Vista City Council
February 22, 2022

D-3
D MI
D-5

10.9 Policy 2.1: Maintain the existing residential character of Vista, characterized by large lot single-family residential development, by encouraging land uses and intensities of development that are consistent with this image.

The project does not propose large lot single-family residential development. However, the proposed project is consistent with the goal of providing denser housing near public transit corridors. y
The developers could decrease the number of lots and enlarge the lots while still providing housing near transit corridors. We all know that the Vista 2030 goal of denser housing near transit corridors was targeting the downtown Vista area where residents could reasonably walk to transit. So, the preparers are just inserting some unrelated diversion and not addressing the policy element.

Policy 2.2: Provide flexibility in development standards to accommodate and enhance neighborhood variations within the City while ensuring that site and building design, landscaping, and other amenities reflect neighborhood characteristics.

The project proposes to construct 28 single-family lots. Each lot would be a minimum of one-half acre ranging in size from 21,789 sf to 25,078 sf. The proposed setbacks would be consistent with city standards. y
I believe the Element Policy is addressing the desire to have a city with neighborhood variation as I addressed when I stated: "Some people love the "big city" others love places like Vista. Our city is wonderful because it answers this call to all manner of dreams. Vista is eclectic that way." Placing a tract housing project in the midst of a rural community does not "reflect neighborhood characteristics". Again, this could be remedied by having fewer lots and architectural variation within the project. And again the Project Description completely misses the point of the Element Policy.

Policy 2.4: Discourage subdivision design that disrupts the existing development pattern within established neighborhoods.

The project site is surrounded by residential uses to the south, east and west. The proposed project would improve the existing easterly Vista Grande Drive along the southern boundary of the project site. The newly constructed road would loop north to provide access to the new interior lots and would exit to the west to the easement road on the western side of the project site. The design of the project would not disrupt existing development. y
The proposed road does benefit the Vista Grande Drive neighborhood by replacing a worn and damaged narrow road.

However, that benefit is offset by the stress and burden to other roads and community traffic by having 28 more families. I reiterate, larger and fewer lots would be a remedy and could shift the calculous to being more beneficial and less detrimental.

Policy 2.5: Ensure that multiple -family residential development is sited and designed to enhance the residential character of Vista; includes amenities such as open space, landscaping, and architectural design that contributes to this character; and minimizes impacts on adjacent residential development that is of a lower density.

The proposed single-family development incorporates architectural design elements that would enhance the residential character of Vista. The on -site landscaping would include trees, shrubs, and ground cover. Existing residences to the south and east would be screened by the proposed landscape trees. y
I have not seen any proposed architectural designs and according to the Landscape Concept Plan there is very little open space. One of the charms of our rural neighborhood is the uniqueness and variation of architectural design. The prospect of having 28 cookie cutter tract homes is the absolute antithesis of what the community of Vista represents. 02/22/2022
PH1 Page 112 of 210

D-7
me •
Policy 2.8: Consider adoption of a slope protection ordinance as an amendment to the zoning ordinance to better define grading standards for hillside development and ensure the protection of natural landforms in the review of new development.

The project site contains sloping land. Proposed grading would maintain landscaped slopes within the proposed development.

Y, And:

Policy 2.9: Prohibit mass grading to protect the visual continuity of the hillsides.

Grading of the site is proposed in a manner that creates a relatively flat building site, while creating landscaped slopes.

Slopes would be landscaped with variety of native and non-native evergreen and deciduous trees, shrubs, and ground cover which would be layered in a natural way to provide scale and reduce visual impacts.

M
I imagine that it would reduce building costs to have the land as flat as possible. When the developer/consultants refer to "landscaped slopes" are these truly preserving what is the natural slope of this entire area or are the developer/consultants just including language that suggests they will? How does the city impose and enforce these requirements? This is an example of using vague and ambiguous explanations that evade accountability. Once the developers have a green light, they will prioritize cost over Vista's 2030 goals and aspirations.

Policy 2.11: Preserve immediate ridges and hilltops in a natural state to the maximum extent possible. Intermediate ridges are those with visible land behind them that creates a backdrop to the ridge as viewed from the valley floor.

Development should be sited such that buildings do not project above the natural landform. Development applications shall be designed so that site plans concentrate development in the subordinate or hidden locations, and grading plans minimize disruption of the natural landform and vegetation.

The project would preserve the immediate ridges and hilltops. At locations in close proximity to the project site, the anticipated one-story and two-story dwelling units may provide minor obstructions of views of the San Marcos Mountains depending on the vantage point of the viewer. However, the proposed project would be developed at a scale that would not adversely affect scenic views or vistas from the surrounding area.

Y
A proposal with fewer homes and lots could be submitted that does not cause any obstruction to the view of the San Marcos Mountains. The residents in the adjacent neighborhoods may not consider their view obstruction as "minor." Obstruction of the neighborhood's view of the mountains or any of the beautiful views may seem minor to developers that do not live in Vista, but I would argue that is a conceit of the persuader — so, again, how is it that the preparers find a Y for "Consistent"?
Policy 2.12: Restrict development of hillsides so that the natural appearance and landform of the site is preserved.

Development projects on terrain with a slope greater than 3.5 percent shall conform with the following standards:
development shall be designed to minimize grading requirements by conforming to the natural contours of the site; the site shall be landscaped with existing trees and natural vegetation, as much as possible, to stabilize slopes, reduce erosion, and enhance the visual appearance of the development; and grading, terracing, padding, and cut -and -fill shall be minimized to protect the visual continuity of the hillsides.

The majority of the project site has a slope greater than 3.5 percent. The project proposes to develop the project site into 28 single-family lots and would require approximately 70,000 cy of earth movement. The cut and fill would be balanced on site. The project site would be landscaped with a variety of native and nonnative evergreen and deciduous trees, shrubs, and ground cover. All private yards slopes would be landscaped to stabilize slopes, reduce erosion and enhance the visual appearance of the development.
02/22/2022
PH1 Page 113 of 210

Y
Seventy thousand cubic yards is a lot of grading and earth movement. This could be reduced substantially if there were fewer homes. I would urge the City to hire their own land surveyors to determine the optimal site division to minimize D-9 grading, erosion and maximize stability. There is a sweet spot between development that maximizes profit and cont. development that serves the greater good of the community and Vista's 2030 Smart Growth and Sustainable Development Plan. What's the point of having such a plan if we don't abide by it? �olicy 3.1: Require all new development to be designed to minimize impacts on adjoining residential neighborhoods.

The proposed project would improve the existing easterly Vista Grande Drive along the southern boundary of the project site. The newly constructed road would loop north to provide access to the new interior lots and would exit to the west to the easement road on the western side of the project site. Vista Grande Drive would act as a divide between D-10 the proposed development and the existing residential units. In addition, a variety of native and non-native evergreen and deciduous trees would be planted along Vista Grande Drive.

Y
The improvement and benefits of constructing a new road could be provided without the offset of increased traffic, pollution, noise, etc. by reducing the number of homes in this project.

Policy 3.2: Mitigate unacceptable levels of noise, odors, pollution, dust, light, and glare upon residential areas and other sensitive receptors, such as schools and day care centers.

The project's MND provides avoidance or mitigation measures to ensure that all impacts are reduced to less than D-11 significant levels.

D-12
A question I have for all the "mitigation" proposals is, how are these enforced? Policy 3.3: Require visual and acoustic buffering between non—residential and residential land uses and other sensitive receptors by employing techniques such as landscaping, setbacks, sound walls, and sensitive siting of buildings.

The project is surrounded on residential uses on the south, east and west. The newly constructed Vista Grande Drive would serve as a boundary between the existing and proposed development. A variety of native and non-native evergreen and deciduous trees would line Vista Grande Drive.

Y
A road to serve as a boundary and buffer is absurd, even with the described landscaping. A road with the increased traffic of 28 homes with families will generate negative visual and acoustic impacts. Again, this Y for "Consistent" is meaningless.

Policy 9.1: Provide land use designations that support semi -rural, suburban, and urban housing options.

The proposed development would be consistent with nearby estate residential land uses with the incorporation of similar lot sizes, anticipated dwelling unit square footage, building heights, architectural design features, and D-13 landscaping.

Y
The Vista City Council just needs to look at an aerial google map to see that this is a lie. The lot sizes are not similar to the nearby estate residential land uses. Y for "Consistent"? 02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 114 of 210

In summary, our position is an acceptance of the inevitability and need for growth and development in our community, but a rejection of any proposal that necessitates a radical amendment to the General Plan and revising the current land use and zoning designations. The benefits of growth and development can be achieved by a plan that proposes fewer homes, larger lot sizes, considerably more green space, and most importantly, does not exacerbate an already fraught D-14 fire hazard area. If the City of Vista does its due diligence in representing the interests of our community, this development could be a win -win for everyone.

Respectfully submitted,
Alisa Willens-Davis and Haydn Davis
02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 115 of 210

DocuSign Envelope ID: 16FDC7B5-7F52-4C68-AC4D-3825EFE4EAFF C State of California — Natural Resources Agency GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor E DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE CHARLTON H. BONHAM, Director - South Coast Region
3883 Ruffin Road
San Diego, CA 92123
(858) 467-4201
www.wildlife.ca.gov
November 1, 2021
Mr. John Conley,
Director of Community Development
City of Vista Community Development, Department Planning Division 200 Civic Center Drive
Vista, CA 92084
JCon ley(a)_cityofvista.com
Subject: Vista Grande Residential Project (PROJECT); Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND); SCH #2021090600
Dear Mr. Conley:

The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) has reviewed the City of Vista's draft MND for the Project pursuant the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and CEQA Guidelines.' Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments and recommendations regarding those activities involved in the Project that may affect California fish and wildlife. Likewise, we appreciate the opportunity to provide comments regarding those aspects of the Project that CDFW, by law, may be required to carry out or approve through the exercise of its own regulatory authority under the Fish and Game Code.

CDFW ROLE
CDFW is California's Trustee Agency for fish and wildlife resources and holds those resources in trust by statute for all the people of the state. (Fish & G. Code, §§ 711.7, subd. (a) & 1802; Pub.

E-1 Resources Code, § 21070; CEQA Guidelines § 15386, subd. (a).) CDFW, in its trustee capacity, has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection, and management of fish, wildlife, native plants, and habitat necessary for biologically sustainable populations of those species. (Id., § 1802.) Similarly, for purposes of CEQA, CDFW is charged by law to provide, as available, biological expertise during public agency environmental review efforts, focusing specifically on projects and related activities that have the potential to adversely affect fish and wildlife resources.

CDFW is also submitting comments as a Responsible Agency under CEQA. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21069; CEQA Guidelines, § 15381.) CDFW may also need to exercise regulatory authority as provided by the Fish and Game Code. As proposed, for example, the Project may be subject to CDFW's lake and streambed alteration regulatory authority. (Fish & G. Code, § 1600 et seq.) Likewise, to the extent implementation of the Project as proposed may result in "take" as defined by State law of any species protected under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) (Fish & G. Code, § 2050 et seq.), the project proponent may seek related take authorization as provided by the Fish and Game Code.

CDFW also administers the Natural Community Conservation Planning (NCCP) program. The City has participated in the NCCP program by preparing a draft Subarea Plan (SAP) under the ' CEQA is codified in the California Public Resources Code in section 21000 et seq. The "CEQA Guidelines" are found in Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, commencing with section 15000. 02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 116 of 210

DocuSign Envelope ID: 16FDC7B5-7F52-4C68-AC4D-3825EFE4EAFF Mr. John Conley
City of Vista
November 1, 2021

subregional Multiple Habitat Conservation Plan (MHCP), which addressed eight incorporated cities E-1 in northern San Diego County. However, the City's SAP was not finalized and has not been cont. adopted by the City or received permits from the Wildlife Agencies (collectively CDFW and the U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)).

E-2

PROJECT DESCRIPTION SUMMARY
Proponent: City of Vista (City)
Objective: The proposed Project involves the approval of a General Plan Amendment, zoning change, and Tentative Subdivision Map to construct 28 single-family detached lots, an access road, and associated utilities situated on two parcels in the northeastern part of the City. The site is currently designated Rural Residential in the Vista General Plan 2030 (City of Vista 2012)2, which allows up to one dwelling unit per acre. The project proposes to change the General Plan land use designation to Low Density Residential, which would allow up to two dwellings per acre. The property is currently zoned Agricultural Zone. The Project also proposes to rezone the property as Estates Residential.

The Project proposes to construct 28 residential lots. The proposed single-family detached residences would be a mix between single -story and two-story structures and range in size from approximately 3,200 sf to 4,200 square feet (ft). In addition, the proposed project would include four open space areas that would contain decomposed granite trails and park benches.

Location: The City is a largely built out, being a predominantly low -density residential community approximately seven miles inland from the Pacific Ocean in northern San Diego County. The

16.99-acre Project site lies east of East Vista Way, north of Warmlands Avenue, and west of Green Hills Way in the northeast part of the City, bordering unincorporated San Diego County to the north and east. The Project site is composed of two parcels, Assessor's Parcel Numbers 171-100-05 and 171-100-28. An occupied single-family residence exists on the western parcel, and the remainder of the site is vacant. An existing road easement runs north to south along the western border of the site, and existing aboveground power lines run along the southern border of the project site.

Biological Setting: The Project site has moderately steep slopes and is on a south -facing slope of an east -to -west -trending ridge. Elevations range from 725 ft above mean sea level in the northern corner of the site on the ridge and 630 ft above mean seal level in the southwestern corner of the site at Vista Grande Drive, with a total elevation difference of approximately 95 ft. According to the Vista Grande Biological Report prepared for the Project in February 2021 by Tierra Data, the Project site supports five distinct vegetation communities/land covers: approximately 0.13 acre of Diegan coastal sage scrub (CSS) that is contiguous with an approximately 60-foot wide band of CSS directly to the north of the site, 0.01 acre of disturbed coastal sage scrub in the southeast corner of the Project site, 12.65 acres of non-native grassland (NNG), 2.85 acres of disturbed habitat (compacted soils, very low vegetation cover consisting primarily of nonnative, weedy species that are indicators of surface disturbance and soil compaction), and 1.34 acres that are developed. No special -status plant or animal species were observed on site, and none have a high potential to occur on site. It is assumed that the whole Project site will be impacted with no areas remaining for biological open space. The Project would also impact 0.10 acre of off -site disturbed 2 City of Vista. 2012. Vista General Plan 2030. Adopted February 28. Accessed September 2021. https://www.cityofvista.com/city-services/city-departments/community-development/building-planning- perm its-applications/vista-general-plan-2030.
02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 117 of 210

DocuSign Envelope ID: 16FDC7B5-7F52-4C68-AC4D-3825EFE4EAFF Mr. John Conley
City of Vista
November 1, 2021

CSS and 0.33 acre of off -site NNG, which would be added to the total impacts to be mitigated off site.

No Critical Habitat has been designated on site. The nearest land under such designation is for the federal -listed threatened coastal California gnatcatcher (gnatcatcher; Polioptila californica E-2 californica) approximately 0.30 mile to the north and northeast of the northeastern corner of the cont.

Project site.

In compliance with the City's draft MSCP SAP, the Project shall mitigate the proposed impact to CSS and disturbed CSS at a ratio of 1:1 with acquisition of a minimum of 0.24 acre of CSS at an off -site location, acceptable to the City, CDFW, and USFWS (jointly, the Wildlife Agencies). The Project shall mitigate the proposed impact to NNG at a 0.5:1 ratio with acquisition of a minimum of

6.49 acres of NNG at an off -site location, acceptable to the City and the Wildlife Agencies.

COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
CDFW offers the comments and recommendations below to assist the City in adequately identifying and/or mitigating the Project's significant, or potentially significant, direct and indirect impacts on fish and wildlife (biological) resources. Editorial comments or other suggestions may also be included to improve the document.

I. Mitigation Measure or Alternative and Related Impact Shortcoming COMMENT #1: Surveys for coastal California gnatcatcher
Issue: Surveys for gnatcatcher were last conducted in 2010 and 2014 on the property to the north of the Project site. Those surveys showed no usage by gnatcatcher of the band of CSS bordering and overlapping the site. The MND speculates that the band of CSS is likely too narrow to support gnatcatcher. The general Project site survey was performed on January 22, 2021, early in the season, which limited the potential for observing gnatcatcher.

E-3 Specific impact: If gnatcatcher is currently utilizing the CSS habitat adjacent to and overlapping the Project site, construction of the Project could impact individuals of the species.

Why impact would occur: It is possible that gnatcatcher may have begun utilizing the CSS patch to the north and overlapping the Project site in the years since the previous gnatcatcher surveys. The January 2021 general survey of the Project site may have been too early in the year to detect gnatcatcher activity.

Evidence impact would be significant: Gnatcatcher is listed as threatened under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) and is also designated as a Bird Species of Special Concern by the State of California.

Recommended Potentially Feasible Mitigation Measure(s) (Regarding Mitigation Measure or Alternative and Related Impact Shortcoming)
Mitigation Measure #1:

To reduce impacts to less than significant: CDFW recommends that updated protocol -level gnatcatcher surveys be conducted to determine the status of gnatcatcher within the on- and off - site CSS. If found, potential impacts to the gnatcatcher could be addressed under section 7 (if there is a federal nexus) or 10 of the ESA.
02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 118 of 210

DocuSign Envelope ID: 16FDC7B5-7F52-4C68-AC4D-3825EFE4EAFF E-4
Mr. John Conley
City of Vista
November 1, 2021

ENVIRONMENTAL DATA
CEQA requires that information developed in environmental impact reports and negative declarations be incorporated into a data base which may be used to make subsequent or supplemental environmental determinations. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21003, subd. (e).) Accordingly, please report any special status species and natural communities detected during Project surveys to the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). The CNNDB field survey form can be found at the following link:
http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/cnddb/pdfs/CNDDB FieldSurveyForm.pdf. The completed form can be mailed electronically to CNDDB at the following email address: CNDDB(a-wildlife.ca.gov.

The types of information reported to CNDDB can be found at the following link:
http://www.dfq.ca.gov/biogeodata/cnddb/plants and animals.asp.

FILING FEES
The Project, as proposed, would have an impact on fish and/or wildlife, and assessment of filing fees is necessary. Fees are payable upon filing of the Notice of Determination by the Lead Agency and serve to help defray the cost of environmental review by CDFW. Payment of the fee is required in order for the underlying project approval to be operative, vested, and final. (Cal. Code Regs, tit. 14, § 753.5; Fish & G. Code, § 711.4; Pub. Resources Code, § 21089.)

CONCLUSION
CDFW appreciates the opportunity to comment on the MND to assist the City in identifying and mitigating Project impacts on biological resources.

Questions regarding this letter or further coordination should be directed to Meredith Osborne, Environmental Scientist, at Meredith.Osborne(ab-wildlife.ca.gov.

Sincerely,
DocuSigneedAbyy:I.

D700B4520375406...

David Mayer
Environmental Program Manager
South Coast Region
ec: CDFW
David Mayer, San Diego — David. Mayer(a)_wildlife.ca.gov Jennifer Turner, San Diego — Jennifer.Turner(a�-wildlife.ca.gov Meredith Osborne, San Diego — Meredith.Osborne(a�wildlife.ca.gov Jennifer Ludovissy, San Diego — Jennifer. Ludovissy(a)wildlife.ca.gov Cindy Hailey, San Diego — Cindy. Hailey(a-)wildlife.ca.gov State Clearinghouse, Office of Planning and Research — State. Clearinghouse(a�opr.ca.gov Janet Stuckrath, USFWS — Janet Stuckrath(d_)fws.gov
Attachments
A. CDFW Comments and Recommendations
02/22/2022
PH1 Page 119 of 210

DocuSign Envelope ID: 16FDC7B5-7F52-4C68-AC4D-3825EFE4EAFF Mr. John Conley
City of Vista
November 1, 2021

Attachment A:

CDFW Comments and Recommendations
Recommendations/Mitigation Measures
Timing
Responsible
Party
Mitigation
CDFW recommends that updated protocol -
Measure 1
level gnatcatcher surveys be conducted to
determine the status of gnatcatcher within
Prior to
City of Vista
the on- and off -site coastal sage scrub. If
construction
found, potential impacts to the gnatcatcher
activities
could be addressed under section 7 (if
there is a federal nexus) or 10 of the ESA.
02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 120 of 210

11/1/21, 7:49AM
MUROW CM Mail - FW: Vista Grande
�M U RcoONsuirW
FW: Vista Grande
John Conley
To: Greg Perrine
Cc: Christopher Winters
From: Ursula Sack
Sent: Saturday, October 30, 2021 8:11 AM
To: John Conley ; Patsy Chow
Subject: Fwd: Vista Grande
Begin forwarded message:

From: Guajome Alliance
Subject: Vista Grande
Date: October 29, 2021 at 5:28:15 PM PDT
To: John Conley
Cc: [email protected]
To: John Conley, Director of Community Development
El
Greg Perrine
Mon, Nov 1, 2021 at 7:32 AM
02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 121 of 210
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=45edf93l ef&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f%3Al7l5236646891456893&simpl=msg-f%3Al7l 5236646891456893 1 /7

1111121, 7:49 AM
MUROW CM Mail - FW: Vista Grande
From: Ursula Sack, Ph.D.

Secretary
Guajome Alliance for Responsible Development (GuARD)
There is no justification for amending Vista's General Plan to increase the density on this property, as is made clear in the recently updated General Plan Housing Element. The Housing Element was developed with public participation, and states that "Public comments received at the meeting focused F-1 on support for a housing plan that does not require ... up -zoning of existing lower density residential areas. The City was able to meet Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) goals without ... up -zoning existing lower density areas as requested." In other words, there is no need to double the density on this property in order to meet the housing needs of the City. Which is what the public supports.

F-2
F-3
There is also no need to double the density, because any benefits provided by development of the property (such as road improvements) would be provided under the current zoning designation of one dwelling unit per acre.

According to statements made by Vista City Council members in public meetings, there must be a "significant public benefit" in order to amend the General Plan.

There is no significant public benefit to the citizens of Vista in increasing the density. There is, however, a significant negative impact on the semi-rural/agricultural neighborhood, and therefore a significant negative impact on the land uses valued by Vista citizens (as well as the surrounding County residents).

The citizens of Vista who participated in General Plan development workshops made it clear that they value the Enhancement of Community Identity and Character: "Throughout the workshops ... residents stressed the importance of preserving and enhancing Vista's ... agricultural heritage, and its semi -rural development pattern, which contributes to its unique community character as articulated in the vision." (p. 1-17) The General Plan Guiding Principles states: "Create a balanced plan that preserves the enhances Vista's distinctive semi -rural neighborhoods ..." (p. 1-19) The General Plan's "Land Use and Community Identity (LUCI) policies ... demonstrate the City's value and commitment to preserving and enhancing the unique character treasured by Vista's residents." (p. 1-20).

These values are stated in the General Plan's Land Use and Community Identity Element:

Policy 2.1: "Maintain the existing residential character of Vista, characterized by large- lot single-family residential development, by encouraging land uses and }pp,�ieo�dexelopment that are consistent with this image." (p. 2-4) PH 1 Page 122 of 210 https:Hmail.google.com/mail/u/O//?ik=45edf931 ef&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f%3A1 715236646891456893&simpl=msg-f%3A1 715236646891456893 2/7

1111121, 7:49 AM
MUROW CM Mail - FW: Vista Grande
In discussing this policy, the MND admits that "The project does not propose large -lot single-family residential development." Nevertheless, the MND concludes that the project would "maintain consistency with the existing semi -rural environment." This claim is NOT true. This development urbanizes the area with a gated F-4 community of large estate homes for the wealthy with wide streets, sidewalks, curbs, two-story homes, and street lights, all of which are incompatible with the open, "country" feel of the adjoining properties. The development is not rural in nature —it has no agriculture, no orchards, no community gardens, and no livestock. The amount of open space is minimal, and its houses will dominate the skyline at the top of a hill, destroying daytime blue sky views and nighttime dark skies that are characteristic of the surrounding semi -rural and agricultural lands.

In addition, the MND concludes that "the project is consistent with the goal of providing denser housing near public transit corridors." This claim defies common sense. Wealthy owners of these million+ dollar homes are extremely unlikely to utilize transit, which would require walking a full mile (along streets without F-5 sidewalks) to catch a southbound bus near Old Taylor Street. It is far more likely that the estate homes will have garages for multiple cars, which will be the transportation choice for their owners.

Contrary to the conclusion of the MND, this proposed General Plan amendment violates all of the following Land Use and Community Identity (LUCI) Policies:

F-6
LUCI Element: Intro: Vista is a well -established community that value its strong sense of identity, diverse neighborhoods, semi -rural character ..." (p. 2-1) LUCL• Purpose: The primary purpose of the Land Use and Community Identity Element is to establish the policy foundation that will direct future land use decision -making for Vista and its SOI. It functions as a guide to policy makers, decision makers, the general public, and planners in the City regarding the desired pattern of land use and development through the 2030 planning period. (p. 2-2) LUCI Policy 2.7: Provide flexible public improvement standards in certain neighborhoods to retain their semi -rural character ... keeping street lighting to a minimum, allowing trails or paths rather than concrete sidewalks ... and preserving mature trees and landscaping ..." (p. 2-5) LUCI Policy 2.9: " ... protect the visual continuity of the hillsides." (p. 2-5) LUCI Policy 2.10: "Discourage development on skyline ridges ..." (p. 2-5) https:Hmail.g000gle?��2il/�0/?ik=45edf931ef&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f%3A17152366646891456893&simpl=msg-f%3A1715236646891456893 Page 123 of 210 3/7

11/1/21, 7:49 AM
MUROW CM Mail - FW: Vista Grande
LUCI Policy 2.11: "Preserve immediate ridges and hilltops in a natural state ... Development should be sited such that building do not project above the naturallandform." (p.2-5)
LUCI Policy 2.12: "Restrict development of hillsides so that the natural appearance and landform of the site is preserved." (p. 2-5) F-6
cont.

LUCI Policy 2.13: "Support and encourage the ability of Vistans to continue the tradition of small-scale horticulture and specialty crop enterprises." (p. 2-6) LUCI Policy 3.1: "Require all new development to be designed to minimize impacts on adjoining residential neighborhoods." (p. 2-6) LUCI Policy 9.1: "Provide land use designations that support semi -rural ... housing options." (p. 2-10) F-7
When this property was annexed into the City, the land was zoned Agricultural with a land use designation of Rural Residential, which allows one dwelling unit per acre. (This was a doubling of the density under the County's zoning of one dwelling unit per two acres). In regard to lot sizes, an MND developed at that time (in 2016) provided the following analysis:
"Sixteen properties are contiguous to the project site. Only one of those properties, directly north of the site, includes any large scale agricultural use, consisting of a 300-acre commercial farming operation. Of the remaining 15 properties, 13 are developed with single-family residential homes with lot sizes ranging from 0.5 acre to 3.7 acres. Four of these 13 lots are under 1.5 acres in size, and seven of the 13 are under one acre in size. The lot sizes in the proposed project range from one acre to 1.4 acres in size. Therefore, the proposed density of 1.2 units per acre of the project would be consistent with the majority of surrounding land uses." The current land use and zoning designations (one acre lots) are, therefore, consistent with the City's 2016 analysis and the LUCI goals below. Doubling the density with a General Plan amendment (to '/2 acre lots) is NOT "consistent with the majority of surrounding land uses" and would violate these policies and goals:

LUCI Goal 13: "Ensure that annexation of property within Vista's SOI occurs in a manner that permits the existing character of the areas to remain when annexation occurs and is consistent with the planned land uses for these areas." (p. 2-12) "Vista has designated the majority of land in its SOI to Rural Residential with one -acre minimums, consistent with the County, to protect the rural nature of the Benefits of prezoning include ... providing notice ... of thlouse regulations that would affect (residents) should aurgaa? qcsL ,�, OT 210 https:Hmail.googgll/e.ccoLm/mmailil/uu/0/?ik=45edf931ef&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f%3A1715236646891456893&simpl=msg-f%3A1715236646891456893 ciyyee 1 4/7

11/1/21, 7:49 AM
MUROW CM Mail - FW: Vista Grande
indicating to LAFCO a city's intentions regarding property." (p. 2-14 and 2-15) F-7
cont
WO
"The Rural Residential (RR) land use category includes extremely low density, large -lot, single-family residential uses and non -habitable accessory structures for agricultural and limited animal husbandry land uses. It encourages the continuance of agricultural and agri-business land uses within the community ... This is also important to promote a healthy community by allowing and encouraging urban agriculture for local food production. The RR designation is also intended to enhance and preserve the rural atmosphere in certain areas of Vista by lessening negative impacts on ... land features, and by protecting the integrity of Vista's hillside areas ..." (p. 2-16).

LUCI Policy 2.4: Discourage subdivision design that disrupts the existing development pattern within established neighborhoods. (p. 2-5) In regard to the quality of public views of the site, the MND concludes that there is a less than significant impact, based on the false assertion that "the proposed project would be developed at a scale that would not adversely affect scenic views or vistas from the surrounding area." The MND fails to consider that this 28- home development plan disturbs views and community character by violating several LUCI policies regarding building on skyline ridges, with buildings that project above the natural landform and disturb daytime blue sky views, and nighttime dark skies with street lights:

LUCI Policy 2.7: "Provide flexible public improvement standards in certain neighborhoods to retain their semi -rural character ... keeping street lighting to a minimum, allowing trails or paths rather than concrete sidewalks ... and preserving mature trees and landscaping ..." (p. 2-5) LUCI Policy 2.9: " ... protect the visual continuity of the hillsides." (p. 2-5) LUCI Policy 2.10: "Discourage development on skyline ridges ..." (p. 2-5) LUCI Policy 2.11: 'Preserve immediate ridges and hilltops in a natural state ... Development should be sited such that building do not project above the naturallandform." (p.2-5)
LUCI Policy 2.12: "Restrict development of hillsides so that the natural appearance and landform of the site is preserved." (p. 2-5) "Require all new development to be designed to minimize irr`''� on adjoining residential neighborhoods." (p. 2-6) Page 125 of 210 https://mail.googgll/e.ccoLm//mmail/u/OO//?ik=45edf931 ef&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f%3A17152311I 66I14�-6I1891456893&simpl=msg-f%3A1715236646891456893 5/7

11/1121, 7:49 AM MUROW CM Mail - FW: Vista Grande
The MND of 2016 (analyzing a 14-home project) stated that "While it is acknowledged that the proposed project would develop single-family homes along an existing ridgeline," it goes on to falsely state that "the subject ridgeline is currently developed with single-family homes along the peak of the ridge both west and F-9 east of the project site." Homes at 10 addresses are named, all of which are well below the peak of the ridge, and this falsifies both the 2016 MND and the current MND's claim that "the proposed project would be consistent with the existing development pattern of the area." In addition, the MND asserts that the development aligns with LUCI Policy 9.1 ("Provide land use designations that support semi -rural ... housing options") because "The proposed development would be consistent with nearby estate residential land uses with the incorporation of similar lot sizes, anticipated dwelling unit square footage, (and) building heights ..." In actuality, the 13 adjacent homes are primarily single -story, with an average size of 2,241 square feet, which is considerably smaller than the proposed development, described as "a mix between singe -story and two-story structures (which) range in size from approximately F-10 3,200 sf to 4,200 sf." The six homes on acre lots along the south side of Vista Grande Drive average 1,804 square feet. Common sense indicates that houses up to 4,200 sf, even though they sit on the same size lots, are hardly "consistent" with the modest semi -rural homes along the south side. Again, looking at the analysis of the 2016 MND which considered all the adjacent properties, "the proposed density of 1.2 units per acre ..." was deemed to be "consistent with the majority of surrounding land uses." Thus current zoning for a lot size of one acre is consistent, while amending the General Plan to increase the density would NOT be consistent with the neighborhood.

A concern that is not addressed by this MND, is the tremendous impact this property has on the large farm along its north border (which is in unincorporated County). The 300 acres of the Bonsall Farms to the north are designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, Farmland of Local Importance, and Farmland of Statewide Importance. In 2017, when annexed into the City, this Vista Grande Drive property moved the City boundary northwards, to be contiguous with the Bonsall Farms property. This opens the door for annexation by the City in the future, and re -zoning to '/2 acre lots would result in sprawl development causing a loss of precious farmland, open space, rural environment, habitat, wildlife corridors, fire break land, and greenbelt between communities. The loss of community character in the southernmost part of Bonsall would have a tremendous negative impact on a great many County residents who live in the area, and Vista residents, who would also be impacted by increased population, traffic, greenhouse gases, and all the negative impacts of sprawl.

F-11 There is a great contradiction expressed by City officials in regard to the impact that any land development project decision has on adjacent land. When a public comment is made about a serious negative effect to a neighboring property (such as the Bonsall Farms impact described above), city officials say that each development project must be considered on its own, without regard to potential negative impacts on adjacent properties. However, when a project is (inevitably, it seems) approved, City officials cite surrounding properties as justification for approval of projects that increase density. As the City annexes into County lands, it is like laying out dominoes end to end, where each project justifies higher density on the next one in line, without consideration of the actual impacts on the majority of properties in the greater surrounding areas.

