Vista City Council
September 23, 2025

ADD TO PACKET
in either (1) effects that are peculiar to the project or its site, and which the PEIR failed to analyze as significant effects; or (2) off-site and/or cumulative impacts that the PEIR failed to evaluate. Further, there is no substantial new information that results in more severe significant impacts than anticipated by the PEIR, and the project will undertake feasible mitigation measures specified in the PEIR.

We have prepared this response with input and review from the applicant, the expert environmental consultants at Helix Environmental Planning, and transportation engineers at CR Associates. We urge the City Council to consider this letter alongside the reports and recommendations of City staff, as well as those expert analyses in the administrative record.

We respectfully request that the Council uphold the Planning Commission's Project approval, deny the appeal, and affirm the Project's CEQA exemption.

I.The Grounds for the Appeal are Unsupported.
a.The Project is Exempt Under CEQA; there is no "Violation" The appeal asserts the Project failed to undertake complete an adequate environmental review on three unsupported grounds.

1.The City Appropriately Evaluated Impacts of the Project as Proposed The appeal asserts various CEQA errors based on the City's alleged omission of analysis for "16 detached ADUs and 19 potential garage conversions." The appellant claims this omission led to an underestimation of cumulative impacts on traffic, parking, and neighborhood infrastructure, and amounted to improper project segmentation. However, these claims are unfounded. There was no error or omission. 1.CEOA Review Is Properly Limited to the Proiect as Proposed The City properly evaluated the environmental impacts of the Project as proposed­ which includes 19 single-family homes with l 6 attached Junior ADUs (JADUs). Two of the single-family homes would be reserved for very low-income purchasers, providing the Project a density bonus under State Density Bonus Law.

The Project does not propose any detached ADUs or garage conversions. As such, the City had no obligation to analyze hypothetical development scenarios that were not part of the actual project proposal. CEQA requires an agency to evaluate the impacts of the project as proposed, not speculative "worst-case scenarios" imagined by opponents but not proposed by the applicant.

This precise argument was squarely rejected by the Court of Appeal in Save Round Valley Alliance v. County of Inyo (2007) 157 Cal.App.4th 1437, 1447. In that case, the project involved 09/23/2025 PH1 Page 338 of 386

Gatzke Dillon & Ballance LLP

L AWYERS
Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers
August 8, 2025

ADD TO PACKET
subdivision of a 74-acre parcel into 27 lots. The petitioner argued the environmental review was inadequate because it failed to evaluate the impacts of potential second units under state ADU law, claiming that if "each of the 27 future lot owners apply for and obtain a permit to build, and do build, a second dwelling unit, then the subdivision would hold 54 dwelling units." (Id.) The Court rejected this argument, holding CEQA only requires analysis of impacts that are "a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the initial project," not "speculation" about "unspecified and uncertain" future development. (Id. at p. 1449, citing Laurel Heights Improvement Assn. v. Regents of University of California (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376, 390, Sierra Club v.West Side Irrigation Dist. (2005) 128 Cal.App.4th 690, 698; Guidelines,§ 15064 (d)(3).)) The possibility that future owners might seek permits for additional units was "extremely uncertain," and any impacts from those hypothetical units were "highly speculative." The Court further reasoned, that "[ w ]hether a ... permit to build a second unit will ever be sought depends initially upon the desires of future lot owners, who are unknown." Even if some were foreseeable, "it is impossible to predict how many units will be built, the size of such units, on which lots they might be built, their location within a lot, the visibility of a second unit from outside the subdivision, or how such units might impact the environment." Thus, the County appropriately focused its review on the project proposed-not speculative ADUs. (Id. at p. 1450.)
Here, the appellant is making the same numerical claim-asserting a total "buildout" of 54 units by adding 16 hypothetical detached ADU s and 19 hypothetical garage conversions to the 19 proposed primary units. But, as in Save Round Valley Alliance, none of these additions are part of the proposed project. Their inclusion in the analysis would require speculation about future owners' preferences, future permitting decisions, and unknown design characteristics-all well beyond what CEQA requires.

In short, CEQA review is appropriately limited to the Project as proposed. There is no legal or factual basis to require environmental analysis of unproposed, speculative development scenanos. 11.Approval of JADUs and ADUs is a Ministerial Action Exempt from CEOA CEQA does not apply to the ministerial approval of ADUs and JADUs. Under Government Code section 66323, ADUs and JADUs that meet certain objective criteria are permitted by right and must be approved ministerially.

Specifically, subdivision (a) of section 66323 provides that "a local agency shall ministerially approve" "[ o ]ne accessory dwelling unit and one junior accessory dwelling unit per lot with a proposed or existing single-family dwelling" provided the units meet the specified statutory requirements.
09/23/2025 PH1 Page 339 of 386

Gatzke Dillon & Ballance LLP

L AWYERS

ADD TO PACKET
Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers
August 8, 2025

Because CEQA applies only to discretionary projects, and not to ministerial approvals, the construction of by-right AD Us or JADUs-whether attached or detached-is exempt from CEQA review. (See CEQA Guidelines,§ 15268(a); Friends of Westwood v. City of Los Angeles (1987) 191 Cal.App.3d 259, 272-273 [ministerial approvals are exempt from CEQA].) 111.Impacts from Attached JADUs Were Evaluated and Do Not Alter the CEOA Findings
Notwithstanding the appellant's claim, the City did consider the potential impacts of the 16 attached JADUs as part of its CEQA review of the Project. As explained in the 1800 Monte Vista Residential -Supplemental Traffic Memorandum (June 16, 2025) prepared by expert transportation consultants Chen Ryan Associates, the 16 JADUs would range from 386 to 481 square feet, be located entirely within the primary residences, and would not function as independent dwelling units for purposes of CEQA trip generation or parking analysis.

