary to protect fragile coastal resources or public safety, or where adequately provided for in another area. Development projects shall be reviewed to determine evidence of public use.The proposed Balanced Plan, in conjunction with the Port of San Diego, would also increase the availability of lower costs visitor serving uses a nd allow greater public access to the waterfront. Implementation of the Balanced Plan would provide new opportuni ties to experience views of the Bay and Sweetwater Channel from the expansion of Pepper Park, and new hotels, a recreational vehicle park, and modular cabins. These land use changes provi de lower cost recreational opportuni ties for the community and mem bers of the near -by region that have been historically underserved.

10. Public access shall include access to natural or constructed co astal, recreational resources, except where necessary to protec t fragile coastal resources or public safety, or where adequately provided for in another area.

v

vi

RECREATION

1. The National City Bayfront sha ll be designated for tourist c ommercial and recreational use, as indicated in the Land Use Plan (Figure 12). Using the SD&AE railroad as a point of demarcation, consistent with the wetland area proposed for acquisition by th e Army Corps of Engineers, the area located to the east, inclu ding Paradise Marsh and surround ing lands, shall be designated suitable for passive recreational uses only. The areas to the west and to the north of the Marsh shall be designated for tourist commercial and recreational uses. Wetland resources located west of the railroad, which are not proposed for public acquisition, shall be protected from incompatible development, consistent with marsh preservation policies.

2. The passive recreational area w ould accommodate the preservation of Paradise Marsh, along with the provision of public accessways and landscaped areas. Publi c access would be provided and managed consistent with the public access component of the LCP and the maintenance of wetland resource values. Beyond this area, a transition to more active uses could begin. Landscaped areas suitable for picnicking and general recreation may be appropriate.

3. In order to meet specific recreational market demand and pro vide an attraction for secondary uses, overnight uses and boating uses shall be assigned the highest commercial development priority for the commercial recreational areas. For the area west of Paradi se Marsh, appropriate uses include expanded marina development, new hotel/motel and restaurant facilities, recreational vehicle park/campground, dry-storage and boat service facility, and/or public park areas. For the area north of Paradise marsh, hotel/motel facilities, restaurants and other tourist commercial uses would be appropriate. The intensity of development shall be reviewed for impacts on traffic circulation.

A Specific Plan shall be prepared to address traffic circulatio n and roadway improvements, in conjunction with development plans for the tourist commercial area west of Paradise Marsh. The Specific Plan shall determine the location of roadway improvements, based on resource protection standards, i.e., consistency with marsh preservation policies.

Tourist Visitor commercial development in the above referenced areas shall be consistent with existing or currently planned ro ad capacities to the north and south of the proposed tourist commercial area, including the planned extension of Harrison Av enue and the Tidelands Avenue crossing proposed in the City of Chula Vista Bayfront LCP . The intensity of development shall also be reflective of the constraints placed on these roadways by the Marsh Preservation policies of the LCP.this Plan. Approval of these land uses shall not be considered precedent for increasing the capacity of the roads to the north and south of the tourist commercial area.

4. In order to develop the visitortourist commercial and recreational area west of Paradise Marsh coordination with the Port District for concurrent development of Port District lands shall continue to be encouraged while environmental justice impacts are mitigated. shall be encouraged. A higher quality project and a better de sign should result from such coo rdination and a more viable development will likely be attracted to the area.

5. To enhance the recreational potential and attractiveness public use of the National City waterfront, the restoration of Paradise Marsh is a desirable program. A fe asible restoration program shall be determined with the potential assistance of the Coastal Conservancy, or other appropriate agencies, to finance, plan, and implement such a restoration program. Th e program shall also involve

vii

coordination with the Bayfront Conservancy Trust in its efforts to finance, plan and implement a restoration program, including access and recreational features.

6. To ensure that the recreational potential of the area is max imized, development shall take into account the proximity to the MTDB’s MTS Trolley System“San Diego Trolley” , the Bays Shore Route Bikeway, and the Sweetwater Rive r Flood Control Channel’s recr eational areas and trails systems, as well as recreational uses planned infor the adjacent Chula Vista Bayfront and other waterfront development along theon San Diego Bay.

MARSH PRESERVATION

1. The wetlands of the Paradise Creek Marsh as well as the seco ndary area of Paradise Marsh, east of I-5, including salt marsh, freshwater marsh, salt-pan, channel, and mudflat habitats, are valuable and sensitive biological resources, and shall be preserved. Th e plan designation for these areas shall be OPEN SPACE/WETLAND PRES ERVE. The boundaries of the “O pen Space Wetland Preserve” areas include the marsh area required for acquisition by the Army Corps of Engineers for the Sweetwater River flood control improvements, marsh area within Caltrans right-of-way easterly of the SDG&E right-of-way, and the secondary area of P aradise Marsh east of the I-5 freeway. The Sweetwater River area, south of 35th Street, desi gnated for industrial and commercial use, and the wetlands located west of the railroad, which are not proposed for public acquisition, also contain valuable biological resources which shall be preserved under an overlay zone or other appropriate, implementing regulation which shall be defined in the implementation plan. The overlay zone or imple menting regulation shall includ e requirements for mapping all wetlands not included in the “Open Space Wetland Reserve” land use designation, execution of open space easements over identif ied resources and their buffer s in conjunction with new development and a determination of appropriate buffers for any new development.

2. In order to preserve Paradise Marsh , ; the wetlands located west of the former railroad right-of- way, including the proposed part of the Bayshore Bikeway Segment 5,of the railroad, which are not proposed for public acquisition; the secondary area of Para dise Marsh, east of I-5; and the Sweetwater River south of 35th Street shall adhere to the following:

 Alteration shall be limited to minor incidental public faciliti es, restoration measures, and nature study. Consistent with the provisions of Section 30233, the di king, dredging and filling of wetlands, open waters, estuaries and lakes shall be permitted o nly where there is no feasible less environmentally damaging alternative, and where feasible mitigation measures have been provided to minimize adverse environmental effects, and shall be limited to the following: incidental public service purposes, restoration purposes, and nature study. Ther e shall be no alteration of Paradise Marsh, the wetlands located west of the railroad which are not proposed for public acquisition, as well as of the secondary area of Paradise Marsh, east of I-5, a nd the Sweetwater River south of 35th Street, except as determined by a marsh restoration program which has been approved by the California Coastal Commission.

 The dumping of rubbish or commercial waste into the marsh areas shall be prohibited.

 The intrusion of off-road vehicles and unauthorized pedestrian traffic into the marsh areas shall be discouraged.

viii

A buffer area shall be established for new development adjacent to wetlands. A 100 ft. distance from the edge of the wetland shall generally provide an acceptable buffer acceptable to the sState and fFederal agencies.
 The required distance may be increased or decreased based on co nsultation with the Department of Fish and Game. A buffer area less than 100 feet wide may be permitted, depending upon the analysis of the specific site proposed for development. Examples which may demonstrate that a lesser distance would be acceptable include but are not limited to the type and size of development, proposed buffer improvements such as landscaping o r fencing, and existing site characteristics such as a grade differential between a marsh area and adjacent upland area, existing development in the area, and parcel size and configuration. Co nsistency with buffers required as part of the Sweetwater River Channel/Rt. 54 project shall also be considered in order to determine appropriate buffers less than 100 feet wide. The buffers shall be determined with the concurrence of the state Department of Fish and Game.

 3. To enhance the habitat and aesthetic value of Paradise Marsh , the wetlands located west of the railroad, which are not proposed for acquisition, a s well as the secondary area of Paradise Marsh, east of I-5, and the Sweetwater River south of 35th Street, feasible restoration activities shall be encouraged. Feasible restoration activities shall be determined with the potential assistance of the Coastal Conser vancy, or other public agency o r private group, including the Bayfront Conservancy Trust, to finance, plan, implement and manage a restoration program. The recommended elements for a restoration program include:

 A public access and information program that would be designed to allow observation of the marsh, while controlling intrusion into the marsh itself. A component of the access program should be an interpretive nature trail along the western margins of Paradise Marsh, which could connect with an observation platform.

 The removal of all rubbish and debris from the marsh through a volunteer effort, or the California Conservation Corps.

 The dredging of Paradise Marsh, consistent with a marsh restora tion program, prepared in consultation with the California Department of Fish and Game an d approved by the California Coastal Commission, possibly concurrent with the construction o f the Sweetwater River Flood Control Channel, to improve tidal flow and flushing. Dredging shall be restricted to existing tidal channels.

 The encouragement of a scientific research program.

4. To enhance the habitat and aesthetic value of Paradise Marsh, t he wetlands located west of the railroad and , proposed new development, including roadways , located near to the wetlands of Paradise Marsh, Proposed new development, including roadways, located adjacent to the wetlands of Paradise Marsh, the wetlands located west of the railroad wh ich are not proposed for public acquisition, the secondary area of Paradise Marsh, east of I-5, and the Sweetwater River south of 35th Street, shall be designed to discourage the intrusion of pedestrians, v ehicles, or domestic animals into the marsh through physical barriers such as fencin g and/or landscaping with appropriate non-invasive species. In association with new development or remodeling of existing development contiguous with the wetlands, including roadways, drainage shall be directed off-site toward the Sweetwater River Floo d Control Channel, or to existi n g s t r e e t d r a i n s , w h e n e v e r possible, or channeled into a settling area before entering the marsh. Potential increase in the rate

ix

of storm-water runoff, which may result from new development, including roadways, adjacent to wetlands, shall be controlled by de tention basins or other mean s to avoid impacts of erosion and sedimentation on wetlands consistent with all applicable local, state , and federal standards. The size, design and placement of such sedimentation control device s shall be developed in consultation with the State Department of Fish and Gameresource agencies prior to or concurrent with the commencement of construction and shall be installed an d maintained by the developer, or any successors in interest.

5. Wetlands in private ownership, which may be located in the C T , C a n d M , a s w e l l a s O S R designated areas, shall be prot ected from development through t he application of mitigation measures that include , but not be limited to , buffer zones ;, shielding of lights ;, barriers ;, educational signage;, predator control measures;, and run-off protection features. of an overlay zone or other appropriate, implementing regulation proposed in Policy #1. Necessary protective measures, including adequate buffers, regulations re garding the design and siting of structures, etc., and open space easements shall be determined during review of proposals for development, by application of criteria to be specified in the LCP Implementation Plan.

6. Landscaping in areas adjacent to wetlands shall include only native plants only which are non- invasive species. of wetlands.

7. For all properties that have wetland features, each projects shall incorporate BMP erosion control measures Specific erosion control measures and shall be in place during all construction activities, biological monitoring and planning, and control of run-off duri ng all grading activitiesshall be approved, incorporated into development, be in place at the ini tial phase of work, monitored and maintained in conjunction with all grading activities, along Marina Way.consistent with Section X (B)(4)(k) of the Implementation Plan, during the period of November 1 to April 1 of each year for all properties which drain directly to marsh and wetland ar eas. These properties shall include all properties located in the following areas:

All properties between 35th Street and the southerly City limits;

All properties in the area lying between 33rd Street, Hoover Av enue, 30th Street and the MTDB San Diego Trolley Line;

All properties in the City’s jurisdiction located westerly of H ighway I-5 and south of 24th Street Bay Marina Drive.