The potential growth -inducing impact on the Bonsall Farms agricultural land is far too important to continue with this double standard. The potential loss of Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, Farmland of Local Importance, and Farmland of Statewide Importance must not be ignored by City officials. https:Hmail.g000gle?��2il/�0/?ik=45edf931ef&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f%3A17152366646891456893&simpl=msg-f%3A1715236646891456893 Page 126 Of 210 6/7

1111121, 7:49 AM
MUROW CM Mail - FW: Vista Grande
Dangerous wildfires have had devastating consequences throughout California, and the threat of wildfire must be taken seriously by City officials in regard to this property. It is bordered at its northeast corner by more than 8 acres of native brush, which is a Very High Fire Severity zone. The hillside is steep, and a Santa Ana driven wildfire would come from that direction. The procedures of the past regarding fire safety, which are outlined in the MND, seem inadequate in these days of severe fire events. A decision to build on this hilltop should require increased scrutiny from from fire officials, before rather than after General Plan zoning has been F-12 amended, particularly in light of the fact that several neighboring properties have had fire insurance cancelled or reduced. Will the owners of new houses on this dangerous hilltop be able to obtain fire insurance coverage? Will the City have a thorough assessment conducted by an independent fire professional to determine the fire dangers associated with building on this property, so that information can be considered before a General Plan Amendment is put forward for a vote by the City Council?
Should a wildfire (or other emergency) occur, the MND provides minimal information, except to state that "Emergency secondary access would be provided from the easterly Vista Grande Drive to Vista Grande Terrace. This access would be gated and used for emergency secondary access/egress purposes only." Is this a condition of approval for the project? The provision of an emergency evacuation route would seem to be a necessity.

F-13 However, Vista Grande Terrace is a private road on County land, maintained by a small group of homeowners who hold easement rights. The MND does not specify if the City has the authority to allow this project to use Vista Grande Terrace for emergencies. The implication of the MND language is that the residents of the development will be allowed "egress" (or "exit") using this route. In the event of a fire blocking the project's primary road, to the west of the property, the families in the development would have no alternative for evacuation other than utilizing Vista Grande Terrace to the east. The MND conclusion in regard to emergency access is based on incomplete information, and is therefore unsubstantiated. Clarification regarding emergency access/egress utilizing the private road, with specific clarification of evacuation plans, is necessary.
https:Hmail.g000gle?��2il/�0/?ik=45edf931ef&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f%3A17152366646891456893&simpl=msg-f%3A1715236646891456893 Page 127 of 210 7/7

City of Vista Attachment K - Comments and Responses to Comments Responses to Comments
Letter A - Bob and Sue Carnall
A-1: This comment is concerned with the Vista Grande Residential Project (project) using Vista Grande Terrace as a fire exit because the current residents on the Vista Grande Terrace cul-de-sac could be trapped in case of an emergency. The comment further states that Vista Grande Terrace is a private street that the residents maintain and that any extra traffic could damage the street.

Response: As stated in Section XVII, Transportation/Traffic, of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND), Vista Grande Terrace to Vista Grande Drive would be gated and used for secondary emergency access/egress purposes only. In addition, the Vista Fire Department has reviewed the project plans and confirmed that Vista Grande Terrace is required for secondary egress in case of an emergency. Regarding the street capacity concern, in the event of an emergency and the need to evacuate the project site, future residents of the 28 homes included in the project would leave in approximately one to two vehicles per household, which would equate to 28 to 56 vehicles vacating the project site at once. The proposed project's internal drive aisle and driveway could accommodate all resident vehicles during an emergency. The private/public roads within the project vicinity (Vista Grande Terrace, Vista Grande Drive, Warmlands Avenue, and East Vista Way) have capacity to accommodate emergency traffic generated by the proposed project and the surrounding neighborhoods (Arizabal pers comm. 2021). This issue is adequately addressed in the IS/MND.

A-2: This comment asks if future home sellers will disclose the pipelines on the northern edge of the project site that emit a low -pitch noise. The commenter stated this sound originates from the Vista Irrigation District pipes.

Response: This comment discusses an issue of the existing environment on the project site, which is not under the purview of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) or the IS/MND for the project.

However, the Acoustical Site Assessment prepared for the project by Helix Environmental (2021) and included as Attachment I of the IS/MND includes an ambient noise survey to capture existing noise levels on the project site. The acoustical engineer did not encounter or capture the pipe noise described in the comment. If warranted, the project applicant would be willing to disclose the noise to future residents on the project site.

Vista Grande Residential - IS/MND
Nove��r�Q-9,2022
P FBI
P-21-0114

City of Vista Attachment K - Comments and Responses to Comments Responses to Comments
Letter B - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Janet Stuckrath B-1: This comment introduces the comment letter, discusses the primary duties of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and provides a description of the proposed Vista Grande Residential Project (project).

Response: This comment is introductory and reiterates a summary of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) project description. No further response is required.

B-2: This comment recommends that updated protocol -level coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica) (CAGN) surveys be conducted to determine the status of CAGN in the on- and off -site coastal sage scrub to avoid, minimize, and adequately mitigate impacts to CAGN.

Response: The Biological Report prepared by Tierra Data (2016) for the previously approved project and reaffirmed in the updated Biological Report prepared by Tierra Data (2021) for the proposed project and included as Attachment D to the IS/MND concludes that CAGN has a very low potential to occur on or in the immediate vicinity of the project site. Project site field surveys occurred in 2015 and 2021 and yielded no CAGN sightings on site. In addition, 2010 and 2014 protocol -level surveys of the property directly north of the project site showed no CAGN use of the band of coastal sage scrub bordering the project site. The small area (0.13 acre) of coastal sage scrub along the northern border of the project site and a small area (0.01 acre) in the southeastern corner of the project site are considered disturbed, low -quality habitat that are too small and isolated to support CAGN. Therefore, it is the professional opinion of the project biologists that protocol -level CAGN surveys on the project site for 0.14 acres of disturbed coastal sage scrub are not warranted (Tierra Data pers comm. 2021). This issue is adequately addressed in the IS/MND.

Vista Grande Residential - IS/MND
Nove��r�Q-9,2022
P FBI
P-21-0114

City of Vista Attachment K - Comments and Responses to Comments Responses to Comments
Letter C - County of San Diego, Department of Environmental Health and Quality, Land and Water Quality Division, Colleen Hines
C-1: This comment introduces the comment letter and states that the following comments were originally sent on June 6, 2021, and still apply to the Vista Grande Residential Project (project).

Response: This comment is introductory, and no further response is required.

C-2: This comment states that the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) does not adequately address two potential impacts of the project related to the existing and potential on -site water disposal system. The first issue is the potential risk to groundwater related to the abandonment of the existing on -site wastewater systems within the project boundary. The comment further relates the applicable San Diego County Code that would regulate the decommissioning of the existing system. Finally, the comment requests that the project commit to the removal of all existing sewage and all existing sewage septic system components before any grading on site.

Response: The project would comply with the San Diego County Code of Regulatory Ordinances provisions that implement state standards and that are applicable county -wide to regulate the decommissioning of existing septic systems (San Diego County Code, Sections 68.301 and 68.314) to protect groundwater quality. The project applicant agrees to commit to the removal of all existing sewage and all existing septic system components before any grading of the project site.

C-3: This comment states that the second issue is the potential for site grading to reduce the area available for on -site wastewater treatment system dispersal fields on contiguous private lots outside of the project site. The comment further states that the dispersal fields must be set back five feet for each one foot of grading cut, which could put the setback into the contiguous private parcels. If septic systems were installed on those parcels before grading on the project site begins, the grading could compromise the ability of those installed systems to confine sewage below ground, and daylighting sewage would be a threatto public health.

The comment states that the IS/MND should commit to consultations with the County of San Diego, Department of Environmental Health and Quality, Land and Water Quality Division, before any grading plans are approved.

Response: The project applicant's engineer (Ryan Waufle, Senior Project Manager, Pasco LaretSuiter & Associates, November 4, 2021) confirmed that the grading plans consider the existing leach lines that occur along the eastern boundary of the project site at Lot 14. The cut slope along the tract boundary at Lot 14 accounts for the required codes and regulations for a 5:1 setback for cut grading adjacent to an existing leach line system from an adjacent property owner. The project has been designed to comply with required setbacks for dispersal fields on adjacent properties and would not result in a public health issue from daylighting sewage. This issue is adequately addressed in the IS/MND.

C-4: This comment states that San Diego County staff are available to assist in the review process and provides San Diego County contact information.

Response: This is a closing comment, and no further response is required.

Vista Grande Residential - IS/MND
Nove��r�Q-9,2022
PM
P-21-0114

City of Vista
Attachment K - Comments and Responses to Comments
Responses to Comments
Letter D - Alisa Willens-Davis and Haydn Davis
D-1: This comment introduces the comment letter, discusses the project applicant and consultant team, and expresses general concern of the findings in the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the proposed Vista Grande Residential Project (project).

Response: This comment is introductory and does not address the adequacy or accuracy of information provided in the IS/MND. No further response is required.

D-2: This comment reiterates the Vista General Plan 2030 Land Use and Community Identity (LUCI) Element Policy 1.6 and the consistency response in Section XI, Land Use and Planning, Table LU-1, Consistency with General Plan LUCI Element Goals and Policies, in the IS/MND. The comment also states that the Landscape Concept Plan shows that an existing power pole near Lot 15 will remain, but the IS/MND states that all utilities would be undergrounded.

Response: The existing power pole in question is in the southeastern corner of the project site adjacent to Lot 15 along the project boundary. Due to its location and aboveground connection to the adjacent residences, the power pole could not be undergrounded without impacting off -site properties. The rest of the aboveground power poles on the project site would be undergrounded as part of the project.

D-3: This comment reiterates the Vista General Plan 2030 LUCI Element Policy 2.1 and the consistency response in Table LU-1 in the IS/MND. The comment recommends that the number of lots be decreased but the size of the lots be increased. The comment also states that Policy 2.1 targets the downtown area where people could reasonably walk to transit.

Response: As stated in Chapter 2, Environmental Setting and Project Description, of the IS/MND, the proposed lot sizes are consistent with the surrounding development. In addition, the project site is within 0.5 mile of four bus stops, which makes it a development near transit.

D-4: This comment reiterates the Vista General Plan 2030 LUCI Element Policy 2.2 and the consistency response in Table LU-1 in the IS/MND. This comment further elaborates on the City of Vista's character and states that putting a tract housing project in the middle of a rural community would not reflect the city's neighborhood characteristics.

Response: As stated in Section I, Aesthetics, in the IS/MND, existing site character would be improved through implementation of the proposed project because the functionality and visual quality of the site would increase. The architectural characteristics of the proposed residences would draw from elements of the surrounding area and maintain consistency with the existing semi -rural environment.

The proposed development would be consistent with nearby estate residential land uses with similar lot sizes, dwelling unit square footage, building heights, architectural design features, and landscaping. This issue is adequately addressed in the IS/MND.

D-5: This comment reiterates the Vista General Plan 2030 LUCI Element Policy 2.4 and the consistency response in Table LU-1 in the IS/MND. The comment also states that the proposed road would benefit the Vista Grande neighborhood by replacing a damaged narrow road. However, the benefit would be offset by the burden to other roads and increased traffic from adding 28 more residences to the area.

Vista Grande Residential - IS/MND P-21-0114
Novel, ej�2/2022 P I Page 131 of 210

City of Vista
Attachment K - Comments and Responses to Comments
Response: As stated in Section XVII, Transportation/Traffic, of the IS/MND, the project's development of 28 residences would not cause a significant impact on any of the surrounding intersections or street segments. The project would implement a variety of roadway improvements to the surrounding roadways. Based on the project -specific Local Transportation Assessment (Attachment F), the private/public roads within the project vicinity (Vista Grande Terrace, Vista Grande Drive, Warmlands Avenue, and East Vista Way) are adequately sized to accommodate the traffic generated by the proposed project and the surrounding neighborhoods. No traffic impacts would occur. This issue is adequately addressed in the IS/MND.

D-6: This comment reiterates the Vista General Plan 2030 LUCI Element Policy 2.5 and the response in Table LU-1 in the IS/MND. The comment also states that the commenter has not seen any proposed architectural designs, that very little open space is proposed, and that having 28 cookie -cutter tract residences is the opposite of what the unique community represents.

Response: See response to comment D-4 regarding the architectural design elements of the project and the project's consistency with the surrounding semi -rural neighborhood. The proposed residences would be one to two stories and range in size from 3,200 to 4,200 square feet. As stated in Chapter 2, Environmental Setting and Project Description, of the IS/MND, the project would include four open space areas that would contain decomposed granite trails and park benches with approximately 4.6 acres of landscaping (see Figure 4, Conceptual Landscape Plan). This issue is adequately addressed in the IS/MND.

D-7: This comment reiterates the Vista General Plan 2030 LUCI Element Policies 2.8 and 2.9 and the consistency response in Table LU-1 in the IS/MND. The comment questions if landscaped slopes would truly preserve the natural slope of the area and asks how the city would enforce these requirements.

Response: As stated in Section X, Hydrology and Water Quality, of the IS/MND, the project would be required to implement site design best management practices to enhance infiltration and evaporation of runoff and to minimize impervious areas. One of these requirements includes conserving natural areas, soils, and vegetation by providing landscaping along the perimeter slopes to mimic the natural landscape and to prevent erosion. The project would be required to implement these best management practices to achieve project approval. This issue is adequately addressed in the IS/MND.

D-8: This comment reiterates the Vista General Plan 2030 LUCI Element Policy 2.11 and the response in Table LU-1 in the IS/MND. The comment also states that fewer residences on the site would not cause any obstruction to the views of the San Marcos Mountains and that residents in the adjacent neighborhoods may not consider the obstructions minor.

Response: Policy 2.11 pertains to the preservation of ridgelines and hilltops and the construction of development in these areas. Neither is located on the project site. Thus, the project would not conflict with this policy. However, as stated in Section I, Aesthetics, of the IS/MND, the San Marcos Mountains are approximately 1.7 miles east of the project site. The addition of 28 single -story and two-story residences could cause minor view disruptions of these mountains to only those in very close proximity to the project, which would most likely be nearby residents. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) is not required to address private views, only views from a public vantage point. The proposed project would be developed at a scale that would not adversely affect scenic views or vistas from the surrounding area. This issue is adequately addressed in the IS/MND.

Vista Grande Residential - IS/MND
Nove��r�Q2,2022
PM
P-21-0114

City of Vista Attachment K - Comments and Responses to Comments D-9: This comment reiterates the Vista General Plan 2030 LUCI Element Policy 2.12 and the consistency response in Table LU-1 in the IS/MND. The comment also states that 70,000 cubic yards of earth movement could be reduced with fewer residences on site. The comment asks that the City of Vista hire its own land surveyors to determine the optimal site division to minimize grading and erosion and to maximize stability.

Response: Section VII, Geology and Soils, and Section X, Hydrology and Water Quality, in the IS/MND analyzed the potential impacts of the project related to the stability of soils and erosion and concluded that construction and development of the project would not result in significant environmental impacts related to unstable slopes, soil erosion, and site hydrology. Therefore, further investigation into optimal site division is not necessary. This issue is adequately addressed in the IS/MND.

D-10: This comment reiterates the Vista General Plan 2030 LUCI Element Policy 3.1 and the consistency response in Table LU-1 in the IS/MND. The comment also states that the improvements and benefits of construction of Vista Grande Drive could be done without the increased traffic, pollution, and noise by reducing the number of residences on site.

Response: Refer to response to comment D-5 regarding project traffic. Section III, Air Quality, and Section XIII, Noise, of the IS/MND analyzed the potential air quality pollution and noise pollution impacts from the proposed project and found less than significant impacts and less than significant impacts with mitigation incorporated, respectively. These issues are adequately addressed in the IS/MND.

D-11: This comment reiterates the Vista General Plan 2030 LUCI Element Policy 3.2 and the consistency response in Table LU-1 in the IS/MND. The comment also asks how all mitigation would be enforced.

Response: All mitigation measures in the IS/MND would be incorporated into a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the project. The MMRP would identify all mitigation actions to be taken, the timing for these actions, who is responsible for performing these actions, and who would verifythatthese mitigation measures were carried out. The MMRP is required to be adopted bythe City Council when the IS/MND is adopted.

D-12: This comment reiterates the Vista General Plan 2030 LUCI Element Policy 3.3 and the consistency response in Table LU-1 in the IS/MND. The comment also states that the newly constructed Vista Grande Drive serving as both a boundary and a buffer is absurd. The comment is also concerned with the increased traffic of 28 residences that will generate negative visual and acoustic impacts.

Response: Please see responses to comments D-5, D-8, and D-10 regarding project traffic, visual impacts, and noise impacts from the proposed project. The project would improve and extend Vista Grande Drive into the proposed development. The improved Vista Grande Drive along the southern border of the project site would serve as a boundary for the proposed development and a distance buffer from adjacent residences. This issue is adequately addressed in the IS/MND.

D-13: This comment reiterates the Vista General Plan 2030 LUCI Element Policy 9.1 and the consistency response in Table LU-1 in the IS/MND. The comment also states that the proposed lot sizes are not similar to the nearby estate residential land uses.

Response: As stated in Chapter 2, Project Description and Environmental Setting, in the IS/MND, the proposed lot sizes would be at minimum 0.5 acre, which is consistent with the large -lot residential uses southwest of the project site. The architectural characteristics of the proposed residences would draw from elements of the surrounding area and maintain consistency with the existing semi -rural environment. This issue is adequately addressed in the IS/MND.

Vista Grande Residential - IS/MND
Nove��r�Q-9,2022
Pq
P-21-0114

City of Vista Attachment K - Comments and Responses to Comments D-14: This comment summarizes the above comments and serves as a closing statement.

Response: Refer to responses to comments D-2 through D-13. This comment concludes the comment letter, and no further response is required.

Vista Grande Residential - IS/MND
Nove��r�Q-9,2022
P Fri
P-21-0114

City of Vista
Attachment K - Comments and Responses to Comments
Responses to Comments
Letter E - California Department of Fish and Wildlife, David Mayer E-1: This comment introduces the letter and discusses the role of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) as a trustee agency and a responsible agency.

Response: This comment is introductory and does not address the adequacy or accuracy of information provided in the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND). No further response is required.

E-2: This comment provides a summary of the IS/MND project description. It also provides the biological setting of the Vista Grande Residential Project (project), biological impacts from the project, and proposed mitigation as stated in the Biological Report prepared for the project by Tierra Data (2021) and included as Attachment D to the IS/MND.

Response: This comment summarizes the IS/MND project description and the results of Section IV, Biological Resources, in the IS/MND. No further response is required.

E-3: This comment states that the last surveys for coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila califomica califomica) (CAGN) were conducted in 2010 and 2014 and that a general survey was completed in January 2021. The comment further states that it is possible that CAGN may have started using the coastal sage scrub patch to the north and overlapping the project site in the years since the previous CAGN surveys and that the January 2021 general survey of the project site may have been too early in the year to detect CAGN activity.

The CDFW recommends that updated protocol -level CAGN surveys be conducted to determine the status of CAGN in the on- and off -site coastal sage scrub.

Response: The Biological Report prepared by Tierra Data (2016) for the previously approved project and reaffirmed in the updated Biological Report prepared by Tierra Data (2021) for the proposed project and included as Attachment D to the IS/MND concluded that the CAGN has a very low potential to occur on or in the immediate vicinity of the project site. Project site field surveys occurred in 2015 and 2021 and yielded no CAGN sightings on site. In addition, 2010 and 2014 protocol -level surveys of the property directly north of the project site showed no CAGN use of the small band of coastal sage scrub bordering the project site. The small area (0.13 acre) of coastal sage scrub along the northern border of the project site and a small area (0.01 acre) in the southeastern corner of the project site are considered disturbed, low -quality habitat that are too small and isolated to support CAGN. Therefore, it is the professional opinion of the project biologists that protocol -level CAGN surveys on the project site for 0.14 acre of disturbed coastal sage scrub are not warranted (Tierra Data pers comm. 2021). This issue is adequately addressed in the IS/MND.

E-4: This comment states that any special -status species or natural communities detected during project surveys should be reported to the California Natural Diversity Database. The comment details filing fee requirements and provides a conclusion.

Response: This comment states known requirements and fees that the project would comply with.

No further response is required.

Vista Grande Residential - IS/MND
Nove��r�Q2,2022
Pi
P-21-0114

City of Vista
Attachment K - Comments and Responses to Comments
Responses to Comments
Letter F - Guajome Alliance for Responsible Development, Ursula Sack F-1: This comment states the commenter's opinion that no justification for amending the Vista General Plan 2030 exists and references the recently updated Housing Element, which states that the City of Vista was able to meet its Regional Housing Needs Allocation goal without up -zoning existing lower density areas.

Response: This comment concerns the potential up -zoning of the proposed Vista Grande Residential Project (project) site, compares the findings of the Housing Element Update with the project, and does not address the adequacy or accuracy of information provided in the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND). Therefore, no further response is required.

F-2: This comment states the commenter's opinion that there is no need to double the density of the project site because the benefits of developing the site, including road improvements, would occur under its current zoning designation.

Response: The IS/MND prepared for the project analyzed the environmental impacts of increasingthe density on the project site and found that all potentially significant impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level with mitigation identified in the IS/MND.

F-3: This comment reiterates phrases from the Vista General Plan 2030 Land Use and Community Identity (LUCI) Element's guiding principles and policies and states that citizens of the city value the community character, including agricultural heritage, semi -rural development pattern, and large -lot single-family residential development.

Response: As stated in Section I, Aesthetics, in the IS/MND, existing site character would be improved through implementation of the proposed project because the functionality and visual quality of the site would increase. The architectural characteristics of the proposed residences would draw from elements of the surrounding area and maintain consistency with the existing semi -rural environment. The proposed development would be consistent with nearby estate residential land uses with similar lot sizes, dwelling unit square footage, building heights, architectural design features, and landscaping. This issue is adequately addressed in the IS/MND.

F-4: This comment reiterates a phrase from the IS/MND that the project does not propose large -lot single- family residential development but concludes that the project would maintain consistency with the existing semi -rural environment. The comment states the commenter's opinion that this is not true because it urbanizes the area with a gated community of large estates, which is incompatible with the adjoining properties. The commenter states that the development would not be rural, would have minimal open space, and would dominate the skyline, disrupting day- and nighttime sky views.

Response: See response to comment F-3 regarding project consistency with the surrounding semi - rural neighborhood. Section I, Aesthetics, of the IS/MND analyzed the potential impacts of the proposed project on scenic views and vistas and light and glare and found that the project would have less than significant impacts. The proposed project would be developed at a scale that would not adversely affect scenic views or vistas of the surrounding area. In addition, architectural plans for the buildings would be reviewed by the City of Vista Building Department and Planning Division before each lot owner obtains building permits to address any lighting concerns.

F-5: This comment reiterates a phrase in the IS/MND that states that the project is consistent with the goal of providing denser housing near transit corridors. The comment speculates that owners of the future homes are unlikely to use transit and would use their private transportation instead.

Vista Grande Residential - IS/MND P-21-0114
Novel, ej�2/2022 P i Page 136 of 210

City of Vista
Attachment K - Comments and Responses to Comments
Response: As stated in Chapter 2, Environmental Setting and Project Description, of the IS/MND, the project includes approval of a General Plan Amendment to increase the site density from one dwelling unit per acre to two dwelling units per acre. In addition, the project site is located within 0.5 mile of four bus stops, which makes it a development near transit that future residents can use. This issue is adequately addressed in the IS/MND.

F-6: This comment claims that the IS/MND violates the following LUCI Element policies: Introduction, Purpose, Policy 2.7, Policy 2.9, Policy 2.10, Policy 2.11, Policy 2.12, Policy 2.13, Policy 3.1, and Policy 9.1.

Response: This comment does not specifically state why or how the project would violate these policies.

However, Section XI, Land Use and Planning, in the IS/MND included a Vista General Plan 2030 consistency analysis and found that the project would be consistent with these policies, and therefore, less than significant impacts would occur. This issue is adequately addressed in the IS/MND.

F-7: This comment discusses the previously approved 2016 project, which proposed lot sizes from one to 1.4 acres, and that the current land use and zoning designations for the site are consistent with the 2016 project and LUCI Element goals. The comment further states the commenter's opinion that doubling density on the site would make the project inconsistent with the majority of the surrounding land uses and would violate LUCI Element Goal 13 and Policy 2.4, which include protecting the rural nature of the area, discuss the rural residential land use category, and discourage subdivisions that disrupt existing development patterns.

Response: The comment regarding the 2016 IS/MND is not relevant to the current proposed project and, therefore, is not underthe purview of these responses. See responses to comments F-2 through F-4 regarding the project's consistency with the surrounding semi -rural neighborhood and impacts resulting from increased density. This issue is adequately addressed in the IS/MND.

F-8: This comment claims that the IS/MND fails to consider that the 28 residences would disturb views and community character by violating LUCI Element policies regarding skyline ridges, building development above the natural landform, and disturbing daytime and nighttime sky views. The comment further reiterates phrases from LUCI Element Policies 2.7, 2.9, 2.10, 2.11, 2.12, and 3.1.

Response: See response to comment F-3 regarding consistency of the proposed project with the surrounding semi -rural neighborhood. Policy 2.11 pertains to development of ridgelines and hilltops, which is not applicable to the proposed project because neither ridgelines nor hilltops are on the project site. In addition, as stated in Section I, Aesthetics, of the IS/MND, the project would introduce new streetlights on the project site. However, installation of the new streetlights would not create a significant, substantial source of light or glare or disturb nighttime views. In addition, architectural plans for the buildings would be reviewed by the City of Vista Building Department and Planning Division before each lot owner obtains building permits, including whether the exterior building materials or exterior lights would produce substantial light or glare. This issue is adequately addressed in the IS/MND.

F-9: This comment claims that the 2016 IS/MND falsely states that, although the project would develop residences along the existing ridgeline, that ridgeline is currently developed along the peak of the ridge both west and east of the project site. The comment states that these residences would actually be below the peak of the ridge. Therefore, it falsifies both the 2016 IS/MND and the current project, which state that the residences would be consistent with the existing development pattern of the area.

Vista Grande Residential - IS/MND P-21-0114
Novel, ej�2/2022 P i Page 137 of 210

City of Vista
Attachment K - Comments and Responses to Comments
Response: The comment regarding the 2016 IS/MND is not relevant to the current proposed project and, therefore, is not under the purview of these responses. See response to comment F-8 regarding development on hilltops and ridgelines. In addition, as stated in Section X, Hydrology and Water Quality, of the IS/MND, the project would be required to implement site design best management practices, including conserving natural areas, soils, and vegetation, by providing landscaping along the perimeter slopes to mimic the natural landscape and to prevent erosion. This issue is adequately addressed in the IS/MND.

F-10: This comment states that the project is not consistent with LUCI Element Policy 9.1 because the proposed residence sizes are considerably larger than some of the adjacent homes and that amending the Vista General Plan 2030 to increase the density of the project site would be inconsistent with the existing neighborhood.

Response: As stated in Chapter 2, Project Description and Environmental Setting, of the IS/MND, the proposed lot sizes would be at minimum 0.5 acre, which is consistent with the large -lot residential uses southwest of the project site. The architectural characteristics of the proposed residences would draw from elements of the surrounding area and maintain consistency with the existing semi - rural environment. This issue is adequately addressed in the IS/MND.

F-11: This comment states that the IS/MND does not address the potential impact that the proposed project could have on the large farm property north of the project site. With increased annexations of surrounding property into the city from the County of San Diego, this could result in additional rezonings to 0.5-acre lots, which would result in sprawl development and cause a loss of farmland. The comment further claims that city officials do not take into account potential negative impacts on adjacent properties but use surrounding properties to justify project approvals.

Response: The IS/MND prepared for the proposed project addressed consistency with surrounding development in Section XI, Land Use and Planning. The IS/MND found that development of the proposed project would not create any new land use barriers, preclude the development of surrounding parcels, or divide or disrupt the physical arrangement of the surrounding community.

Overall, the proposed project would result in a residential development that would be consistent with the established community. This issue is adequately addressed in the IS/MND.

F-12: This comment states that the fire safety outlined in the IS/MND seems inadequate when the project is bordered by native brush in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. The comment asks if the city will have an assessment completed by an independent fire professional to determine the fire dangers associated with developing the project site.

Response: As stated in the Section XIX, Wildfire, of the IS/MND, the proposed project would provide all required emergency access in accordance with the requirements of the Vista Fire Department. In addition, the project was designed to meet all applicable development and fire codes, including landscaping and vegetation requirements. Future homes would be required to comply with the 2019 California Fire Code and the 2019 California Building Standards Code, which includes minimum standards for ignition -resistant construction, methods, and design in these fire hazard zones.

Compliance with the 2019 California Building Standards Code would ensure that the minimum standards for construction materials, methods, and design are incorporated into the proposed project. Once applications for building permits are submitted, the Vista Fire Department would review all construction plans for adequate fire suppression, fire access, and emergency evacuation. This issue is adequately addressed in the IS/MND.

Vista Grande Residential - IS/MND
Nove��r�Q2,2022
P Fri
P-21-0114

City of Vista
Attachment K - Comments and Responses to Comments
F-13: This comment asks if the emergency secondary access onto Vista Grande Terrace would be a condition of approval for the project. The comment also states that Vista Grande is a private road maintained by homeowners who hold easement rights and questions if the city has the authority to allow the project to use Vista Grande Terrace for emergencies. The comment also requests clarification regarding emergency access/egress.

Response: As stated in Section XVII, Transportation/Traffic, in the IS/MND, Vista Grande Terrace to Vista Grande Drive would be gated and used for secondary emergency access/egress purposes only.

In addition, the Vista Fire Department reviewed the project plans and confirmed that Vista Grande Terrace is required for secondary egress in case of an emergency. Furthermore, before receipt of building permits, project plans would be subject to plan check to ensure that the project has been designed to incorporate all required Vista Fire Department standards to ensure that its implementation would not result in hazardous design features or inadequate emergency access to the site or areas surrounding the site. In the event of an emergency and the need to evacuate the project premises, future residents of the 28 homes would leave in approximately one to two vehicles per household, which would equate to 28 to 56 vehicles vacating the project site at once. The proposed project's internal drive aisle and driveway could accommodate all resident vehicles during an emergency. The private/public roads within the project vicinity (Vista Grande Terrace, Vista Grande Drive, Warmlands Avenue, and East Vista Way) have capacityto accommodate all emergency traffic generated by the proposed project and the surrounding neighborhoods (Arizabal pers comm. 2021). This issue is adequately addressed in the IS/MND.

Vista Grande Residential - IS/MND
Nove��r�Q2,2022
P-21-0114

City of Vista Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) was formulated based on the findings in the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the proposed Vista Grande Residential Project (project).

The MMRP is in compliance with Section 15097 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, which requires that the lead agency "adopt a program for monitoring or reporting on the revisions which it has required in the project and the measures it has imposed to mitigate or avoid significant environmental effects." The MMRP lists mitigation measures recommended in the IS/MND and identifies mitigation monitoring and reporting requirements. These requirements are provided only for mitigation measures that would reduce or avoid significant impacts of the proposed project.

The table below presents the mitigation measures identified for the proposed project. Each mitigation measure is identified by the first three letters of the topical section to which it pertains, followed by a hyphen and measure number, which indicate the order that the mitigation measure is listed in the topical section.

For example, Mitigation Measure 1310-1 is the first mitigation measure identified in the Biological Resources section of the IS/MND.

The first column of the table provides the mitigation measures identified in the IS/MND. The column entitled "Party Responsible for Implementing Action" identifies the party responsible for carrying out the required action(s). The columns entitled "Party Responsible for Monitoring" and "Timing" identify the party ultimately responsible for ensuring that the mitigation measure is implemented and the approximate time frame for the oversight agency to ensure implementation of the mitigation measure, respectively.

Vista Grande Residential — IS/MND P-21-0114
Novea2/ 2() f/2022 W1.1 Page 140 of 210

City of Vista
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Responsible for
Party Responsible
MitigationParty
• -menting Action
for• •
Biological•
BIO-1: All shrub trimming, thinning, or removal shall be performed prior to or after the bird Project Biologist
City Planner
Prior to the start of
breeding season, January 1 through September 15 (i.e., only between September 16 and construction; if occurring
December 31). If clearing is planned to occur during the breeding season, pre -construction during breeding season it
nest surveys shall be conducted prior to any clearing. Work may proceed if no bird nests are shall be done prior to any
observed. Regular brush management activities shall also occur outside of the bird breeding clearing
season. By avoiding clearing and brush management during the bird breeding season, the proposed project will ensure compliance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and pertinent sections of the California Fish and Game Code.

BIO-2: Per compliance with the Multiple Habitat Conservation Plan, the project shall Project Applicant, Project
City Planner, CDFW,
Prior to the start of
mitigate the proposed impact to coastal sage scrub at a ratio of 1:1 with acquisition of a Biologist
USFWS
construction
minimum of 0.24 acre of coastal sage scrub at an off -site location, acceptable to the city, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The project shall mitigate the proposed impactto non-native grassland at a 0.5:1 ratio with acquisition of a minimum of 6.49 acres of non-native grassland at an off -site location, acceptable to the city, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

ResourcesCultural
CUL-1: For discoveries of Native American human remains, the procedures and processes Qualified Project
City Planner and/or
During construction
required under California Public Resources Code, Section 5097.98, and California Health Archaeologist, Tribal
City Engineer
and Safety Code, Section 7050.5, shall be followed. If human remains are encountered, all Representative
ground -disturbing activities shall halt within 100 feet (buffer area) of the discovery, and orange construction fencing shall be installed to denote the buffer area. Work on the remainder of the project site could continue, but all work within the buffer area shall cease until the processes and procedures required under the aforementioned code sections are completed and the Tribal Representatives have authorized the removal of the fencing around the buffer area.

CUL-2: If, during ground -disturbing activities on the project site, Tribal Cultural Resources, Qualified Project
City Planner and/or
During construction/
as defined in California Public Resources Code, Section 21074, or unique cultural Archaeologist, Tribal
City Engineer
ground -disturbing activities
resources, as defined in California Public Resources Code, Section 21083.2, are Representative
discovered that were not assessed by the site -specific archaeological reports, all ground - disturbing activities shall halt within 50 feet (find area) of the discovery until the Tribal Representatives and project archaeologist (defined in Mitigation Measure CUL-4) can assess the discovery and recommend recovery, treatment, and reburial procedures. Work on the remainder of the project site could continue, but all work within the find area shall cease until the Tribal Representatives and project archaeologist have completed their assessments and the Tribal Representatives have made a reburial recommendation.

CUL-3: At least 30 days prior to issuance of the first grading permit for the project, the Project Applicant, Native
City Planner and/or
30 days prior to the
developer/permit applicant shall enter into agreement(s) with the consulting Tribes for American Monitors/Tribal
Director of Community
issuance of the first
Native American monitors. In conjunction with the archaeological monitors, the Tribal Representatives,
Development
grading permit
Representatives/Native American monitors shall attend the pre -grading meeting with the Archeological Monitor
contractors to provide cultural sensitivity training for all construction personnel. In addition, an adequate number of Tribal Representatives/Native American monitors shall be on site during all initial ground -disturbing activities, including clearing, grubbing, tree Vista Grande Residential — IS/MND
Noved2hpr.2021.

P-21-0114

City of Vista
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Party Responsible for
Party Responsible
Mitigation Measures
Implementing Action
for Monitoring
Timing
removal, grading, and trenching, and excavation of each portion of the project site. In conjunction with the archaeological monitors, the Tribal Representatives/Native American monitors have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect, and/or halt the ground - disturbing activities to allow appropriate identification, evaluation, and potential recovery of cultural resources. The developer/permit applicant shall submit a fully executed copy of the agreement(s) to the City of Vista to ensure compliance with this condition of approval. Upon verification, the project archaeologist shall clear this condition. This agreement(s) shall not modify any condition of approval or mitigation measure.

CUL-4: At least 30 days prior to issuance of the first grading permit for the project, the Project Applicant,
City Planner
30 days prior to the
project applicant shall retain a project archaeologist who meets the minimum Qualified Project
issuance of the first
qualifications of the U.S. Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines (NPS 1983).

Archeologist
grading permit
The project archaeologist shall be present for all ground -disturbing and grading activities on the project site and shall be responsible for notifying and coordinating monitoring by the consulting Tribe(s).

CUL-5: The project archaeologist and Tribal Representatives shall attend the pre -grading Qualified Project
Director of Community
Prior to grading
meeting with the project's construction manager and any contractors and shall conduct a Archaeologist, Tribal
Development
cultural sensitivity training to provide an overview of the cultural sensitivity of the project Representatives
site and surrounding areas, the requirements for the project archaeologist and Tribal Representatives, the protocols that apply in the event of inadvertent finds, and any other appropriate disclosures and discussions.

CUL-6: Upon completion of all ground -disturbing and grading activities on the project site, Tribal Representatives
City Planner and/or
Upon completion of all
the Tribal Representatives shall rebury any resources recovered from the project site in City Engineer
ground -disturbing and
an open space area that shall remain free from any active recreational uses or any further grading activities
excavation or ground disturbance. Any reburial site shall be culturally appropriate and explicitly approved in writing by the consulting Tribes. The reburial location shall be covered first by a layer of geomat and then backfilled with clean fill dirt. Once reburial activities are completed, the site shall be protected via a restrictive covenant or similar deed restriction that prohibits future excavation or disturbance of the reburial location.

CUL-7: Prior to Grading Permit Final Inspection, a Phase IV Cultural Resources Monitoring Qualified Project
Director of Community
Prior to grading permit final
Report shall be submitted that complies with the City of Vista Community Development Archeologist
Development
inspection
Department's requirements for such reports for all ground -disturbing activities associated with this grading permit. The report shall follow the City of Vista's cultural resources standard procedures. The report shall include results of any feature relocation or residue analysis required and evidence of the required cultural sensitivity training for construction staff held during the required pre -grade meeting and evidence that any cultural and heritage material/artifacts have been treated in accordance to procedures stipulated in the Phase IV Cultural Resources Monitoring Report. The Phase IV Cultural Resources Monitoring Report shall be filed with the City of Vista under a confidential cover and shall not be subject to public records requests.

Vista Grande Residential — IS/MND
Noved2hpr.2021.
'N i
P-21-0114

City of Vista
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
MitigationParty
Hazards• Hazardous
Responsible for
• -menting Action
Party Responsible
for• •
HAZ-1: Prior to obtaining a Demolition Permit for the removal of the on -site single-family Project Applicant
City Planner, City
Prior to obtaining a
residence located in the western portion of the project site, the applicant/owner shall have Engineer
demolition permit
a survey conducted of the existing residence for asbestos -containing materials and lead paint, followed bythe preparation of a written report. The report shall include, at minimum, the following components that are to be conducted during the survey:
• Locate and quantify readily accessible suspect asbestos -containing materials and lead paint throughout the structure, including exterior surfaces. • Assess the condition of each suspect asbestos -containing materials and lead paint location identified.
• Collect bulk samples of homogeneous suspect asbestos -containing materials and lead paint location using an appropriate sampling protocol. • Analyze each asbestos -containing materials and lead paint sample collected using standard techniques (e.g., Polarized Light Microscopy with Dispersion Staining) for asbestos -containing materials and lead paint.
• Recommend appropriate response actions for materials analyzed as containing asbestos -containing materials and lead paint.

If asbestos -containing materials and/or lead paint is found on or within the structure, it shall be removed by a licensed/certified abatement contractor and disposed of at a Class I Landfill facility in accordance and compliance with all federal, state, and local laws, regulations and guidelines. A copy of the above -noted report, as well as written documentation of the removal and legal disposal of any identified material, shall be sent to the City Engineer and City Planner for their records.

N01-1: Prior to any blasting on the project site, the project applicant shall prepare a Project Applicant, Blasting
City Planner, City
Prior to any blasting
Blasting Management Plan that minimizes potential blasting effects on adjacent Contractor
Engineer
residences. All blast planning must be done by a City of Vista approved blasting contractor and submitted to the city with the appropriate blasting permits, and all other applicable local, state, and federal permits, licenses, and bonding. The blasting contractor or owner must conduct all notifications, inspections, monitoring, and major or minor blasting requirements planning with seismograph reports, as necessary.

Vista Grande Residential — IS/MND
Noved2hpr.2021.
`41 1
P-21-0114

CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2022-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CHARTERED CITY OF

VISTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR A 25-LOT SINGLE-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT 2277 VISTA GRANDE DRIVE (APNS 171-100-05 AND 171-100-28)
APPLICANT: GREGORY PERRINE
PLANNING CASE: P21-0114
The City Council of the City of Vista does resolve as follows:

Findings. The City Council hereby finds and declares the following:

A. The applicant, Gregory Perrine, has submitted an application for a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from Rural Residential (RR) to Low Density Residential (LD), a Zone Change from Agricultural (A-1) to Estates (E-1), and a Tentative Subdivision Map to develop 25 residential lots, private streets, and associated improvements for the project site located at 2277 Vista Grande Drive (APNs 171-100-05 and 171-100-28).

B. The property for which the approvals are requested is more specifically described as follows:

A 17-acre site consisting of two parcels located at the street address 2277 Vista Grande Drive, which is located on the north side of Vista Grande Drive, northwest of Vista Grande Terrace (APNs 171-100-05 and 171-100-28).

C. On December 7, 2021, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to consider a request for the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting program, General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and Tentative Subdivision Map for the project site located at 2277 Vista Grande Drive and continued the hearing to an undetermined date.

D. On January 18, 2022, the Planning Commission held the continued public hearing to consider the request for the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting program, General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and the Tentative Subdivision Map that was reduced from 28 lots to 25 lots. At said hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 2022-01, recommending City Council approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for this project with the finding that the project, if mitigated as proposed, will not have a potentially significant impact on the environment; and adopted Resolution 2022-02, recommending City Council approval of the proposed General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and Tentative Subdivision Map.

F. On February 22, 2022, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing to consider a request for the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting program, General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and Tentative Subdivision Map for the project site located at 2277 Vista Grande Drive F. At the public hearing staff reports both written and oral were received in evidence, and all persons desiring to speak on the project were heard. At the conclusion of said 001054732{P21-0114 P EXHIBIT 2
02/22/2022 PH1 Page 144 of 210

RESOLUTION 2022-

CITY COUNCIL OF THE CHARTERED CITY OF VISTA
PAGE 2
hearing, after consideration of all evidence presented, the City Council made certain findings and reached a decision on the project as hereinafter set forth.

2. Action.

A. The above findings are true and correct
B. For the following reasons, the City Council hereby amends the General Plan Land Use designation for the project site located at 2277 Vista Grande Drive as proposed by the applicant:

1. The General Plan, Land Use and Community Identity (LUCI) Element, Goal 2 promotes the preservation and enhancement of neighborhoods that share common development patterns, topography, major streets, and zoning patterns. The proposed project would provide for a new residential development consisting of minimum one-half acre lots that would be compatible with existing housing and lot sizes in the surrounding area. The project would also improve the existing access road (Vista Grande Drive) to the benefit of the proposed development and the existing homes south of the project site.

2. General Plan LUCI Goal 3 promotes the protection of residential neighborhoods from land uses that may have an adverse impact upon the enjoyment of the residential living environment. The proposed project will include street trees and associated landscaping to beautify the surrounding area. The project will also provide sufficient off-street parking to serve the proposed residential development.

3. The proposed development furthers the goals of the General Plan Housing Element by providing additional housing resources for the community that will be designed to be compatible with the intended character of the area.

4. The proposed Zone Change from Agricultural (A-1) to Estates (E-1) will implement the General Plan by requiring minimum one half -acre lots consistent with the General Plan Low Density land use designation, while establishing development standards including building height limit and setbacks and that will ensure that the proposed development would be compatible with nearby residential land uses with comparable lot sizes, architectural design features, and landscaping. Therefore, with compliance to the applicable development standards of the Zoning Ordinance, the project will be compatible with surrounding land uses.

C. The City Council herby makes the following findings regarding the Tentative Subdivision Map:

The project conforms to the following:
a. The proposed map is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Vista, and every element thereof, for the following reasons:
i. The applicant is requesting a General Plan Amendment from Rural Residential (RR) to Low Density Residential (LD) which allows a maximum density of two dwelling units per acre. The proposed subdivision has a density of 1.5 dwelling units per acre. Therefore, upon approval of the General Plan Amendment, the density of the proposed project would be consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan. 001054732P21-0114 RESO GPA-TSM
02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 145 of 210

RESOLUTION 2022-

CITY COUNCIL OF THE CHARTERED CITY OF VISTA
PAGE 3
ii. The proposed subdivision is located in a semi -rural area adjacent to single-family residential land uses of various lot sizes ranging from one-half acre and larger parcels. The proposed density (1.5 units per acre) and lot size (minimum one-half acre) of the proposed subdivision would allow for the construction of a semi -rural development of 25 single-family homes consistent in lot size and density with nearby properties to the south and southwest, and compatible with larger lot sizes to the west, north, and east. Therefore, the project is compatible with surrounding land uses in compliance the policies of the General Plan. iii. The proposed map is consistent with the Housing Element of the General Plan because the project helps to achieve the Housing Element goal to provide a wide range of housing by location, type of unit, and price to meet the existing and future needs of Vista residents; also, the project helps the City to provide its fair share of regional housing needs.
b. The design and improvements of the proposed subdivision are compatible with the Vista General Plan for the following reason:
i. The design and improvements must meet the criteria of Development Code Titles 16, 17, and 18 to implement the General Plan. Construction of the project requires compliance with Title 16 Building and Construction, and the California Building Code. Construction drawings must be reviewed and approved through the City's permit application, plan check, and inspection process. The proposed subdivision must comply with Section 17.16.010 which regulates the design of subdivisions including minimum requirements for lot areas, frontage, lot depth and width, and access to public utilities. The project has been reviewed for conformance with the requirements of Section 17.16.010. Individual building permits will be required for the construction of each residence, at which time the construction drawings shall be reviewed for compliance with the development standards required by Title 18 Zoning.

C. The site is physically suitable for the type of development for the following reason:
i. The land area and topography will support the 25-lot subdivision and associated roadway improvements proposed by the Tentative Subdivision Map. d. The site is suitable for the proposed density of development for the following reason:
i. The density of the proposed project is 1.5 dwelling units per acre, which is below the maximum density of 2 dwelling units per acre allowed by the General Plan LD Land Use designation, and the project complies with the minimum lot size (one-half acre) required for the Estates (E-1) Zone upon approval of the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change.
e. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvement are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage, or substantially and avoidably injure fish, wildlife, or other habitat for the following reason:
001054732P21-0114 RESO GPA-TSM
02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 146 of 210

RESOLUTION 2022-

CITY COUNCIL OF THE CHARTERED CITY OF VISTA
PAGE 4
i. The project site is substantially surrounded by existing single-family homes and it does not contain any endangered, rare or threatened species.

Approval of the project would not result in significant effects related to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality.
f. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is not likely to cause serious public health problems for the following reasons:
i. Adequate public services, including emergency services, and utilities, including sewer service, will be extended to the subdivision to ensure no public health problems occur as a result of the subdivision.
ii. The road improvements as proposed and imposed by the Conditions of Approval meet City standards.
g. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements of record or easements established by court judgement acquired by the public at large for access through, or use of property within the proposed subdivision for the following reason:
development.

All such easements shall be relocated or reserved from
h. All requirements of CEQA have been met.

D. The above findings satisfy all of the requirements of the Subdivision Map Act and Title 17 of the City's Development Code.

E. In view of the necessary findings heretofore made, and considering the applicable law, the City Council approves the General Plan Amendment changing the land use designation from Rural Residential (RR) to Low Density Residential (LD), a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "B", and Tentative Subdivision Map for the development of 25 residential lots on the 17-acre site located at 2277 Vista Grande Drive (APNS: 171-100-05 and 171-100-28), a copy of which is included in the Project Plans attached hereto as Exhibit "C", subject to the Conditions of Approval in Exhibit "A" to this Resolution.

F. The Tentative Subdivision Map, or any portion thereof for which a Final Map is not yet recorded, shall become null and void as set forth in Exhibit "A". [Continued on page 5.]
001054732P21-0114 RESO GPA-TSM
02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 147 of 210

RESOLUTION 2022-

CITY COUNCIL OF THE CHARTERED CITY OF VISTA
PAGE 5

3. Adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a meeting of the City Council of the City of Vista held on the February 22, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

DAROLD PIEPER, CITY ATTORNEY
By:

Exhibits (on filed with the City Clerk):

A. Conditions of Approval
B. General Plan Land Use Map Amendment
C. Tentative Subdivision Map

APPROVED
Darold Pieper
20220208110143

JUDY RITTER, MAYOR
ATTEST:

KATHY VALDEZ, CITY CLERK
By:
001054732P21-0114 RESO GPA-TSM
02/22/2022 PH 1

EXHIBIT "A"

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
P21-0114
VISTA GRANDE 28-LOT SUBDIVISION — GREGORY PERRINE
Note: Conditions modified or added at the January 18, 2022, meeting of the Planning Commission are shown below in bold/underline format.

A. SCOPE OF PROJECT
This project consists of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and Tentative Subdivision Map for a 25-lot single-family residential subdivision located at 2277 Vista Grande Drive (APNs 171-100-05 and 171-100-28) which shall conform to Exhibit "B".

B. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS

1. Where not otherwise specified, this project shall be subject to the regulations of the City of Vista Municipal and Development Codes as well as other applicable local, State and Federal regulations.

2. Prior to any construction on the site, all required permits shall be obtained.

C. FINAL MAP
A Final Map is required for this subdivision as set forth in Engineering Condition F.1.a., below.

D. EXPIRATION AND PHASING OF TENTATIVE MAP

1. Unless a Final Map is recorded or an extension granted pursuant to Title 17 of the Development Code, this Tentative Subdivision Map shall expire at 11:59 PM on the third anniversary of the adoption of this Resolution.

2. The recordation of the Final Map and construction of all access improvements and public utility improvements may not be phased.

E. VIOLATION OF CONDITIONS
Should significant violations of conditions be reported to the City, the City may take action pursuant to Chapter 17.88 of the Vista Development Code.

F. ENGINEERING INFORMATION AND CONDITIONS

1. General
a. A Final Map shall be prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer or Licensed Land Surveyor and shall be in accordance with the approved Tentative Map, the Subdivision Map Act and Vista Development Code Title 17, Chapter 17.68, and shall be subject to approval by the City Engineer.
b. Prior to acceptance of any building plans, the grading and public improvement plan sets shall be submitted for the second plan check and deemed substantially complete by the Land Development Engineer. Prior to issuance of any building permits, the public improvement plans shall be approved by the City Engineer and bonded for.
c. An Owners Association shall be formed for this project to address the maintenance of private facilities. The applicant shall submit two sets of CC&Rs P21-0114 EX2A 1
02/22/2022 PH1 Page 149 of 210

with the Final Map for concurrent review and approval. The CC&R's shall be recorded before or concurrent with the Final Map recordation, or after Final Map recordation but prior to granting of any occupancy. The CC&R's shall address the maintenance of private street(s), public street areas, monument signage, common area (and inaccessible non -common area) landscaping, private drainage systems (including detention basins), BMP's, access roads, streetlights, gates, and perimeter fencing. The CC&R submittal shall include a spreadsheet noting each applicable condition of approval and the page within the CC&R's where the item is addressed. Recorded CC&Rs shall include a signature line for the City with a declaration that the recorded CC&Rs satisfy the terms of the land use approval authorizing the map. The signature block for the CC&R's shall be accepted by the City with the following signature block:

The City of Vista has reviewed these CC&R's and the terms of the land use approval authorizing the map have been complied with, based on language included in the following provisions or the CC&R's. Any amendment to those provisions must be countersigned by the City to confirm that the changes do not materially modify the preceding list of the CC&R's in a manner to deviate from the requirements of the land use approvals.

City of Vista Representative
d. The approval of the Tentative Map/project shall not mean that closure, vacation, or abandonment of any public street, right of way, easement, or facility is granted or guaranteed to the applicant. Section 66434(g) or 664450) of the Government Code may be applied at the discretion of the City Engineer. If not applied, the applicant is responsible for applying for all closures, vacations, and abandonments as necessary. The application(s) for such actions shall be reviewed and approved or rejected by the City under separate process per codes, ordinances, and policies in effect at the time of the application. e. Where proposed off -site improvements, including but not limited to slopes, streets, driveways, public utility facilities, and drainage facilities, are to be constructed, the applicant shall, at his own expense, obtain all necessary easements or other interests in real property and shall dedicate the same to the City as required. The applicant shall provide documentary proof satisfactory to the City that such easements or other interest in real property have been obtained prior to the approval of the final map or other available instrument. Additionally, the City, may at its sole discretion, require that the applicant obtain at his sole expense a title policy insuring the necessary title for the easement or other interest in real property to have vested with the City of Vista or the applicant, as applicable.

The applicant shall obtain any necessary permits and clearances from all public agencies having jurisdiction over the project due to its type, size, or location, including but not limited to the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, California Department of Fish & Game, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/or San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board (including NPDES), San Diego County Health Department, prior to the issuance of grading permits. g. This project shall provide year-round erosion control including measures for the site required for the phasing of grading. Prior to the issuance of grading permit, P21-0114 EX2A
02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 150 of 210

an erosion control plan, designed for all proposed stages of construction, shall be reviewed, secured by the applicant with cash securities and approved by the City Engineer.

The drainage design on the Preliminary Grading Plan is conceptual only. The final design shall be based upon a hydrologic/hydraulic study to be approved by the City Engineer during final engineering. All drainage picked up in an underground system shall remain underground until it is discharged into an approved channel, or as otherwise approved by the City Engineer. All public storm drains shall be shown on City standard plan and profile sheets. All storm drain easements shall be dedicated where required. The applicant shall be responsible for obtaining any off -site easements for storm drainage facilities.

Prior to grant of occupancy, the Engineer of record must submit "As -Built" drawings to construction inspector assigned to his project for final approval. The Inspector will review the "As -Built' drawings, sign and return them to the Engineer.

The development shall comply with all applicable regulations established by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) as set forth in the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (N.P.D.E.S.) permit requirements for urban runoff and storm water discharge and any regulations adopted by the City pursuant to the N.P.D.E.S. regulations or requirements.

Further, the applicant may be required to file a Notice of Intent with the State Water Resources Control Board to obtain coverage under the N.P.D.E.S. General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction Activity and may be required to implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) concurrent with the commencement of grading activities. SWPPPs shall include construction pollution prevention and pollution control measures The applicant shall comply with all the provisions of the Clean Water Program during and after all phases of the development process, including but not limited to: mass grading, rough grading, construction of street and landscaping improvements, and construction of dwelling units.
k. Any existing broken pavement, concrete curb, gutter or sidewalk or any damaged during construction along the frontage of the project, shall be repaired or replaced as directed by the Land Development Inspector.

2. Grading
a. Prior to any grading of any part of the project, a comprehensive soils and geologic investigation shall be conducted of the soils, slopes, and formations of the project.

All necessary measures shall be taken and implemented to assure slope stability, erosion control, and soil integrity. No grading shall occur until a detailed grading plan, to be prepared in accordance with the Development Code, is approved by the City Engineer.
b. If the project involves demolition of an existing structure or surface improvements, the grading and construction BMP plans shall be approved by the Land Development Engineer prior to the issuance of a demolition permit. No demolition shall be permitted without an approved construction erosion control plan. c. A precise grading and private improvement plan shall be prepared, reviewed, secured and approved prior to the issuance of any building permits. The grading P21-0114 EX2A 3
02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 151 of 210

plan shall be prepared by a California Registered Civil Engineer. The plan shall reflect all pavement, flatwork, drainage devices, utility services, landscaped areas, special surfaces, curbs, gutters, walls, medians, striping, signage, streetlights, and footprints of all structures. An erosion control plan shall be submitted along with the grading plans for the site.
d. The applicant shall monitor, supervise, and control all construction and construction -supportive activities, so as to prevent these activities from causing a public nuisance, including but not limited to, insuring strict adherence to the following:

Dirt, debris and other construction material shall not be deposited on any public street or within the City's storm water conveyance system.

2. All grading and related site preparation and construction activities shall be limited to the hours of 7 AM to 5 PM, Monday through Friday, and from 8 AM to 4 PM on Saturdays. No Engineering related construction activities shall be conducted on Sundays or legal holidays unless written permission is granted by the City Engineer with specific limitations to the working hours and types of permitted operations. All on -site construction staging areas shall be as far as possible (minimum 100 feet) from any existing residential development. Because construction noise may still be intrusive in the evening or on holidays, the City's Noise Ordinance also prohibits any disturbing, excessive, or offensive noise which causes discomfort or annoyance to reasonable persons of normal sensitivity.

3. The construction site shall accommodate the on -site parking of all motor vehicles used by persons working at or providing deliveries to the site. e. Grading and drainage facilities shall be designed and installed to adequately accommodate the local storm water runoff and shall be in accordance with the City's Development Code and as directed by the City Engineer. Drainage facilities shall be designed to attenuate the peak flows resulting from a 100-year storm event down to a level equal to or less than the pre -development flow.

This project requires off -site improvements. No grading or improvements shall occur outside the limits of this approval unless the Developer obtains, records, and submits a recorded copy to the City Engineer a grading or slope easement or agreement from the owners of the affected properties. If Developer is unable to obtain the grading or slope easement, or agreement, no grading permit will be issued. In that case Developer must either apply for and obtain an amendment of this approval or modify the plans so grading and improvements will not occur outside the project and apply for and obtain a finding of substantial conformance from both the City Engineer and Planning Director.

3. Improvements
a. Prior to approval of the Final Map all improvement requirements shall be covered by a subdivision agreement and secured with sufficient improvement securities or bonds guaranteeing performance and payment for labor and materials, setting of monuments, and warranty against defective materials and workmanship. Any private streets that are created shall be subject to a Private Street Maintenance Agreement to be recorded before or concurrently with the Final Map. A portion of P21-0114 EX2A
02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 152 of 210

Vista Grande Drive shall be privately maintained by this development from Station 14+82.19 to the East property line as shown the Preliminary Grading Plan submitted as file P21-0114.

All public improvements are required at the time of subdivision and/or development and shall be under construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to the issuance of the first building permit, excluding retaining wall permits. All public improvements including underground conversion of existing overhead utilities shall be completed prior to issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy.
c. Engineered street, sewer, storm drain, and all utility improvement plans for Vista Grande Drive and all private streets shall be prepared and submitted by a California Registered Civil Engineer for plan check and approval of the City Engineer.
d. The following streets shall be dedicated on the Final Map and improved as noted:

Vista Grande Drive — public portion:
a.) A minimum 50-foot-wide right-of-way (ROW) improved with a minimum 28-foot-wide curb -to -curb pavement section centered within the ROW. b.) Improvements shall include, streetlights as shown on the Preliminary Grading Plan, 6-inch concrete curb and gutter on the South Edge of the roadway with an asphalt pavement section on the North side of the roadway matching the edge of the existing pavement. A minimum pavement section of 4 inches AC over 8 inches class 2 base with a TI of 6.5 is required.

Vista Grande Drive — private portion
a.) A minimum 40-foot private road and public utility easement improved with a minimum 28-foot-wide curb -to -curb pavement section centered within the easement.
b.) Improvements shall consist of streetlights as shown on the preliminary grading plan, 6-inch concrete curb and gutter on both sides of the private street, a 5-foot-wide concrete sidewalk on one side, a minimum pavement section of 4" AC over 8" class 2 base structural with a TI of 6.5.

Private Street A- Sta 10+00.00 to Sta 12+39.93 and Private Street B a.) A minimum 35-foot private road and public utility easement improved with a minimum 24-foot-wide curb -to -curb pavement section centered within the easement.
b.) Improvements shall consist of streetlights as shown on the preliminary grading plan, 6-inch concrete curb and gutter on both sides of the private street, a 5-foot-wide concrete sidewalk on one side, a minimum pavement section of 4" AC over 8" Class 2 base with a TI of 6.5.

Private Street A — Sta 12+37.93 to Sta 14+78.32
a.) A minimum 31-foot private road and public utility easement improved with a minimum 24-foot-wide curb -to -curb pavement section centered within the easement.
b.) Improvements shall consist of streetlights as shown on the preliminary grading plan, 6-inch concrete curb and gutter on both sides of the private street, a minimum pavement section of 4" AC over 8" Class 2 base with a TI P21-0114 EX2A
02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 153 of 210

of 6.5.
e. Street name signs and traffic control devices shall be built to City standards and as required by the City Engineer and the Traffic Engineer. f. All right-of-way alignments, street dedications, exact geometrics and widths shall be dedicated and improved as required by the City Engineer. g. Sight distance requirements at all street intersections shall conform to the Cal Trans intersectional sight distance criteria. Landscaping features such as slopes, fencing, retaining walls, trees, shrubs, and signage shall be designed to conform to the Cal Trans sight distance criteria.
h. The applicant shall pay all applicable fees, energy charges, and/or assessments and privately maintain the constructed streetlights on all public or private streets within the subdivision boundary. Streetlight plans shall be submitted and approved prior to issuance of the grading permit.

Design and construction of all improvements shall be in accordance with standard plans and requirements of the City of Vista and subject to approval by the City Engineer.

Public and private sidewalk and hardscape designated as "ADA path of travel" shall comply with ADA requirements.
k. Any public street adjacent to the project shall be improved as required by the City Engineer.

Pavement sections for all public and private streets and access roads shall be based upon approved soil tests and traffic indices. The pavement design is to be prepared by the applicant's soil engineer and must be approved by the City Engineer, prior to paving. The minimum section shall be as listed above, 4 inches of asphalt pavement on 8 inches of class 2 base for all pavement sections. m. All existing overhead utility lines within the property and/or in the public right of way on the same side of a public right-of-way or private street abutting a new project, and all new extension services for the development of the project, including but not limited to, electrical, cable and telephone, shall be placed underground per City Code requirements and as required by the City Engineer and current City policy.
n. The City of Vista does not provide water service for projects within our city limits.

A separate submittal and/or permits, fees, bonds, agreements, and other conditions may be required to be attained by Vista Irrigation District. o. Any private water lines shall be designed by a registered Civil Engineer in the State of California. The plan check and inspection for private water lines shall be paid for by the developer as part of the Engineering review and construction process.
p. The project shall enter into an encroachment agreement to maintain the private storm drain facilities being designed within the public ROW.

P21-0114 EX2A 6
02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 154 of 210

q. The project shall maintain in perpetuity an existing portion of the public ROW along APN 171-100-48. This area shall be included in the CC&R's for maintenance.
r. Any increase in runoff volume, flow or velocity to the adjacent neighboring properties along Vista Grande Terrace or any other property downstream shall be mitigated by this development as approved by the City Engineer.

4. Stormwater
a. The applicant shall prepare and submit an Operations & Maintenance (O&M) Plan to the Engineering Division with the first submittal of engineering plans. The O&M Plan shall be prepared by the applicant's Civil Engineer. It shall be directly based on the project's Storm Water Quality Management Plan (SWAMP) previously approved by the City Engineer. The O&M Plan shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to approval of any plans by the Land Development Division. At a minimum the O&M Plan shall include the designated responsible parties to manage the storm water BMP(s), employee's training program and duties, operating schedule, maintenance frequency, routine service schedule, specific maintenance activities, copies of resource agency permits, and any other necessary elements.

The applicant shall enter into a City -Standard Stormwater Facilities Maintenance Agreement with the City obliging the future owner(s) to maintain, repair and replace the storm water Best Management Practices (BMPs) identified in the project's approved Storm Water Quality Management Plan (SWAMP), as detailed in the O&M Plan into perpetuity. The Agreement shall be approved by the City Attorney and shall be recorded at the County Recorder's Office prior to issuance of any precise grading permit.
c. At a minimum, maintenance agreements shall require the staff training, inspection and maintenance of all BMPs on an annual basis. The project proponent shall complete and maintain O&M forms to document all maintenance activities.

Parties responsible for the O&M plan shall retain records at the subject property for at least 5 years. These documents shall be made available to the City for inspection upon request at any time.
d. The project shall provide a separate sheet as part of the grading plan showing all construction BMP's required. This construction BMP sheet shall be phased as needed and required by the City of Vista, alterations and or updated plans may be required during construction. Additional BMP's when requested by the City of Vista shall be implemented at least before the next rain event or within 48 hours of request whichever comes first.
e. The BMPs described in the project's approved Storm Water Quality Management Plan (SWAMP) shall not be altered in any way, shape or form without formal approval by the City Engineer.
f. This project will be required to implement post construction BMP's in accordance with the City of Vista BMP Design Manual and the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board (SDRWQCB) MS4 permit reissued as order no R9-2013- 0001. A separate sheet shall be provided as part of the grading plans that P21-0114 EX2A
02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 155 of 210

indicates all site design, source control and treatment control BMP's. This sheet shall be signed by the architect, civil engineer, landscape architect, and geotechnical engineer. It shall show construction level details for all BMP's as required by the City Engineer.
g. All post construction BMP's shall be surveyed by a professional land surveyor. A written certification signed and stamped by the Civil Engineer of record shall be submitted prior to final inspection and occupancy release. The certification shall include language that the civil engineer has personally visited the site and confirms the BMP's as constructed are in conformance with the approved SWQMP and H&H reports and that all water quality requirements have been satisfied.

5. Public Sewer and Water Utilities - Sanitation Engineering Conditions

1. The Residential development proposed density is in compliance with the current General Plan and zoning requirements. Therefore, the Project proposed sewer capacity is within the allowable sewer capacity for these parcels as determined by the current `2017-Sewerage Master Plan'.

2. The proposed Residential development project is within the City of Vista Sewer Service Area V17.02A as determined by the current `2017-Sewerage Master Plan' and the `Sewer Facility Maps'. Therefore, sewer is available for this project.

3. The peak sewer capacity estimate for this project, based on the Site Development Plan submittal dated August - 2021, will be calculated based on the current City of Vista Municipal Codes (Ref. VMC Sections 14.01.030, 06.110, 120, & 130).

4. Developer shall obtain a `Sewer Discharge' permit from the City of Vista, and pay all related fees and charges, prior to obtaining a Building permit.

5. Commitment to provide sewer services is made by the District's Board and/or City Council, and is subject to compliance with Sewer District's conditions, terms, rules, and regulations, posting required securities/bonds, and payment of all pertinent fees and charges.

6. Water meters are required to be installed and labeled separately (Ref. VMC

18.56.080.G6.ix). One separate, individual, dedicated water meter for interior domestic use for each separate lot. Another separate, individual, dedicated water meter for exterior landscape irrigation use of the common areas.

7. An existing 8-in PVC (Dwg-3121, 1991-Yr) public sewer main along Prince Way (Private Road) is available for connection (Sewer Manhole #V17.02A).

8. Developer shall hire a qualified California Registered Land Surveyor or Engineer to survey and certify the invert elevations of the existing sewer manholes #V17.02A and #V17.02B where the proposed sewer main extension is connecting.

9. The Land Surveyor/ Engineer shall submit a signed, stamped and dated `Survey Manhole Certification' prior to approval of the Grading and Improvement Plans.

P21-0114 EX2A 8
02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 156 of 210

10. The certificate shall include manhole IDs, top of rim and invert elevations, city Benchmark, and survey date — add `Survey Sewer Manhole Certification' block for plans to reflect this requirement. Certification block to also show manhole IDs, top of rim and invert elevations, city Benchmark, and survey date.