VISUAL RESOURCES

1. To ensure that the Army Corps of Engineer's Sweetwater River Flood Control project improves the scenic resources of the area, National City shall support and encourage the project as proposed with the following mitigations:

 The restoration of the marsh connections with the Sweetwater River, and

 The development of shoreline recreational features along the banks of the flood control channel.

x

12. To ensure that the development of the proposed commercial and recreational area adjacent to Paradise Marsh west of the SD&AE railroad is of the highest aesthetic quality, the City shall require that the development of the site shall be in accordance with development standards and requirements to be determined by a Specific Plan for the area. The Specific Plan shall determine appropriate height limits, landscape elements, signage, and vie w protection and enhancement, consistent with the policies of the Land Use Plan. Vistas shall be provided from public roadways and public open space areas to Paradise Marsh and the Sweetwater River Flood Control Channel.

Height limits shall be established as determined necessary to provide for focal points in key activity areas.

32. To ensure that the new road to provide access to the proposed recreation area adjacent to Paradise Marsh is of high visual quality, its design shall implement and incorporate the General Plan policy proposing the construction of landscaped entryways from . Landscaped entryway improvements for 24th StreetBay Marina Drive. would be especially appropriate.

4. A Specific Plan shall be prepared to identify design improvemen ts to enhance the visual identity of the Paradise Marsh area, provide a visual linkage between recreational uses near the Sweetwater River Channel and tourist commercial uses west of the Marsh and at 24th StreetBay Marina Drive, and appropriate visual separation or buffering of industrial uses to the west and freeway to the east.

The design improvements identified in the Specific Plan shall include landscape elements, signing, and architectural elements or cr iteria, such as height, scale, bulk, color and building materials.

Protection or creation of vistas should also be identified in the Specific Plan. .

345. To ensure that new development throughout the Coastal Zonecoastal zone is visually appropriate, projects shall be reviewed for conformance to City standards for building aesthetics and materials, height, signing and landscaping. See Appendix IV.

45. All visual resource mitigation measures, as identified in the National City Bayfront Projects and Plan Amendments Environmental Impact Report applicable to the City, shall be incorporated into all projects located in the in the City’s Coastal Zone and Balanced Plan area. Project design shall also be reviewed with regard to other appropriate visual elements identified throughout the development review process.

INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT

1. In the event that different industrial land uses are competi ng for available industrial land, priority shall be given to marine related industrial uses

ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS

1. Review of new development for sea level rise, and potential floodingpotential flood, seismic, and geologic hazards shall determine necessary improvements to mini mize risk during the site plan review process, or during any applicable, discretionary review process.

2. Geotechnical and sea level rise reports shall be required for n ew development in areas subject to flooding and geologic hazards.Geotechnical reports shall be required for new development in areas subject to geologic hazard.

xi

3. Waivers of liability shall be required from applicants for Ccoastal Ddevelopment Ppermits in areas of sea level rise and geologic hazards.

4. Prior to the development of the parcels on both sides of the existing Sweetwater River Channel, south of 35th Street, a sea level rise and flood hazard study shall be conducted, based upon design criteria anticipating the potential flood hazard remaining after the construction of the Sweetwater River Flood Control Channel or from a 100-year flood, whichever is applicable at the time of development. Only development consistent with the recommendations of the stu dy shall be approved for the area. Specific development policies shall be provided in the Implemen tation Plan. The policies shall stress provision of adequate setbacks to minimize the amount of fill necessary for flood protection, and no armoring or channelization of the existing river channel for flood protection shall be allowed.

LAND USE PLAN SUMMARY

COMMERCIAL/RECREATION/OPEN SPACE

The National City Bayfront should be designated for tourist co mmercial, recreational and open space use. Using the SD&AE railroad spur as a point of demarcation, the area located to the east, including Paradise Marsh and su rrounding lands, would be suitab le for passive recreational and open space uses only. Areas to the north of the marsh and west of the marsh and railroad spur should be designated for tourist commercial and recreational uses.

The total land area within National City which is developable, west of the railroad spurbikewyBayshore Bikeway and SDG&E right-of-way, and desi gnated for tourist commercial and recreational open space use is approximately 23 acres . and is owned by the Santa Fe Land Improvement Company and Atchison Topeka & Santa Fe Railway. Ho wever, additional vacant land totaling 15 acres, under the jurisdiction of the Port District, lies adjacent to the west, southeast of 32nd Street and Tidelands Avenue, and east and north of the boat launch facilities. The Port’s Master Plan designates the area f or commercial recreation and P ublic Park. It is important to emphasize that the development of this area should be closely coordinated with the Port during the project planning phase. Also, to ensure a well-integrated and quality development, the concurrent development of both the National City parcel and the Port District parcel should be encouraged.

Although the touristvisitor commercial designation covers a broad range of uses, one or tw o anchor uses should be sought for the area. Particularly appropriate for the area would be an overnight use and a boating rela ted use, the two activities wit h the greatest unmet demand.

Desirable forms of overnight use include hotel or motel facilit ies, and/or a recreational vehicle park/campground complex. Such uses, in a close proximity to th e Port’s launching ramp and the Army Corps’ proposed recreational features, would have apparent possibilities. The Balanced Plan includes the expansion of Pepper Park, a new dry boat storage, and additional boat piers, RV park, and future hotels all within the Port District jurisdiction. Development of a marina on adjacent Port District property may also be appropriate. With the proposed e xtension of the channel for the flood control project, increased boat usage will become even more desirable. Other boating related facilities that would be appropriate include a dry-storage area and a sales/service establishment.

Again, available space for boat storage near San Diego Bay is a t a premium and the situation is only going to become tighter. A s tacked or tiered dry-storage area, similar to that at Perez Cove on Mission Bay, would be a desirable use at the National City location. With an overnight use and

xii

boating use serving as anchors, it can be expected that other r elated uses such as eating establishments and specialty shops will be attracted to the area.

The area to the north of the Paradise Marsh, east of the SD&AE railroad right-of-way and south of 24th StreetBay Marina Drive is also designated for tourist commercial use. As part of the Balanced Plan, a transition area from the work ing waterfront to expanded recr eational facilities will provide a gateway to the National City Bayfront.

A transition from existing industrial uses to future commercial is appropriate to provide a gateway to the Bayfront and Port area.

INDUSTRIAL

National City’s portion of the Coastal Zonecoastal zone includes two separate areas that are characterized by industrial development. The most heavily indu strialized area is located west of I-5. It is almost entirely developed with medium industrial us es, and is designated “Medium IndustrialManufacturing” and “Heavy IndustrialManufacturing” in the General Plan. Truck access in this planning area is from I-5 and includes limited rail access. The other industrial area within National City’s cCoastal zZone is the Sweetwater industrial area which is 160 acres in siz e and located east of I-5. The area is well served by truck access v ia I-5, rail access, and ship access through Port District lands. The other industrial area within National City’s coastal zone is the Sweetwater industrial area which is 160 acres in size and locat ed east of I-5. The entire central portion of this area has been reserved for the joint Army Corps /CALTRANS Sweetwater River flood control channel and Highway 54 project and is designated as open space. The areas to the north and south are virtually all developed with light industri al use and some commercial areas fronting on National City Boulevard. As in the General Plan, both areas are designated for industrial and commercial use in the Land Use Plan.As further d escribed in the Balanced Plan section of the LCP, the City proposes to rezone Parcels 1, 2, 3, 5 , and 6 from MM (Medium IndustrialManufacturing) to CT (Tourist Commercial), which could allow th ese parcels to be developed with hotel, restaurant , retail, and/or some combinati on of tourist -/visitor-serving commercial uses.

National City’s coastal zoneCoastal Zone is largely characterized by industrial development, much of which is related to the proximity of the Port’s operationscontainer terminal and wharfage. Due, in large part to the attraction of the marine terminal, virtual ly all of the industrial zoned land in National City’s Bayfront has been developed. New industrial development and redevelopment will occur as older residential uses are eliminated; however, t he assemblage of parcels large enough to accommodate and attract major industrial uses will be difficult. Taken together with the fact that National City has no direct bay frontage, the imposition of a policy giving preference only to marine related industrial use could be unnecessarily burdensome.

In most situations, the free market should adequately handle th e allocation of available industrial land to marine related industrial uses. The reason being that industrial uses that benefit from a coastal oriented location will compete more effectively for suc h parcels. However, a land use policy which would allow the free market to operate with the mi nimum regulatory intervention, and would also achieve consistenc y with the objectives of the C oastal Act for coastal dependent industrial activity would be advisable. Such a policy would only be applicable in situations where different industrial uses are competing for land, and in such i nstances would assign priority to marine related industry.

xiii

OPEN SPACE/WETLAND PRESERVE

The wetlands of the Paradise Creek Marsh, including salt marsh, freshwater marsh, salt-pan, Sweetwater cChannel, and mudflat habitats, are valuable and sensitive biolog ical resources, and shall be preserved. To that end, the plan designation for these areas is OPEN SPACE/WETLAND PRESERVE.

The value of the Paradise Marsh includes, but is not limited to, the following:

 Through photosynthesis of algal spe cies, the marsh provides an oxygen supply for the waters of San Diego Bay, necessary for survival of fish species and natural pollution impact abatement.

 Flushing of plant and animal detritus from the marsh provides o rganic matter important for food chains in the bay.

 The marsh acts as a nursery for at least nine fish species, inc luding several important sport fish species.

 The wetland habitats are extremely important wildlife areas, su pporting a very high diversity of bird species. These include a number of sensitive species, i.e ., Belding’s Savannah Sparrow, California Least Tern and potentially the Light-footed Clapper Rail. The wetlands also are an important stop-over point for migratory species along the Pacific Flyway.

Potential uses for wetlands are:

 Basic Sscientific research, nature study, orand educational uses;

 Passive recreation (i.e., bird watching);

 A possible source for applied research into the use of marsh species to introduce salt-tolerant genes into economically important plants (in agriculture), through selective cross-breeding.

One technique of preserving wetl ands commonly referred to is th e provision of a buffer area b e t w e e n t h e w e t l a n d a n d d e v e l o p m e n t . T h e Coastal Commissionstate and federal resource agencies generally recommends that development be set back 100 feet from the landward edge of a wetland. The 100-foot wide buffer may be increased or decrea sed in consultation with the Department of Fish and Gameresource agencies. The purpose of the 100-f oot buffer is to ensure that the type and scale of development will not significantly degrade the adjacent habitat area. The distinction must be made, however , that the application of the 100-foot buffer assumes that the area surrounding the wetland is substantially undeveloped. With respect to Paradise marsh, the wetland is almost entirely surrounded by existing industrial de velopment and transportation corridors including lumber storage yards, slaughter houses, steel fabricating plant, I-5, and rights- of-way for the AT&SF and SD&AE Railroads. In most locations, this existing development lies immediately adjacent to the landward edge of the wetlands. In such situations, the Commission’s guidelines recommend that new d evelopment observe an appropriat e setback based on unique characteristics of the property. It should also be noted that the marsh areas recommended and required for acquisition as mitigation for the Sweetwater River Flood Control Channel/Route 54 freeway project were determined to include necessary buffers.

xiv

The essential measure necessary to guarantee the preservation o f Paradise Marsh is the maintenance of tidal flushing. As long as the marsh is kept op en to tidal flushing and free from industrial and urban run-off , the existing water quality will be maintained at acceptable lev els. , and as long as the major input of freshwater continues to be runoff from the upstream areas rather than industrial discharge, the existing water quality will be maintained at acceptable levels. Other management alternatives, such as implementing increased street sweeping programs or sediment control measures in selected subbasins, do not appear to be necessary on the basis of the data and results presently available.

10 CHAPTER 1

THE COASTAL ACT

HISTORY

Traditionally, the regulation of land use along California’s coastline has been by local government pursuant to State Planning and Zoning Law. This enabling legislation mandates local governments to prepare general plans and zoni ng to ensure orderly physical growth and development within their jurisdictions as well as the protection of public health, safety and welfare.