11. Developer shall extend approximately 650-LF of 8-inch PVC, SDR-35 (GREEN) `public' sewer main extension along Vista Grande Drive to front the proposed residential development.

12. Existing sewer manhole #V17.02A (connection point) shall be reconstructed to current standards.

13. Developer shall install approximately 2,600-LF of 8-in PVC, SDR-35 (GREEN) `public' sewer main within the project site to serve the development.

14. All sewer pipes shall be designed to maintain a self-cleaning velocity of a minimum of two feet per second (2 fps) to avoid deposition of solids and odor.

Otherwise, maintain a minimum 1.00% slope.

15. Construction Sewer Improvement plans are to be designed and prepared by a Registered Professional Civil Engineer, per Public Standards and/or as directed by the City Engineer.

16. Construction and inspection of the sewer main is to be done per Public Standards and/or as directed by the City Engineer, including Pre- & Post -CCTV inspection (Ref. VMC 14.08). Add note to plans to reflect this requirement.

17. All sewer work is to be inspected by the City of Vista Engineering Inspector. All work done without proper inspection will be rejected. Add note to plans to reflect this requirement.

18. All street monuments damaged during construction of the sewer improvements are to be replaced by a California Registered Land Surveyor. Add note to plans to reflect this requirement.

19. The Construction Grading and Improvement Plans As -Built Signature block shall include a sanitation signature block for review/approval of the as-builts as noted below.

AS BUILT"
DATE
RCE EXP.

REVIEWED BY:

INSPECTION: DATE:

SANITATION: DATE:

20. Each proposed lot shall have a separate, individual, dedicated gravity flow, private sewer lateral, and a `standard two-way' cleanout with utility box fronting and connecting to the sewer main.

P21-0114 EX2A 9
02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 157 of 210

P21-0114 EX2A

21. Each proposed lot shall have a separate individual dedicated `Backflow Preventer' for each sewer lateral as noted on the plans.

22. Plans shall include a `PRIVATE SEWER LATERAL &CLEANOUT' Table per City Standard Dwg SWR24.

23. APN 171-100-29 (2279 Vista Grande Drive) is currently served by an existing active private septic system. The DEH has set back and reserve area requirements for proposed cut slopes and retaining walls near septic systems.

24. Developer shall contact the DEH for any cut slope restrictions impacting the adjacent septic systems.

25. Below is the link to the DEH's website for septic systems. Click the link at the bottom of the page "Design Manual for Onsite Wastewater Systems". This will provide you the latest requirements
a. httpJ/ www.sdcounty.ca.gov/deh/water/lu septic systems.html,

26. Also, the Geotechnical/Soils Report shall be amended to address the impact of cut -slopes near adjacent septic systems in order to prevent potential sewage migration across cut -slopes.

27. Prior to the approval of the Grading and/or Improvement Plans, developer/ engineer shall provide a formal a written 'DEA Clearance' letter stating their findings and recommendations.

28. Any damage to the private septic system during the cutting of the slopes and installation of the retaining walls, causing sewage migration across cut slopes, will result in the developer abandoning the septic system and connecting the parcel/building to public sewer.

29. Connection into the public sewer requires parcel to be annexed into the jurisdictional boundary of the City of Vista, dedication of public sewer easements, obtaining permits, and payment of related and associated fees and charge.

30. Depending on the DEH findings, comments, and recommendations, the Grading Plans may need to include a San Diego Department of Environmental and Health (DEH) Signature block for review and approval.

31. APN 171-100-28 (2277 Vista Grande Drive) is currently served by an existing active private septic system. Developer shall obtain a DEH Plumbing Permit to abandon the septic system. Below is the link to the DEH's website for abandonment of septic systems. Click the link at the bottom of the page "Design Manual for Onsite Wastewater Systems". This will provide you the latest requirements.
a. http://www.sdcounty.ca.pov/deh/water/lu septic systems.html, 10 02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 158 of 210

32. Upon abandonment of the existing private septic system, developer shall submit a County DEH Certificate of Abandonment as proof the sewer system was abandoned.

33. Also, the Geotechnical/Soils Report shall be amended to address the removal & backfill of the septic system.

34. This project does NOT qualify for public sewer reimbursement. All cost incurred for the installation of the sewer facilities shall be borne by the developer (Ref.

VMC14.08-050, & 16.56.150).

35. All `Private' roadways/ streets (full width) are to be dedicated to the benefit of the City of Vista as sewer easements on the Final Map.

36. The FINAL MAP GENERAL NOTES shall include the following notes:
a. GRADING, DRAINAGE, SURFACE & UNDERGROUND

IMPROVEMENTS, LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION, AND BMPS

REQUIREMENTS PER APPROVED PLANNING COMMISSION (CITY
COUNCIL) RESOLUTION 2021
b. ALL EASEMENTS DEDICATED WITHIN THE FINAL MAP SHALL BE SUBJECT TO THE `VSD RESTRICTIONS FOR SEWER & DRAINAGE
EASEMENTS', DOC#1991-0433396, RECORDED AUGUST 23, 1991
c. ALL PARCELS SHALL BE SUBJECT TO A RECORDED `PRIVATE
SEWER MAINTENANCE AGMT' DOC#2021-
RECORDED 2021.
d. ALL PARCELS SHALL BE SUBJECT TO A RECORDED `COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS' (CC&RS) DOC#2021-
, RECORDED 2021.
e. PUBLIC EASEMENTS DEDICATED AND REJECTED HEREON SHALL

REMAIN AS PRIVATE EASEMENTS TO BE CONVEYED WITH EACH

LOT WITHIN THIS MAP UNTIL CITY OF VISTA ACCEPTS THE OFFER OF DEDICATION.

37. Statewide General Discharae Reauirements for Sanitary Svstems Compliance:

Developer is to comply with the SWRCB requirements to prevent Sanitary Sewer Overflows (SSOs) and Spills. Compliance can be met by complying with the conditions and requirements noted above, and by performing the required pre - and post -CCTV inspection, and installing approved sewer manholes.

38. For questions regarding sewer design and/or these sanitation terms, requirements, and/or conditions, please, contact Mr. Tony Tirado, P.E, at

1.760.643.5432, or email: ttirado(c_cityofvista.com,

6. Miscellaneous
a. Traffic control during the construction of streets which have opened to public travel shall be in accordance with construction signing, marking and other protection as required by the State Department of Transportation (CalTrans) Traffic Manual.

P21-0114 EX2A 1 1
02/22/2022 PH1 Page 159 of 210

Water improvements are separately approved by and bonded with the Vista Irrigation District prior to approval of the grading plan. Please submit with VID concurrently to avoid project delays.
c. A Right -of -Way permit shall be required prior to commencement of any work within the City right-of-way.
d. The road connection from the eastern end of Vista Grande Drive to Vista Grande Terrace vA14 shall be gated to provide for secondary fire apparatus ernergensy access only, and a corresponding note shall be shown on the Final Map.

G. TRAFFIC ENGINEERING

1. Provide curve warning signs and 15 MPH advisory speed placards in each direction for the curve just west of the project. Show the signs on the public improvement plans when they are submitted in the future.

2. Provide improvements at the intersection of E. Vista Way and Warmlands Avenue as detailed below:
a. Widen E. Vista Way adjacent to 2131 E. Vista Way to ultimate street cross section as designated in the City's Circulation Element (4-Lane Major) to include the following:
i. New pavement, curb & gutter, sidewalk and one streetlight in the widened section.
ii. A full curb return with two directional curb ramps on the southeast corner.
iii. Relocating an existing traffic signal/streetlight pole using new Caltrans standard pole.
iv. Two new pedestrian push buttons and poles to allow for pedestrian travel on the south and east legs of the intersection.
v. Provide grading as needed to accommodate the widening. b. Provide a curb return with a curb ramp on the northeast corner and a new pedestrian push button and pole to allow for pedestrian travel on the east leg of the intersection.
c. Provide a curb ramp and a new pedestrian push button and pole on the southwest corner to allow for pedestrian travel on the south leg of the intersection. Provide minor grading modifications behind the existing AC curb to allow for transition from the new curb ramp to the dirt walking pathway along E. Vista Way heading south.
d. Eliminate the existing pedestrian crossing on the north leg of the intersection. Include all needed signal modifications.
e. Provide striping as required for the widening as well as crosswalks on the south and east legs of the intersection.
f. Provide Improvement design plans in accordance with City requirements prior to constructing above Improvements.

P21-0114 EX2A 12
02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 160 of 210

g. The cost of the improvements at the intersection of E. Vista Way and Warmlands Avenue are eligible for credit towards the project's Traffic Impact Fees.

H. FIRE DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS

1. Street Address Numbers/Sians
Building and unit addressing shall comply with VFD policy for multi -family dwellings:

Unit numbers - Four (4) inches in height, minimum — interior hallways and/or doors illuminated during hours of darkness. All address number shall be three dimensional and shall contrast in color to the background visible from either direction of approach.

Street name signs meeting the requirements of the City shall be installed at the intersections. Temporary address and street name signs shall be provided during construction.

2. Fire Access Roads
Fire apparatus roads shall be designed and maintained to support an imposed load of at least 75,000 pounds and shall provide an approved paved surface.

All fire access roadways must be maintained unobstructed and driveable by fire apparatus throughout the construction process. If the roadway becomes undriveable, a Stop Work Order will be requested until access is restored.

A paved all-weather driving surface approved by the fire chief, capable of supporting fire apparatus, must be installed prior to combustible building materials being brought to the site. (Exception: forming lumber for foundations permitted prior to all-weather surface.) As a minimum the first lift of paving must be installed prior to combustibles being brought on site. Complete paving is required prior to building final inspection.

Any gate or barrier across a fire access roadway must meet Vista Fire Department standards and have specific plans reviewed and approved prior to installation. Gate swing shall not obstruct the width of any fire lane. All gates serving residential projects must be automatic. Automatic gates must be equipped with sensors detecting emergency vehicle strobe lights from any direction of approach. In addition, Knox brand key -operated electric switches keyed to Vista Fire Department specifications are required. Both the strobe light detector and Knox switch shall override all gate functions and open the gate.

The gated secondary emergency (fire apparatus) access to be installed on the access roadway between Vista Grande Drive and Vista Grande Terrace shall be a simple pole gate design with a Knox padlock.

Roadway design features (speed bumps, speed humps, speed control dips, etc.) which may interfere with emergency apparatus responses shall not be installed or allowed to remain on fire access roadways.

Fire lane designations shall be required for all fire access roadways as determined by the Fire Department. Minimum unobstructed paved width is 24 feet. All interior P21-0114 EX2A 13
02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 161 of 210

roadways are designated "fire access roadways" or "fire lanes". Parking is not allowed and shall be marked "No Parking" for the purpose of unobstructed access for emergency vehicles. Roadway shall be marked per CFC Sec. 901.4 and CVC Sec. 22500.1. Posted signs which state "FIRE LANE, NO PARKING" shall be installed or curbs painted red and stenciled with white letters stating "No Parking Fire Lane" on the face with 4" minimum white stenciled blocked letters and on top of any curb as directed by the Fire Department. All Fire Lanes shall be marked and identified prior to Certificate of Occupancy. Parking shall be prohibited upon interior roadways.

3. Fire Sprinklers
All residential structures and attached garages built on the subject property are required to have residential fire sprinkler systems meeting NFPA 13D standard, latest edition and local VFD sprinkler policy.

All Building Plan framing, and floor plan pages shall include the following statement in bold type:
"BUILDING SHALL NOT BE ENCLOSED UNTIL FIRE DEPARTMENT APPROVES FIRE SPRINKLER HYDROSTATIC TEST."

4. Emergency Response Map
Provide an "as built" site plan for emergency response mapping in a format compatible with current Fire Department mapping contractor needs. Fee for map update is charged.

5. Hydrants & Waterlines
Jones model 3700 and Clow model 2050 are the only acceptable hydrants.

Required fire flow at hydrant is 1500 GPM.

Prior to any building construction at the site all fire hydrants shall be installed and operational. If any existing fire hydrant does not meet minimum fire flow or approved type as indicated above it shall be the responsibility of the applicant to improve the system as needed.

Waterlines for fire control must be capable of supplying the required demand of the hydrant(s), plus the largest fire sprinkler demand, plus any domestic use supplied from that line.

Fire hydrants shall be painted per Vista Fire Department standards and be maintained free of obstructions. Blue reflective raised pavement marker shall be installed on pavement at approved location marking each hydrant.

If any hydrants are taken out of service, the Fire Marshal's office shall be notified in advance and the hydrants clearly marked OUT OF SERVICE per department policies.

VISTA IRRIGATION DISTRICT INFORMATION AND CONDITIONS

1. The site is totally within the Vista Irrigation District.

2. Payment to the Vista Irrigation District for this Water Availability Letter has not been made and will be due when payment for all other processing fees are made.

P21-0114 EX2A 14
02/22/2022 PH1 Page 162 of 210

3. All Grading and Improvement plans are required to be submitted to District for review and approval, including all City/County conditioned offsite improvements that are required in proximity to existing waterlines. All offsite improvements must be disclosed to the District and may require waterline replacement or relocation due to resulting encroachments.

4. One or more of the following requirements apply in order for the District to supply water to this project:
a. A public water line extension.
b. Installation of a reduced pressure detector assembly (RPDA) to serve your private system.
c. Installation of water facilities off existing District water line(s). d. All lots being created must be adjacent to a public water main and served through individual water meters(s) and/or RPDA(s).

5. A Specific Easement (ref. Vista Irrigation District Standard Drawing 5-1) is necessary for: X public water line extension X existing water line. In addition, the District may require easements through the property for future extensions. If any off -site easements are needed, the owner of the property is responsible for obtaining them and for the expenses that may be incurred.

6. District Blanket Easement No. N109 encumbers the property.

7. An existing District waterline crosses or is adjacent to the land being developed and should be shown on the final map. These waterlines may need to be replaced or relocated due to the grading operations or project configuration.

8. Pursuant to Water Code Section 537 et seq. (or subsequent California Building Standards Code updates conforming to Section 537), all newly constructed multiunit residential and newly constructed mixed -use residential and commercial structures, for which an application for water service is submitted after January 1, 2018, are required to measure the quantity of water supplied to each individual residential dwelling unit as a condition of new water service (District Rules and Regulations Section 3.12.3.J Meter Rules). The owner of the structure shall be responsible for installing and reading sub -meters and complying with all applicable laws and regulations.

9. Service is being provided via existing two 3/4" water meters, Account Nos. 8346-479 and 8346-0191. Additional meters or water facilities may be needed.

10. This project is subject to payment of the District's Capacity Fee as well as the San Diego County Water Authority's Capacity Charge at the time application is made for water service.

11. The complete hydraulic analysis and design study dated May 27, 2021 determines available domestic service pressures, fire flow availability, on -site and/or off -site system improvements required to serve the project.

12. When the required fire flow amount and fire hydrant locations are known, the developer and his engineer must meet with District staff to discuss water service to the site.

P21-0114 EX2A 15
02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 163 of 210

13. If the owner of this residential development desires to construct it in phases, he is required to request it in writing before or at the time the improvement plans are submitted to the District for plan checking. The owner must also get written approval from the City of Vista Building Department.

14. The District's water system design criteria recommends that a minimum residual pressure of 40 psi during peak hour conditions be provided at each water meter required for the project. Additionally, required fire flows for the project must maintain a minimum of 20 psi during maximum day conditions. The District has an 8-inch and 10-inch size waterline in Vista Grande Drive with a maximum hydraulic gradient of 810 feet. The owner shall contact the Fire Agency having jurisdiction over this project to obtain fire flow requirements and fire control facilities needed to serve the project and inform the District to determine if a fire flow analysis is necessary.

15. Meters serving commercial, industrial, agricultural, governmental, or multi -family residential zoned lands; any property with a well, private pumping system, auxiliary water supply, where substances harmful to health have the potential to enter the water supply, or where cross -connections are likely to occur; and dedicated fire protection and irrigation uses are required to have a District approved backflow prevention device. The project may trigger the requirement under District Rules and Regulations for existing water service facilities of private customers in proximity to the project to install a District approved backflow prevention device as a result of this development. Notice to all affected District customers of this potential requirement must be provided by the project applicant in connection with public noticing requirements for the project and prior to project approval, and the applicant may obtain addresses and contact information from the District to accomplish such notice. If fire hydrants are required which are not adjacent to any District waterlines or which are adjacent to undersized waterlines, a waterline extension may be required which may also require specific easements.

VISTA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT INFORMATION AND CONDITIONS

1. The applicant must mitigate the impact of this development before a building permit is issued. Fees may be paid at the Vista Unified School District Office, 1222 Arcadia Avenue, Vista, California, 92084 between the hours of:

Monday through Thursday 9 a.m. to 1 p.m.

Monday through Thursday 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. by appointment only Fridays 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. by appointment only
Appointments can be made by telephone at 760-726-2170 ext. 2893 or 2820.

K. PLANNING INFORMATION AND CONDITIONS
Landscape:

1. The landscape construction drawings shall be consistent with the conceptual plans (Exhibit "B") and shall contain complete planting and irrigation plans, details & specifications to meet the requirements of the City of Vista's Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance (Chapter 18.56) and The City of Vista's Landscape Manual

2. All areas that are graded or disturbed as a result of the project must be re - landscaped to the requirements of the City of Vista's Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance (Chapter 18.56) and the City of Vista's Landscape Manual.

P21-0114 EX2A 16
02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 164 of 210

3. Following grading put prior to the commencement of the irrigation system's installation, a soils management report must be submitted to the City for review and approval. It shall contain the following: An analysis of the soil for the proposed landscape area of the project including soil texture, soil infiltration rate, pH, total soluble salts, plant sodium, percent organic matter, horticultural suitability, and recommendations for soil amendments and mulch that may be necessary to provide for healthy plant survival and growth.

4. The project Landscape Architect shall supervise the installation to insure that the work is installed per the plans approved by the City. This shall include an observation of the irrigation system of all points of connection (prior to backfill), backflow protection devices, mainlines, electrical connections, automatic controllers, control valves, as well as all soil amendments, root barriers, existing and proposed plantings, tree staking and mulch. The completed irrigation system must be tested to verify adequate coverage and that no overspray or runoff is occurring.

5. Prior to the request of the applicant for review and approval by the City of the project's completion, provide an irrigation schedule showing the time period when irrigation will be scheduled and confirm that no overhead irrigation shall be used between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. and also in compliance with current Vista Irrigation District's limitations.

6. Prior to the request of the applicant for review and approval by the City of the project's completion, identify the entity who will be responsible for maintenance and provide a landscape and irrigation maintenance schedule to include the following:

A. Adjustments and repair of the irrigation system to prevent runoff and erosion and to detect irrigation system failure;
B. replacement of dead, dying and diseased vegetation;
C. eradication of invasive species;
D. addition of soil amendments when necessary to support and maintain healthy plant growth;
E. fertilizing, pruning and weeding and maintaining turf areas; and F. maintenance to avoid obstruction of motorists' view.

7. The submission by the project landscape architect's Certificate of Completion shall serve as a formal request for final observation by the City. The Certificate of Completion shall include:

A. Conformance with the approved plans and specifications with any deviations noted;
B. an updated irrigation schedule;
C. irrigation and maintenance schedule; and
D. soils management report.

8. The City's inspection shall include, but not be limited to conformance with the approved irrigation and planting plans. Tentative approval shall be granted when the City is satisfied that the installation of the landscaping and irrigation system has been satisfactorily installed per the approved plans.

9. Final approval of landscape installation shall require an additional field observation of the landscaping and irrigation system by the City no sooner than one year from P21-0114 EX2A 17
02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 165 of 210

the date of tentative approval. Prior to the request for final approval, the owner is required to obtain an irrigation audit report prepared by a certified landscape irrigation auditor, certifying satisfactory testing for the following: distribution uniformity, over spray and runoff control, and that water use does not exceed the MAWA once landscaping has been established. This report must be submitted prior to the requested final inspection by the City.

10. All plantings shall be maintained in a healthy and thriving condition and relatively weed free. All plants which fail to thrive because of disease, damage, accident or other cause shall be immediately replaced with a plant of the same species and size as originally approved. At the discretion of the City planner, replacement of any plant materials that have been improperly maintained shall be required at a size equal to the size of the plant had it been properly cared for.

11. All trees shall be maintained in a manner that retains the natural form of the species.

Topping and aggressive pruning will not be allowed.

12. The Homeowner's Association (HOA) shall be required to maintenance the landscaped slope areas at the rear of Lots 4 through 12, including the slope area on the south side of Lot 4 adjacent to Private Street B. An access easement shall be provided for the HOA maintenance of these areas, and the maintenance shall be included in the project's Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions. The access easement shall be shown on the Final Map to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.

No fencing or walls shall be allowed or constructed within the common landscaped slope areas located beyond the edge (top or toe of slope of rear yard, as applicable) of the individual lots/graded pad areas unless prior approval is granted by the City Planner.

General:

13. Any proposed fence or wall details and materials shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Planner. No razor wire, barb wire or chain link fencing is allowed. The use of unfinished CMU as a wall material is not permitted.

14. Building setbacks shall conform to the setback lines delineated on the Tentative Map as well as setback requirements per the zone (E-1). Setbacks shall also be shown on the Final Map.

15. The project shall provide parking in conformance with the Development Code, Section 18.54.050. The project requires a minimum of 2 enclosed garage parking spaces per dwelling unit and a minimum two 2.5 open guest parking spaces per dwelling unit.

16. Street Name, Numbers and Warning Signs:
a. Building addresses shall be assigned by the Planning Division. b. The applicant shall cause to be installed in all public and private rights of way, at his/her expense, street signs and City standard warning signs, including stop signs, as required by the Traffic Engineer, to ensure the safety of the public. Street name signs shall be of the type approved by the Traffic Engineer. The placement of all signs shall be shown on the approved street improvement plans. Public street name signs shall be green with white letters and private street name signs shall be blue with white letters.

P21-0114 EX2A 18
02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 166 of 210

17. Prior to Final Map approval, the subdivider shall give notice to public utilities as required by the Subdivision Map Act.

18. Prior to the Final Map approval, the subdivider shall have a mail collection system approved by the Postmaster. The mail collection system shall be installed with the onsite street systems.

19. The Final Map shall conform to the Tentative Map as determined by the City Engineer. A Final Map shall be deemed to conform if public infrastructure meets City standards, even if it is not as shown on the Tentative Map. A Final Map shall also be deemed to conform to the Tentative Map if there are fewer residential lots, or if the lots are larger, or if the grading varies slightly from the concept shown but meets the City Ordinance and generally conforms as determined by the City Planner.

20. Prior to Final Map approval, construction drawings showing all slopes, street trees, and any other proposed landscaping shall be submitted to the City Planner. These plans shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and shall comply with the applicable City ordinances. The plans must be approved by the City Planner prior to Final Map approval.

21. Any retaining walls exceeding 5 feet in height shall be "plantable" and shall incorporate landscape materials and permanent irrigation to the satisfaction of the City Planner. Any retaining walls exceeding 3 feet in height that are not plantable shall include vines planted along the exposed faces. All retaining wall planting details and specifications shall be indicated on the construction landscape drawings and shall meet the approval of the City Planner.

22. Prior to Final Map approval, a Notice of Land Use Restriction approved by the City Planner must be recorded acknowledging all Conditions of Approval.

Development Service Fees:

23. The proposed project will require development fees to be paid at the time of building permit issuance. Please check with the Development Services Division for the current City fee schedule.

Indemnification:

24. By accepting the permit or approval, applicant agrees to accept responsibility for defending against any third -party challenge to the grant of this permit or approval.

Except as otherwise provided by state or federal law, the applicant shall defend, indemnify and hold the City harmless from any costs, claims, penalties, fines, judgments, or liabilities arising from the approval, including without limitation, any award or attorney's fees that might result from the third party challenge.

25. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any challenge and the City shall cooperate fully in the defense. If the City fails to promptly notify the applicant of any challenge or if the City fails to cooperate fully in the defense, the applicant shall not thereafter be responsible to defend, indemnify, or hold harmless the City. For the purposes of this indemnity, the term "City" shall include the City of Vista, its officers, officials, employees, agents and representatives. For the purposes of this section, the term "challenge" means any legal or administrative action to dispute, contest, P21-0114 EX2A
19 02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 167 of 210

attach, set aside, limit, or modify the approval, project conditions, or any act upon which the approval is based, including any action alleging a failure to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act or other laws.

26. For this permit or approval to become effective, the applicant must, within thirty business days of the grant of this permit or approval, execute a form accepting the permit or approval with all conditions. Upon executing the form, the applicant may not challenge the imposition of any condition, except as otherwise provided by law.

27. Mitigation Measures:

The following Mitigation Measures have been incorporated into the project design or are to be implemented before or during construction in accordance with the project conditions of approval, thereby reducing all identified impacts to a less than significant level.
113I0-1: All shrub trimming, thinning, or removal shall be performed prior to or after the bird breeding season, January 1 through September 15 (i.e., only between September 16 and December 31). If clearing is planned to occur during the breeding season, pre -construction nest surveys shall be conducted prior to any clearing. Work may proceed if no bird nests are observed. Regular brush management activities shall also occur outside of the bird breeding season. By avoiding clearing and brush management during the bird breeding season, the proposed project will ensure compliance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and pertinent sections of the California Fish and Game Code.

BIO-2: Per compliance with the Multiple Habitat Conservation Plan, the project shall mitigate the proposed impact to coastal sage scrub at a ratio of 1:1 with acquisition of a minimum of 0.24 acre of coastal sage scrub at an off -site location, acceptable to the city, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The project shall mitigate the proposed impact to non-native grassland at a 0.5:1 ratio with acquisition of a minimum of 6.49 acres of non-native grassland at an off -site location, acceptable to the city, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

CULA: For discoveries of Native American human remains, the procedures and processes required under California Public Resources Code, Section 5097.98, and California Health and Safety Code, Section 7050.5, shall be followed. If human remains are encountered, all ground -disturbing activities shall halt within 100 feet (buffer area) of the discovery, and orange construction fencing shall be installed to denote the buffer area. Work on the remainder of the project site could continue, but all work within the buffer area shall cease until the processes and procedures required under the aforementioned code sections are completed and the Tribal Representatives have authorized the removal of the fencing around the buffer area.

CUL-2: If, during ground -disturbing activities on the project site, Tribal Cultural Resources, as defined in California Public Resources Code, Section 21074, or unique cultural resources, as defined in California Public Resources Code, Section 21083.2, are discovered that were not assessed by the site -specific archaeological reports, all ground - disturbing activities shall halt within 50 feet (find area) of the discovery until the Tribal Representatives and project archaeologist (defined in Mitigation Measure CUL-4) can assess the discovery and recommend recovery, treatment, and reburial procedures. Work on the remainder of the project site could continue, but all work within the find area shall cease until the Tribal Representatives and project archaeologist have completed their assessments and the Tribal Representatives have made a reburial recommendation.

P21-0114 EX2A
20 02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 168 of 210

CUL-3: At least 30 days prior to issuance of the first grading permit for the project, the developer/permit applicant shall enter into agreement(s) with the consulting Tribes for Native American monitors. In conjunction with the archaeological monitors, the Tribal Representatives/Native American monitors shall attend the pre -grading meeting with the contractors to provide cultural sensitivity training for all construction personnel. In addition, an adequate number of Tribal Representatives/Native American monitors shall be on site during all initial ground -disturbing activities, including clearing, grubbing, tree removal, grading, and trenching, and excavation of each portion of the project site. In conjunction with the archaeological monitors, the Tribal Representatives/Native American monitors have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect, and/or halt the ground -disturbing activities to allow appropriate identification, evaluation, and potential recovery of cultural resources.

The developer/permit applicant shall submit a fully executed copy of the agreement(s) to the City of Vista to ensure compliance with this condition of approval. Upon verification, the project archaeologist shall clear this condition. This agreement(s) shall not modify any condition of approval or mitigation measure.

CUL-4: At least 30 days prior to issuance of the first grading permit for the project, the project applicant shall retain a project archaeologist who meets the minimum qualifications of the U.S. Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines (NPS 1983). The project archaeologist shall be present for all ground -disturbing and grading activities on the project site and shall be responsible for notifying and coordinating monitoring by the consulting Tribe(s).

CUL-5: The project archaeologist and Tribal Representatives shall attend the pre -grading meeting with the project's construction manager and any contractors and shall conduct a cultural sensitivity training to provide an overview of the cultural sensitivity of the project site and surrounding areas, the requirements for the project archaeologist and Tribal Representatives, the protocols that apply in the event of inadvertent finds, and any other appropriate disclosures and discussions.

CUL-6: Upon completion of all ground -disturbing and grading activities on the project site, the Tribal Representatives shall rebury any resources recovered from the project site in an open space area that shall remain free from any active recreational uses or any further excavation or ground disturbance. Any reburial site shall be culturally appropriate and explicitly approved in writing by the consulting Tribes. The reburial location shall be covered first by a layer of geomat and then backfilled with clean fill dirt. Once reburial activities are completed, the site shall be protected via a restrictive covenant or similar deed restriction that prohibits future excavation or disturbance of the reburial location.

CUL-7: Prior to Grading Permit Final Inspection, a Phase IV Cultural Resources Monitoring Report shall be submitted that complies with the City of Vista Community Development Department's requirements for such reports for all ground -disturbing activities associated with this grading permit. The report shall follow the City of Vista's cultural resources standard procedures. The report shall include results of any feature relocation or residue analysis required and evidence of the required cultural sensitivity training for construction staff held during the required pre -grade meeting and evidence that any cultural and heritage material/artifacts have been treated in accordance to procedures stipulated in the Phase IV Cultural Resources Monitoring Report. The Phase IV Cultural Resources Monitoring Report shall be filed with the City of Vista under a confidential cover and shall not be subject to public records requests.

P21-0114 EX2A
3 02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 169 of 210

HAZ- 1: Prior to obtaining a Demolition Permit for the removal of the on -site single-family residence located in the western portion of the project site, the applicant/owner shall have a survey conducted of the existing residence for asbestos -containing materials and lead paint, followed by the preparation of a written report. The report shall include, at minimum, the following components that are to be conducted during the survey:
• Locate and quantify readily accessible suspect asbestos -containing materials and lead paint throughout the structure, including exterior surfaces. • Assess the condition of each suspect asbestos -containing materials and lead paint location identified.
• Collect bulk samples of homogeneous suspect asbestos -containing materials and lead paint location using an appropriate sampling protocol. • Analyze each asbestos -containing materials and lead paint sample collected using standard techniques (e.g., Polarized Light Microscopy with Dispersion Staining) for asbestos -containing materials and lead paint.
• Recommend appropriate response actions for materials analyzed as containing asbestos -containing materials and lead paint.

If asbestos -containing materials and/or lead paint is found on or within the structure, it shall be removed by a licensed/certified abatement contractor and disposed of at a Class I Landfill facility in accordance and compliance with all federal, state, and local laws, regulations and guidelines. A copy of the above -noted report, as well as written documentation of the removal and legal disposal of any identified material, shall be sent to the City Engineer and City Planner for their records.

N0I-1: Prior to any blasting on the project site, the project applicant shall prepare a Blasting Management Plan that minimizes potential blasting effects on adjacent residences.

All blast planning must be done by a City of Vista approved blasting contractor and submitted to the city with the appropriate blasting permits, and all other applicable local, state, and federal permits, licenses, and bonding. The blasting contractor or owner must conduct all notifications, inspections, monitoring, and major or minor blasting requirements planning with seismograph reports, as necessary.

28. The prolect's construction traffic is prohibited from using Vista Grande Terrace, and at no time shall construction or grading activities block access to Vista Grande Terrace or its easement holders.

29. Vehicular access shall be provided for the existing residents (homes) that take access on Vista Grande Drive at all times during construction.

30. All structures on Lots 4 through 10, 22, 24 and 25 shall be restricted to single - story construction, only. This restriction shall be noted on the Final Map and included in the project CCRs.

31. The 16 street -side parking stalls shall be reserved for "quest only." This restriction shall be noted on the Final Map and included in the project CCRs.

32. The street -side parking areas shall be designed with a curve at both ends (the entrance and the exit) to allow for easier vehicle access.

P21-0114 EX2A
22 02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 170 of 210

Exhibit A Proposed General Plan Amendment
Existing
Rural Rural
Residential Residential
(RR) ■ ■■ ■` : (RR)
■
r ■
Rural ;
Residential ,0.
(RR) M
Rural Residential ■
(RR) Rural
■ Residential
*s■.
(RR)
"r �
■►�V'ista GYa be
Low Density ■
Residential
(LD)
Proposed
"*■ ►, a
■■■■■■■■■M■ ►r
Rural
Residential
(RR)
Rural Rural
Residential IF ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Residential
(RR) • (RR)
Rural M`
Residential •
■
(RR) Low Density Residential
(LD)
' Rural
■
■ Residential
(RR)
■►!V`ista GC���e
a
Low Density ■
Residential
(LD)
■
r•■rr
f ► �

MOSEEMEME
Rural
Residential
(RR)
02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 171 of 210

TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR
LEGEND
ITEM SYMBOL 2277 VISTA GRANDE DRIVE

PROJECT BOUNDARY

LOT LINE

EASEMENT LINE
ArN 171-0
BUILDING SETBACK LINE u e reo

CENTERLINE

EXISTING CITY BOUNDARY

EXISTING OVERHEAD ELECTRICAL

EXISTING WATERLINE

EXISTING SEWER MAIN

EXISTING GAS LINE

EXISTING STORM DRAIN

EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT

EXISTING FENCE

DAYLIGHT LINE

CUT/FILL LINE

FINISHED GROUND CONTOUR

EXISTING GROUND CONTOUR

PROPOSED CUTIFILL SLOPE

TOP/TOE GRADING LINE

RETAINING WALL (PER SEPARATE PERMIT)
EXISTING SPOT ELEV.

FUTURE SPOT ELEVATIONS
PROPOSED 6" CURB & GUTTER
PROPOSED 6" ROLLED CURB & GUTTER

PROPOSED STORM DRAIN

PROPOSED CURB INLET

PROPOSED STORM DRAIN CLEANOUT

PROPOSED MODULAR WETLAND SYSTEM

PROPOSED RTANK

PROPOSED CURB OUTLET

PROPOSED SEWER MAIN

PROPOSED SEWER MANHOLE

PROPOSED WATER MAIN

PROPOSED BROW DITCH
W W
„C
�F
440
(400.50 FG)
400.50
FG
SD
lul
FE 11
O
S

PROJECT

BNDY PL
PRIV. VISTA

GRANDE DR
VARIES P.U.E
��71111
i
i
i
LOT 14
PAD = 677.0
C I 100 I 200 3C
SCALE:1" =100'

EXISTING
GRADE
i
i
LOT 23
PAD = 700.5 I 1 111=

SECTION B-B
HORIZ. SCALE: 1"=50'
VERT. SCALE: 1"=20'
LOT 25
PAD = 717.5
PL FL
IPRIV. ST S I
P.U.E.

R\�

2.0% L
P
LOT 7
--PAD---748.0_

PROJECT
BNDY
I
?1 I

PASCO LARET SUITER

A ASSOMATES
San Diego I Solana Beach I Orange County
Phone 858.259.82121 www.pisaengineering.com

OWNER/SUBDIVIDER

WE HEREBY CERTIFY THAT WE ARE THE RECORD OWNERS

OF THE PROPERTY SHOWN ON THIS TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION

MAP AND THAT SAID MAP SHOWS OUR ENTIRE CONTIGUOUS
OWNERSHIP (EXCLUDING SUBDIVISION LOTS). WE

UNDERSTAND THAT PROPERTY IS CONSIDERED

CONTIGUOUS EVEN IF IT IS SEPARATED BY ROADS, STREETS,
UTILITY EASEMENTS OR RAILROADS RIGHTS -OF -WAY.
n\A/ N F R

OMNI FINANCIAL
1260 41ST STREET, SUITE 0
CAPITOLA, CA 95010

SIJRDIVIDFR

GREG PERRINE
1151 DURYEA AVENUE
IRVINE, CA 92614
FN(;INFFR nF WnRK
D�OFESSIpNgI
No. RCE 68964
EXP. 12-31-21
q� Civi\

OF CAUFO/

LEGAL DESCRIPTION
PARCEL 1: (APN:171-100-05-00)
PORTION OF SECTION 8, TOWNSHIP 11 SOUTH, RANGE 3 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE

AND MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO UNITIED STATES GOVERNMENT SURVEY APPROVED DECEMBER 14,1885.

PARCEL 2: (APN:171-100-28-00)
ALL THAT PORTION OF SECTION 8, TOWNSHIP 11 SOUTH, RANGE 3 WEST, SAN

BERNARDINO BASE MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO UNITIED STATES GOVERNMENT SURVEY APPROVED DECEMBER 14, 1885.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, ZONE CHANGE, AND TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP TO DEVELOP 25 LOTS.

AERIAL TOPOGRAPHY
AERIAL TOPOGRAPHY INLAND AERIAL SURVEYS, INC.

SUPPLIED BY: 7117 ARLINGTON AVENUE, SUITE A
RIVERSIDE, CA 92503
951-6874252
FLOWN 12/24/2013

ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER
171-100-05,171-100-28
TAX RATE AREA: 96-099

EARTHWORK QUANTITIES
CUT: 69,532 CY
FILL: 69,532 CY
EXPORT: 0 CY
GENERAL NOTES:

1. APN:171-100-05,171-100-28

2. GROSS ACREAGE:16.99 AC

3. NET ACREAGE:15.12 AC

4. NUMBER OF LOTS: 25

5. NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS: 25

6. EXISTING ZONING: A-1 (AGRICULTURAL)
PROPOSED ZONING: E-1 ESTATE RESIDENTIAL

7. EXISTING GENERAL PLAN: RURAL RESIDENTIAL (1 DU/AC)
PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN: LID - LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (2 DU/AC)

8. FINISH GRADES SHOWN HEREON ARE APPROXIMATE AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE IN FINAL DESIGN.

9. PROPOSED DENSITY: 2 DU/AC

10. CUT AND FILL SLOPES NO STEEPER THAN 2:1

11. PUBLIC SERVICES AND DISTRICTS:

GAS & ELECTRIC: SAN DIEGO GAS AND ELECTRIC
TELEPHONE: AT&T
WATER: VISTA IRRIGATION DISTRICT
SEWER: CITY OF VISTA
FIRE DISTRICT: CITY OF VISTA
SCHOOL DISTRICT: VISTA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

12. NO SPECIAL DISTRICTS ARE PROPOSED

13. PROPOSED SETBACK: FRONT YARD = MINIMUM 50' FROM CL
SIDE YARD = MINIMUM 10'
REAR YARD= MINIMUM 20'

14. SEE STORM WATER MITIGATION PLAN PREPARED BY:

PASCO LARET SUITER & ASSOCIATES DATED: MARCH 2O21

15. SEE PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE STUDY PREPARED BY:

PASCO LARET SUITER & ASSOCIATES DATED: MARCH 2O21

16. SEE PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION PREPARED BY:

GEOSOILS, INC DATED: W.O.5053-A1-SC FEBRUARY 23, 2006

17. SEE INFILTRATION TESTING RESULTS PREPARED BY:

GEOSOILS, INC DATED: W.O.7149-A-SC OCTOBER 18, 2016
SAVE DATE: ---- — PLOT DATE: ---- — FILE NAME: J:WCTIVE JOBS\3474 Vista Grande\CIVIL\DRAWING\DISCRETIONARY PLANS\TENTATIVE MAP\3474-TM-TBLOCK.dwg 02/22/2022 PH1 Page 172 of 210

EX.

R/W

50.9' - 54.3' PUBLIC ROAD
0 w I
o I
I
U- > VARIES
14'
0 EX. GROUND
z I
o v
0 LU
w
2" MIN. DEPTH

GRIND &
��
J
LU
F
Q

OVERLAY
X
w
d
0 2%
�
EX.

R/W
PROP.

R/W
I

VARIABLE WIDTH

1.7' - 4.3'

DEDICATION
APN:171-100-48
LU
I
z I 2:1 MAX
� I
U 12% I EX. GROUND
f- I
PROP. 4" AC/8" CLASS II PROP. 6" CURB &

PAVEMENT SECTION (PER GUTTER PER SDRSD
SOILS ENGINEER G-2 (TYPE G)

RECOMMENDATION)

TYPICAL SECTION - VISTA GRANDE DRIVE (PUBLIC)
STA. 13+83.09-14+83.09
SCALE:NTS

TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR
2277 VISTA GRANDE DRIVE

LOT C PROJECT
R 28' BOUNDARY

PRIVATE ROAD AND PUE
21 12 12 2
?.� z PROP. 6" CURB & z

GUTTER PER
m i SDRSD G-2 PROP. RETAINING
OpF ? �
I U I (TYPE G) c� WALL
2% H=2.5' MAX
2%
PROP. 6" CURB —�
PER SDRSD G-1
EX. GROUND
PROP. 4" ACl8" CLASS II -

PAVEMENT SECTION (PER

SOILS ENGINEER

RECOMMENDATION)
T\ / n 1 /1 A 1 /1 r /1 T 1 -% \ 1 A .0% r /"1 /1 r\ r\ A r\ SCALE:NTS
LOT
B

PROJECT
R

39.0' - 42.5' PRIVATE ROAD & P.U.E.

BOUNDARY
LOT A

PROJECT
U)Z
0 BOUNDARY
35 PRIVATE ROAD & P.U.E.

I?-
I
I U
PROP. 5' WIDE

5.5'
14'
14'
VARIES

13.5'
12' 12'

7.5' I SIDEWALK PER
SDRSD G-7
2 I
z
z

5.5'- 9
w
w

HOA ESMT
�
9 I S
GOOF
m I
m
I
�
5Co --
I
°
2 /—►
L)
U
21 MAX
2% �N
EX. GROUND

2.�
/Llg�
PROP. 6" CURB
PER SDRSD G-1 I
2%
2%
2%
PROP. 5' WIDE
EX. GROUND

SIDEWALK

SIDEWALK PER
COpF
SDRSD
PROP. 4" AC/8" CLASS II

PAVEMENT SECTION (PER
PROP. 6" CURB &

GUTTER PER SDRSD
-
PROP. 4" AC/8" CLASS II
PROP. 6"CURB & HOA ESMT
PROP. 6" CURB &

SOILS ENGINEER
G-2 (TYPE G)

PAVEMENT SECTION (PER

GUTTER PER SDRSD
G-2 TYPE G)

GUTTER PER SDRSD

RECOMMENDATION)

SOILS ENGINEER
G-2 (TYPE G)

RECOMMENDATION)

TYPICAL SECTION
- VISTA GRANDE

DRIVE (PRIVATE)

TYPICAL

SECTION
-

PRIVATE
STREET
A
STA.14+83.09 - 24+27.35
SCALE:NTS
LOT B
R
PROP. 5' WIDE
35' PRIVATE ROAD & P.U.E.

I

SIDEWALK PER
SDRSD G-7 I
�
I

5.5'
12' 12'

5.5'
/Lj I
w
m
I
w
m
S`OpF
U
U
2%
.-�
f ° I 2%�
-.62%
—
SCALE:NTS

PROJECT LOT A

BOUNDARY R
31' PRIVATE ROAD & P.U.E.

PROP. DG WALK
ICk
I

3.5' 12' 12' 3.5'
w w
OQ� PROP. RETAINING j m I co5.5'
g� WALL I PROP. 6"CURB I M I
- 5 PER SDRSD R
2%
EX. GROUND �' 2% �—
PROP. 6" CURB & -J PROP. 4" AC/8" CLASS II PROP. 6" CURB &

GUTTER PER PAVEMENT SECTION (PER GUTTER PER
SDRSD G-2 (TYPE SOILS ENGINEER SDRSD G-2 (TYPE

G) RECOMMENDATION) G)
T\ /r%1/1 A I 0%r-%T11-%A I 1'%r%1% / A Tr 0%T r%r rT IP11 SCALE:NTS
`J PROP. 4" AC/8" CLASS II` PROP. 6" CURB &

PAVEMENT SECTION (PER GUTTER PER SDRSD
SOILS ENGINEER G-2 (TYPE G)

RECOMMENDATION)
T\ /n1/1 A I /1r /1T1--\ 1 P'%r\1% / A Tr 0%T r\rrT A
SCALE:NTS

DRIVEWAYS - ADJOINING LOTS
SCALE: 1"=30'
SW\ALE MI
�-4
�,—
�� y 10�I� 10 --
YSBI ,
SY B
PROP. 3 CAR GARAGE
WITH 40-50' LONG �' \

DRIVEWAYS CAPABLE
OF PARKING 4 CARS.

I �
PROP. DRIVEWAY
ON HIGH SIDE OF ! �/
LOT (TYPICAL) 1
_----- Cco
1 U-
CD
--- -- Ln
w w -w w w-
0 TYPICAL LOT
SCALE: 1" = 30'
/
� OF SPN GO
CO CO \51 P _

19.5'-23' VISTA GRANDE PROJECT
DRIVE (PRIVATE) BOUDARY EX. COUNTY R/W
� z
o
PUE U
14' VARIES 1 25'
HOA ESMT J 5.5'-9'
I
MATCH EX.
-PAVEMENT �
/

XISTING
IRS,
I w
0 0
o N
\ APN 171-100-14 I o
ti
23,212 SF \
631.00 TOP A
629.50 IE 18" SD
PROP. FIRE HYDRANT
616.7IE12"SD I - 1LU
Louo0
/ J z MWS L-4-
I / / / PROP.CLEANOUT z > a :z >U) \\ \ \ .751E12"SD \ TYPICAL DRIVEWAY SECTION - ADJOINING LOTS - / / / �� \ \� Of 0 0 - C p APN.171-10d-48\ I N a \ a U °O o s
SCALE:NTS \ \ I I 1 1 \ \ o o
U) / \
I \ I 1 I I I \
nPTA11 If 1
A-PU-111--1004S-
,-
C

LAF ET SUITER

ASSOCIATES
IATES
San Diego I Solana Beach I Orange County
Phone 858.259.82121 www.pisaengineedng.com
SCALE: 1" = 20'
SAVE DATE: 09/13/21 - PLOT DATE: ---- - FILE NAME: J:\NCTIVE JOBS13474 Vista GrandelCIVIL\DRAWINGIDISCRETIONARY PLANS\TENTATIVE MAP\3474-TM-TBLOCK.Ug 02/22/2022
PH1

PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN FOR
LEGEND
ITEM SYMBOL _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 2277
VIS,TA
GRANDE
�U e Ar Q, ( 1Obs0c2°t7 5C

PROJECT BOUNDARY
I
LOT LINE 700
EASEMENT LINE 705
BUILDING SETBACK LINE / �� IyBS!/
// �
CENTERLINE=--O°cL
EXISTING CITY BOUNDARY \
� 1 OE

EXISTING OVERHEAD ELECTRICAL
/ �°�� AP17/1-106 7 g
W o I 718.5 AD 714
.0 PADEXISTING WATERLINE IP E PbLE/TO/ PA
° I 35,682 SIF 33,016 SIF 33,060 SF -s .XIS
EXISTING SEWER MAIN ° E�APEIRGI�ITIESTG OUND. OB
°°��M Ef� HO$ITE1 x
EXISTING GAS LINE w\I `\
712.0 PAD
PIOJE
\\`\ I , 8 � \ OIU\ND R1 ( ; \ L� � a � \ / //
EXISTING STORM DRAIN oB [IRS � \0 ,33,452 SF
�a
/
a
EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT f
PROJECT II \\
EXISTING FENCE \PROO. B�
I/I1IIIIIIIIIlIIIIIIlIlIII3l/ I(IIl
I/ I1III I,I I I II Iw w IT�H
DAYLIGHT LINE -APN A- O6-`2 \
C 2183SFPROJECT� CUT/FILL LINE J F \BpUNDARY\ 2 3 1 IS
FINISHED GROUND CONTOUR �440 �SI IRI 0 INW3
670.0 PAD 690.0 PAD I W2loW WNvv
21,780 SF 70b.3b I 8.30
PADHOA ESMT 21,EXISTING GROUND CONTOUR s s
21 1 0 TO) 51 T R FS//
PROPOSED CUTIFILL SLOPE 2,774 \ \ IAM�REIAOVE . XI TI I sl/
y/
HEAD YTIL TI S:IT�J TOP/TOE GRADING LINE\ cn s / / 1 O � I Eft I� 0 UKDEG U�1 \ �\ \ \ \��\Or,-\� E kiY \ \ \ T �1. 9 a / / / / / �C� i �/ / / / / / 11 Conc,
RETAINING WALL (PER SEPARATE PERMIT) o \o\ ° I \ B 1 \ \ \ \ \ z \ \ �/ „S / / 7`� / / / / 705.0 PAD / III III \ JI I I EXISTING SPOT ELEV. _ (400.50 FG) 1 I �, i \ \ \\ -\� \ 1 1 \ \ I I \ n� \ \ / / / / / / / / / / / / III I SD \ I it \ dJ / / 33,5� SF/ I - I I
400.50 - \ \ w \ \ \` > 1 l o a 713.5 PAD \ \ \ \ \ \ o \ \ / Ll� / / / / 3:OTOP` � \ � /-120�-53�8 • I /
FUTURE SPOT ELEVATIONS _ = 648 8 0 \ \ \ \ \ SIBS, 21,782 SF \ \ \ \I \\ i I / / / / - - C � / I I rL �\� \ , -� � � �\� \ \ a\--\ \ \ ` \` \\ \\ \ \ \ \ � � � Q � / / / / � PA LIM�T - �OP PROPOSED 6" CURB &GUTTER r �I I 1 5 ` `\ \ \ �` � \ o \ \ \ \ \ 7+ 8 I \ Z 5 0 I /\ 0 0 0 )E /�Y \ \\ 1 1 \~ J `` I Uvi 6 2 \ \ \ \\��` rn �" \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \� /a - 0 l I 24 (� 1 \ \\ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ '` 717.5 PAD I 713.0 PAD � '� L \
PROPOSED 6" ROLLED CURB & GUTTER 1 1\ \ 1 �\ \ \ _ P� \ i I22,046 \\ � \ \ \ \\ \ � \ \ 11 � / cn / 22,528 SF (/ / SF
PROPOSED STORM DRAIN sD \ \\ i/ \\\\ \ o I 66� _ \ "'
PROPOSED CURB INLET lul \ 16 .04 N - _ W \ \ \ \
EX. HOU 48D�1 0 T W W W W ° -w W W AvT FEE - % /
/ 1 , SD - - / S S I S - g I / / \ \ } J / ,� / ,' / \ I \ \ \ \ PL z \ S L Ai S PROPOSED STORM DRAIN CLEANOUT 0 STA.1 \�� S S S -�2 °S S "' �0 707.79 FS A (\ /� / / / / / / / Q/ cn 1� _ \�\\\ \ \(\T\l'�E 299RR C'\

PROPOSED MODULAR WETLAND SYSTEM -
\ Asph, - H �5 \\ 1 ( \ \ i I I \ \ \ \ 1 III I - , / / // / #g \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \\ _ / - C RIM=±695.78 \ \
PROPOSED RTANK ® -_ - �' I I I ( \ \ \ \ \ \ 1 I I I J I I - J PL - NV \\\ \ \\ °\ \ \� I-1 I I \ L \� - \ P I IT \ \ / / 0. W 7 INV �__ I- \ \ `rt tl �I I1 \\` \ \ \ `� \ \ \\ \III k TY \\ �S/ i \ \ I 1 \ \ \ -' - - / / / / / L �� / _ POP. RKINGI \
PROPOSED CURB OUTLET \ \ \ \ I 1' 1 I \ \ \ \ °- 0' 3 SfiALLS 51 SE AE _HOAESMT Ill I ► I \ ww I I I \\ \�� , / / -
S -� _ Q \ ZO \ \ \ I I \ 21 - \ �lxI I 22 \ o\z\ / / 5 P ( )\ LAC WE� PROPOSED SEWER MAIN _ - PAD III \ \ I I \ I
\ 663.0 PAD \ 6 0 PAD \ 1 I 701.5 PAD �* �,/ - _ \ \
\ � / 2 3 / - POP. G'1JRB 1 �I �I 3,144 SF > � � � \ � \ \ \ \ _� \ � 11 PROPOSED SEWER MANHOLE Q _ - \ \ \ - \ \ \�\ \ \ \ 21 790 SF i i "' \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ / 700.5 PAD 86. TC 697.4 PAD
., -/ o Ca III \� � \ 23,729 SF � \ \ a�. a� \ \ � - 21 8 3 SF \ \ � � \\ � � rn � i i / � i / `� SEE E # } \ \ \ \ l \ \ \ \ I Q\ \ - - _ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ / / / - 68g. I 8" _ \ \ - \ \ I I I I I I \ \ `n - \ 1 \ \ 1 i j I I \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ - / 21,820 SF / - \ 33,095 SF - \� PROPOSED WATER MAIN W -� \ \ � \ \'
\ \ \ I \ \ \ \ 1 I I I \ \ \ / I P OP.`k�ET
PROPOSED BROW DITCH // \ \ \I \ \ I I \ 1 N�SI� T\2 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \� \\ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \\ PL \ \ \\ \\\ \\ \ \ \ / i / / / / / // 15. \WA L H�4. - - APN�17B YOQ 1 \ 11 0 1 \ \ \ \ \ \680 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ / / / \MAX\ 40k858 �` `K Gam/ HOA ESMT \ III I III I I I ` \
- - - � - PAD "' I I I 650 I \ \ � O� _ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ - _ /� - - 6T9.0$ BOTH \ // / ��o -x/ �\ \- a 5,154 SF III 6451 \ \\ \ \� \ \ \ \\\ \ I / / ��' \ \PL /
XI3TiNG_POWEI�P6L 0 \ � \ �\� \ ` / 4NLET
MOVED. EXI T1N \� \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ - / 13 PF�OP / PL \_\ VERH E \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \� �\ 686.5 PAD = \ \ \\
\ \ J \ J \ J \ J T
n \ IObs�c ed�Area _ 1 \ \ \ \ \ \ ��d.Al�e� \\ \ \ \ �� 21,930 SF cn ANT PAD
..- x v / / I \ 19 \ \ E TO SE LlNQER iUNO. \ \\ \ \\ . \ \ \ \ \\\� \ \ \ \ \ 14 // I / R�STR>F / I J \ \ 4,780 SF y \ J Z \ \ \ \ \
\� �L �- SS W +- ' / 6'is` ti 643.5 PAD \I \ \ 1 - 17 \ \ \ \ 16 \\ \\ \ 15 \ \ \ \ y LI(�Hy _ _ _ j SD 23 212 St- \ \ cn \ 1-1 / / -c - o - ^ EX. 8" AC WATER PER A \ \ > III \ \ - i - I / 7U,,\Q F- DWG. NO.1-2792-1989 ` / III ` J \- -' _ \ \ _ \1 \ ' \ \ - - _ _` _ - - - _ s - ADDRESS: 27127 CALLE ARROYO, SUITE 1904 SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO, CA 92675 II - �I I J/ 1\ _ SIGNATURES CONSTITUTE THAT ALL PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, GUARANTEES, AND OTHER TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT: 25 LOTS I EX. PUBLIC SEWER EASEMENT DOC. v I - --� I �/� -\N REQUIREMENTS NECESSARY FOR ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT CONFORMING TO THIS SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN HAVE BEEN LE EXIST. ZONE: A-1 PROP. ZONE: E-1 APN(S): 171-100-05,171-100-28 i I 0-1 N0.1990-0621452, REC. 02-02-1990 I I COMPLETED

D AND APPROVED BY THE APPROPRIATE

SITE DATA I I DWELLING UNITS I COMMON OPEN SPAT
0 50 100 150
SCALE: 1" = 50'
SEWER NOTE: INSTALLATION OF PRIVATE SEWER

LATERALS TO PROPERTIES OUTSIDE THE CITY OF VISTA

JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARY WILL NOT BE PERMITTED

A ASSOMATES

PASCO LARET SUITER
San Diego I Solana Beach I Orange County
Phone 858.259.82121 www.pisaengineering.com
WE DATE: 09/13121 - PLOT DATE ---- - FILE NAME: J:\ACTIVE JOB0474 Vista Grande\CIVIL\DRAWING\DISCRETIONARY PLANSITENTATIVE MAP13474-TM-TBLOCK.dwg 02/22/2022
PH1

PROPOSED EASEMENTS

U INDICATES PRIVATE ROAD, PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT, AND

PUBLIC SEWER EASEMENT TO THE CITY OF VISTA

INDICATES ACCESS AND PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT TO THE

CITY OF VISTA

INDICATES EASEMENT TO THE HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION

LOT MATRIX

LOT INFORMATION
LOT NO.

GROSS LOT AREA
(S.F.)

NET LOT AREA
(S.F.)
1 21,829
2 21,781
3 21,780
4 21,782
5 21,833
6 35,682
33,333
7 33,016
8 33,060
33,452
1 u
33,559
11 33,095
12 23,454
21,809
13 21,930
14 21,838
15 23,850
16 21,850
17 21,850
LEGEND

EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY

PROPOSED LOT LINE

PROPOSED EASEMENT LINE

ADJACENT PROPERTY LINE

EXISTING CITY BOUNDARY

LOT INFORMATION
LOT NO.

GROSS LOT AREA
(S.F.)
18 21.909
19 23,212
20 23,729
21 21,803
22 21,790
23 21,820
24 22,046
25 22,528

TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR
2277 VISTA GRANDE DRIVE
APN 171-100-02
O
_W
z
Q
U-
O
z
IM
V
I LU
0 03
I Co
�
Z
I
APN 171-100-14 I C
I 35.

I �
f—
I O
I
I
I
I
-I--- 1 001-4 z
TR/WD
Cn
'10 R=169.50'
PoA=10°46'56"

DEDICATION
PER
I DOC NO.
36°525gN
B ,
�S R2
I\ •SOa� aQQo�
APN 171-100-48 38°2435� 40,48 °24'04
I �
0 50 100 150
SCALE: 1" = 50'
APN 171-100-40
NOTE: SEE SHEET 5 FOR EXISTING EASEMENTS
APN 171-100-29
IY VV IL VV � TVv•v �
LOT B 0
APN 171-080-08
APN 171-110-31
APN 171-120-51
0 ti
w
co
ti
M
0 Z
00 APN 171-120-50
w
0 Z
Q
cn
W
O
Z
Z)
O
u
w
APN 171-120-40
M
M _
Z 1.61'
g, S 78°57'02" E
N 89°12'39" E 399.35' COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ' I APN 171-100-62 �'20O.4Q1 ----T-- --�--

EXISTING COUNTY

OF SAN DIEGO R/W I M
o SHEET 4 CITY of
APN 171-100-30 I APN 171-100-33 APN 171-100-43 I APN 171-100-27 I GEN PLAN AMEND (RR TO LDR), ZONE CHANGE (Al APN 171-100-25 OWNER: OMNI FINANCIAL, LLC CONTACT
a ADDRESS: 1151 DURYEA AVENUE, IRVINE, CA 92E

Q I ARCHITECT, ENGINEER

OR DESIGNER PASCO LARET SUITER & ASSOCIATES
ADDRESS: 27127 CALLE ARROYO, SUITE 1904 SA
SIGNATURES CONSTITUTE THAT ALL PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, GUARANTEES, AND OTHER TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT: 25 LOTS REQUIREMENTS NECESSARY FOR ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT CONFORMING TO THIS SITE EXIST. ZONE: A-1 PROP. ZONE: E-1 Al

DEVELOPMENT PLAN HAVE BEEN COMPLETED AND APPROVED BY THE APPROPRIATE DEPARTMENT. SITE DATA D�

PASCO LARET SUITER

ASSOUATES
San Diego I Solana Beach I Orange County
Phone 858.259.82121 www.pisaengineering.com
SAVE DATE: 09/13/21 - PLOT DATE: -- - FILE NAME: J:IACTIVE JOBS13474 Vista GrandelCIVILIDRAWINGIDISCRETIONARY PLANSITENTATIVE MAP13474-TM-TBLOCK.dwg 02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 175 of 210

TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR PROJECT FILE NUMBER: P21 Jul 114 — �, �j 227/7/VISTA
DRIV.E
o Tom\ ��
— ----- — ��' /�� / // ( ) \ ) / / / / / / / / = \� \��\ I Ob cr-�o Area — 661-
— — — _�—r''� — _ ,�
EXISTING EASEMENTS =--_-_—___-- — / / // /'
UNSPECIFIED WIDTH SDG&E EASEMENT PER BOOK 4150
PAGE 27, RECORDED JUNE 27, 1951 TO BE QUITCLAIMED , — — — — —_ 1111 050' WIDE EASEMENT FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS PER BOOK
©5020 PAGE 264, RECORDED OCTOBER 19,1953 /1 71A / _-----_ --- °
f
l b
o(
/ APN 7/-00- 9 I 114WIDE SDG&E EASEMENT PER INSTRUMENT BK. 5477 °Il \ / I
P.536, RECORDED DECEMBER 29,1954 /
I I
30 WIDE COUNTY HIGHWAY EASEMENT PER INSTRUMENT
0 _--, // III /
NO.61-125815, RECORDED JULY 21,1961 1 I — / / i / I I 1 \ \ \ I 1 I I I I I / \ ` ` — _ — i i / / / / / / / / / J II I O 0000000 / /// I I I I I I I \ \I \ I I aBs, \ I I l / —_\-
12' WIDE SDG&E EASEMENT PER INSTRUMENT NO.61-201031, ) I r J / I \ / / /II \ I 1 I \ \ ) I ) ) ) ) I I I % / / / ` / / / / / / / / / / I g I ° o / / \ 1 I I I I \ \ I ) / / / / J J /—�,\ �\ �\ �, /� �� / IIII IIII—� RECORDED NOVEMBER 20,1961 TO BE QUITCLAIMED \ J
aBs, I 1 ` I EG
OUNSPECIFIED WIDTH EASEMENT TO VISTA IRRIGATION ` \ \ 8 33i�.98' \ COtQN OF SA D DISTRICT FOR WATER PIPELINES AND INCIDENTAL \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ \ \ CITY CQF ST � \ I I I I I I I / / / / / / / / / / / / I / � \ \ (///� \ \ \ \
PURPOSES PER BK.1270 P. 21, RECORDED AUGUST 20, 1926

TO BE QUITCLAIMED - NOT PLOTTABLE
O11 25 WIDE EASEMENT FOR ROAD PURPOSES PER BK. 2004
P.481-487, RECORDED DECEMBER 31,1945
\ \ I 17—
\ \ \ \ \
OUNSPECIFIED WIDTH EASEMENT TO SDG&E FOR POLES, \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 8�,� \ ��)) \S, \ / ) I \ \ I I I I I 1 \ 1 1 1 I 1 I / I I 1 I / 1 I I \ \ \ / 1 J I l l l l / / ' / ' ' / / i / / / / ' j % /IMW WIRES AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES PER BK. 4151 P. 458,
\ \ \ \ \ \ � \� ° RECORDED JUNE 28,1951 TO BE QUITCLAIMED � \ � \ \ \ \ \ l ROAD MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT RECORDED OCTOBER 19, \ ,100`02 14 1953 PER BK 5020, PAGE 264 \ \ \ (�P7
,c,�
30 WIDE SDG&E EASEMENT PER INSTRUMENT NO.74-10771
& 74-10784, RECORDED JANUARY 15,1974 TO BE
QUITLCLAIMED \ \ \ \ \ \ 6B , \ \ \1 \ I \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \\ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ' /' ' /' /' ' ' i'/ /' / / /'/' ' / I I conc, II I \ � � \ _ '� \ \ \ �\ \\ \ \ \ \\\ \\ \ \ems, I / / / / / //// / // / � / / _ \ \ �. II
\o\ Ic. \ B \ \ 1 I \ )
5' WIDE EASEMENT FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS AND — \ \ \ \ I \ \ )\ 17 � \ � \
UTILITY PURPOSES PER INSTRUMENT N0.77-518755,
RECORDED DECEMBER 15,1977 TO BE QUITCLAIMED — — \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ / / / / , / 1 ^ ��Jo /j/ \\ \ \� \ � \ \ BS. \ 1 1 1 1 \\ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ � / / / / / / / / / / / / / / , / / / / � � I III \ PN 17-120�-51/ I 18 3 WIDE EASEMENT FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS AND
UTILITY PURPOSES PER INSTRUMENT N0.77-518756,
RECORDED DECEMBER 15,1977 TO BE QUITCLAIMED

REFERENCES
--CBS,ROS `
PM72076 'N.
\ \ \ \ \ \ 1 \ \\ \� \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ I IIII I I ! I IIII �l II / �'/ �\\ —I z ROS 1543 � / \\ \ \ � I \ \ \ �, \\ \ � \ \ \ � \ \ V\ I 1 \ \ � \ 1 \ \ 1 i I I \ ( � / ) / � �- `" \l \ \ o \ \\\ \ \\ \ \ \ Q MAP 12552 / \ \ \ \ \ \ I—
RS1126 \� \ \ X\ \\ \ \} \\ \ l \ \ \\� \\�\ \ \ \\ \ \ \\ 1 I 1 I IIII IIII II \ \� �/ / l 3-*oe.�4\
\\D\
Abe 7�31Q012
11 2\ \�� \\\ \ \ \ \ \ III 1 \ \\ \ \\ \ \ —_�[PBS/
LU
,EXPGB � E
\' \ —ARN110e
/
V7/0sAc ed-,Area _
\ \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ o
T-7 �A
o �
4 \\ \ \ VISTA PERDOC.NO. IIII �\ \ \\\ \ \ \\ \\ \\ \ \ \ \ \J� _` II \ \ \\\ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ �b red �1r�
I 1991-0218589, REC. 05-09-1gg1 ( \ \ \ \ —
�` "l III \\\\\\ \ \\\\ \ \\\ \\\ \\ \ \ \ \ \ I \OBS' I-�ED 4Mfl—
I SHEET5 CITY of VISTA OF 6
1 \ \ \ \ \ /�PLAN AMEND (RR TO LDR), ZONE CHANGE (Al TO E1), AND TSM (25 LOTS) - FILE # P21-0114 ���)� / / I / �H ` _ _ / � - _ ,� /� OWNER: OMNI FINANCIAL, LLC CONTACT: GREG PERRINE PHONE: (714) 600-8141 /// // �✓ \ // ° / — ° a— — _ — — — — I ADDRESS: 1151 DURYEA AVENUE, IRVINE, CA 92614 1 \ \\ \\ \ \\ \ \ =,f ` / \ �a \ ///// _ - ARCHITECT, ENGINEER \ \ \ \ /`\ r , , I �y II //�/ _ / _ _ — OR DESIGNER PASCO LARET SUITER & ASSOCIATES, INC. PHONE: 949-661-6695 _ _
W }. ^ MAP 12552 \� III \— — — \ \ \11 ` — _ ADDRESS. 27127 CALLE ARROYO, SUITE 1904 SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO, CA 92675 Z\� > / III / r \ / \ \\\ = _— — — — �I I I \ J/ �\ _ J SIGNATURES CONSTITUTE THAT ALL PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, GUARANTEES, AND OTHER TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT: 25 LOTS