However, local control over land use in the Coastal Zonecoastal zone was significantly modified with the passage of the Californi a Coastal Zone Conservation Ac t by the voters of California in November, 1972. In approving Proposition 20, the people of California declared that;

“The permanent protection of the remaining natural and scenic r esources of the Coastal Zone coastal zone is a paramount concern to present and future residents of the s tate and nation”, and

“It is the policy of the state to preserve, protect, and where possible, to restore the resources of the Coastal Zone coastal zone for enjoyment of the current and succeeding generations.”

Proposition 20 set forth a distinct role for the State in coast al land use matters, and created the California Coastal Zone Conservation Commission. The mandated m ission of the Coastal Commission was to prepare a statewide comprehensive plan for th e “orderly, long-range conservation and the management of the coast”, and to regulate development while the plan was being prepared. Preparation of the Coastal Plan commenced in 1973, and it was submitted to the state legislature in December, 1975. Based upon the Coastal Pla n and the Commission’s experience of the preceding years, the California legislature p assed the California Coastal Act in August, 1976.

GOALS AND POLICIES

The Coastal Act of 1976 in its opening section, Section 30001, contains the following finding and declaration of the state legislature:

(a) That the California Coastal Zonecoastal zone is a distinct and valuable resource of vital and enduring interest to a ll the people and exists as a d elicately balancedbalanced ecosystem.

(b) That the permanent protecti on of the state’s natural and sc enic resources is a paramount concern to present and future residents of the state and nation.

(c) That to promote the public safety, health, and welfare and to protect public and private property, wildlife, mari ne fisheries, and other ocean r esources, and the

2 natural environment, it is necessary to protect the ecological balance of the Coastal Zonecoastal zone and prevent its deterioration and destruction.

(d) That existing developed uses , and future developments that are carefully planned and developed consistent with the policies of this division, ar e essential to the economic and social well-being of the people of this state and especially to working persons employed within the Coastal Zonecoastal zone. (Amended by Cal. Stats. 1979 Ch. 1090)

The basic goals of the legislature for the Ccoastal zZone are defined in Section 30001.5 of the Coastal Act:

(a) Protect, maintain, and where feasible, enhance and restore the overall quality of the Coastal Zone coastal zone environment and its natural and man-made resources.

(b) Assure orderly, balancebalanced utilization and conservation of Coastal Zonecoastal zone resources taking into account the social and economic needs of the people of the state.

(c) Maximize public access to and along the coast and maximize public recreational opportunities in the Coastal Zone coastal zone consistent with sound resource conservation principles and cons titutionally protected rights o f private property owners.

(d) Assure priority for coastal-d ependent and coastal related d evelopment over other development on the coast. (Amended by Cal. Stats. 1979, Ch. 1090)

(e) Encourage state and local initiatives and cooperation in pr eparing procedures to implement coordinated planning a nd development of mutually bene ficial uses, including educational uses, in the Coastal Zonecoastal zone.

The heart of the Coastal Act is found in Chapter 3, Coastal Res ources Planning and Management Policies. These policies constitute the standards that local plans must meet in order to be certified by the State as well as the yardstick for evaluating proposed d evelopments within the Coastal Zonecoastal zone. Topics covered by coastal polic es include: beach access, re creation, marine environment, environmentally sensitive habitat areas, agricultu re, visual resources, and coastal dependent and industrial developm ent. In essence, these polici es are the rules for future growth and development in the Coastal Zonecoastal zone.

IMPLEMENTATION

The implementation of the Coastal Act is predicated upon the in volvement of local government.

Section 3004 of the Act declares that “to achieve maximum respo nsiveness to local conditions, accountability, and public accessi bility, it is necessary to re ly heavily on local government and local land use planning procedures and enforcement.” To this e nd, the Act directs each local government within the Coastal Zonecoastal zone , wholly or partly, to prepare a Local Coastal

3 Program (LCP). An LCP consist of a local government’s land use plans, zoning ordinances, zoning district maps, and implementing actions which implement the pro visions and policies of the Coastal Act at the local level. (30108.6).

The basis of the LCP is the land use plan. According to the Coastal Act, the land use plan means the “relevant portions of a local government’s general plan, or local coastal element, which are sufficiently detailed to indicate the kinds, location, and inte nsity of land uses, the applicable resource protection and development policies and, where necessa ry, a listing of implementing actions.” (32108.5) The zoning ordinances and district maps are the legal tools for implementing the land use plan. The Coastal Act also requires each LCP to “ contain a specific public access component to assure that maximum access to the coast and public recreation areas is provided.”

During preparation of a Local C oastal Program, local government s should coordinate planning with affected local, regional, sta te, and federal agencies, and provide the maximum opportunity for public participation. Under the Coastal Act, the responsibility for ensuring meaningful public participation rests with both the Coastal commission and local government; however, the local government retains the primary responsibility for involving the public in the actual planning process.

After the LCP has been reviewe d and approved by the local gover nment, it is then submitted to the State Coastal Commission for review. In certifying the lan d use plan, the Commission must find that the plan conforms to Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act, and contains the required public access component. The zoning and implementing ordinances are then reviewed to determine conformance with the approved land use plan. Once the land use plan and implementing ordinances have been certified, the review authority for new development within the Coastal Zone coastal zone will revert from the Coastal Commission to local government. The local government in issuing coastal development permits must then make the finding that the develop ment is in conformity with the approved LCP.

The State Commission will continue to exercise permit jurisdict ion over certain kinds of developments (i.e., development in state tidelands). The State Commission will also review amendments to LCPs, and continue to hear permit appeals. Howeve r, only certain kinds of developments can be appealed after a local government’s LCP has been certified; these include:

(1) Developments approved by th e local government between the sea and the first public road paralleling the sea or within 300 feet of the inland extent of any beach or of the mean high tideline of the sea where there is no beach, whichever is the greater distance.

(2) Developments approved by the local government not included within paragraph (1) of this subdivision located on tidelands, submerged lands, public trust lands, within 100 feet of any wetland, estuary, stream, or within 300 feet of the top of the seaward face, of any coastal bluff.

(3) Any development wh ich constitutes a major public works project or major energy facility.

The phrase “major public works project or major energy facility ” as used in Public Resources Code Section 30603(a)(5) shall mean any proposed publ ic works project, as

4 defined by Section 13012 of the Coastal Commission Regulations (Title 14, California Administrative Code, Division 5.5) or energy facility, as defined by Public Resources Code Section 30107.

6 CHAPTER II

NATIONAL CITY

HISTORY

The City of National City is located longalong the eastern shores of San Diego Bay within the urbanized South Bay area of the San Diego Region. The City of San Diego’s central business district lies approximately five miles to the north. It is bord ered by the City of San Diego to the north and east, and by Chula Vista to the south. The National City incorporated area includes approximately 8.65 square miles. The population of National City is currently 55,408 (January 1, 1986 est.).

National City is a general law city, incorporated in 1887, and is the second oldest city in San Diego County. Founded in 1868 by Frank Kimball as a competitor to Al onzo Horton’s new San Diego venture, it was planned to be a major terminus for the railroad s then opening lines to the West Coast. Although the railroads chose other cities for their ter minals, the agriculture industry flourished. Population grew slowly until the great boom of the 1940’s, when the population more than doubled in ten years. This was due to the large number of servicemen brought to the area during World War II. National City’s population has fluctuated greatly since then, reflecting changes in the number of military personnel on base. However, household population has continued to increase in a more stable, steady manner, as has the general industrial base.

In modern times, the City’s community members are subject to on e the highest levels of toxic air pollution in the state stemming from the near -by Port operations and vehi cular traveling along I-

5. Prior to the Balanced Plan , the area had few recreational amenities and access to the bay was severely limited due to the industrialized waterfront. While di rect access to the bay continues to be problematic the development of the marina, expansion of Pepp er Park, and addition of new restaurants, and new hotels havewill help helped increase bayfront usage by local and regional visitors. The 2022 Balanced Plan’s intent is to allow for the continued use and expansion of the working waterfront, while at the same time providing for new lower cost visitor se rving uses for the community and region. The efforts to reduce toxic emissions from Port District industrial uses remains a paramount goal and priority for the City.

COASTAL ZONE

The Ccoastal Zzone of National City includes all the area west of I-5, and a small area east of I-5 south of 30th Street. However, the Coastal Zone coastal zone is controlled by three separate governmental agencies: the San Diego Unified Port District, the United States Navy, and the City of National City. The coastal zone area over which National City retainsCity’s retain ed jurisdiction totals approximately 575 561 acres, and is bounded by the Navy Lands to the north, the Chula Vista Bayfront to the south, and the Port District jurisdiction to the west.

RELATED COASTAL PLANS

7 Plans adopted by the San Diego Unified Port District and the Ci ty of Chula Vista designate land uses adjacent to National City’s coastal jurisdiction. They al so designate transportation facilitiesuses which extend into or throughnear National City’s jurisdi ction. National City’s coastal land use designations and proposed circulation improvem ents should be based upon consideration of the plans of the adjacent jurisdictions to the extent that compatible uses can be developed.are developed. National City’s policies, however, need not be decided to implement plans of adjacent jurisdictions.

The Port District has jurisdiction approximately 250280 acres of land area . over all of the state tidelands bayward of the adjudicated mean high tide line, appro ximately 250 acres of land area .

The Port jurisdiction also includes an isolated parcel of tidelands which is located in the salt flats south of Chula Vista and is connected to National City by a 300 -foot wide corridor through San Diego Bay. The Port District submitted its Master Plan to the Coastal Com mission, and it was conditionally- approved in October, 1980. The Port District’s plan designated land areas west of the mean high tide line primarily for industrial use. It desig nates areas south of 32nd Street and generally east of Tidelands Ave nue for commercial recreation an d for park uses along the Sweetwater Channel, with vista area, public fishing, and bridge , boat launching ramp, public access and comfort station. The park designation reflects existing uses with expansion to the east.

The channel itself is designated for berthing and navigation co rridor up to the boat launching facilities, with open bay further east. National City’s land u se designations for adjacent area are complementary to the Port’s.

As described in the Balanced Plan section of this LCP, the Balanced Plan proposes the removal of approximately 12.4 acres within t he Balanced Plan area, located mostly on the current day GB Capital leasehold east of the mean high tide line and on land owned in fee by the District, from the City’s General Plan, LCP, andLCP, and LUC to reflect changes in land use and jurisdictional authority. This change will cl arify the jurisdictional boundar y between the City and the District and will be reflected on all City zoning and General Plan mMaps. These lands are not currently regulated by the PMP and this jur isdictional amendment will ens ure consistency with the California Coastal Act, Public Trust Doctrine, and Act. The Dis trict will amend its PMP map accordingly.

The Port District is studying the feasibility of marina develop ment in the area north of the Sweetwater Channel, adjacent to National City coastal jurisdict ion. Marina development would complement National City’s plans for tourist commercial and recreational use in the area.

The Port’s plan also provides for the extension of off-ramps fr om I-5 and Route 54 through the National City Bayfront to 32nd Street. However, the off-ramps are not included in current State freeway plans. The Port’s plan also indicates the need to connect Tidelands Avenue from National City to Chula Vista, via bridge over the channel. However, Chula Vista’s Local Coastal Program locates a bridge in the vicinity o f the SD&AE railroad right-of -way, generally in line with the proposed extension of Harrison Avenue.