REQUIREMENTS NECESSARY FOR ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT CONFORMING TO THIS SITE ` IV II �--� I �/� ` DEVELOPMENT PLAN HAVE BEEN COMPLETED AND APPROVED BY THE APPROPRIATE EXIST. ZONE: A-1 PROP. ZONE: E-1 APN(S): 171-100-05,171-100-28 1 I DEPARTMENT. SITE DATA DWELLING UNITS COMMON OPEN SPACE AREA (SO. FT.) COVERAGE% 1 BDRM PROVIDED REQUIRED
LOT: 740,115 100% 2 BDRM -
PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE BLDG: 69,300 9% 3 BDRM PRIVATE OPEN SPACE PARKING/PVMT: 110,457 13% 4 BDRM PROVIDED REQUIRED
PASCOLARET SUITER SUBMITTAL NUMBER DATE CHANGES ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT DATE LANDSCAPE: 560,358 78% TOTAL UNITS 25 0 50 100 150 o Q��O ^ „� �� 1 MARCH 2021 INITIAL SUBMITTAL DRIVEWAY (�," 2 MAY 2021 RESUBMITTAL FIRE DEPARTMENT DATE PARKING ORD. REQ. 126 (SIZE & SLOPE) SETBACKS San Diego I Solana Beach I Orange County 3 AUGUST 2021 RESUBMITTAL I GARAGE 84 LOADING - REC. VEH. 1 WAY 12' MIN. FRONT 50' REAR 20' SCALE: 1" = 50' Phone 858.259.82121 www.pisaengineering.com -- PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT DATE GUEST 116 HANDICAP - STORAGE 2 WAY 24' MIN. L. SIDE 10' SPECIAL N/A SPACES
OPEN TOTAL 1 200 N/A SLOPE VARIES I R. SIDE 10' ACCES. BLDG N/A SAVE DATE- ---- - PLOT DATE: ---- - FILE NAME: J:WCTIVE JOBS\3474 Vista Grande\CIVIL\DRAWING\DISCRETIONARY PLANS\TENTATIVE MAP\3474-TM-TBLOCK.dwg 02/22/2022 PH1 Page 176 of 210

DMA #
BMP #

BMP TYPE

BMP AREA

BMP OUTLET

OULET PIPE
1 A

MODULAR WETLAND SYSTEM INLET/
MWS L-4-19 I

1.2-INCH ORIFICE 16-FT
12"

DETENTION VAULT A
2,000 SF, 5' HIGH R-TANK
WIDE WEIR @ 4.5-FT HIGH
Al

TREE WELL
5 FT TREE AND 10 FT TREE
--
--
2 B

MODULAR WETLAND SYSTEM INLET I
MWS L-4-19 /

1.0-INCH ORIFICE / 8-FT
12"

DETENTION VAULT B
1,200 SF, THIGH R-TANK
WIDE WEIR @ 6.5-FT HIGH
B1

TREE WELL
5 FT TREE AND 10 FT TREE
--
--
3 E

MODULAR WETLAND SYSTEM INLET
MWS L-4-6
N/A
12"
E1

TREE WELL
10 FT TREE
--
--
4 D

DETENTION VAULT D
3,400 SF, 5' HIGH R-TANK

1.5-INCH ORIFICE / 12-FT
18"
WIDE WEIR @ 4.5-FT HIGH
D1

TREE WELL
10 FTTREE AND 15 FTTREE
--
--
5 --

SELF MITIGATING AREA
--
--
--
6 C

MODULAR WETLAND SYSTEM INLET I
MWS L-10-30 I

1.9-INCH ORIFICE / 18-FT
18"

DETENTION VAULT C
5,000 SF, 10' HIGH R-TANK
WIDE WEIR @ 9.5-FT HIGH
C1

TREE WELL
15FTTREE
--
--
C2

MODULAR WETLAND SYSTEM INLET
MWS L-44
N/A
12"
i
t]
i
o
10 j � // / � as � % Oro
- i
--------------
go"
I " // /
1 ,--------
�%% // 1 / %/ //,% ��%/i// - / /---------------------
-Fill
�/OF vroi
-----------------------------110
- ---
100
�i%i�% /
ply
NX
• ♦ .. 1 r�r / / Jr/ / /
EV,,/0,00,� %ice% %%�%i � �•=
- -p - - --- ----- ---- -- ---- ri/i . /
I/ / `� v ��, r/ i i/ ''/ %' j////////:vim �/,.%/%%/////e.�%i%/i.I/�%///�/�✓.�d////////' ✓///�I ��/ % �/� ,� //01 �I/%�r/� • 1 i11
0�,, / /� 1 •
r ♦ -
00 r ♦
/pal
i/
♦
-„ ► it
./ r / ♦
/r
III
- — ffwn
//' / / ♦ 1
./ //// r /// /// %/ / / / r / o/ / �% # '
�— ♦� p /o % / / / /// /// , , /o, /, %%�i/// // , /�. � 3101/ ► .EPA _
r/ /// / / / / , ,//
%'• 1W 2.1�O/ i //�%;� / ►���0 V � /�o: f�''/ ( ...;•
I�r I
00110
� I
Ili �a�, •i//.%
.. �/ / // - / -vi/ // � : %3"f,v/ " - ' /:�//ICI i/�����/�// �;� . i • ,, la_- b `'' /O // �i •..//i...,ii � �!i/ ---- - -
-- ii/i/i. / O,./ ,- ---- ---- - ---- -
wh
- /!I /////.!'1i i �/�9////%///%///� // I///////iv///� /////L"� /QI�� ..>-..�.._"..-.' " f -. - - - poi --� /! � is %�O ♦ i (r � - :%/ ;i./ .i / —
• •

I HAVE REVIEWED THE SOIL AND GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS FOR

THIS PROJECT AND CONFIRM THE SELECTED POST
CONSTRUCTION BMPS HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED, COORDINATED oNi
AND JUSTIFIED AS REQUIRED BY THE C.O.V. BMP DESIGN h�e``o W• S/� l�yc MANUAL.

No. RCE 47857 'T
cc
Exp.
qTF OF C ALNF�
ZZ

LANDSCAPE NOTE ARCHITECT NOTE

I HAVE REVIEWED THE BIOLFILTRATION BASIN LOCATION SHOWN

ON THE CIVIL PLAN AND CONFIRM THAT THE CONCEPT

LANDSCAPE PLANS ARE COORDINATED AND APPROATE PLANING

AND IRRIGATION WILL BE DIESNG IN THOSE BIOFILTRATION
BASINS.

LEGEND

MAJOR BASIN BOUNDARY
HMP POINT OF COMPLIANCE POC 1
IMPERVIOUS AREA 4.25 AC (184,989 SF)
PERVIOUS AREA 12.82 AC (558,506 SF)
"ASSUMED IMPERVIOUS AREA PER LOT 3,051 SF (BLDG + DWY)

MY ARCHITECT'S SEAL AND SIGNATURE IS TO VERIFY THAT THE O ,WDSCgAF KTGY ARCHITECTURAL PLANNING HAS REVIEWED THIS PLAN apRD �,G 4115 �P� PREPARED BY THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND HARD COORDINATED

THE SCHEMATIC DESIGN OF THE BUILDING ARCHITURE
ACCORDINGLY.
lJ1J, 3/31 /23
-9� EXP. DATE/
OF CAS \�O

DMA HMP EXHIBIT
2277 VISTA GRANDE DRIVE PASCO LARET SUITER
SCALE: A=50' ° QSSD�OQTES
DATE: AUGUST 2021 San Diego I Solana Beach I Orange County SHEET 1 OF 1 Phone 858.259.82121 www.pisaengineering.com ,)v

GENERAL INFORMATION
THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS LOCATED WITHIN THE SAN LUIS REY UNIT (HU) — LOWER SAN LUIS REY— MISSION, 903.11. STORM WATER THAT DISCHARGES THE PROJECT SITE ALONG THE EASTERN AND

NORTHERN BORDERS FLOWS NORTHERLY TO THE SAN LUIS REY RIVER (LOWER) WHICH FLOWS WESTERLY. STORM WATER THAT DISCHARGES THE PROJECT SITE ALONG THE SOUTHERN AND

SOUTHWESTERN BORDERS FLOWS WESTERLY TO GUAJOME LAKE WHICH FLOWS TO THE SAN LUIS REY RIVER (LOWER) WHICH FLOWS WESTERLY AND ULTIMATELY DISCHARGES TO THE PACIFIC OCEAN.

POLUTTANTS OF CONCERN - EUTROPHIC, BENTHIC COMMUNITY EFFECTS, BIFENTHRIN, CHLORIDE,

NITROGEN, PHOSPHORUS, TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS, TOXICITY AND INDICATOR BACTERIA

LID SITE DESIGN BMP'S

1. MODULAR WETLAND SYSTEMS

2. DENTENTION VAULTS

3. ROOF DRAIN TO LANDSCAPING

4. MINIMIZE IMPERVIOUS SURFACES

5. PROTECT SLOPES AND CHANNELS

6. TREE WELLS

SOURCE CONTROL BMP'S

1. STORM DRAIN STENCILING

2. EMPLOY INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES

3. EMPLOY EFFICIENT IRRIGATION AND DROUGHT TOLERANT LANDSCAPE DESIGN

SOIL INFORMATION
HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP: TYPE C

GROUND WATER INFORMATION
GROUND WATER WAS NOT ENCOUNTERED AT THE SITE. SEE
REPORT PREPARED BY: GEOSOILS, INC
DATED: W.O.5053-Al-SC FEBRUARY 23, 2006

COARSE SEDIMENT YIELD
REFER TO ATTACHEMENT 2B OF THIS REPORT FOR CRITICAL
COARSE SEDIMENT YIELD AREAS WITHIN THIS PROJECT SITE.

BMP NOTES

1. THESE BMPS AREA MANDATORY TO BE INSTALLED PER MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS

OR THERE PLANS

2. NO CHANGES TO THE PROPOSED BMPS ON THIS SHEET WITHOUT PRIOR APPROVAL FORM THE

CITY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT

3. NO SUBSTITUTIONS TO THE MATERIAL TYPES OR PLANTING TYPES WITHOUT PRIOR APPROVAL

FROM THE LAND DEVELOPMENT ENGINEER

4. NO OCCUPANCY WILL BE GRANTED UNTIL THE CITY INSPECTOR STAFF HAS INSPECTED THIS PROJECT FOR APPRORIATE BMP CONSTRUCTION AND INSTALLATION.

WATER QUALITY TECHNICAL REPOT

TITLE - PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT STORM WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT REPORT FOR 2277 VISTA GRANDE DRIVE
DATE - MARCH 2O21

PREPARED BY - PASCO LARET SUITER & ASSOCIATES

MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT DOCUMENT

TITLE -
DATE -

PREPARED BY -

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PLAN
TITLE - STORM WATER OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE PLAN FOR 2277 VISTA GRANDE DRIVE DATE - MARCH 2O21

PREPARED BY - PASCO LARET SUITER & ASSOCIATES

RESPONSIBLE PARTY I N FORMATION

GREG PERRINE
1151 DURYEA AVENUE
IRVINE, CA 92614
\VE DATE: 09/13121 - PLOT DATE ---- - FILE NAME: J:\ACTIVE JOBS\3474 Vista Grande\CIVIL\DRAWING\DISCRETIONARY PLANSITENTATIVE MAP13474-TM-TBLOCK.dwg 02/22/2022 PH1 Page 177 of 210

LANDSCAPE CONCEPT PLAN
EXISTING POWER POLE TO BE REMOVED.

EXISTING OVERHEAD UTILITIES TO SITE
TO BE UNDERGROUND.
---t--T—
I I
EX 1ST 1 NG TREES TO BE REMO\/ED-
SEE LEGEND SHEET 2
II
I
PROPERTY LINE (TYP.) I I
STREET TREE (TYP.) TO I I
II

BE LOCATED ON THE

ROW LINE, WITH ROOT

BARRIER
DG TRAIL (TYP. IN ROW)
I �

FIRE HYDRANT PER

CIVIL ENGINEER'S
PLANS (TYP.)
I

OPEN SPACE LOTS WITH DG

TRAILS AND BENCHES

THROUGH FLOWERING

GROUNDCOVERS AND
SHRUBS (TYP. LOTS A-D)

PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT PER
CIVIL ENG 1 NEER'S PLANS (TYP.)
3 690.0 PAD
21,780 SF
---------------
----- --- ---------------t---
I
I
+
21 663.0 PAD I 6 .0 PAD
23,729 SF 21,8 3 SF
i

PROPOSED STRET
LIGHT (TYP.) S,
PRIVATE YARD SLOPES OVER 5' HT.

TO BE LANDSCAPED
6 718.5 PAD
35,682 SF
5 96,
716.5 PAD
W W
I,
_5s
� � I
I / I
I
19 643.5 PAD I 18 ' 17 �� 16 I 15
23,212 SF
651.5 PAD I 659.0 PAD I 669.0 PAD 673.0 PAD
21,909 SF 21,850 SF I \ 21,850 SF i 21,850 SF
I
TREE WELL W 1 TH ADA-ACCESSIBLE TREE
GRATES, PER ENGINEER'S PLANS (T-T-P.)
7 718.0 PAD
33,016 SF
---------------
--- U-- I "
- W W
25 717.5 PAD
i 22,528 SF
14 '\
I�
I.
677.0 PAD 1-
I
21,838 SF I'
I
I.

I
r
23 700.5 PAD
21,820 SF
8 714.0 PAD
33,060 SF
'_ �Fii: ��r •
►.' :,'.fir: ,
5'-C " TO &'-0" WIDE DG

TRAIL WITH REDWOOD

HEADER IN ROW

COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
9 712.0 PAD
33,452 SF
10 705.0 PAD
33,559 SF
11 697.4 PAD
33,095 SF
LOT D
PAD r
4,780 SF d
12 692.5 PADI ILL
23,454 SF
cou
SAN DNryIECyatO 81i
W9A
� GRW1)E
CITY OF 0WNrY o�
VISTA A D/EG.0

VICINITY MAP /

VICINITYMAP
NO ScuF
TOTAL PROJECT SITE:

16.q ACRES
TOTAL LANDSCAPE AREA:

4.6 ACRES
OF SITE LANDSCAPED:
2-7%

THE SITE WILL HAVE A DEDICATED

POTABLE WATER METER FOR
HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION IRRIGATION.

EXISTING LEACH LINES
— _ (TYP) PER T682ggRR
PRIVATE YARD SLOPES OVER 5' HT.

TO BE LANDSCAPED
5'-&' BLACK TUBULAR
STEEL FENCE (TYP. AT

PERMETER

EXISTING POWER POLE

TO REMAIN
IN
PAD _
_ I - - - - - - -- -- c--_—
-- _
SD
------ --- -- -- - ---- - - _ __-----------------
\ ---------- - --- --- - - -
IS GR NL _E DD IVE
I i � PROPOSED FIRE \ � � I 3

CITY OF I TAB I HYDRANT PER CIVIL
\ W-_ w COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO I APN 171-10 -6-- ENG 1 NEER'S PLANS w � w

W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W
� I � w�

I I I I I I I

PROPOSED STREET
M I LIGHT (T)"P.) I
l 0 1 PROPSED SIDEWALK PER CIVIL
APN 1 -100-4 I APN 171-100-30 I APN 171- 00-33 1 A N 171-100 43 I APN 171-100-� I I nonl �� _� nn_�� ENGINEER'S PLANS

DRIVEWAY PER C I V I L
NOTE: PLANT MATERIAL WITHIN SIGHT LINE TO BE MAX. 24''
HEIGHT. ANY TREE THAT FALLS W 1 TH I N A SIGHT LINE SHALL BE LIMBED AND MAINTAINED AT LEAST 8' ABOVE FINISH
GRADE (TYP.)
ENGINEER'S PLAN (TYP.)
STREET TREE (TYP.) TO BE

LOCATED ON THE ROW LINE,

WITH ROOT BARRIER
PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT PER CIVIL ENGINEER'S PLANS (TYP.)

EXISTING POWER POLES TO
BE REMOVED. EXISTING

OVERHEAD UTILITIES TO SITE
TO BE UNDERGROUND.

TREE WELL WITH

ADA-ACCESSIBLE

TREE GRATES, PER

ENGINEER'S PLANS
(TYP.)
I am familiar with and agree to comply with the requirements for landscape improvements as described in Chapter 18.56 of the Vista Development Code and the Landscape Manual. This plan has been prepared in compliance with those regulations. I certify that the plan implements the regulations to provide efficient landscape water use.

Applicant
Landscape Architect
Date
2021
Date
5,408 SF HD RTANK
685.5 FG
684.0 TOP
6�q.08 BOT
WDS
�IS1�.� .NpRD L 41 \0
0 25' 50' 150' �CID y

SIG A RE
12/2021
DATE
5/5125 �Q
9J EXP. DATE
North Scale 1" = 50' OF CA�-�F
0 z �-4 O
N Q0
Cf)
w
U ON
r rl
U 0
� o
Ct N
o
C� �
Ct
U Q
V1 �
O
U
N
CV
Z
J
W
U
w
J
Z
0 H
w
U
LU
w
Q
U
U)
Z
J
Q
U
Uj
z
co
Cf)
w
i
�0
LL
U
DATE: 12/20/2021
DRAWN BY: LL
JOB NUMBER:

FILE:

REVISIONS:

OF
:2 SHEETS

02/22/2022
PH1

WATER CONSERVATION PLAN
ETWU (Annual Gallons Required) _
Eto x 0.62 x ETAF x Area
ETo - see Appendix A in Water Efficient Landscape
Design Manual.

0.62 is the conversion factor to gallons per sq. ft.

ETAF is Plant Factor/Irrigation Efficiency.

Area is the Landscaped Area for each hydrozone.

WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE WORKSHEET
REFERENCE EVAPOTRANSPIRATION (ETo)
I
MAWA (Annual Gallons Allowed) = 0 40' 80' 240'
(ETo) (0.62)[(ETAF x LA) + ((1- ETAF) x SLA)]
(ETO = 51.1) LA is the total landscape of all hydrozone areas in sq. ft.

SLA is the total special landscape area in square feet. North Scale 1" = 80' ETAF is 0.42 for all areas
rol ol
Hydrozone # / Planting
(a)
Description
Plant Factor
(PF)
Irrigation
(b)
Method
Irrigation
Efficiency
(c)
(IE)
ETAF
(PF/IE)
Landscape Area
In Square Feet
ETAF x Area
Estimated Total
Water Use
(d)
(ETWU)
Regular Landscape Areas
H1- PRIVATE YARD SLOPES 0.3 Rotor 0.75 0.40 160,997 64,399 2,040,283 H2-PRIVATE STREET TREES

0.3 Drip

0.90 0.33
3,480
1,160
36,751
H3- HOA COMMON AREAS

0.3 Drip

0.90 0.33
22,314
7,438
235,651
H4- HOA STREET TREES

0.3 Drip

0.90 0.33
480
160
5,069
H5- HOA SLOPES

0.3 Rotor

0.75 0.40
5,790
2,316
73,376
H6- PRIVATE YARD SLOPES

0.3 Drip

0.90 0.33
7,932
2,644
83,767
Totals
200,993
78,117
2,474,896
Special Landscape Areas
Totals
0 Estimated Total Water Use (ETWU) Total
2,474,896
Maximum Water Allowance (MAWA)(e)
2,674,501
Irrigation Efficiency (IE) Average**

0.36 **Average Irrigation Efficiency for overall irrigation system shall meet or exceed 0.75 (total of all efficiency ratings divided by number of hydrozones).

ETAF CALCULATIONS
Average ETAF for Regular Landscape Areas must be 0.42 or below for residential areas and 0.42 or below for non-residential areas. Provide Totals based on information calculated in Worksheet above.

Regular Landscape Areas
Totals
Total ETAF x Area
(B) =
78,117
Total Area
(A) =
200,993
All Landscape Areas
Totals
Total ETAF x Area
(B+D) =
78,117
Total Area
(A+C) =
200,993
NOTES:

I . ALL SLOPES (4:1 OR STEEPER) W ILL BE PROVIDED WITH
REINFORCED STRAW MATS (SC 150 MANUFACTURED BY NORTH
AMERI CAN GREEN,-800-4�3- I q65, OR CITY APPROVED EQUAL).

2. ALL LANDSCAPED AREAS, I NGLUD I N6 SLOPES (4:1 OR STEEPER)

THAT ARE GRADED OR DISTURBED AS PART OF THIS PROJECT

WILL BE PROVIDED WITH PERMANENT IRRIGATION TO MEET CITY REOU I REMENTS.

3. NO OVERHEAD IRRIGATION SHALL BE INSTALLED WITHIN 24" OF

ANY NON -PERMEABLE SURFACE

4. TREES ARE PROHIBITED WITHIN 10' OF ANY DRIVEWAY

5. PLANT MATERIALS OVER 50" HT. OR WITHOUT AN 8' MINIMUM CLEARANCE ARE PROHIBITED WITHIN STREET INTERSECTION 516HT TRIANGLES.

6. AREAS SHALLOWER THAN 5:1 SHALL REGE I VE 3 1 NCHES OF BARK MULCH, B I O-FILTRATION BASINS SHALL NOT RECEIVE BARK MULCH.

A MINIMUM 3" LAYER OF MULCH SHALL BE APPLIED ON ALL

EXPOSED SOIL SURFACES OF PLANTI NO AREAS EXCEPT TURF

AREAS, CREEPING OR ROOTING &ROUNDCOVERS, OR DIRECT
SEEDING APPLICATIONS WHERE MULCH 15 CONTRA I ND I GATED.

PRIVATE STREET TREES SHALL RECEIVE A 40 S.F. MIN AREA OF BARK MULCH.
-7. TREE ROOT BARRIERS SHALL BE INSTALLED WHERE TREES ARE PLACED WITHIN 5 FEET PAVED SURFACES IMPROVEMENTS

I NGLUD I N& WALKS, CURBS, OR STREET PAVEMENT ROOT BARRIERS WILL NOT BE WRAPPED AROUND THE ROOTBALL. ROOT BARRIERS
SHALL BE 'B I O-BARRIER. ALL STREET TREES SHALL RECEIVE ROOT BARRIERS.

ALL SLOPES 4:1 OR GREATER MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING
REGE I REMENTS. THIS APPLIES TO ALL SLOPES EVEN THOSE NOT SHOWN ON THE PLANS:

A. ALL GRADED SLOPES MUST BE PERMANENTLY I RRI GATED WITH A CENTRALLY CONTROLLED SYSTEM WITH NO OVER SPRAY.

B. GROUND COVERS MUST BE PLANTED FROM LINERS OR FLATS AT 12" O.G. OR I GALLONS AT la" O.G.

C. PROVIDE I ONE GALLON SHRUB FOR EACH 100 SF OF SLOPE AND I FIVE GALLON SHRUB FOR EVERY 200 SF OF SLOPE.

D. PROVIDE TREES ON ALL SLOPES AT A RATE OF ONE 15 GALLON TREE PER 500 SF OF SLOPE ON ALL SLOPES 5OR GREATER
VERTICAL HE I GHT. ON ALL SLOPES 8' OR GREATER VERTICAL HE I GHT, PROVIDE ON 15 GALLON TREE PER 500 SF OR SLOPE PLUS ONE 5 GALLON TREE PER EACH I ,000SF OF SLOPE.

E. REINFORCED STRAW MATS (SC 150 MANUFACTURED BY NORTH
AMERI CAN GREEN I-800-4-73- I q65 OR G I TY APPROVED) MUST BE INSTALLED ON ALL SLOPES 5:1 OR GREATER.

Water Conservation Legend
I. Low Water Use Private Yard Slopes (160,�i�i� s.f.)
80% Total Landscape Area. Rotating Nozzle Irrigation
♦ 2. Low Water Use Private Yard Street Trees (5,480 s.f.) 2% Total Landscape Area. Deep Root Bubblers

5. Low Water Use HOA Common Areas (22,514 s.f.)
1191 Total Landscape Area. In -Line Drip Irrigation
• 4. Low Water Use HOA Maintained Street Trees (480 s.f.) <1916 Total Landscape Area. Deep Root Bubblers

5. Low Water use HOA Maintained Slopes (5,1(i0 s.f.)
5116 Total Landscape Area- Rotating Nozzle Irrigation

6. Low Water Use Private Yard Slopes (1,0152 s.f .)
49/ Total Landscape Area- Drip Irrigation

WATER CONSERVATION NOTES

1. ALL I RR I GAT I ON SHALL I NGLUDE EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT WATERING METHODS UTILIZING HUNTER MP ROTATOR LOW -FLOW I RRI6AT1 ON HEADS, IN -LINE DRIP TUBING AND DEEP ROOT TREE BUBBLERS.

2. ALL IRRIGATION CONTROLLERS SHALL HAVE AUTOMATIC RAIN SHUT-OFF SENSORS.

5. ALL PLANT MATERIAL UTILIZED 15 CLASSIFIED AS 'LOW OR MODERATE WATER USE' BY WUCOLS (WATER USE CLASSIFICATION OF LANDSCAPE SPEC.I ES) .

4. 100% OF THE LANDSCAPED AREA 15 PLANTING ZONE 5,
NATURAL IZI NG/TRANS I T I ONAL.

5. ALL PLANTING AREAS SHALL REGE I VE REGULAR MAINTENANCE AND

MANAGEMENT DESIGNED TO MAXIMIZE HEALTHY GROWTH

6. ALL PLANTING AREAS SHALL REGE I VE COMPLETE AND APPROPRIATE SOIL PREPARATION.
-7. ONLY LOW VOLUME OR SUBSURFACE IRRIGATION SHALL BE USED TO I RRI GATE ANY VEGETATION WITHIN 24" OF AN IMPERMEABLE SURFACE.

8. PLANT 1 NG AREAS SHADED BY BUILDINGS SHALL BE AMENDED TO IMPROVE DRAINAGE AND AVOID REMAINING NET BETWEEN I RR I GAT I ON CYCLES.

Z
ON
xi
ct
ALOE SPP.

ALOE L
O� AGAVE SPP.

AGAVE L

BAGGHARIS CENTENNIAL

COYOTE BUSH L

GALL I STEMON LITTLE JOHN

LITTLE JOHN BOTTLEBRUSH L

G I STUS SKANBER& I I

DWARF PINK ROGKROSE L

MUHLENBER&IA RIGENS

DEER GRASS L

PHLOMIS FRUTIGOSA

JERUSALEM SAGE L
SALVIA SPP.

SAGE L

VERBENA DE LA MINA

DE LA MINA VERBENA L
FLANTINO L.E:iJEND WUGOLS
SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME ZONE 3
TREES

EXISTING TREES TO BE REMOVED
# ; SEE EXISTING TREE INVENTORY LIST BELOW
VISTA 6RANDE STREET TREES - 24" BOX SIZE

GHITALPA TASHKENTENSIS CHITALPA L

GE I JERA PARV I FLORA AUSTRAL I AN WILLOW L

KOELREUTERIA PANICULATA GOLDEN RAINTREE L
SLOPE TREES - 5-15 GAL. SIZE
+ GERG I S OGG I DENTAL I S WESTERN REDBUD L

HETEROMELES ARBUTI FOL I A TOYON L

PRUNUS I L I G I FOL I A HOLLYLEAF CHERRY L
o TREE WELLS - (12'-15' DIAMETER TREES) 24" BOX SIZE
A60NIS FLEXUOSA PEPPERMINT TREE L

GERG I S OCC I DENTAL I S WESTERN REDBUD L
LEPTO5PERMUM LAEVI&ATUM AUSTRALIAN TEA TREE L

SHRUBS AND GROUNDGOVER
SLOPE SHRUBS - 1-5 GAL.

BAGGHARIS CENTENNIAL COYOTE BUSH L

G I STUS SALV I FOL I US SA&ELEAF ROCKROSE L

ENCELIA CALIFORNICA BUSH SUNFLOWER L
&ALVEZ I A SPP. I SLAND SNAPDRAGON L

RHUS OVATA SUGAR BUSH L
0 0051 SHTL I NE SHRUBS - 1-5 GAL. 00 DIANELLA 'LITTE REV LITTLE REV. FLAX LILY L

SENEG I O SERPENS BLUE CHALK STICKS L

VERBENA DE LA MINA DE LA MINA VERBENA L
HOA LOT MASSING SHRUBS AND 6R0UND00VER5 - 1-5 GAL.

HOA LOT &ROUNDGO\/ERS - (FLATS a 12" O.G.)

BAGGHARIS 'PIGEON POINT' DWARF COYOTE BRUSH L

MYOPORUM PUTAH &REEK GREEPIN& MYRPORUM L
SENEG 10 SERPENS BLUE CHALKSTI GKS L
SLOPE 6ROUNDGOVER - (FLATS a 12" O.G.)

BAGGHARIS 'PIGEON POINT' COYOTE BRUSH L

EXISTING TREE INVENTORY
NUMBER

SPECIES

CALIPER
STATUS
1 QUERCUS SPP.
18"

TO BE REMOVED
2 SCHINUS MOLLE
18"

TO BE REMOVED
3 QUERCUS SPP.
12"

TO BE REMOVED
4 QUERCUS SPP.
8"

TO BE REMOVED
5 SCHINUS MOLLE
12"

TO BE REMOVED
6 SCHI NUS TEREBI NTH I FOLIUS
18"

TO BE REMOVED
7 QUERCUS SPP.
10"

TO BE REMOVED
8 EUCALYPTUS SPP.
15"

TO BE REMOVED
9 SCHINUS MOLLE
8"

TO BE REMOVED
10 SCHINUS MOLLE
8"

TO BE REMOVED
11 SCHINUS MOLLE
8"

TO BE REMOVED
12 SCHINUS MOLLE
10"

TO BE REMOVED
13 SCHINUS MOLLE
8"

TO BE REMOVED
14 EUCALYPTUS SPP.
18"

TO BE REMOVED
15 EUCALYPTUS SPP.
12"

TO BE REMOVED
16 EUCALYPTUS SPP.
15"

TO BE REMOVED
17 EUCALYPTUS SPP.
15"

TO BE REMOVED
18 EUCALYPTUS SPP.
18"

TO BE REMOVED
19 WASHINGTONIA ROBUSTA
24"

TO BE REMOVED

NO RECYCLED WATER USE PROPOSED

THE SITE WILL HAVE A DEDICATED

POTABLE WATER METER FOR
HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION IRRIGATION.
'DL\r,_,11DSCRD L-9� ti0?
SIGt A`fURE
12/20/21
5/51 23
\EXP. DATE ��
TF of cP�_
� 0 U N N N
Q
J
Z
W
Q
�
W
w
C%)
2 Z
u)
O
U
W
Q
Z
Q
U
W
�
Q
z
�
(_f)
U
CD
DATE: 12/20/2021
DRAWN BY: LL
JOB NUMBER:

FILE:

REVISIONS:

OF
:2 SHEETS

02/22/2022
PH1

ORDINANCE NO. 2022-

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CHARTERED CITY OF VISTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A ZONE CHANGE FROM THE A-1 AGRICULTURAL ZONE TO THE E-1 ESTATES ZONE ON TWO PARCELS LOCATED AT 2277 VISTA GRANDE DRIVE
(APNs 171-100-05 and 171-100-28)
The City Council of the City of Vista does ordain as follows:

Findings. The City Council hereby finds and declares all of the following:

A. This ordinance is enacted by the City Council pursuant to its authority under the Charter of the City of Vista and Article 11, Section 7 of the California Constitution.

B. The applicant, Gregory Perrine, submitted a formal application to change the zoning designation from Agricultural (A-1) to Estates Residential (E-1) on two parcels located at 2277 Vista Grande Drive (APNs 171-100-05 and 171-100-28).

C. A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was prepared for the proposed subdivision, which is included as Exhibit "A" to Exhibit 1. The mitigation requirements are summarized in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, included as Exhibit "B" to Exhibit 1. The public review period started on October 2, 2021, and ended on November 1, 2021, and 6 comment letters were received during this public review period. The comment letters and the Responses to Comments are included in the Final MND as Attachment K.

D. The Planning Commission is an advisory body to the City Council with respect to zoning amendments, and recommended approval of the proposed Zone Change with the approval of Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-02.

E. Pursuant to chapters 18.06 and 18.80 of the Vista Development Code, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on the requested Zone Change on February 22, 2022.

F. At said public hearing, staff reports, both written and oral were received in evidence and all persons desiring to speak on the proposed project were heard. At the conclusion of said hearing, after consideration of all evidence presented, the City Council reached a decision on the matter as set forth.

2. Code Amendment.

A. The zoning designation on two parcels located at 2277 Vista Grande Drive is hereby changed from Agricultural (A-1) to Estates Residential (E-1). The City Planner is hereby authorized to make a corresponding change to the official Zoning Map on the effective date of this Ordinance.

3. Severability. If any word, sentence, paragraph, or other portion of this ordinance is deemed to be invalid or unenforceable for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, the City Council declares its intent that all remaining words, sentences, paragraphs or portions of the ordinance not held to be invalid or unenforceable shall remain in full force and effect, and 001054752 EXHIBIT 3
02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 180 of 210

ORDINANCE NO. 2022 —

CITY COUNCIL OF THE CHARTERED CITY OF VISTA
PAGE 2
shall be so construed, as if the original ordinance did not contain the invalid or unenforceable language.

4. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect on the thirty-first day following the date of its adoption.

5. Adoption. INTRODUCED and ADOPTED at a meeting of the City Council of the City of Vista held on February 22, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

DAROLD PIEPER, CITY ATTORNEY
By:

Exhibit (on file with the City Clerk):

A. Zone Change Map

APPROVED
Darold Pieper
20220208111345

JUDY RITTER, MAYOR
ATTEST:

KATHY VALDEZ, CITY CLERK
By:
001054752
02/22/2022
PH1 Page 181 of 210

Exhibit 6 Proposed Zone Change
Existing
a
■
■
■
r
r
r
■
■
Agricultural
r
(A-1 }
r
■
r
■
4v oz�
■
Kr at•
Estates
■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■�
Residential
(E-1)
Proposed
■
rr
. ..
.
■
■
r
■
■
■
Estates Residential
■
(E-1 }
•
r
■
O7<■,
■
■
+
Vista Csta��e
• r
•
Estates
Residential
(E-1 }
■
02/22/2022 PH1 Page 182 of 210

PLANNING COMMISSION

STAFF REPORT

PUBLIC HEARING
December 7, 2021
P21-0114
REQUEST: A request for approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration, General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and Tentative Subdivision Map for a 28-lot single-family residential subdivision located at 2277 Vista Grande Drive (APNs 171-100-05 and 171-100-28)
APPLICANT: Gregory Perrine — Murow Development Consultants RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Adopt Resolution 2021- , recommending City Council approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for a
General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and Tentative
Subdivision Map for a 28-lot single-family residential
subdivision located at 2277 Vista Grande Drive (APNs
171-100-05 and 171-100-28)

2. Adopt Resolution 2021- , recommending City Council
approval of a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change,
and Tentative Subdivision Map for a 28-lot single-family residential subdivision located at 2277 Vista Grande
Drive (APNs 171-100-05 and 171-100-28)
LOCATION: The project site is located on the north side of Vista Grande Drive, northwest of Vista Grande Terrace.

LAND AREA: 16.99 acres (gross)
KEY ISSUES: Is the project consistent with the land use designation and applicable policies in the General Plan?
Is the proposed project compatible with surrounding land uses? Can required findings be made to approve the Tentative Subdivision Map?

SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A. Site Description
The 16.99-acre project site is located is in the northeastern part of the city on the border with unincorporated San Diego County at the northeastern terminus of Vista Grande Drive. The site is comprised of two contiguous parcels, Assessor's Parcel numbers 171-100-05 and 28 (12.12 acres and 4.87 acres, respectively).

The site consists of mostly vacant former agricultural land with an existing 1,065 square foot single-family residence located in the northwestern portion of the westerly parcel. The existing residence on the project site is more than 50 years old and has been previously determined to not be of historical significance. The P21-0114 SR 1
02/22/2022 EXHIBIT 4 PH1 Page 183 of 210

area around the residence includes a garden, trailers, sheds, and composting bins, all of which appears to have been used for minor agricultural and landscaping activities. The residence is accessed from a private unnamed road from Vista Grande Drive at the westernmost corner of the westerly parcel.

Potable water is currently provided to the site by the Vista Irrigation District (VID).

Currently, there are no sewer services provided to the site; however, the site is located within the Vista Sanitation District's (VSD) service area. The current General Plan 2030 Update land use designation for the project site is Rural Residential (RR) which allows a maximum density of one dwelling unit per acre.

The current zoning designation is Agricultural (A-1) Zone, which requires a minimum lot size of one -acre consistent with the General Plan RR land use designation.

Other than the residence and minor agricultural/landscaping activities, the property supports mostly non-native vegetation (i.e., weed -dominated grassland) crossed by unpaved roads, with some areas heavily disturbed and supporting little vegetation. As cited in technical reports prepared for the project (e.g., Geotech Report), boulders and rock outcrops were observed on portions of the site. According to the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment prepared for the project, a review of historical aerial photographs and topographic maps has shown that the property has historically been utilized for agricultural purposes. In a 1938 aerial photograph, the property appears to be mostly vacant and undeveloped land. In a 1946 aerial photograph, the property appears to be graded with agricultural activity on the western portion of the site. A residence is first depicted in a 1953 aerial photograph in the northwestern corner of the site.

Orchards are depicted throughout the remainder of the site in aerial photographs from 1953 to 1981. In aerial photographs taken in 1989 to 2012, the orchards were removed and the property is depicted as graded land, with no other structures except the residence in its current configuration in the northwestern corner.

Topographically, the site can be characterized as moderately sloping hillside property (essentially a south -facing slope) that is dominated by an east -west trending ridge in the north central portion of the property. Elevations range from a high of approximately 725 feet near the top of the ridge to a low of about 630 feet in the southwestern corner, with slopes ranging from 11 to five percent. On - site storm water predominately sheet flows from the top of the ridge to the southwest, south, east, north, northeast, and northwest. Once off -site, storm water runoff flowing to the southwest and south sheet flows over roads and land where it eventually discharges into one of two unnamed tributaries that feeds into Guajome Lake. Off -site storm water runoff flowing to the north and northwest eventually discharges into the northernmost unnamed tributary that feeds into Guajome Lake. Storm water from Guajome Lake eventually flows into the San Luis Rey River and eventually discharges into the Pacific Ocean. Off -site storm water runoff flowing to the east and northeast eventually sheet flows into Little Gopher Canyon Creek, which then discharges into the San Luis Rey River and eventually discharges into the Pacific Ocean.

The land uses surrounding the project site primarily consist of single-family residential development on one-half acre and larger lot sizes, agricultural area to the north, and a few undeveloped parcels. Properties immediately adjacent to P21-0114 SR 2
02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 184 of 210

the project boundary include Bonsall Farms and a single-family residence to the north; three single-family residences to the east; eight single-family residences and a vacant parcel to the south of Vista Grande Drive; and a single-family residence and a vacant parcel to the west.

Background
On December 6, 2016, the Planning Commission approved Resolution Nos. 2016-18, 2016-19, and 2016-20 recommending City Council approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; that the City Council make application to the San Diego Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) for the Annexation; and recommending approval of a Tentative Subdivision Map and Zoning Change to A-1 Agricultural Zone for a 14-lot single family residential subdivision (Planning Case No. PC6- 061).

On January 10, 2017, the City Council approved Resolution Nos. 2017-11, 2017- 12, and 2017-13 which approved the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, application to LAFCO for the proposed annexation, and the Zone Change to A-1 Agricultural Zone in conjunction with the Tentative Subdivision Map for fourteen (14) one -acre single- family residential lots. The annexation was subsequently approved by LAFCO and the City's Zoning Map was amended to reflect the A-1 zoning. As of this date, a Final Map has not been recorded. Prior to the three-year expiration date of the Tentative Subdivision Map (January 10, 2020), the prior owner was granted a request for approval of a 5-year Extension of Time as allowed under the Subdivision Map Act. Therefore, the 14-lot Tentative Subdivision Map is active through January 10, 2025.

On January 12, 2021, the City Council discussed a preliminary request by the current owner to amend the General Plan land use designation from Rural Residential (RR — allows one dwelling unit per acre) to Low Density Residential (LD — allows two dwelling units per acre), and to correspondingly change the zoning from the A-1 Agricultural to E-1 Estate Residential to enable the development of 28 single-family residential lots at a minimum size of one-half acre. The Council provided input to the applicant and no vote was taken on the discussion item.

B. Protect Description
The project consists of a request for approval of a Tentative Subdivision Map to subdivide the 16.99-acre site described above into 28 single-family residential lots with a minimum size of one-half acre. The project includes a request for a General Plan Amendment from Rural Residential (RR) to Low Density Residential (LD) to allow for a density of two dwelling units per acre, and a corresponding Zone Change from A-1 Agricultural to E-1 Estates Residential Zone which requires a minimum lot size of one-half acre (minimum 21,780 square feet). As shown on the project plans (Exhibit 4), the proposed lot sizes range from 21,780 to 26,116 square feet, with an average lot size of 22,257 square feet. The applicant anticipates the single-family detached residences to be a mix between one-story and two-story homes ranging in size from approximately 3,200 to 4,200 square feet. The homes are anticipated to include three -car garages. Although architectural designs for the proposed homes are P21-0114 SR 3
02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 185 of 210

still under consideration by the applicant, the final designs are anticipated to draw from elements of the surrounding area to produce a design that will be consistent with the existing semi -rural environment.

Regarding access to the subdivision, the project traffic would utilize the public road route from Vista Grande Drive going west, then south to Warmlands Avenue, then west to E. Vista Way. A proposed private road improvement (Private Road "B") would loop from Vista Grande Drive north through the project site to provide access to the 21 interior lots as shown on Exhibit 4. This portion of the roadway would be 24 feet wide, providing two 12-foot-wide travel lanes.

Private Road "B" connects to Private Road "A" which is located on the western boundary of the site. The remaining 7 lots would take access from Vista Grande Drive along the southern boundary of the project site, which will be required to be improved as a condition of project approval. Emergency secondary access would be provided from the easterly Vista Grande Drive to Vista Grande Terrace.

This access would be gated and used for emergency secondary access/egress purposes only. The project would also provide a five-foot wide sidewalk along the northern side of Vista Grande Drive and within the internal tract on the eastern side of Private Street "A" and southern and western sides of Private Street "B." Three streetlights would be provided for traffic safety, one near the northeast corner of the intersection of Vista Grande Drive and Private Street "A", one near the southeast corner of the intersection of Private Street "A" and Private Street "B", and one near the southwest corner of the intersection of Private Street "B" and Vista Grande Drive.

New sewer main lines would be constructed within the proposed improvement of Vista Grande Drive. A new eight -inch gravity sewer main line would be connected to the existing eight -inch gravity sewer main line in Prince Way and extended through an existing easement up to Vista Grande Drive and then east to the project site. New sewer laterals would be extended from the new on -site mains and stubbed to each residence. The project would connect to two existing water service pipelines and meters on the project site that extend from the existing water main line in Vista Grande Drive. The project would install privately owned booster pumps with backflows for areas on the project site above 702 feet. New fire hydrants would also be installed on the project site. The Vista Fire Department would verify the final locations of all hydrants during review of the precise grading plans. In addition, the existing power poles would be removed, and the proposed project would underground the existing overhead utilities.

A total of 4.6 acres of landscaping is proposed. The overall landscape concept plan for the proposed project would consist of a variety of native and non-native evergreen and deciduous trees, shrubs, and ground cover that would be planted on site. Plant selection would be based on the Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance in Chapter 18.56 of the Vista Development Code. The proposed plant species would be drought tolerant and require low to moderate water use. The landscape areas include decomposed granite trails and park benches in three areas adjacent to Lots 1, 15, and 23 as shown in the Landscape Concept Plan included with Exhibit 4.

In regard to site drainage, the project would include six drainage basins on site.

Stormwater runoff would be conveyed over land and in proposed storm drains to P21-0114 SR 4
02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 186 of 210

four Modular Wetlands Systems and four proposed underground storage facilities within the six drainage basins to meet the requirements for storm -water management and pollutant control. A proposed storm drain and curb outlet would be constructed along Vista Grande Drive in the southwestern corner of the site.

Site development is anticipated to take approximately six months beginning in April 2022, with grading of the project site taking approximately 35 working days.

The project would require demolition of the existing residence on the property.

Development of the project would require approximately 70,000 cubic yards of earth movement on site, with an average depth of cut at 4.85 feet and an average depth of fill at 5.31 feet. The cut and fill on site is anticipated to be balanced with no import or export off site. Temporary and permanent erosion control measures are required for all cut and fill slopes. Planting and irrigation will be required following grading activity for all proposed slopes. On -site phases assumed include demolition and clearing, grading, wet utilities, fencing, dry utilities, concrete flatwork and paving, and parkway landscaping. Off -site construction phases assumed include demolition and clearing, grading, wet utilities, dry utilities, concrete flatwork and paving, and parkway landscaping.

The entire project will be developed at once, but the construction of the homes will be phased. Construction of the project would require compliance with the California Building Code and the City's permit application, plan check, and inspection process.

D. Zoning/Existing Land Use
Subject property:

Existing: A-1 Agricultural / One single-family residence with associated minor landscaping/agricultural activity; vacant land
Proposed: E-1 Estates Residential
Surrounding property:

North: A-70 (County) (Agriculture)/agriculture (Bonsall Farms) East: RR (County) (Residential) Zone/single-family residential units South: A-70 and RR (County), E-1 Estate Residential (City)/single-family residential units and vacant land
West: A-70 (County) (Agriculture)/single-family residential units and vacant land
E. General Plan Land Use Designation
Subject property:

Existing: RR (Rural Residential, 1 DU/acre)
Proposed: LD (Low Density Residential, 2 DU/acre)
Surrounding property:

North: County: SR-4 (Semi -Rural Residential, 1 DU/4, 8, 16 AC) City: RR (Rural Residential, 1 DU/acre)
East: County: SR-2 (Semi -Rural Residential, 1 DU/2, 4, 8 AC) City: RR (Rural Residential, 1 DU/acre)
South: County: SR-1 (Semi -Rural Residential, 1 DU/1, 2, 4 AC) & SR-2 City: LD (Low Density Residential) and RR
West: County: SR-2 (Semi -Rural Residential, 1 DU/2, 4, 8 AC) P21-0114 SR 5
02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 187 of 210

City: RR (Rural Residential, 1 DU/acre)
G. Environmental Review
A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was prepared for the proposed subdivision, which is included as Exhibit "A" to Exhibit 1. The mitigation requirements are summarized in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, included as Exhibit "B" to Exhibit 1. The public review period started on October 2, 2021, and ended on November 1, 2021, and 6 comment letters were received during this public review period. The comment letters and the Responses to Comments are included in the MND as Attachment K.

ANALYSIS
A. General Plan and Zoning Conformance
The current General Plan 2030 Update land use designation for the project site is Rural Residential (RR) and the current zoning designation is A-1 Agricultural Zone. The minimum lot size is one acre under the current land use and zoning designations. Given that the applicant is requesting approval to subdivide the approximately 17-acre project site into 28 single-family residential lots at a minimum size of one-half acre, the project includes the corresponding requests for a General Plan Amendment to Low Density Residential (LD) and a Zone Change to E-1 Estates Residential Zone to allow for the development of one-half acre lots. If the proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change are approved by the City Council, then the proposed 28-lot subdivision would be in conformance to the LD Land Use designation and the E-1 Zone.

The subsequent residential development would be subject to the development standards of the E-1 Zone which stipulate allowable land uses, maximum building height, required setbacks, and building site area, as well as other applicable sections of the City's Development Code. Individual building permits will be required for the construction of each residence, at which time the plans would be reviewed for compliance with the development standards summarized above.

A condition of approval within the attached resolution requires that the project provide parking in conformance with Section 18.54.050 in the City's Development Code. The project requires a minimum of two enclosed garage parking spaces per dwelling unit, and a minimum two and one-half open guest parking spaces per dwelling unit. Therefore, the minimum number of parking spaces required for the proposed 28 semi -rural residences is 56 garage parking spaces plus 70 open parking spaces, which totals 126 parking spaces. The project plans indicate that the development would provide a total of 196 parking spaces (7 per residence) that will be accommodated on the driveways required to serve each one-half acre property, in addition to the guest parking spaces located in front of the garages and the minimum two garage parking spaces. The homes will likely be designed with three -car garages. In no event shall less than 126 parking spaces be provided. The provision of parking as required by the Development Code will be verified by staff upon review of construction drawings for the development.

B. Subdivision Analysis
The proposed Tentative Subdivision Map would provide for the development of P21-0114 SR 6
02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 188 of 210

28 residential lots on 16.99 gross acres with a resulting density of 1.6 units per acre. Therefore, if the proposed General Plan Amendment from Rural Residential (RR) to Low Density Residential (LD) is approved by the City Council, the subdivision will be consistent with the Land Use and Community Identity Element of the General Plan.

The project is designed for consistency with the E-1 Zone development standards. The proposed lot sizes range from 21,780 to 26,116 square feet, and all 28 lots are a minimum of one-half acre in size. Therefore, upon approval of the proposed zone change, the project would comply with the required minimum lot size. Additionally, the proposed subdivision must comply with Section

17.16.010 of the City's Development Code which regulates the design of subdivisions including minimum requirements for lot areas, frontage, lot depth and width, and access to public utilities. The project has been reviewed for conformance with the requirements of Section 17.16.010, and the subdivision as designed will allow for the construction of single-family detached residences in compliance with applicable Development Code requirements.

C. Land Use Compatibility
Existing land use and zoning designations to the south and southwest of the project site are similar to the proposed designations of the project. County properties adjacent to the project consist of agricultural and residential land uses.

As detailed in the Initial Study prepared for the project, the proposed development would alter but not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the project site or surroundings. The visual character of the surrounding area is a mixture of large -lot and estate residential, commercial, and agriculture uses. The project would enhance the visual quality of the project site by introducing an aesthetically cohesive development with associated landscaping on a currently underutilized piece of land.

The architectural characteristics of the proposed residences would draw from elements of the surrounding area to maintain consistency with the existing semi - rural environment. The overall landscape concept plan for the proposed project would consist of a variety of native and non-native evergreen and deciduous trees, shrubs, and ground cover that would be planted on site. In addition, existing aboveground utility power poles on the project site would be undergrounded, further enhancing the visual aesthetic of the property. The proposed development would be consistent with nearby residential land uses with compatible lot sizes, maximum building heights, architectural design features, and landscaping. Therefore, with compliance to the applicable development standards of the Zoning Ordinance, the project will be compatible with surrounding land uses.

D. Public Service Availability
The Fire Department is presently servicing the project area and fire protection services would be available from Fire Station No. 3 located at 1070 Old Taylor Street, less than one mile to the south. The provision of utilities for the proposed project, such as sewer, water, electricity, etc., would be available either from existing utilities on -site, within or adjacent to Vista Grande Drive, or through nearby easements. A proposed new sewer main would be connected to an existing off -site sewer main located in Prince Way via a City -owned easement.

P21-0114 SR 7
02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 189 of 210

New sewer laterals would be extended from sewer mains located in the roadways. New one -inch water service lines and meters would be extended into each lot from the existing water main line in Vista Grande Drive. Gas and electrical service would be available and provided by the San Diego Gas & Electric Company (SDG&E) and telephone service will be provided by AT&T.

E. Traffic Impacts
A Local Transportation Assessment (LTA) was prepared to identify and disclose any potential circulation effects to local intersections and roadway segments associated with the development of the proposed project. The proposed project is forecast to generate approximately 280 trips per day at full buildout (i.e., when all 28 homes are built), which includes approximately 22 a.m. peak hour trips and approximately 28 p.m. peak hour trips. Based on the results of this LTA, the proposed project can be implemented without impacting the operations of the surrounding roadway system. An evaluation of Level of Service (LOS) shows that the addition of the project traffic to the existing traffic volumes would not significantly impact the study area intersections or roadways, according to the City's and County's performance criteria. A Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) analysis was not required for this project. That analysis is necessary if: (1) a project that is consistent with the General Plan results in equal to or greater than 1,000 Average Daily Traffic (ADT); or (2) a project that is inconsistent with the General Plan would result in 500 or more ADT.

In consideration of the proposed development utilizing the existing roadway infrastructure and in order for the project to provide a benefit to the existing community, the applicant met with the City's Engineering staff and proposes traffic and roadway improvements that would increase safety and decrease potential traffic hazards. As a result, the project has also been conditioned to provide improvements to the intersection of Warmlands Avenue at E. Vista Way which include the widening of E. Vista Way at the southeast corner of the intersection, with work to include a new curb, gutter, sidewalk, street -light, and relocation of a traffic signal. Other improvements at this intersection will consist of new curb ramps, pedestrian push button crossings, and associated striping and crosswalks as further detailed in the project conditions. The project will also require the installation of curve warning signs and 15 MPH" advisory speed placards in each direction for the street curve just west of the project site. These traffic and roadway improvements ensure that the proposed project would successfully integrate within the existing neighborhood, and that significant impacts would not occur with project development.

F. Public Policy Consideration and Required Approvals
General Plan Conformance: The site is currently designated Rural Residential (RR) in the Vista General Plan 2030 Update, which allows for a maximum density of one dwelling unit per acre. The project proposes to change the General Plan land use designation to Low Density Residential (LD) which would allow up to two dwelling units per acre, with a corresponding Zone Change from A-1 Agricultural to the E-1 Estates Residential Zone in order to maintain consistency with the General Plan.

Table LU-1 in the project's Mitigated Negative Declaration (Exhibit A in Exhibit 1) details the various policies of the General Plan's Land Use and Community P21-0114 SR 8
02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 190 of 210

Identity Element that the project would be consistent with, which include:
• Policy 1.6 which encourages the undergrounding of utilities: The project conditions of approval require all existing overhead utility lines and new extension services for the development of the project be placed underground per code requirements and current City policy as required by the City Engineer.

Policy 2.1 which encourages land uses and intensities that would maintain the existing residential character of Vista characterized by large -lot single- family residential development: The project proposes a semi -rural development of 28 one-half acre lots that will be compatible with the semi - rural surrounding areas which include larger lot sizes, as the proposed lots are consistent in size with nearby one-half acre properties located to the south within the County of San Diego and to the southwest within the City of Vista.
• Policy 2.10 which discourages development on skyline ridges visible from scenic roadways and gateway corridors. Skyline ridges are those which define the horizon. As stated in the MND, the subject site is not defined as a skyline ridge.

Policy 2.11, to preserve immediate ridges and hilltops in a natural state to the maximum extent possible. The proposed development would not obstruct the view of a prominent ridge as viewed from a gateway corridor. The anticipated one-story and two-story dwelling units may provide minor obstructions of views of the San Marcos Mountains depending on the vantage point of the viewer. However, the proposed project would be developed at a scale that would not adversely affect scenic views or vistas from the surrounding area.

Policy 3.1 which requires new development to be designed to minimize impacts on adjoining residential neighborhoods: The proposed project would improve the existing easterly Vista Grande Drive along the southern boundary of the project site. The newly constructed road would loop north to provide access to the new interior lots and would exit to the west to the easement road on the western side of the project site. In addition, a variety of native and non-native evergreen and deciduous trees would be planted along Vista Grande Drive.
• Policy 9.1 to provide land use designations that support semi -rural, suburban, and urban housing options: The proposed development would be consistent with nearby estate residential land uses with the incorporation of similar lot sizes, anticipated dwelling unit square footage, building heights, architectural design features, and landscaping.

Additional details regarding the project's consistency with the General Plan's Land Use and Community Identity Element, as well as the Circulation Element and the Resource Conservation and Sustainability Element, are discussed in Table LU-1 in the project's Mitigated Negative Declaration. The required approvals for the project are:

P21-0114 SR 9
02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 191 of 210

General Plan Amendment: A request for a General Plan Amendment is subject to City Council consideration in accordance with Chapter 18.48 of the Vista Development Code. The project area is currently designated Rural Residential (RR) in the Vista General Plan, and the applicant requests to change the land use designation to Low Density Residential (LD) as shown in Exhibit A to Exhibit

2. Zoning Change: Pursuant to Chapter 18.04 of the Vista Development Code, this application is required to change the existing zoning on the subject property from the A-1 Agricultural Zone to the E-1 Estates Residential Zone to maintain consistency with the requested General Plan Amendment described above and to accommodate the proposed 28-lot subdivision to allow for lots with a minimum size of one-half acre.

Tentative Subdivision Map: Per Chapter 17.12 in the Vista Development Code, this map is required for the division and development of 28 proposed single- family lots and associated private roads on the subject property.

General Plan Amendment and Zone Change requests are at the discretion of the City Council, with formal recommendation required by Planning Commission.

Since the project also involves the request for approval of a Tentative Subdivision Map, the City Council will review and consider all three required actions concurrently.

Following approval of a Tentative Subdivision Map, the developer has a period of three years to process a Final Map, otherwise the Tentative Subdivision Map lapses. The Final Map can be approved by the City Council when a licensed engineer submits a map which substantially complies with the Tentative Subdivision Map and satisfies the applicable conditions, including the completion of street and other public improvements or the provision of bonds guaranteeing the construction of those improvements, typically within one year. Upon recordation of the Final Map, legal lots are created and building permit applications may be submitted for single-family residences and associated land uses permitted by Development Code.

III. REQUIRED FINDINGS:

The draft findings for approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration, General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and Tentative Subdivision Map are included in the attached Resolutions (Exhibits 1 and 2).

IV. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

The project, as proposed, will comply with the requirements of the City's Development Code for a subdivision in the E-1 Estates Residential Zone and the allowable density and policies discussed above in this report for the General Plan designation of Low Density Residential (LD). Therefore, staff recommends approval of the General Plan Amendment from RR to LD, the Zone Change from A-1 to E-1, and the Tentative Subdivision Map for the development of 28 single-family residential lots at a minimum size of one-half acre.

P21-0114 SR 10
02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 192 of 210

Respectfully submitted,
% 0
C�
Chris Winters "�
Associate Planner
EXHIBITS:

1. Resolution 2021- , recommending City Council approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and Tentative Subdivision Map for a 28-lot single-family residential subdivision located at 2277 Vista Grande Drive (APNs 171-100-05 and 171- 100-28) with Exhibits "A" (MND) and "B" (MMRP)

2. Resolution 2021- , recommending City Council approval of a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and Tentative Subdivision Map for a 28-lot single-family residential subdivision located at 2277 Vista Grande Drive (APNs 171-100-05 and 171-100-28) with Exhibits "A" (General Plan Amendment), "B" (Zone Change), "C" (Conditions of Approval) and "D" (Tentative Subdivision Map)

3. Location Map

4. Tentative Subdivision Map — full size (limited distribution) P21-0114 SR 11
02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 193 of 210

COMMISSIONERS
Chair Rick Rosaler, Vice Chair Charles Grimm,
John Aguilera, Garry Garretson, Beth Hastings,
Don Looney, John Savage

STUDENT COMMISSIONERS
Kassani Rio Herrera, Peter Childs

PLANNING COMMISSION

REGULAR MEETING
December 7, 2021

MINUTES
The December 7, 2021, Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order by Chair Rosaler at 6:00 pm.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Led by Cmnr. Savage
COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT:

Chmn. Rick Rosaler, Vice Chair Grimm, John Aguilera, Garry Garretson, Beth Hastings, Don Looney, John Savage
COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT:

None
STAFF PRESENT:

Director of Community Development & Engineering John Conley Deputy Director of Community Development/City Planner Patsy Chow Principal Planner Michael Ressler
Associate Planner Chris Winters
Assistant City Attorney Walter Chung
Administrative Secretary Joanne Principe
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:

Deputy Director of Community Development/City Planner Patsy Chow stated that there are no changes to the agenda.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES:

Vice Chmn. Grimm moved to approve minutes of October 19, 2021. Seconded by Cmnr. Garretson
MOTION TO APPROVE CARRIED: Vote: 5-0-2 (abstention: Cmnrs. Aguilera and Savage)
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS:

None
02/22/2022 200 Civic Center Drive Vista, CA 92O84 1 760-726-134U cityoivista.eom Page 194 of 210

Planning Commission - Minutes
December 7, 2021

PUBLIC HEARING ITEM:

PH1. P21-0114: Vista Grande Subdivision — Gregory Perrine, Murow Development Consultants
The project applicant, Gregory Perrine, is requesting approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration, General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and Tentative Subdivision Map for a 28-Lot single family residential subdivision at 2277 Vista Grande Drive (APNs 171-100-05 and 171-100-28).

Associate Planner, Chris Winters, provided the staff presentation.

Applicant, Gregory Perrine, provided presentation and was available for questions.

Planning Commission discussed the following issues:
• Is applicant willing to accept additional condition commitment to 1-story houses only? Applicant response: yes.
• Parking space(s) discussion.
• Garage used for storage concern instead of parking
• Common spaces/open spaces (easements on individual lots), decomposed granite walkways, landscape plan -each individual owner develops own landscaping • Are there sidewalks on Vista Grande Drive? Applicant response: yes, on one side of the street.
• 20% of neighbors zoned 1-acre lots. Concerned that size of lot is not a fit for this area
• What latitude will HOA have regarding vegetation and plants? Can this be made a condition of approval and part of CC&Rs
• Public street versus private street. Street maintenance agreement • East Vista Way improvements
Chair Rosaler opened the public hearing.

SPEAKERS:
• Bob Garrison, partner with Gregory Perrine. Discussed fire hydrants, secondary emergency fire apparatus, and traffic.
• Ursula Sack (spoke on behalf of the following: Milton R. Kreml, Alisa Willens- Davis and Paul Colby) — in opposition. Discussion items listed below. o Vista General Plan
o Housing Element
o Preservation of agricultural heritage and semi -rural development pattern o Land Use and Community Identity (LUCI) Element
o Development of hillsides
o Vista Grande Terrace private road on County land maintained by a small group of homeowners who hold easement rights
• Hayden Davis — in opposition. Discussed LUCI and land use • Chip Hasley — in favor.
02/22/2022 PH1 Page 195 of 210

Planning Commission - Minutes
December 7, 2021

• Mariko Gifford — in opposition. Discussed CO2 absorption, oak trees, microclimate, and carbon farming
• David Thor — in favor. Discussed septic system and sewer hook-up • Michael Memory — in opposition. Discussed traffic and safety concerns (UPS/Amazon deliveries)
• Mickey Sanders — in opposition. Discussed traffic, sewer line, sewer hook-up cost, and annexation
Chair Rosaler closed the public hearing.

Planning Commission comments:
• County property — connection to sewer - annexation
• Type of livestock allowed on 0.5 plus acre lot
• SB9 clarification
• Reduction in number of lots — pedestrian gates
Applicant, Gregory Perrine, responded to comments and clarified information.

Bob Garrison thanks members of Commission and audience for their comments and participation in this process.

MOTION BY VICE CHMN. GRIMM TO CONTINUE ITEM TO DATE UNCERTAIN TO

ALLOW APPLICANT TO WORK WITH CITY STAFF TO ADDRESS COMMENTS THAT COMMISSION MADE AT THE PUBLIC HEARING.

SECONDED BY CMNR. AGUILERA.

MOTION TO APPROVE CONTINUANCE CARRIED: Vote 7-0

STUDENT COMMISSIONER COMMENTS
• Peter Childs — density comments
• Kassani Rio Herrera — affordable housing comments

REPORTS/COMMENTS FROM COMMISSION MEMBERS
• Update on hotel and storage unit projects
John Conley - Still waiting on Marriott Hotel
Commercial Laundry (next to proposed site for hotel) going in instead of storage unit project
Director - John Conley
• No meeting on December 21, 2021 or January 4, 2022
• Next meeting will be January 18, 2022
• We have a City Council meeting on December 14, 2021 to revisit S. Melrose Drive and Matagual Drive
• Code updates — staff working on new standards for SB9, Density bonus, ADUs, Objective Design Standards, and small lot development
02/22/2022 PH1 Page 196 of 210

Planning Commission - Minutes
December 7, 2021

• General Plan updates
• Five Guys hamburger restaurant has closed
• Handel's Homemade Ice Cream to open February/March
ADJOURNMENT:

Chair Rosaler adjourned the meeting at 8:16 PM.

SECRETARY
U
02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 197 of 210

IS

CITY OF VISTA

C A L I F U R N I A
Community Development
Interoffice Memorandum -
Date: January 18, 2022
To: Planning Commission
From: Chris Winters, Associate Planner
Subject: P21-0114, Vista Grande Subdivision
CC: John Conley, Director of Community Development and Engineering Patsy Chow, Deputy Director of Community Development/City Planner Michael Ressler, Principal Planner
Amanda Guy, Deputy City Attorney
On December 7, 2021, the Planning Commission opened a public hearing regarding the request for approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration, General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and Tentative Subdivision Map for the development of 28 one -half -acre residential lots and associated improvements on a 17-acre parcel located at 2277 Vista Grande Drive (APNs 171-100-05 and 171-100-28). The proposed General Plan Amendment will change the land use designation from Rural Residential (RR — allows one dwelling unit per acre) to Low Density Residential (LD — allows two dwelling units per acre). The proposed zone change from the A-1 Agricultural to E-1 Estate Residential will enable the development of single-family residential lots at a minimum size of one-half acre.

During the public hearing, the Planning Commission discussed the following items: the compatibility of the proposed lot sizes as compared to the lot sizes within the surrounding areas; the lack of on street parking stalls; if the applicant would commit to only construct one-story houses; confirmation that the road connection from the eastern end of Vista Grande Drive to Vista Grande Terrace would be gated for emergency access only; and landscape maintenance. The Planning Commission voted to continue the item to an undetermined date.

In response to the Planning Commission's concerns, the applicant has redesigned the subdivision map to reduce the number of lots from 28 to 25 lots, enlarged the lot area of lots 6 through 11, and included 16 parking stalls adjacent to the private roads. Lots 6 through 11 now range in size from 33,016 to 35,682 square feet (average size 33,644), resulting in 3/4-acre lots intended to provide a better transition and compatibility with the larger lots located north and east of the project site. The 16 street -side parking stalls are distributed along the project's private roads with four stalls on the north side of Vista Grande Drive adjacent to Lots 15 and 17, three stalls adjacent Lot 11, three stalls adjacent to Lot 7, and six stalls adjacent to Lot 4.

EXHIBIT 5
02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 198 of 210

Planning Commission
January 18, 2022

The project's Conditions of Approval are revised to include the following conditions as discussed by the Commission and as recommended by staff:

1. The road connection from the eastern end of Vista Grande Drive to Vista Grande Terrace will be gated for emergency access only, and a corresponding note shall be shown on the Final Map.