8 Chula Vista’s land use plan, approved by the State Coastal Commission in 1984 and subsequently amended, designates 21 acres across the channel from National City for marina related uses, which includes commercial uses related to waterfront activities, ship repair services and boat marinas or haul out areas. Chula Vista’s Bayfront Specific Plan permits dredging for a small marina for 200 boats just west of the proposed bridge to cross the channel. The Port District also has jurisdiction over lands across the channel from National City west of area i ncluded in Chula Vista’s Local Coastal Program. The Port District lands in Chula Vista across the channel from National City are designated for marine sales and services and, at the most westerly location, expansion reserve.

Under the jurisdiction of the United States Navy is approximately 300 acres and 8,300 lineal feet of bay frontage. Federal lands are under the jurisdiction of the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act, which states that military lands shall comply with coastal planning to the extent that national security is not imperiled.

COASTAL ZONE SUBAREAS
National City’s Coastal Zone coastal zone can be divided into four distr icts: the industrial area west of I-5 (Subarea I), the Paradise Marsh wetlands area (Suba rea II), the Sweetwater industrial area east of I-5 and south of 30th Street (Subarea III), and th e I-5 freeway and San Diego Trolley rights-of-way (Subarea IV).

SUBAREA I

The industrial area west of I-5 contains approximately 210 acres and is almost entirely developed with light and medium industrial uses. The Combined General Pl an/Zoning Map designates the area as primarily “MM”, Medium Manufacturing with a small porti on of “MH”, Heavy Manufacturing. Approximately 6.4 acres located north of the marsh, east of the SD&AE railroad right-of-way, and south of 24th StreetBay Marina Drive are designated for tourist commercial use, but contain industrial uses (meat packing). The area provides the entryway to National City’s Bayfront. The area is well served by truck access via I-5, rail access, and ship access through the Port District. There are a number of older residential uses lo cated in this area, which would be considered non-conforming with the General Plan and zoning designation of industrial.

SUBAREA II

The Paradise Marsh area contains approximately 75 acres and consists primarily of wetlands. The marsh was originally formed by Paradise Creek, which entered th e area from the northeast and flowed across what is now the Port District property to the Bay . The filling of the Port District property destroyed the natural creek bed. The creek now runs d ue south in a man-made channel to the Sweetwater River and hence into the Bay. This channel allows limited tidal action to enter the marsh.

Upstream of the marsh, outside of the coastal area, Paradise Cr eek has also been altered. The drainage area has been reduced due to urban development, and th e creek is entirely contained in man-made drainage facilities. It enters the marsh through culverts under I-5.

9 National City’s General Plan designated this area as Open Space Reserve for preservation of open space wetlands and passive recreational use, and as Tourist Commercial, with the recognition that this area is the only potential area for waterfront recreational facilities.

SUBAREA III

The Sweetwater industrial area contains approximately 160 acres . The entire central portion of this area has been reserved for the Route 54/Sweetwater River Flood Control Channel Project.

This project combines the construction of State Highway Route 5 4 from I-805 to I-5 with the construction of a flood control channel from approximately 600 ft. west of Plaza Bonita Road, immediately upstream of I-805, to San Diego Bay. The flood con trol channel would generally occupy the area between eastbound and westbound lanes of Route 54. In addition, the project proposes the acquisition of a total of 188 acres of marshlands in both the Sweetwater and Paradise Marshes. This acquisition includes 44 acres as compensation fo r the impacts of the project and 144 acres for preservation of habitat for endangered species.

The project also includes a recr eation element consisting of bi cycle, equestrian, and pedestrian trails, rest and staging areas, and shoreline access and recrea tional features (to be located in Subarea II).

The remaining portions of the area are either designated for an d/or partially developed with light industrial uses and some commercial areas fronting on National City Boulevard.

SUBAREA IV

The Interstate 5 Freeway and San Diego Trolley System (MTSDB) right-of-waysrights-of-way include approximately 130 acres. The two regional transportati on facilities are separated from discussion of the other subareas for two reasons. First, the two facilities are existing and under the jurisdiction of the State Department of Transportation (Caltran s) and Metropolitan Transit Development BoardSystem ( MTDBMTS). Second, the facilities and right-of-ways provide existing access and are designated as Open Space by the Combine d General Plan/Zoning Map.

Other than landscaping and transportation related improvements, no development in the subarea is anticipated.

10

10 CHAPTER III

PUBLIC ACCESS
(PUBLIC ACCESS COMPONENT)

COASTAL ACT POLICIES

Sections 30210, 30211, 30212 and 30214 require that public access and recreational opportunities be provided for all the people; that development not interfere with the public’s right of access; that new development provide public access to the shoreline; and tha t public access be managed to protect fragile resources and property rights.

EXISTING CONDITIONS

The United States Navy controls approximately two-thirds of Nat ional City’s Bayfront, through which public access is expressly prohibited. The remainder of the Bayfront is under the jurisdiction of the Unified Port District, and is developed pre dominantly with industrial uses.

However, the Port has developed a launching ramp and an adjacen t public recreation area which accommodates public access to the shoreline - both pedestrian and boating. In addition, it should be pointed out that considerable off-road vehicle activity has taken place in the area. ORV access occurs through Port lands and overlaps into National City’s jur isdiction. Because of numerous problems, including vandalism, violence and accidents, the Port has erected a fence to discourage such use.

The only opportunity for public access within the limits of the C ity is P a ra d is e M a rs h a n d its surrounding lands. However, there is presently no public acces s to nor public use of this area.

Although the Paradise Marsh is subject to limited tidal flow, it is not public tidelands and is not in public ownership. The northern portion of Paradise Marsh west of I-5 will be acquired by the federal government as a condition of approval of the Sweetwater River Flood Control project. The southern portion west of I-5 is Caltrans right-of-way.

EXISTING PLANNING AND ZONING

National City’s combined General Plan/Zoning Map designates the Paradise Marsh area as Open Space Reserve (OSR) and Tourist Commercial (CT). The Open Spac e Reserve designation will preserve wetland areas and provide for passive recreational use , i.e. nature study. The Tourist Commercial designation is estab lished for the provision of serv ices, goods and accommodations for visitors to the area.

The City of National City has historically recognized the Paradise Marsh area as the only potential area for waterfront recreational facilities, and thus public shoreline access.

The General Plan contains several policy statements which support the concept of increased public access to and use of National City’s Bayfront. These policies speak to supporting the Bay-Route Bikeway, Sweetwater Regional Park Connection, and improved transit to the area.

12 Other planning which would affect the National City Coastal Zone is the Highway 54/Sweetwater flood control project. CALTRANS and Army Corps of Engineers are lead agencies for the project.

The recreational aspects of the f lood control channel will be d iscussed in more detail in the Recreation section. With respect to access, the proposed Highway 54 project will improve access to National City’s Bayfront. A direct connection from Route 54 and I-5 to the 32nd Street area should be encouraged to further improve access.

ANALYSIS

DEMAND

The subject of demand will be ex plored more thoroughly in the n ext section dealing with Recreation. However, it should be pointed out that the demand for coastal recreation, and therefore public access to coastal areas, is increasing at a very fast rate. CPO, in their Coastal Access Study for the San Diego Region, estimat ed that the demand for coastal recreation will increase by 55% over the next 20 years.

TRAVEL MODE

The CPO study contains other revealing information as to how individuals actually travel to coastal areas. According to their surve y, 80% of all coastal trips are by private vehicl e (primarily the automobile), 11% by walking, 6% by bicycle, and 4% by transit. Because of the extremely high incidence of automobile usage shown in the survey, the factors of traffic congestion and parking availability become crucial to shoreline access. In examining the National City situation, no problem presently exists with respect to access by automobile. Information available through both National City and the Port District indicates that traffic coun ts and projections are well below designed capacities on Tidelands Avenue and 24th StreetBay Marina Drive . However, factors other than traffic counts must be considered in evaluating vehicular access to the recreational areas, existing and potential, along National City’s Bayfront. Severa l factors which could result in definite conflict between recreational and industrial use include the type of vehicle, the frequency of railroad and container activ ity and the effectiveness of the 24th StreetBay Marina Drive /I-5 intersection. With respect to the type of vehicle, large lumber hauling are continuously traveling along and across Tidelands Avenue to service the lumber yards. The Port’s container terminal at 24th StreetBay Marina Drive is scheduled for expansion, which will result in similar incre ases in truck and rail traffic in the area. Finally, the functional design of the 24th StreetBay Marina Drive intersection with I-5 has presented problems with drainage and difficult turning maneuvers for larger vehicles. Fortunately, peak travel times for recreation al trips usually do not coincide with trip to work peaks. Although industrial activity along the Por t does not follow an 8 to 5 Monday through Friday regimen, no intole rable conflicts between recrea tional and industrial traffic are foreseen.

In conjunction with the CALTRANS Highway 54 project, a 32nd Street off-ramp that would also serve I-5 was proposed but has been deleted from State freeway plans. This new off-ramp would have provided direct vehicular access into the recreational are as of the Bayfront, bypassing most industrial areas. Also, as a part of this LCP a new access road is proposed to provide more direct access to the Bayfront. This new road is proposed to intersect with 24th StreetBay Marina Drive

13 between the right-of-waysrights-of-way for the AT&SF and SD&AE railroads, and connect with 32nd Street. Although the new road would still be dependent up on the 24th Street Bay Marina Drive /I-5 intersection, it would bypass the majority of the industri al areas and would improve both ingress and egress to the proposed recreational area.

Parking capacity is, of course, a prime determinant in assessing recreational access. Although on peak summer weekends the parking lot for the Port’s launching r amp and park sometimes overflows, availability of parking in the area is not considere d critical. On-street parking is abundant in the area, and even with the unauthorized ORV activi ty in the area, parking has been available. As the area develops with more formalized and permanent uses, care must be taken that adequate parking is provided.

Recent developments in the realm of public transit and bicycle travel have some potential for improving recreational access to National City’s Bayfront throu gh travel modes other than the automobile. Those developments are the Metropolitan Transit Development Board’s “San Diego Trolley” along the main line of the old SD&AE railroad right-of-way, and the Bay RouteBayshore Bikeway. The MTDB MTS trolley incorporates a station (24th Street) at 24th StreetMile of Cars Way and Wilson Avenue . The 24th Street station is used for commuter traffic. However, presuming that the National City Bayfront will become a visitor destination, the proximity of the 24th Street station would be of potential benefit. It is withi n short walking distance from the designated tourist commercial area north of Paradise Marsh on t he south side of 24th StreetBay Marina DriveBay Marina Drive . However, pedestrian and bic ycle facilities underneath the I- 5 freeway could be improved to increase separation from traffic and the safety and comfort of users.

While the station location may be beyond comfortable walking range for some users from potential recreation areas at the Sweetwate r River channel, other interme diate modes such as bicycles or jitneys may be feasible. The 24th Street station also connects with routes for National City Transit.

The Bay RouteBayshore Bikeway presents another mode of travel which has positive potential for National City., In its original form, the bikeway was to have passed right by Paradise Marsh and its adjacent lands along the extension of Tidelands Avenue across Sweetwater Marsh. The Coastal Commission, in separate actions, eliminated the extension of Tidelands Avenue across Sweetwater Marsh, and approved an alternative route for the bikeway that w ould take it up 24th StreetBay Marina Drive to National City Boulevard. Although the original route would have been much more conducive for public access to the National City area, the current routing still retains access potential. The extension of a s econdary route to the Port’s la unching ramp and Paradise Marsh complex would be entirely appropriate and consistent with both National City’s General Plan and the Port Master Plan.

Because a direct connection with Chula Vista Bayfront would be preferable to the National City Boulevard routing now approved for the Bay Route Bikeway, efforts to provide a direct connection should not be abandoned. One alternative alignment which would be consistent with the Coastal Commission goal of preserving Sweetwater Marsh would be to util ize the abandoned Coronado Beach line of the SD&AE railroad which already crosses the marsh on trestles. The SD&AE right- of-way is now owned by MTDB; however, the fixed rail transit system will be using the mainline which is east of I-5. Providing that appropriate agreements can be reached with MTDB to use the old branch line for bikeway purposes, recreation and commuter b icycle access in the area will be

14 greatly improved. The Regional Transportation Plan adopted by the San Diego Association of Governments still designates the future Bay Route Bikeway cross ing the Sweetwater River west of I-5.

The City of Chula Vista Local Coastal Program designates a roadway crossing with bicycle lanes over the Sweetwater River channel, along the alignment of the SD&AE railroad right-of-way. A bicycle lane crossing should be encouraged independent of decisions to be reached on the potential roadway crossing.

The roadway crossing proposed by Chula Vista between National C ity and Chula Vista Bayfront areas requires further study. Proposed policies do not require its construction. However, public access policy 8 requires a new roadway extension in the area westerly of Paradise Marsh (Harrison Avenue extension). If found desirable, it could extend to a br idge. An amendment could be pursued to add the bridge to the Land Use Plan. Proposed recre ation policy 3 requires that a Specific Plan address traffic ci rculation and roadway improveme nts, in conjunction with development plans for the tourist commercial area west of Paradise Marsh.

The trails systems, (equestrian, bicycle and pedestrian), proposed in conjunction with the County’s Sweetwater Regional Park and the Army Corps Sweetwater River Fl ood Control Channel, are other access potentials that should be actively encouraged. Th ese trails are of particular importance since they would provide direct linkage between the Bayfront and inland areas.

LOCATION

As previously discussed, the only area that has potential for public shoreline access within National City’s corporate boundaries is Pa radise Marsh and its surroundi ng lands. The reason for this is simply because it is the only area within National City’s jurisdiction that has a shoreline.

It should be noted, however, that provisions are made for public access within the immediate area.

The Port District’s boat launching ramp and recreational area i s located directly adjacent to National City’s jurisdictional limit, and provides shoreline ac cess for the boating enthusiast, the fisherman, and the general recreationist. Whereas the Port has made a concerted effort to accommodate public access and use within its jurisdiction, the U.S. Navy has not. due to security concern for the naval bases , w h i c h i s When considering the security requirements of naval operations, the prohibition of the public for recreational use is appropriate and consistent with the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act.

When assessing the locational needs of public access, care should be taken to differentiate between vertical and lateral access. Ver tical meaning access to the sh oreline, and lateral meaning access along the shoreline. Rather than reciting all the information contained in the Coastal Commission’s Interpretive Guidelines for access, suffice it to say that both forms of access are needed in National City.

15 REGULATION AND MANAGEMENT

As established in the General Plan and in the Coastal Act, it i s a desired goal to provide public shoreline access within the city limits of National City. Thus far, the potential location for such access and the alternative travel modes to reach it, have been discussed. What will now be examined are the various methods by which the public access can be protected and provided in accordance with City objectives and the Coastal Act.

The first method to be investigated would be through public action. Since the Paradise Marsh and its adjacent lands are privately held (Santa Fe Land Company), the feasibility of public action (acquisition, eminent domain) is questionable because of cost and time involved. However, public action for acquisition and development should be considered as an option to provide public facilities and attract appropriate, private development.

The most economic method for the local government would be the dedication of public accessways at the time of development; this action is specifically allowed by the Coastal Act (Section 30212).

Essentially, there are three forms such dedications can take: deed restriction, grant of fee interest, or grant of an easement. Taking into account the development p otential of the area adjacent to Paradise Marsh, the most appropriate method of providing access would be through deed restrictions. With a deed restriction, no interest in the land proposed for access is granted and the land owner retains responsibility for the access way. Deed res trictions are especially suited for commercial/recreational developments, since the security needs of the facility and maintenance of the accessways are most effectively handled by the owner/operat or of the development. Other methods would be appropriate for obtaining public roadway and p ark areas. The provision of public access concurrent with private development is not envisi oned as a problem since the type and form of development envisioned would be predicated upon public use and enjoyment.

Another consideration in the provision of public access, especi ally in areas adjacent to wetlands, is that the resource areas are protected from overuse. Achievi ng consistency with this section of the Coastal Act (30210) is really a matter of design, habitat buffers, and location of the access way.

Lateral accessways, especially a long the shoreline of Paradise Marsh, should be set back a sufficient distance to ensure protection of the marsh . . However, closer proximity to the marsh can be achieved through the uti lization of controlled access po ints. Overall, access ways should be provided and identified in accordance with the coastal access standards adopted by the Coastal Commission and Coastal Conservancy.

A final point on public access has to do with prescriptive rights. In brief, prescriptive rights deals with the legal doctrine of implied dedication, which grants the right of pass and repass over private property to the public if they have not been restricted from pa ssing over that property for a specified number of years. Prescriptive rights may be considered where appropriate, especially, if development does not occur in the near future and if access is not acquired as a condition of development. However, there are no areas in the National City coastal zone where prescriptive rights have been determined to exist. New development, however , should be reviewed to determine that it will not interfere with desirable public access that may be established on or across private property. In addition, it would be in the public inter est to provide for controlled access with appropriately designed development, whether public or private.

16 POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

1. New public shoreline accessways shall be designated to and alon g Paradise Marsh and the Sweetwater River Channel as generally shown in Figure No. 4.

2. Public accessways as designated in Condition Number One shall b e provided in conjunction with new development and protected through public access easements or other suitable means of conveyance.

1. In the event that new development is not forthcoming, it is the City’s policy toIn order to provide new public shoreline accessways, the City will seek the assistance of the Coastal Conservancy, or other appropriate agency, to acquire, plan, and finance public shoreline access.

2. The precise location, design and identification of public accessways shall be consistent, to the maximum degree feasible, with the coastal access standards prep ared jointly by the Coastal Commission, resource agencies, and the Coastal Conservancy.

3. As indicated in the General Plan, it is the City’s policy that the Bayshore Bikeway continue its development south of Bay Marina Drive

2.4.Alternative modes of access to N ational City’s Bayfront shall b e actively encouraged.

Specifically, the trail systems proposed as a part of the Army Corps Sweetwater River Flood Control Channel project, which would provide linkage from National City’s Bayfront to inland areas, are supported.

3.5.All new development shall incorporate adequate on-site parking to accommodate the parking demand generated. The number of required parking spaces for ne w development shall be determined during the implementation phase of the Local Coastal Program, but shall be, at a minimum, consistent with the schedule of parking requirements o f the Municipal Code. (Appendix III).

4.6.A new access road located westerly and parallel to the Paradise Marsh would extend southerly from the vicinity of Harrison Avenue at 24th StreetBay Marina Drive to the National City Boat Launching Facilities and future marine oriented, commercial/and or recreational uses. A buffer shall be provided between the roadway and the marsh. A Specifi c Plan shall be prepared to identify desirable buffering between the marsh and roadway, loc ated in the upland area west of Paradise Marsh. It should also proposed landscaping or othe r design elements to provide visual linkage and identity for the Paradise Marsh area and appropriate visual separation from the industrial area to the west and freeway to the east.

New development shall not interfere with desirable public access that may exist or be established by public use on or across private property., i.e., prescriptive rights. Desirable public access shall include access to natural or constructed coastal, recreational resources, except where necessary to

17 protect fragile coastal resources or public safety, or where adequately provided for in another area.

Development projects shall be reviewed to determine evidence of public use.

CHAPTER 1V

RECREATION

COASTAL ACT POLICIES

Sections 30212.5, 30213, 30220-30223, and 30256(c) require the provision of public and low-cost recreation and visitor-serving facilities, and the protection of coastal water and land areas that are suitable for recreational use. Also, visitor-serving commercia l uses designed to enhance public opportunities for coastal recreation are assigned a higher prio rity than other private residential or general commercial development. As previously discussed, the Balanced Plan creates new low- cost visitor serving amenities for the public ; s u c h a s a : A dry boat storage facility, RV Park, expanded park spaces, boating finger piers, and improved access to the bay.

EXISTING CONDITIONS

As mentioned in the previous section on access, the majority of National City’s Bayfront is either under the jurisdiction of the United States Navy or the Unified Port District. In the case of the Navy lands, public access and recreational use is prohibited. The majority of the Port's holdings are developed with large scale industrial marine uses. The only provision for public recreation within the general area is the launching ramp and park provided by the Port. Approximately 7 acres of land area are devoted to this recreational use. The Port Master Plan reports that continued heavy use of the launching ramp and park is anticipated, and that the area is plagued with problems of vandalism and crime.The District has developed recreational opp ortunities in Pepper Park, the Aquatic Center, and the Pier 32 Marina. While all of these are within the Dist rict’s jurisdiction, they do offer recreational opportunities and public access to both National City residents and the general public.

Also, as referenced in the section on Public Access, unauthoriz ed off-road vehicle activity has been taking place on the undeveloped tidelands located east of the launching ramp and park. The ORV activity has also extended into areas within National City' s jurisdiction around the Paradise Marsh, and the "D" Street fill in Chula Vista. Because of surveillance problems and intrusion into sensitive resource areas, the Port District has erected a fence around the perimeter of the area.

The only area within National City's portion of the Bayfront that is suitable for recreational use are the lands around Paradise Marsh. These lands are now privately owned and are not developed for any public recreational use. The City of National City has lon g recognized the potential of the Paradise Marsh area, and has examined this potential in both the General Plan and precise planning documents.

EXISTING PLANNING AND ZONING

A discussion of the General Plan designations and policies relative to the recreational potential of the Paradise Marsh is presented in the preceding section on Public Access. Rather than duplicate

18 that discussion, the primary proposals of the Sweetwater River Flood Control Channel plans will be examined.

SWEETWATER RIVER PLANS

ARMY CORPS-FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL

The recreation element of the Army Corps of Engineers' Sweetwater River Flood Control Channel Plan calls for bicycle, equestri an and pedestrian trails along the length of the channel on levees that would connect with the National City Bayfront and the Coun ty's Sweetwater Regional Park.

A bicycle staging area is proposed to be located in the vicinity of the existing boat launching ramp, and would provide easy access to the Bay Route Bikeway. Also proposed are shoreline access and recreational features along the northern shore of the channel i n the area easterly of the launching ramp.

SAN DIEGO COUNTY - SWEETWATER REGIONAL PARK

The purpose of mentioning the County’s Sweetwater Regional Park is to highlight the potential of linking three recreational areas together: National City's Bayf ront, Army Corps' Flood Control Channel, and the County’s Regiona l Park. Such linkage is espec ially significant in terms of providing an access to and from inland areas and offering a high quality recreational experience.

ANALYSIS

DEMAND

To quote from the California Coastal Plan,

"The California coast provides an almost endless variety of rec reational opportunities for people to play, to be refreshed, and to be inspired: wide sandy beaches for cooling off from the heat of the city, rocky head lands for exploring; high bluff s for watching the ever- changing ocean; waters for swimming, boating, surfing, and fish ing; and tide pools, sea caves, and coastal wetlands for nature study. In short, the co ast is a major provider of recreation important to the quality of life in California."

Even with the many public and co mmercial recreational opportuni ties and facilities which exist along the coast, a shortage of f acilities persists for almost e very popular recreational activity.

According to the Coastal Plan, a reason for this situation is t hat 85% of California’s population lives within 30 miles of the o cean. Although the exact demand for specific types of recreational facilities is difficult to project, studies universally indicat e a continued high demand for the traditionally popular coastal activities such as fishing, sight seeing, beach and general day use throughout the southern portions of the state.