2. The Homeowner's Association (HOA) shall be required to maintenance the landscaped slope areas at the rear of Lots 4 through 12, including the slope area on the south side of Lot 4 adjacent to Private Street B. An access easement shall be provided for the HOA maintenance of these areas, and the maintenance shall be included in the project's Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions. The access easement shall be shown on the Final Map to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.

No fencing or walls shall be allowed or constructed within the common landscaped slope areas located beyond the edge (top or toe of slope of rear yard, as applicable) of the individual lots/graded pad areas unless prior approval is granted by the City Planner.

3. Fire lane designations shall be required for all fire access roadways as determined by the Fire Department. Minimum unobstructed paved width is 24 feet. All interior roadways are designated "fire access roadways" or "fire lanes". Parking is not allowed and shall be marked "No Parking" for the purpose of unobstructed access for emergency vehicles. Roadway shall be marked per CFC Sec. 901.4 and CVC Sec. 22500.1. Posted signs which state "FIRE LANE, NO PARKING" shall be installed or curbs painted red and stenciled with white letters stating "No Parking Fire Lane" on the face with 4" minimum white stenciled blocked letters and on top of any curb as directed by the Fire Department. All Fire Lanes shall be marked and identified prior to Certificate of Occupancy. Parking shall be prohibited upon interior roadways.

Attachments:

1. Staff Report dated December 7, 2021

2. Resolution for the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, with Exhibits "A" and "B"

3. Resolution for the Tentative Subdivision Map, with Exhibits "A" through "Y

4. Location Map

5. Large scale plans - limited distribution
02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 199 of 210

COMMISSIONERS
Chair Rick Rosaler, Vice Chair Charles Grimm,
John Aguilera, Garry Garretson, Beth Hastings,
Don Looney, John Savage

STUDENT COMMISSIONERS
Kassani Rio Herrera, Peter Childs

PLANNING COMMISSION

REGULAR MEETING
January 18, 2022

MINUTES
The January 18, 2022, Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order by Chair Rosaler at 6:02 pm.

COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT:

Chmn. Rick Rosaler, Vice Chair Charles Grimm, John Aguilera, Garry Garretson, Beth Hastings, Don Looney, John Savage
Student Commissioners: Kassani Rio Herrera and Peter Childs logged into meeting late COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT:

None
STAFF PRESENT:

Director of Community Development & Engineering John Conley Deputy Director of Community Development/City Planner Patsy Chow Principal Planner Michael Ressler
Associate Planner Chris Winters
Deputy City Attorney Amanda Guy
Administrative Secretary Joanne Principe
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:

Deputy Director of Community Development/City Planner Patsy Chow stated that there are no changes to the agenda.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES:

Cmnr. Looney moved to approve minutes of December 7, 2021. Seconded by Cmnr. Garretson.

MOTION TO APPROVE CARRIED: Vote: 7-0
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS:

None
02/22/2022 200 Civic Center Drive Vista, CA 92084 1 760-726-1340 cityotvista.cem Page 200 of 210

Planning Commission - Minutes
January 18, 2022

PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS:

PH1. P21-0114: Vista Grande Subdivision — Gregory Perrine, Murow Development Consultants (Continued from December 7, 2021, Planning Commission Meeting) The project applicant, Gregory Perrine, is requesting approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration, General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and Tentative Subdivision Map for a 25-Lot single family residential subdivision at 2277 Vista Grande Drive (APNs 171-100-05 and 171-100-28).

Associate Planner, Chris Winters, provided the staff presentation.

Applicant, Gregory Perrine, provided presentation including detailed responses to Commission's comments from December 7, 2021 meeting.

Planning Commission discussed the following issues:
• Open space 4,800 square feet - lower southeast area by Lot 12 • Landscape mix — 5-gallon,15-gallon, 24-inch boxed trees • Slope areas HOA maintained — further restrictions in CC&Rs • Sidewalks/walkways Vista Grande interior loop - no sidewalk on south but sidewalk on north
• Proposal of 2-Story homes on certain lots decided by developer • Background as to basis of City Council approval for the 14-lots proposed in 2017 — what prompted the 14-lots?
Prior applicant proposal of 1-acre lots based on existing General Plan Designation within the City's sphere of influence and rural residential which allows for the one unit per acre density. In conjunction with that they applied for the corresponding zone change of A-1.
• Change proposed from 14-lots to 25-lots
• Vista Grande Drive -public street versus private street City Engineer prefers it to remain as a private road. New developments - developers are encouraged to establish streets as private to reduce burden on city's budget for street maintenance.
• Slopes on various lots to become common open space in which HOA would maintain
• Street parking — long walk to park on street
• Parcels somewhat higher than street elevation
• Steep driveways
• Fire zone — Fire Department requirements
• Lot 23 very narrow for single story home
• Designate specific lots that would remain 1-story — 4-10, 22,24, and 25 • Grading elevations
• Tentative map
Chair Rosaler opened the public hearing.
02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 201 of 210

Planning Commission - Minutes
January 18, 2022

SPEAKERS:
• Michelle and Dan Webster — explain why all traffic from this project goes out Vista Grande Drive and not Vista Grande Terrace. Traffic should flow in both directions.

The reason all traffic goes out Vista Grande Drive is that it is a public street. City maintains. Vista Grande Terrace is a private street. Easement holders have rights to Vista Grande Terrace but not open to the public. • Alisa Willens-Davis — overarching concerns have not been adequately addressed by applicant.
0 Wildfire
0 Open space and greenbelt
0 Increased traffic density
0 Maintaining existing residential character — semi -rural 0 Homeowners insurance - high fire hazard
0 S.D. County Department of Environmental Health and Quality, Land and Water Quality Division, Colleen Hines, had concerns: The potential risk to groundwater related to the abandonment of the existing on -site wastewater treatment systems
0 Potential for site grading to reduce the area available for the wastewater treatment system dispersal fields on contiguous private lots outside the projected area. This could compromise the ability to confine sewage below ground resulting in "daylighting" sewage that would pose a public health threat.
0 Applicant's engineer felt the issue was adequately addressed.

Chair Rosaler: How do we obtain environmental consultants used on this project? John Conley: The consultants used were on call for the city — third -party consultants.

Chair Rosaler: What do we know about the County's comment on the daylighting of sewer on adjacent properties?
Chris Winters: The project engineer, PLSA, confirmed that the grading plans considered the existing leach lines that occur along the eastern boundary of the project. The cut slope along the tract boundary accounts for the required codes and regulations for a 5:1 setback for cut grading adjacent to an existing leach line system from an adjacent property owner. The project has been designed to comply with required setbacks for dispersal fields.
• Ursula Sack and Joe Kreml — the updated plan for the Vista Grande Drive property has been submitted with minimal changes that do not adequately incorporate the suggestions made at the December meeting.
0 Size of lots
0 70,000 cubic of earth must be moved
0 Vague promises of 1-2 story homes
0 Open space
0 The General plan wisely designates all SOI land as Rural Residential —one acre lot sizes —to be "consistent with the County, to protect the rural nature of the outlying areas." The General Plan alone contains the City policies 02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 202 of 210

Planning Commission - Minutes
January 18, 2022

that address this question —there are no other policies, ordinances, or documents. Therefore, if this higher density rezone exists as precedent, it is inevitable that the landowners of every subsequent annexation will request, and expect to receive, the same (or an even higher density) rezoning.

We ask that you thoroughly discuss the General Plan Amendment at this meeting.

Haydn Davis — could not be heard, audio issues at speaker's end Staff and Commission received speaker's correspondence.

Chair Rosaler closed the public hearing.

Planning Commission comments:
• Decrease in units — increase in lot size — condition 16 parking spots in CC&R maintained solely for use of guests/not residents
• Happy with adjustments made — street improvements will improve the area quite a bit — drainage improvements — underground utilities — turn lane • Compatibility with neighboring properties
• General Plan discussion
• Identify lots 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 22, 24, and 25 for single story homes. • Infrastructure improvements vital to area.
• Walking trail through property and security issues
MOTION BY CMNR. AGUILERA TO ADOPT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTIONS WITH ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. SECONDED BY CMNR. SAVAGE.

Adopted Resolution 2022-01, recommending City Council approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and a Tentative Subdivision Map for a 25-lot single-family residential subdivision located at 2277 Vista Grande Drive (APNs 171-100-05 and 171-100-28)

2. Adopted Resolution 2022-02, recommending City Council approval of a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and Tentative Subdivision Map for a 25-lot single-family residential subdivision located at 2277 Vista Grande Drive (APNs 171-100-05 and 171-100-28)
Conditions added by the Planning Commission on January 18, 2022:

6. Miscellaneous (d)
The road connection from the eastern end of Vista Grande Drive to Vista Grande Terrace wiH shall be gated to provide for secondary fire apparatus ere eras access only, and a corresponding note shall be shown on the Final Map.

2. Fire Access Roads
if a qate4s The gated secondary emergency (fire apparatus) access to be installed on the access roadway between Vista Grande Drive and Vista Grande 02/22/2022 PH1 Page 203 of 210

Planning Commission - Minutes
January 18, 2022

Terrace -,A shall be a simple pole gate design with a Knox padlock.

28. The proiect's construction traffic is prohibited from using Vista Grande Terrace, and at no time shall construction or grading activities block access to Vista Grande Terrace or its easement holders.

29. Vehicular access shall be provided for the residents (homes) that take access on Vista Grande Drive at all times during construction.

30. The homes to be built on Lots 4 through 10, 22, 24 and 25 shall be single -
story only.

31. The 16 street -side parking stalls shall be reserved for "quest only." This restriction shall be noted on the Final Map and included in the project CCRs.

32. The street -side parking areas shall be designed with a curve at both ends (the entrance and the exit) to allow for easier vehicle access.

MOTION TO APPROVE CARRIED: Vote 5-2 (Garretson, Looney voted "No" for following reasons)
Cmnr. Garretson: Opposed project. 157-190 shows that almost 80% of the surrounding area is rural residential. By taking that one section and making it a little larger doesn't change the other % of the percent. Out of character — not compatible with the surrounding areas.

Cmnr. Looney: Disappointed with resubmittal — better job needed with site design — steep slopes not compatible with existing terrain. Reduce number of lots and reduce some of the steep slopes. Cannot support project the way it is.

PH 2. P19-0404 — North Santa Fe Plaza Aaartments — Amer Maraieh The project applicant, Amer Margieh, is requesting approval of a Site Development Plan to construct 21 apartment units and a 746 square foot coffee shop on a vacant .64-acre site located at 1558 N. Santa Fe Avenue (APNs 161-051-06, 21, & 26). The project proposes a four-story apartment building consisting of three residential floors above a ground floor parking garage, a one-story coffee shop building, open space amenities, parking, and associated site improvements. This project is exempt from environmental review in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 — In -Fill Development Projects.

Principal Planner, Michael Ressler, provided the staff presentation.

Applicant, Tony Khalil, provided presentation and was available for questions.

Planning Commission discussed the following issues:
• Coffee shop — has a lease agreement been approved yet? not yet according to applicant.
• 746 sq. ft. for any retail commercial use
02/22/2022 PH1 Page 204 of 210

Planning Commission - Minutes
January 18, 2022

• Build kitchen — will it have a grease interceptor and venting? Essential to have commercial as food preparation capable
• Improvements on Champa Lane — widening — underground improvements • North side fagade — tower in back — are those windows? Recessions — elevation break
• Project has come a long way — looks a lot better
• Great improvements — buildings developed simultaneously • On -site manager — state housing law requires when you have more than 17 units • Number of parking spaces
• Courtyard well designed
• Deck areas/private patios/balconies 5 x 6
• Floor plans D, E, and F forced air unit accessible from hallway and not from inside the unit
Peter Chou — Hard to find location to access from the interior. Only resident will have key and access to door housing the unit.

Chair Rosaler opened the public hearing.

SPEAKERS:
• None
Chair Rosaler closed the public hearing.

Planning Commission comments:
• Great job — parking concern addressed
• Like what they've done to revitalize the area
• In favor of project
• Great improvement
• Affordable housing/parking spaces/number of cars tenants operate • Good access for citizens
MOTION BY VICE CHAIR GRIMM TO ADOPT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION.

SECONDED BY CMNR. GARRETSON.

1. Adopted Resolution 2022-03, approving a Site Development Plan to construct 21 apartment units and a 746 square foot coffee shop on a vacant .64-acre site located at 1558 N. Santa Fe Avenue (APN 161-051-06, 21, and 26)
MOTION TO APPROVE CARRIED: Vote 7-0
PH 3. P21-0401 — Amendments to Vista Development Code Chapter 18.52, Signs on Private Property — City of Vista
Amendments to Chapter 18.52 of the Vista Development Code, Signs on Private Property, to clarify rules regulating the number and size allowed for temporary election signs and residential signs. This project is exempt from environmental review under the Business and Professions Code Section 26055(h).
02/22/2022 PH1 Page 205 of 210

Planning Commission - Minutes
January 18, 2022

Director of Community Development & Engineering John Conley, provided the staff presentation.

Planning Commission discussed the following issues:
• Limit signs to 80 sq. ft.
• Protects free speech
• Seems like a lot of signage — could create some clutter Chair Rosaler opened the public hearing.

SPEAKERS:
• None
Chair Rosaler closed the public hearing.

Planning Commission comments:
• No signs in public right-of-way
MOTION BY CMNR. GARRETSON TO ADOPT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION.

SECONDED BY CMNR. AGUILERA.

1. Adopted Resolution 2022-04, recommending City Council approval of ordinance amending section 18.52.060A of the Vista Development Code relating to residential and temporary election signs MOTION TO APPROVE CARRIED: Vote 7-0
Director - John Conley
• Next meeting February 1 — one item on agenda — virtual meeting — same format • City Council, Tuesday, January 25: Homeless Master Plan Proposed General Plan Amendment
Sunset Drive

REPORTS/COMMENTS FROM COMMISSION MEMBERS
• 607 Civic Center — ADU with garage
• Another project approved down the hill from 607 Civic Center • McDonald's with new drive thru — taking longer than anticipated • Church purchased Walgreens's building — no formal application submittal yet • South Santa Fe — property owner requesting modifications to the landscape plan - final inspection once building is built as per plan
• Walgreens/Pala Mesa traffic circle — we have right-of-way — executed contract with PAL construction
• Pala Vista Park manpower issues with contractor — problems with SDG&E with undergrounding and energizing the underground utilities — see activity back out there with the contractor mid -February
ADJOURNMENT:
02/22/2022 PH1 Page 206 of 210

Planning Commission - Minutes
January 18, 2022

Chair Rosaler adjourned the meeting at 9:02 PM.

SECRE Y
rA
02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 207 of 210

ill
I
Location Map
SITE
-VISTA GRANDE DR
.�<*
4r
` _�
W
LU
ii%C,
y F Y i f w I t

WARMI ANDE
i, IKT_ f
IL
�I4
EXHIBIT 6
02/22/2022 PH 1

Exhibit 7
Large Scale Plans
(Limited Distribution)
EXHIBIT 7
02/22/2022 PH1 Page 209 of 210

From: Judy Ritter
To: Kathy Valdez
Subject: Fwd: Vista Grande Drive Housing Project
Date: Saturday, February 12, 2022 2:39:51 PM
To include with Agenda packet
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:

From: Sue
Date: February 12, 2022 at 7:24:05 AM PST
To: Judy Ritter
Subject: Vista Grande Drive Housing Project
My husband and I have written to the City of Vista about our concerns with the 25 houses being built on Vista Grande Drive.

While we are not opposed to the project, we are very concerned about the developer putting in a gate that would allow residents of these new homes to use our private street in case there's a fire.

There will be an exit on the other side of the property, and we are scared we will be trapped since we live at the end of Vista Grande Terrace. Our private street cannot accommodate so many cars. I have written previously to the City.

Could you please include this email in the City Council agenda for the February 22, 2022 meeting. We feel this is a legitimate concern especially since there is an alternative for the new residents to exit on the other side of the development which is closer to E. Vista Way. My husband is a retired Fire Captain with Los Angeles County Fire Department after 38 years of service.

Sue Carnall
@ Vista Grande Terrace
Vista, CA 92084
EXHIBIT 8
02/22/2022 PH 1 Page 210 of 210

ADD TO PACKET
From:

To: Public Comments
Subject: 11REVISEDII comments for P21-0114 Vista Grande Subdivision Date: Thursday, February 17, 2022 7:49:25 AM
Grammar revisions from the first email. Please share this version with the Council. Thank you!
Please share this information with appropriate people before the February 22, 2022, City Council meeting.

I'd appreciate this also going to John Conley, Community Development Director.

Please consider the following:

1. The before and after photos of Attachment A are a Google Earth photo with the proposed subdivision plat added from a
georeferenced GIS layer. The photo shows the changing
topography and how the new Vista Grande Drive south bound traffic will be looking directly into our front yard. It also shows how the homes on pads 11, 12, 13 and 23 will also have a direct view into our front yard. My wife and I are asking:
a. That large, mature trees be planted along our fence/property boundary so that we can maintain our privacy. The after picture shows the impact mature trees will have on
maintaining our privacy.
b. In conversations with Bob Garrison, of the development team, he supports this concept, so we are asking the City Council to make this a requirement of the final development plan.
c. We request that the number and type of trees needed be determined as the planting process is started.
d. As our property fence is right on the boundary with the proposed subdivision, we are asking for help to make sure there is plenty of room between the property lines for the five- foot square hole that mature trees require when they are transplanted.
e. We are asking that the new homes near us be oriented such that their largest windows do not face our front yard.

2. Attachment B before and after photos show the actual view from the new road location and what the benefits would be after planting the new line of trees. Again, we ask that the planting of PH1

these trees be made a requirement of the final development plan.

3. Attachment C is a Google Earth photo showing the existing fire danger to the development and its neighbors. I understand the fire danger isn't on City property, but it does fall within the City's protection zone or coverage area. We are asking that the Vista Fire Department work with the landowners and the appropriate other fire agencies to make sure the thick brush be thinned or removed further away from the new homes and the brush closest to the project boundary be removed completely.

4. Finally, we would like to know what will happen with the water collected in the holding tank in Pad D/Lot D. After a severe rainstorm, when a large volume of water is collected, where will the water go after the storm? Is the plan that the water sits in the holding tank and evaporate? What is the plan for dealing with mosquitos coming from the standing water in the holding tank? Thanks for the opportunity to share our concerns.

Al and Paula Colby

W �
Ail
y .r

lob
1 I IL
4L
�_.
1 r �•
0 1 arn.*. LAL
- r
Trees added along Colby residence fence boundary to
provide privacy frarn Gin coming traffic along the new
+ development Visla Grande Drive and the close b
homes on pads 11. 12. 13 and 23.
_ A
i 1 6
_ - AN6
AAL-
r 1 L
k Fu�
1 NL kk •� -
L
r•
+ 1 Lab
-
J i
rep
{ _7

i�
r
I.T .Pit
31��.14:�Sx�_?..��i.ki�.3i.�i•�{'.i{i': •.��.r...�-i.:�;.:�t {}..Ir` 4�
yQems! 1y n x!'r
•� r�,+�: r i�'.-.:�':ki T�,:i r'�1r� �t �;7�t-0�y,_,r'�f�4�,:'1:4� .-� 'r'� ��r'-'-• k ,w - ,•l CpJ�_�'+�`...

damage for the new development �
and existing homes in the area.
""'" _ f

From: Claire Lopez
To: Kathy Valdez
Subject: FW: Proposed conditions for Vista Grande Drive development Date: Thursday, February 17, 2022 10:40:15 AM
Attachments: Grading Plan.odf
mage001.pnno
Claire Lopez, CIVIC
Assistant City Clerk
200 Civic Center Dr
Vista, CA 92084
Direct: (760) 643-5323
www.cityofvista.com
From: Christopher Winters
Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2022 10:38 AM
To: Claire Lopez
Cc: Patsy Chow
Subject: FW: Proposed conditions for Vista Grande Drive development Claire — See below regarding PH1 on Tuesday's CC meeting.

Chris Winters, Associate Planner
City of Vista Community Development
(760) 643-5394
From: Ursula Sack
Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2022 8:45 AM
To: Katie Melendez ; Corinna Contreras ;
Judy Ritter ; John Conley ; Patsy Chow
; Joe Green ; John Franklin
; Christopher Winters
Subject: Proposed conditions for Vista Grande Drive development Dear Vista Council Members and Staff,
On behalf of myself, my husband, and our Vista Grande Terrace neighbors whose properties are adjacent to the proposed Vista Grande Drive development on the east side, I would like to thank you for meeting with us and hearing our concerns.

In our meetings we discussed some conditions that the City might put in place that would alleviate

our major privacy concerns. We ask you to give these careful consideration. 1). The topography of this hilltop area means that new homes will be built rising high above existing homes, compromising privacy and community character. The Planning Commission recognized this, and made a condition that the homes above 700 feet elevation should be limited to a singe story in height. We believe they didn't go far enough, and think that the entire development should be one- story to fit in with the neighborhood. All existing homes adjacent to this property (to the west, south, and east) are one-story homes.
2). If that condition is not granted, then we ask that the elevation for one-story homes in the development be changed from 700 feet down to 690 feet. That would add lots 23, 11, and 12 to the single -story condition. Those lots are the closest to existing homes on Vista Grande Terrace (in the southeast corner of the development) and would be most intrusive if allowed to be two stories in height.
3). Lot 12 is especially problematic —it has a drainage basin in the west part, which means there is less setback from the eastern boundary. That would place the new house close to the adjacent existing house (Davis house). There is very little open space in this project. Instead of building a home on Lot 12, we ask that it be landscaped as a small park that would provide open space for the residents, and serve as a buffer between the development and Vista Grande Terrace. 4). All one-story homes should have a designated height limit of no more than 18 feet. 5). Another condition needs to be made, in regard to the landscaping along the entire eastern boundary and along the existing driveway (Colby house) bordering the southeast corner of the development. Large mature trees that are green year-round, grow fast, and grow tall, need to be planted, in order to provide a significant privacy screen (so that residents and neighbors do no have to wait years for the trees to grow large enough).

We thank you for your consideration,
Ursula Sack, Ph.D.

Secretary/Treasurer
Guajome Alliance for Responsible Development
(760) 691-0964

PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN FOR PROJECT FILE NUMBER: P21-0114 LEGEND 2277 VISTA GRANDE DRIVE

ITEM SYMBOL
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - i RDIECTGRr f APN,n osG Ge '\ caiwTAPI 111.11031 ONE BDUNDARY - WNwro — —

CENTERLINE
F%si NG CfIY fiWNDARY v o C I
Ex si NG OVFRHLA➢FLECTPoLLL .r E 171 29

RE MOEAD /
OO x D S Y 66A5
ws NGSOW DRa - - HOPE.
o ROP fiRW, oncx PRaecr��u"
EwsTNGFIREnYPRANTa-
EwsiNGEENCE w W RD.EGT6NDY ' i - 1 w,OP6RDWDITCN EX. HOUSE 171100-02
a�T ,"'NEE BEN II , 6"wpD6A
OCRWrvo oNTouR P e NOARr , 00 E ,i� eoP \a.°°'"vs o g
EwsT NC GRWND co,TOIIN �E HOA ESMTa r fizs F i. WELL 6 — - w ED ,i I ae ow Po o e eR R E I ff
-6se F
TO11CIRADruc�xE II °° c I. GVEANEAD III o RE — _ L
I WV TO 6E UND O P�f OP FlREMroRAM •6'qg� PCC I T5�55°DSAF RETNNIrvGwAu (PER SEPARATE wRInIT I Pi $�y
ExISTINGSFOT ELEN, i°D5DFG °� x0 o ww
FuiuRE SPGT ELENA.pxsr T%, 1i0 s,
PROPO6ED6 cU-SITTEA mPI
—EDE HOLLI-UR66D1TTER
PRCHOSI s­DRux 1^i_
t
PROPWEDCURP "LET _
PROPWEDSID-C NCLEANCUT O Ex. 8I S. - —5�— m � I 0 1
P�P �
PER T69E99RR
SlOCURWEDA6YSTE RDx o q _ a NG
PROPGEEDRTANK 6 — PoM;NS a
Roros nso xwaxT —S HOA�ESMT 20 "w 21 " 222�2 o s o e,:Y°v a _ - - -EPP �

1. PROPosEos6WERua+naE O '� ��""S SE m°p3sao �6o"rc ME finPno PROPOSED-PEANNN —W— ONEsxEEis SP ' ga rc� I ry 6B25IE,9 t...

CETrzN: i 1 ov.R L
PRoro6ED6RDw wmx b b 1 �ON L I n1 Laaoe sFxD6rANK
'fin iHOAESMT��Do
R r.oawT _ ousE
13 7 API m 120 So
O RE p
* m - s PRa wrcx
19 T ERGROINa 14 T
017 16 15 0 P «3., L 12pD
m � II IE E 65A0 P 669.0 P 6r6A PAO 1, fiE6 I � S � � I 1 ISnxG� �RPO 95 P l
2,P
• e e6r TasD z,aw aw a IE,'
� �f =� ExRAr o`�► 5�5' �� o� I ��>I ' �` z3,
€Isn Par rtPOleTo Eg � p E5+ I QQWREIxu
Ell EVkn CO 0 WERN "'� ST/ ° P C fa n
^� k 8 T d _ / 8655 TO hN 0 F A 9 R
E m nE s a P WNG 1ESI W S, a �W DWG N
- 6EDOERPAR J «rl
g r N=, :; - z G_ R�'� PH fi AN„TS�D.wE
H APN Tzi<=o-T6 � AP � _ _ _ _ _ _ G O �c R �<' � _ S � PnoPEnrveno X I o o PER v�ic No Fs eax _ - _ \5( 'na° E,e aae K I ° as PROPPROP
I— u <� N `? "= PROP. R,W - I ¢� Ex. NousE < - ry
W N .. F i 6iia6F5 i/ APN li31oO-6%"}P
APx 1T1 � � AP d"
ZE CrvOF aI DE A
` h URIIE-
0 DAPY - -—�IsilNxc OV In sIi[D� EZp y �
Ro 0R6lxlei T
,� b=eA]IE,zsD E ­TCTO REwJry AY OREa I�PExeEUND RGRou9 `�3a�+� '.ro �6'eFNu.

ICI 56D — TDREI N I S gg E%PRVEWAV iO RENAN s 'I 0
9e APH 1711110 . iousE I in Tw 21 s wGPavERPOLETOREIIAN CITY of VISTA OFE 'N 1 L- g z. xousE IE.ILN E.NIN oLDR11E CHANCEw, ro E,I AID TV1.-11 a.E»n,°,a �4 PINY_ — — IW E%. NOU5E s OUSE E i Ex NO"0 OWNER, OPorvI FIrvnrvCIP1, uC WNTACT GREG PERRWE PxOxE IT,a,6oData, 1 R6DWG NO3E3 ' CAS.14
Igo SCO IARET9UITERIASSWNTEs, INC. PRONE: E496B,A695
�35 Dworvo�.,�E z�� O.. LE TRAN0. CA 626P6
6 AG WATER PER ARROro, SUITE Ea sAN.uAry OAPIs
Puacs mErvT Doc. "IE L „M. „.� IeT. zalEhl PROP. GONE: EH APNtS.,T„DOas, n,.mD26 axo.,0s0cez,as2, REc.ozaa,ssD - -- -
d SItE DATA IING IR9TO— OPEN
_,-ET.)
a.910axWERIE'sG° I0E PEcrvO Aid
PASCO LARET SUITERENGINEERING EPRx i D E
a ASSOC AT[ES Fw DEPARTx DATe
San Dim I Sdene Burch I Omnp Ccuny
scuE., =s6' PhmeBBB.259ffi121 nww.plseen�neering cpn PUBUCIXORISDEPARTMENT DArE 01/18/2022 PH1 183 of 190

ADD TO PACKET
Alisa Willens-Davis and Haydn Davis
=Vista Grande Terrace
Vista CA 92084
February 17, 2022
Dear Vista City Council Members and Staff,
We have had a fundamental anxiety that the approval process for the Vista Grande project has provided formal courtesies to our concerns without the implementation of transparent, unbiased assessments of our concerns. For example, we have brought up the report submitted by Colleen Hines of the S.D County Department of Environmental Health and Quality, Land, Water Quality Division regarding the potential for the site grading to compromise the area available for the wastewater treatment dispersal fields on contiguous private lots outside the projected area. Such a compromise to the dispersal fields could result in "daylighting" sewage literally in our backyards. She stated: "To avoid this potential impact. The MND should commit to consultations with the DEHQ Land and Water Quality Division before any grading plans are approved." The response to this concern was that the engineer hired by the developer thought this issue was adequately addressed. This is where we believe the City of Vista should step in as our representatives to ensure that the recommendations set forth by the DEHQ are enforced. When such a recommendation is ignored, it feels to us that the City Council members that represent the citizens of this city are just rubber stamping the developer's submissions and empty promises.

The same argument could be made about the repeated concern that the elevation of the lots of the proposed development will compromise the privacy of the surrounding private lots. One of our neighbors, Al Colby, took the time to provide an explicit and detailed visual of how the lots of the proposed development would loom over the existing adjacent properties. If the original proposal of 14 homes on 1+ acre lots is to be discarded, we are requesting that all homes be limited to one story, or at the very least, lots 11, 12, 13, and 23 among others be one story homes. This request is not just in the interest of our neighborhood, but in the interest of the long-term goals for the City of Vista as articulated in the Vista General Plan 2030 and the future generations that will inhabit this city.

Finally, regarding lot 12 specifically, this lot directly impacts our home. It has a drainage basin in the western part of the lot which means there would be less set back from the eastern boundary which directly abuts our property. Our suggestion of a green belt or at least significantly more green space have been ignored. There is very little open space in this project which makes it inconsistent with the aspirations of Vista's General Plan Land Use and Community Identity goals and policies. We ask that instead of building a home on Lot 12, that it be landscaped as a small park that would provide open space for the residents and serve as a buffer between the development and our Vista Grande Terrace neighborhood.

Thank you for your consideration.

Respectfully,
Alisa Willens-Davis and Haydn Davis
PH1

ADD TO PACKET
From:

David Sparkman
To:

Public Comments
Subject:

Vista Grande Drive
Date:

Monday, February 21, 2022 1:10:49 PM
Good afternoon,
I am opposed to the proposed general amendment plan to double the density for the subdivision located at 2277 Vista Grande Drive (P21-0114).

I have been receiving newsletters and updates from our neighborhood group, and I have yet to hear what the benefits are of doing this? All I can currently conclude is - - money. More homes make more taxable units for the city. Is that all that this decision has come down to? The negatives are many and documented well, but what is the City Council considering to be the benefits? Negatives include:
• increased traffic congestion on top of an already constrained East Vista Way • Increased fire hazard
• Semi -rural neighborhoods compromised with smaller lots • Sets precedent for more sprawl with lower densities
• More construction for homes when already existing zoned neighborhoods in Vista aren't even subscribed yet (Panorama Estates at top of ridge)
If tax revenue is all the City Council is using as logic to make this decision, then that does not bode well for the development of Vista.

The precedent being set to double the density merely because of taxpayer revenue is a slippery slope, and I respectfully request the City Council vote NO on the proposed amendment.

Thank you,
Dave Sparkman
Spark Your Culture Consulting
www.Sl2arkYourCulture.com
Crossroads Career Board Chair
www.CrossroadsCareer.org
PH1

ADD TO PACKET
From:

Hitoshi Watanabe
To:

Public Comments
Subject:

PH1. General Plan Amendment, zone Change, and 25-Lot Tentative Subdivision Map at 2277 Vista Grande Drive (APNs 171-100-05 and 171-100-28) (CC)
Date:

Tuesday, February 22, 2022 1:36:30 PM
Dear Madam/Sir,
We have been recently denied to renew our homeowner's insurance by our existing insurance company.

They said it was due to the recent fire hazard severity reclassification in the area on Vista Grand Terrace where our house is located. While searching for a company who could insure our property, we learned that many insurance companies no longer provide insurance for the properties in the area. After some efforts of our own and assistance by an industry expert, we were introduced to a company who could insure our property with a significantly increased premium. We had no choice to accept their policy offer but without earthquake insurance (which we had been purchasing as part of homeowner's insurance policy).

This experience not only caused an inconvenience to us not also raised a concern for prospective new homeowners of the properties to be built as a result of this Plan.

We would like to request for comments/responses on the following inquiries:

1. In a previous meeting, it was presented that target prospective homeowners for this Plan will be married couples who can afford to purchase -$800K properties and assumed to be on mortgage. Without exception, lenders will require mortgagees to secure homeowners insurance including acceptable coverage for wildfires.

Given our recent experience and an expectation that this trend will probably not improve, it seems there is a need to study and verify that the insurance industry will insure the properties to be built based on the Plan as is. If the study should find potential concern(s) from the industry, the plan may need improvement(s) and/or correction(s) based on the inputs from the insurance industry. If such study has been conducted, we would like the results of the study be made publicly available.

2. Has there been a change in target prospective homeowners from married couple who will be assumed to be on mortgage to those who can afford to pay cash? If this is the case, will this be still consistent with the city's policy for providing affordable housing in the community? Also, will this impact to a likelihood that the new properties will be occupied?
Since the project is nearly an irreversible process, it will be of vital importance to ensure there will be no substantial risk as is and if any sufficient corrective actions be made ahead of time.

We have submitted similar comments to this agenda (PH1) previously.

Sincerely and respectfully,
Hitoshi Watanabe
A resident on Vista Grande Terrace
PH1