These same findings are particularly true for the San Diego coast. The CPO Coastal Access Study conservatively estimated that part icipation in recreational activities at coastal areas will grow by at least 55% over the next 20 years. The study also shows that the activities pursued by the highest

19 number of participants are sunbathing, walking and swimming. Whereas sunbathing, walking and swimming are the most popular coa stal recreational activities, the two activities which probably have the greatest unmet demand are beach camping and boating. San Diego County’s Regional Park Implementation Study states that the greatest unmet recrea tion need is for beach camping, and projected that, in 1980, 10% to 15% of the demand for overnight facilities would be met. With respect to boating, the Port District projected that available slip sites might be exhausted by 1985.

Of particular importance to National City is the fact that ther e is a pent-up demand for coastal recreation opportunities throughout the state and San Diego. B ecause the South Bay has comparatively fewer recreational areas than other coastal areas in the San Diego Region, it could be deduced that there is even a larger unmet demand for coastal recreation in the South Bay. Not only is there demand, but the activities which are most popular or in greatest demand are those which are especially suitable to National City’s Bayfront.

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS.

When discussing, in specific term s, the recreational developmen t of National City’s Bayfront in accordance with Coastal Act policy, the market, traffic usage, acc ess, and other environmental constraints must first be considered. The Environmental Impact Report of 2022 considered these factors in developing the Balanced Plan development program. Th e Balanced Plan was a careful balance between maritime - related industrial and the crea tion of new recreational facilit ies and uses. the environmental constraints must first be considered. In other words, what areas should be preserved, and what areas should be developed?

As explained in the Marsh Prese rvation discussion, the preservation of coastal wetland areas is a paramount objective of the Coastal Act. It is the position of both the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the State Department of Fish and Game, that Paradise Creek Marsh is tidal marsh, and is an important and inseparable part of the Sweetwater Marsh complex. Any new recreational uses should be passive in nature. The obvious conclusion, based upon the Coastal Act and the mitigation plans for the Sweetwater River Flood Control Channel to acquire the Paradise Marsh, is that development in the marsh for intensive recreation cannot be considered. Both of theseBoth features are within federal ownership and are protected by existing regulations.

Realistically, restoration will be required to turn Paradise Ma rsh into a natural attraction. One factor that will have a positive influence is the construction of the Sweetwater River Flood Control Channel. Not only should the flood control channel improve water circulation to Paradise Marsh, but as a mitigation it is also proposed that the connection to the marsh be reconditioned. Another possible avenue to follow would be the involvement of the Coast a l C o n s e r v a n c y . A s i m i l a r restoration program is now underway for the San Dieguito Lagoon in Del Mar. Through funding by the Conservancy, a restoration plan for San Dieguito Lagoon was prepared. The Conservancy also funded the preparation of t he engineering studies to accom plish the restoration work. Joint efforts with the Bayfront Conservancy Trust should also be cons idered. Enhancement of the Paradise Marsh could have seconda ry, beneficial effects to the Chula Vista Bayfront and Nature Interpretive Center.

20 With respect to the recreational potential of the marsh and its surrounding lands, a passive concept conducive to preservation should be observed. A logical separation between passive recreational uses and more active commercial recreational uses would be the SD&AE spur line that runs to the west of Paradise Marsh. To ensure that the area will be utiliz ed by the public, it is proposed that accessways be sited along the edges of the marsh in a controlle d manner. It is also proposed that one or two viewing platforms be allowed adjacent to the wetland area in order to facilitate the observation of the wetland’s flora and fauna. Such development would be consistent with Section 30233(c) which allows nature study activities to be located in wetland areas.

Beyond the SD&AE spur line, areas can begin a transition to a more active use. While no active play fields are proposed, landscaped areas that are suitable fo r picnicking and Frisbee throwing, etc., would be appropriate.

As a design element that would provide separation and a functio nal element that would provide access, a new road is proposed. As discussed in the Access section, the road would intersect 24th Street between the AT&SF and SD&AE railroad tracks and would ru n parallel with the tracks to the point at which it would turn or branch to the west and would provide access to 32nd Street and the Boat Launch facilities. Thi s new road would provide better access to the area since it would bypass and eliminate the potential conflict with industrial traffic along Tidelands Avenue and 24th Street. Of equal importance, the road would open the area for recreational development. The road would also improve visual access and identity of the Paradise M arsh area. Specific roadway improvements will be determined by review of development projec ts. A Specific Plan will need to address traffic circulation and roadway improvements in conj unction with development plans for the tourist commercial area west of Paradise Marsh.

The area located west of the railroad spur, designated for tourist commercial and recreational use, within the jurisdiction of National City is approximately 30 ac res, including 23 acres owned by the Santa Fe Land Company, the SD&AE railroad and SDG&E right-o f-ways. However, additional vacant land totaling 15 acres, under the jurisdiction of the Port District, lies adjacent to the west. The Port’s Master Pla n designates the area for comme rcial recreation and Public Park.

It is important to emphasize that the development of this area should be closely coordinated with the Port during the project planning phase. Also, to ensure a well-integrated and quality development, the concurrent development of both the National Ci ty parcel and the Port District parcel should be encouraged.

Although the tourist commercial recreation designation covers a broad range of uses, one or two anchor uses should be sought for the area. Particularly approp riate for the area would be an overnight use and a boating relate d use, the two activities whi ch the greatest unmet demand.

Desirable forms of overnight use include hotel or motel facilit ies, and/or a recreational vehicle park/campground complex. Such uses, in a close proximity to th e Port’s launching ramp and the Army Corps’ proposed recreational features, would have apparent possibilities. Development of a marina on adjacent Port District property may be appropriate. With the proposed extension of the channel for the flood control project, increased boat usage will become even more desirable.

Other boating related facilities that would be appropriate incl ude a dry-storage area and a sales/service establishment. Again, available space for boat s torage near San Diego Bay is at a premium and the situation is only going to become tighter. A s tacked or tiered dry-storage area,

21 similar to that at Perez Cove on Mission Bay, would be a desirable use at the National City location.

With an overnight use and boating use serving as anchors, it ca n be expected that other related uses such as eating establishments and specialty shops will be attracted to the area.

When assessing the potential for recreational development along National City’s Bayfront, there are several additional factors which should not be ignored. One factor is the proximity to the 24th Street MTDB station. Although it is over a mile away and probably beyond comfortable walking distance, the station has a park ing lot and provides direct ser vice to such destinations as Tijuana, Seaport village, and downtown Sa n Diego, Another consideration is the numerous bicycle trails which are being proposed in the area. Using National City as a starting point, bicyclists could easily reach the Bay Route Bikeway and the Sweetwater River Cha nnel Bikeway. A final consideration is that the development of the area, especially with overnight uses, will do much to solve the problems of crime and vandalism in the area.

The 24th Street Bay Marina Drive trolley station and freeway access (to I-5 and State RouteRt. 54) at 24th StreetBay Marina Drive provide opportunities for tourist commercial development in th e area north of Paradise Marsh, currently developed with meat pac king facilities and parking lots.

Streetscape and roadway improveme nts, or separated pedestrian f acilities would be needed to improve pedestrian access from the trolley station under I-5 to the area.

Tourist commercial development at 24th StreetBay Marina Drive north of Paradise Marsh would provide a gateway to National City’s Bayfront as well as to the Port. It would provide facilities such as restaurants, hotel or motel and other complementary uses to those intended at the Bayfront itself, west of Paradise Marsh. It should be developed to enco urage bicycle and pedestrian users since it is within close proximity to both the trolley station and the recreational area along the Sweetwater River Channel.

POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

1. The National City Bayfront shall be designated for tourist commercial and recreational use, as indicated in the Land Use Plan ( See Figure 2). 1). Using the SD&AE railroad as a point of demarcation, consistent with the wetland area proposed for acqu isition by the Army Corps of Engineers, the area located to the east, including Paradise Marsh and surrounding lands, shall be designated suitable for passive recreational uses only. The areas to the west and to the north of the Marsh shall be designated for tourist commercial and rec reational uses. Wetland resources located west of the railroad,Bayshore Bikeway which are not proposed for public acquisition, shall be protected from incompatible development, consistent wi th marsh preservation policies.

2. The passive recreational area would accommodate the preservatio n of Paradise Marsh, along with the provision of public acce ssways and landscaped areas. Public access would be provided and managed consistent with the public access componen t of the LCP and the maintenance of wetland resource values. Beyond this area, a tr ansition to more active uses could begin. Landscaped areas suitable for picnicking and gene ral recreation may be appropriate.

22 3. In order to meet specific recreational market demands and provide an attraction for secondary uses, overnight uses and boating uses shall be assigned the hig hest commercial development priority for the commercial recreational areas. For the area west of Paradise Marsh, appropriate uses, as described in the Balanced Plan , include marina development, hotel/motel and restaurant facilities, recreati onal vehicle park/campground, dr y-storage and boat service facility, and/or public park areas. For the area north of Paradise Marsh, hotel/motel facilities, restaurants and other tourist commercial use would be appropria te. The intensity of development shall be reviewed for impacts on traffic circulatio n. A Specific Plan shall be prepared to address traffic circulation and roadway and other improvements, in conjunction with development plans for the tourist commercial area west of Paradise Marsh. The Specific Plan shall determine the location of roadway improvements, base d on resource protection standards, i.e., consistency with marsh preservation policies.

Tourist commercial development in the above referenced areas shall be consistent with existing or currently planned road capacities to the north and south of the proposed tourist commercial area, including the planned extension of Harrison Avenue and the Tidelands Avenue crossing proposed in the City of Chula Vista Bayfront LCP. The intensity of development shall also be reflective of the constraints placed on these roadways by the M arsh Preservation policies of this Plan. Approval of these land uses shall not be considered precedent for increasing the capacity of the roads to the north and south of the tourist commercial area.

4. A higher quality project and a better design should result from such coordination and a more viable development will likely be attracted to the area.

4. As previously denoted in the Balanced Plan and in order to develop the tourist commercial and recreational area west of Paradise Marsh coordination with the Port District for concurrent development of Port District lands shall continue to be encouraged.

5. To enhance the recreational pote ntial and attractiveness of the National City waterfront, the restoration and protection of Paradise Marsh continues to be imperative and a continued City policy.of Paradise Marsh is a desirable program. A feasible restorat ion program shall be determined with the potential assistance of the Coastal Conserv ancy, or other appropriate agencies, to finance, plan, and implement such a restoration program. The program shall also involve coordination with the B ayfront Conservancy Trust in its efforts to finance, plan and implement a restoration program, including access and recreational features. .

6. To ensure that the recreational potential of the area is maximized, development shall take into account the proximity to the MTDBMTS ’s “San Diego Trolley System”, the Bayshore Route Bikeway, and the Sweetwater Rive r Flood Control Channel’s recre ational areas and trails systems, as well as recreational uses planned for the adjacent Chula Vista Bayfront and other waterfront development on San Diego Bay.

24 CHAPTER V

MARSH PRESERVATION

COASTAL ACT POLICIES

Sections 30230, 30231, and 30236 require the preservation, enhancement, and restoration of water and marine resources including co astal waters, streams, wetland s, estuaries, and lakes. Sections 30233 and 30235 establish conditions under which diking, dredgi ng, filling and the use of shoreline structures may and may not occur. Section 30233 (c) limits dredging related to maritime industries and facilities, minor public facilities, restorative measures, and other marine dependent uses. in the 19 priority wetlands identified by the Department of Fish and Game to minor public facilities, restorative meas ures, and nature study. Section 30240 provides for the protection of environmentally sensitive habitat areas by restricting uses within or adjacent to such areas.

EXISTING CONDITIONS

The Paradise Creek Marsh in southwest National City consists of two areas comprising a total of

29.8 areas, as described in the Working Paper on Paradise Marsh Biological Resources. The main area, 26.1 acres is size, is located west of Interstate 5 (I-5) , within a 40-acre area designated as Open Space Wetland Preserve (OSR) in the Land Use Plan. A seco nd area of approximately 3.7 acres lies east of I-5 and is connected to the main area by a culvert. It is designated as OSR in the Land Use Plan. Paradise Creek, partly in a meandering original channel and partly in a new channelized straight course, leads from the northeast corner of the main area to join the Sweetwater River south of the National City-Chula Vista border. Because o f the Sweetwater River’s connection to San Diego Bay and the low elevation of the area, the marsh is subjected to tidal action.

The main area is bounded on the east by I-5, on the west of the Bayshore Bikeway by San Diego and Arizona Eastern railroad tracksMarina Way, and on the north by medium manufacturing along 24thTwenty-FourthBay Marina Drive Street . The southern boundary of the subject area is the National City-Chula Vista city line, but the wetland extends 1,800 more feet (20 more acres) south to the junction of the Paradise Creek channel with the Sweetwater River. This main area contains a large 9.4-acre section of coast al salt marsh represented by t he Cordgrass, Saltwort, and Pickle weed habitats. The salt marsh surrounds a small intertidal fla t and is itself surrounded by slopes leading to higher upland sites. O n each side of a newly dredge d channel are large, flat expanses of fill which support a salt pan with occasional patches of vegetation.

The secondary area is bounded on the east by Hoover Avenue, on the north by light manufacturing properties along West Thirtieth Street, and on the south by more light industry. The Metropolitan Transit Development Board’s transit line is the west boundary. About one acre of coastal salt marsh and an equal area of salt pan lie within the area. Above and north of this area is a terrace of disturbed upland, most likely a former roadbed. Slopes lead up from here to the building sites at the north edge.

Paradise Creek originally flowed into the Paradise Marsh area, then west into San Diego Bay.

Presently, Paradise Creek enters the main area from a culvert at the northeast corner of the marsh.

25 Before entering the marsh, the creek runs in a channelized bed nearly 4,000 feet long. It drains approximately 1.5 square miles of upland National City. Almost half of its length within the marsh is the original meandering channel; the remaining length is a s traight channel leading to the Sweetwater River. At the National City-Chula Vista border, the channel is about 28 feet wide.

The sides are steep and the almost flat bottom is under about t wo feet of water at low tide of -1.5 feet. There are many small tidal creeks connected to the meand ering part of the creek and a few incipient tidal creeks along the straight part. Another stream flows from a storm drain at Hoover Street, through the second marsh area and a culvert, and then joins Paradise Creek.

Historically, the wetlands of California have been subjected to severe alteration by mansignificant development. In 1900, California had 381,000 acres of wetlands, and south ern California, from Santa Barbara County to San Diego County, had 26,000 acres. California’s coastal wetlands have been reduced to 126,000 acres, a 67 percent reduction. Southern California’s wetlands have been reduced by a similar percentage to 8,500 acres. Within the sli ghtly larger Southern California boundaries, between Morro Bay and Ensenada, Mexico, three of the original 28 sizeable estuaries have been destroyed, ten drastic ally modified, and 15 moderatel y modified, leaving none untouched. San Diego Bay has lost an even higher percentage of its wetlands; it has 360 acres of salt marsh plus 600 acres of tidal flats remaining from an original 2,450 acres and 1,200 acres - an overall loss of 74 percent.

The land surrounding the marsh has been heavily impacted by man through industry, major highways, dredge, and historic fill operations. and fill operations, parks and all-terrain vehicle (ATV) activity. The marsh itself has been impacted by ATV, pedestrian activity and rubbish dumping. These man-induced impacts can be traced back to 1888 when a pier was built at the end of Twenty-Fourth Street. The open area to the west of the marsh was filled in 1946. Construction of the 1,960-acre Twenty-Fourth Street Terminal began in 1967. The area between Paradise Creek and San Diego Bay was filled in 1968, and the channel was dredg ed between Paradise Creek and the Sweetwater River. The land around the dredged channel is, for the most part, bare fill. The D Street fill in Chula Vista was formed in 1969, covering an area of 108 acres. It has eroded on its western edge, depositing sediment into a 26-acre tidal flat, degrading the tidal flat habitat. Due to creation of the Twenty-Fourth Street Marine Terminal, the dredg ing of the Twenty-Fourth Street channel and filling of some wetland area, another channel was dredged in 1969 to divert Paradise Creek south into the Sweetwater River.

Today, Paradise Creek is a remnant of a formerly extensive marsh system. It once joined with the Sweetwater River Marsh to create a continuous estuarine area all along National City’s shoreline, and extended inland beyond National City Boulevard. It is now reduced to 29+ acres and is separated from the Sweetwater Marsh by the D Street fill. Stil l, the Sweetwater-Paradise Marsh complex is the highest quality marsh remaining in San Diego Bay.

EXISTING PLANNING AND ZONING

The Natural Setting Section of t he National City’s Updated Gene ral Plan contains several policy statements recommending the preservation of Paradise Marsh. For example:

26 Policy F. The City will preserve open space as necessary and de sirable to conserve natural resources, to provide adequate recreation, and to protect public health and safety.

Policy H. The City will support efforts by the Coastal Commission and Army Corps of Engineers state and federal resource agencies related to preserving valuable natural habitats in the Paradise Marsh and Sweetwater River areas.

Implementation Policy 9. Seek imp lementation of the adopted Local Coastal Program’s Land Use Plan, regarding preservation and upgrading enhancing of natural resources in the Paradise Marsh and Bayfront areas of the cCoastal zZone in National City.

National City’s Combined General Plan/Zoning Map designates the Paradise Marsh as Open Space Reserve (OSR). The secondary area of the marsh, that which is located east of I-5, is also designated as Open Space Reserve. The designation is applied p rimarily to implement the Local Coastal Plan, regarding preservation of open space wetland area s and passive use of the land for limited nature study purposes.

The Paradise Marsh area is also located within the Floodway Fringe (FF-1). This zone is applied to those areas of special flood hazard designated as Floodway Fringe on the “Flood Boundary and Floodway Map” of the Federal Flood Insurance Study. Before development can proceed within a special flood hazard area, a Flood Hazard Development Permit must be obtained concurrently with routinely required development permits. The FF-1 zone establis hes the development standards with which development must comply to receive the Flood Hazard Development Permit.

Another project that would impact the Paradise Marsh area is th e joint Army Corps/Caltrans Sweetwater River Flood Channel - Highway 54 Proj ect. The Paradise Marsh would be acquired as mitigation for the construction of the flo od control channel. Also, the connection between the marsh and the flood control channel woul d be restored to improve tidal flow.

ANALYSIS

RESOURCE VALUE

The value of the Paradise Marsh includes, but is not limited to, the following:

1. Through photosynthesis of algal species, the marsh provides an oxygen supply for the waters of San Diego Bay, necessary for survival of fish species and na tural pollution impact abatement.

2. Flushing of plant and animal detritus from the marsh provide s organic matter important for food chains in the bay and protection from sea level rise.

3. The marsh acts as a nursery for at least nine fish species, including several important sport fish species.

27 4. The wetland habitats are extremely important wildlife areas, supporting a very high diversity of bird species. These include a number of sensitive species, i.e., Belding’s Savannah Sparrow, and potentially the Light-footed Clapper Rail. The wetlands al so are an important stopover point for migratory species along the Pacific Flyway.

Potential uses for the wetlands, if preserved, are:

1. Basic scientific research, na ture study, or educational uses;

2. Passive recreation (i .e., bird watching);

3. A possible source for applied research into the use of marsh sp ecies to introduce salt- tolerant genes into economically important plants (in agricultu re), through selective cross- breeding.

IMPACT ON MARSH

The biological resources of the Paradise Creek Marsh have been affected by both past and current impacts. Past impacts to the marsh, which changed is character and size, were reduction in total area of wetlands, landfill activities, and channel alteration o f Paradise Creek. Current, ongoing impacts to the biological resources include off-road vehicle ac tivity, rubbish disposal, and sedimentation and pollutant deposition from urban runoff.

The most adverse of these impacts is by off-road vehicle activi ty, especially in the southern salt- pan habitat. There is also evidence of refuse and commercial w aste dumping along the northern and western margins of the salt marsh from the meat packing pla nt and railroad easement. The secondary area, to the east of I-5, has been degraded to a grea t extent by landfill, erosion, and vehicular activity. Preservation of the Paradise Marsh will require reduction of the current impacts of off-road vehicles, rubbish and commercial waste dumping into the marsh, and, at a minimum, maintenance of current sedimentation and total dissolved solids in runoff at or below present levels.

PRESERVATION CONSIDERATIONS

One technique ofmitigation measure for preserving wetlands commonly referred to is the provision of a buffer area between the wetland and development. The Coas tal Commission and other resource agenciesgenerally recommend s that development be set back 100 feet from the delineatedlandward edge of a wetland. The 100-foot-wide buffer may be increased or decreased in consultation with the Department of Fish and Game.resource agencies. The purpose of the 100- foot buffer is to ensure that the type and scale of development will not significantly degrade the adjacent habitat area. The distinction must be made, however, that the application of the 100-foot buffer assumes that the area surrounding the wetland is substantially undeveloped. With respect to Paradise Marsh, the wetland is almost entirely surrounded by existing industrial development and transportation corridors , including lumber storage yards , automobile storage, , and I-5 , and State Route 54 rights-of-ways.. , slaughter houses, steel fabricating plant, I-5, and rights -of-way for the AT&SF and SD&AE Railroads. In most locations, this existing development lies

28 immediately adjacent to the landward edge of the wetlands. In such situations, the Commission’s guidelines recommend that new d evelopment observe an appropriat e setback based on unique characteristics of the property. It should also be noted that the marsh areas recommended and required for acquisition as mitigation for the Sweetwater River Flood Control Channel/Rt. 54 freeway projects were determined to include necessary buffers for protection of wetlands.

In order to preserve the marsh, it is essential that the marsh be open to tidal flushing. Salt marshes need nitrogen, and preliminary fertilizer experiments have indi cated that a marsh could be more productive if more nitrogen were available. One important source of nitrogen is ammonium from the ocean via tidal flushing. For example, in the Tijuana estu ary, flushing can supply 1.0 - 2.16g nitrogen per square meter per yea r (28 percent of the nitrogen required for vascular plants, 10 percent of that required by vasc ular and algal plants combined) . Another source of nitrogen is mineral recycling within the marsh itself, partly through decom position. Also, tidal flushing exports about 30 percent of the marsh’s net primary productivit y to the ocean. For example, organic carbon leaves the Tijuana estuary at the rate of 35-105g carbon per square meter per year, mostly in the dissolved form. Since little particulate organic carbon (i.e., carbon in detritus) leaves, it is assumed that the detritus is consumed within the marsh and is a partial source of nutrients.

Lowered tidal flushing has seve ral possible effects. In years of high rainfall, it could lead to increased production, as happened in Los Penasquitos Lagoon in 1978. Less organic matter is lost to the ocean and is available for recycling. Soil nutrients re main high. Higher production by vascular plants initially appears to be an advantage, but algal productivity can suffer due to shading and may upset the balance of detritus versus grazer-based food chains. Detritus-feeders consume broken plant parts where grazers feed on the algal mats that grow between the vascular plants.

In years of low rainfall, lower tidal flushing can lead to hyper-salinity of the soil, which can reduce productivity, leading possibly to the elimination of some species. For example, Cordgrass cannot tolerate either high salinity or widely fluctuating salinities, and a population of Light-footed Clapper Rails would disappear from an area if it were deprived of Cordgrass for its nesting sites.

It has been hypothesized that Los Penasquitos Lagoon lost its C ordgrass between 1942 and the 1970’s due to altered tidal circulation.

As mentioned previously, the essential measure necessary to guarantee the preservation of Paradise Marsh is the maintenance of tid al flushing. As long as the mar sh is kept open to tidal flushing, and as long as the major input of freshwater continues to be runoff from the upstream areas rather than industrial discharge, the existing water quality will be maintained at acceptable levels. Other management alternatives, such as implementing increased street sweeping programs or sediment control measures in selected sub-basins, do not appear to be necessary on the basis of the data and results presently available.

RESTORATION CONSIDERATIONS

As proposed, the Sweetwater River Flood Control Channel would h ave an overall beneficial impact upon the biological resources of Paradise Marsh. The rea son for this, in addition to the preservation of the marsh itself through acquisition, is the re storation of the marsh’s primary

29 connection channel. The intended result of these actions is to increase the rates of tidal flushing, thereby improving the productivity of the marsh.

Consideration of restoration activities should definitely not be limited to the connection channel.

Improving the tidal inundation of the main marsh itself would r esult in a more productive habitat and an increased number and diversity of wildlife utilizing the marsh. In addition, the marsh could become an aesthetic asset of National City's Coastal Zonecoastal zone.

In general, restoration of the a rea would entail removal of som e of the fill from the present high salt-pan to the south of the mar sh itself and in the secondary area to the east of I-5, and re - channelization of these two areas. It would be desirable to complete these actions in conjunction with construction of the Sweetwater River Flood Control Channel project in order to minimize disruptions to the wetland and wildlife.

POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

1. The wetlands of the Paradise Creek Marshes well as the secon dary area of Paradise Marsh, east of I-5, including salt marsh, freshwater marsh, salt-pan, channel, and mudflat habitats, are valuable and sensitive biological resources, and shall be p r e s e r v e d . T h e p l a n designation for these areas shall be OPEN SPACE/WETLAND PRESERV E; t . The boundaries of the “Open Space Wetland Preserve” areas include t he marsh area required for acquisition by the Army Corps of Engineers for the Sweetwat er River flood control improvements, marsh area within Caltrans right-of-way easterly of the SDG&E rights-of- way, and the secondary area of Paradise Marsh east of the I-5 f reeway. The Sweetwater River area, south of 35th Street , designated for industrial and commercial use ;, and the wetlands located west of the railroad, which are not proposed f or public acquisition, also contain valuable biological resour ces which shall be preserved under an overlay zone or other appropriate, implementing regulation which shall be defin ed in the implementation plan. The overlay zone or implementing regulation shall include requirements for mapping all wetlands not included in the “Open Space Wetland Reserve” l and use designation, execution of open space easements over identified resources and their buffers in conjunction with new development and a determination of appropriate buffers for any new development.

2. In order to preserve Paradise Marsh ,; the wetlands located west of the Bayshore Bikeway;, ; railroad, which are not pr oposed for public acquisition ; the secondary area of Paradise Marsh, east of I-5; and the Sweetwater River south of 35th Stre et shall be subject to the following policies:

 Alteration shall be limited to marine- dependent uses, minor incidental public facilities, restoration measures, and nature study. Consistent with the provisions of Section 30233, the diking, dredging and filling of wetlands, open waters, estuaries and lakes shall be permitted only where there is no feasible le ss environmentally damaging alternative, and where feasible mitigation measures ha ve been provided to minimize adverse environmental effects, and shall be limited to the following:
incidental public service purposes , restoration purposes, and n ature study. There

30 shall be no alteration of Paradise Marsh, the wetlands located west of the railroad which are not proposed for public acquisition, as well as of th e secondary area of Paradise Marsh, east of I-5, and the Sweetwater River south of 35th Street, except as determined by a marsh restoration program which has been app roved by the California Coastal Commission.

 The dumping of rubbish or commercial waste into the marsh areas shall be prohibited.

 The intrusion of off-road vehicles and unauthorized pedestrian traffic into the marsh areas shall be discouraged.

 the Department of Fish and Game. A buffer area less than 100 f eet wide may be permitted, depending upon the analysis of the specific site pro posed for development. Examples which may demonstrate that a lesser dist ance would be acceptable include but are not limited to the type and size of development, proposed buffer improvements such as landscaping or fencing, and existin g site characteristics such as a grade differential between a marsh ar ea and adjacent upland area, existing development in the area, and parcel size and configuration.

Consistency with buffers required as part of the Sweetwater Riv er Channel/Rt. 54 project shall also be considered in order to determine appropri ate buffers less than 100 feet wide. The buffers shall be determined with the concur rence of the State Department of Fish and Game.
 A buffer area shall be established for new development adjacent to wetlands. A 100 ft. distance from the edge of the wetland shall generally provi de an acceptable buffer. The required distance may be increased or decreased based on consultation with state and federal resource agencies.

3. To enhance the habitat and aesthetic value of Paradise Marsh , the wetlands located west of the railroad, which are not pr oposed for acquisition, as well a s the secondary area of Paradise Marsh, east of I-5, and the Sweetwater River south of 35th Street, feasible restoration activities shall be encouraged. Feasible restorati on activities shall be determined with the potential assistance of the Coastal Conservancy, or other public agency or private group, including the Bayfront Conservancy Trust, to finance, plan, implement and manage a restoration program. The recommended elements for a restoration program include:

 A public access and information program that would be designed to allow observation of the marsh, while controlling in trusion into the marsh itself . A component of the access program should be an interpretive nature trail along the western margins of Paradise Marsh, which could connect with an observation platform.

 The removal of all rubbish and debris from the marsh through a volunteer effort, or the California Conservation Corps.

31  The dredging of Paradise Marsh, consistent with a marsh restoration program, prepared in consultation with the California Department of Fish and Game and approved by the California Coastal Commission, possibly concurrent with the con struction of the Sweetwater River Flood Control Channel, to improve tidal flow a nd flushing.

Dredging shall be restricted to existing tidal channels.

 The encouragement of a scientific research program.

4. Proposed new development, including roadways, located adjace nt to the wetlands of Paradise Marsh, the wetlands located west of the railroad which are not proposed for public acquisition, the secondary area of Paradise Marsh, east of I-5, and the Sweetwater River south of 35th Street, shall be d esigned to discourage the intrusion of pedestrians, vehicles, or domestic animals into the marsh through physical barriers su ch as fencing and/or landscaping with appropriate non-invasive species. In associat ion with new development or remodeling of existing development contiguous with the wetla nds, including roadways, drainage shall be directed off-site toward the Sweetwater River Flood Control Channel, or to existing street drains, whenever possible, or channeled into a settling area before entering the marsh. Potential increase in the rate of storm-water runoff, which may result from new development, including roadways, adjacent to wetlands, shall be controlled by detention basins or other means to avoid impacts of erosion and sedimentation on wetlands. The size, design and placement of such sedimentation control devices shal l be developed in consultation with the State Department of Fishstate and federal resource agencies and Game prior to or concurrent with the commencement of construction an d shall be installed and maintained by the developer, or any successors in interest.

5. Wetlands in private ownership, which may be located in the C T, C and M, as well as OSR designated areas, shall be protected from development through the application of an overlay zone or other appropriate, imple menting regulation proposed in P o l i c y # 1 . N e c e s s a r y protective measures, including adequate buffers, regulations regarding the design and siting of structures, etc., and open space easements shall be determined during review of proposals for development, by application of criteria to be specified in the LCP Implementation Plan.

6. Landscaping in areas adjacent to wetlands shall include plants only which are not invasive of wetlands.

7. Specific erosion control measures shall be approved, incorpo rated into development, be in place at the initial phase of work, monitored and maintained in conjunction with all grading activities, consistent with Section X (B) (4) (k) of the Implem entation Plan, during the period of November 1 to April 1 of each year for all properties which drain directly to marsh and wetland areas. These propert ies shall include all properti es located in the following areas:

All properties between 35th Str eet and the southern City limits;

All properties in the area lying between 33rd Street, Hoover A venue, 30th Street, and the MTDB San DiegoMTS Trolley lLine;

32 All properties in the City’s jurisdiction located westerly of Highway I-5 and south of 24th StreetBay Marina Drive.

( N O T E ) : T h e p r e c e d i n g h a s b e e n l a r g e l y p a r a p h r a s e d f r o m t h e w ork conducted by Regional Environmental Consultants (RECON), on the biological resources of Paradise Marsh. RECON’s report is incorporated as Appendix II of this Land Use Plan. Al l r e f e r e n c e s f o r t h e M a r s h Preservation section are in RECON’s report, and are not duplica ted in the reference list for the overall Plan.

34 CHAPTER VI

VISUAL RESOURCES

COASTAL ACT POLICIES

Section 30251 of the Coastal Act calls for the protection of the scenic and visual qualities of coastal areas, and, where feasible, to restore and enhance visual quality in visually degraded areas.

EXISTING CONDITIONS

The industrial character of National City’s Bayfront generally does not provide generally scenic values commonly associated with the natural resources of the Coastal Zonecoastal zone .

Nonetheless, coastal industrial areas are essential to the econ omy of the City and region.

Recreational facilities were added on the National City waterfront in the early 2000 s w i t h t h e construction of the National City Marina. The Balanced Plan includes the expansion of the existing Pepper Park, adds a dry boat storage facility, RV Park, and pro vides for future hotel projects. At the same time, it allows the marine- dependent industries to continue and to expand. city and region, and their physical form and functional activit y can foster public interest. While such areas do not usually provide for public viewing, observation opportunities can be educational and provide a different perspective to the varied functions of the coastal zone. As an example, a school excursion to the area would offer exposure to a number o f coastal related industrial activities and operations such as container terminals, lumber s torage, railroad transportation, resource recovery operations, and petroleum handling.

The Balanced Plan provides new s cenic areas, vista points, and public access corridors. Within National City, the most notable scenic resource is the Paradise Marsh and , under the Balanced Plan, the marsh osis fully protected along with its public vista points.

On the subject of coastal visual resources, the more commonly r eferred to elements are scenic areas, vista points, and public access corridors. Within Natio nal City, the most notable scenic resource is the Paradise Marsh. Although the area could not be considered pristine and urban development does intrude, the mar sh does provide visual open sp ace which is accentuated by its linkage with Sweetwater Marsh. The best and most accessible va ntage points to view the marsh are along I-5. The shorefront area adjacent to the Port Distri ct’s launching ramp offers vista opportunities of San Diego Bay. In fact, this area has been de signated a vista area in the Port’s Master Plan.

The only public access area to the bay itself is from the existing boat launching ramp. Direct access to the bay is preclude3d by the National City Marine Terminal operated by the Port District. Pasha Automotive is an automobile importer and exporter with many land areas surrounding the Marine Terminal being used as car storage areas. ABay Marina DriveBay Marina DriveThe areas north of the terminal are typical small industrial facilities, as well as and the Port’s maintenance center.

A discussion of the existing visual qualities of National City’s access corridors is in some respects irrelevant. The reason for this is that the only public access area (boat launching ramp) and the immediate access corridor to it (Tidelands Avenue south of 24th Street) are under the jurisdiction