The memorandum explains:

JADUs are permitted by right to be attached to a single-family residence under zoning regulations applicable to the Project site. In addition to expanding housing flexibility, they support the City of Vista's efforts towards meeting the City's Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) targets.

JADUs are typically used to accommodate extended family members -such as seniors or adult children- rather than functioning as independent units. Further, JADUs are limited in size, lack independent utility metering, and must be contained within the primary dwelling unit, which constrains their functionality as separate units . As such, they do not typically operate as fully independent households and are not expected to generate vehicle trips beyond those already assumed under single-family residential trip rates.

Neither the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) (Not So) Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates for the San Diego Region nor the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition, 2021) provide specific trip generation rates for JADUs. However, both sources assign relatively high daily trip rates to single-family detached homes -rates that already account for a range of household compositions and travel behavior, including configurations that may include JADUs.

Furthermore, under California law, JADUs are not treated as separate dwelling units for the purpose of parking requirements (See Gov. Code § 66334 [ no additional parking required for JADUs]; see also, Gov. Code§§ 66337 and 66338 [JADUs "shall not be considered a separate or new dwelling unit" for purposes of utilities, fire, or life safety 09/23/2025 PH1 Page 340 of 386

Gatzke Dillon & Ballance LLP

L AWYERS

ADD TO PACKET
Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers
August 8, 2025

requirements.]). Per City of Vista Municipal Code Section 18.31.080.C, no additional parking is required for the inclusion of JADUs, as the JADUs would be within the building footprint of the Primary Residence. Based on City of Vista Municipal Code Section 18.54.050, the Project requires 86 parking spaces ( 4.5 parking spaces per unit, including Guest parking; see Attachment A). The Project would provide 95 total parking spaces (76 off-street parking spaces, 19 private on-street parking; see Attachment B), resulting in a parking surplus of 9 parking spaces on-site.

Given the information outlined above regarding JADUs, any potential trips associated with the inclusion of JADU s would be accommodated within the estimated 190 daily trips generated by the proposed Project. Therefore, the presence of JADUs would not change the traffic-related conclusions or environmental findings for the Project.

Therefore, no additional analysis would be required.

Thus, the City's environmental review properly accounted for the proposed JADUs. The traffic analysis demonstrates that the inclusion of these small, integrated residential units would not generate additional significant traffic or parking impacts. Furthermore, given their statutory limitations -i.e., not being considered separate for utilities, fue, or life safety requirements-and typical household use, the JADUs would not place additional burdens on neighborhood infrastructure. 1v. AD Us and JADUs Are Accounted for in the City s General Plan, Housing Element, and Zoning Ordinance
Finally, ADUs and JADUs are anticipated and planned for in the City's General Plan Housing Element and zoning regulations, in full compliance with state law. The Housing Element describes ADUs as "an additional dwelling unit that could provide affordable housing options for family members, friends, students, the elderly, in-home health care providers, the disabled, and others." (City of Vista, 2021-2029 Housing Element, p. 4-5.) It projects that approximately 400 ADUs will be developed during the 2021-2029 planning cycle to help satisfy the City's regional housing needs. (Id.) The Housing Element also outlines recent changes to state law and the City's obligation to amend its Zoning Ordinance and monitor ADU and JADU production accordingly. (Id. at pp. 3-12, 6-16.) The Zoning Ordinance, section 18.31, was amended March 26, 2024 and provides the City's ADU regulations.

In sum, both the City's General Plan and the Project-specific analysis fully account for the inclusion of JADUs in this housing development. Community feedback received by the applicant indicated that multi-generational living is common in the area-a dynamic explicitly recognized in the Housing Element. The inclusion of JADUs offers a practical and policy­ supported solution to accommodate these living arrangements. 09/23/2025 PH1 Page 341 of 386

Gatzke Dillon & Ballance LLP

L AWYERS

ADD TO PACKET
Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers
August 8, 2025

Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15183, no further environmental review is required because the Project is consistent with the General Plan and no project-specific or cumulative impacts have been identified that are "peculiar to the project or the parcel on which the project would be located," or that were "not analyzed as significant effects in a prior EIR." (§ 15183, subd. (b)(l ), (2).) The inclusion of JADUs does not warrant additional CEQA analysis or result in a CEQA "violation."

2.The City Appropriately Evaluated the Traffic and Traffic Safety Impacts of the Project
The appellant next argues that the City failed to analyze school-related peak hour traffic and associated safety hazards. This is incorrect.

First, regarding safety impacts, the 15183 Checklist appropriately relies on the General Plan Program EIR, which concluded that transportation safety impacts would be less than significant due to required development review by the City's traffic engineer and compliance with General Plan policies. The Project would be developed in accordance with the requirements and, therefore, result in no new impact:

The proposed project would undergo development review to ensure project safety. The project was designed according to Chapter 19.08 of the Municipal Code, which establishes design requirements for streets, sidewalks, and driveway improvements to preserve traffic safety. Per Section 12.20.100 of the Municipal Code, the traffic engineer is responsible for prohibiting the installation of driveways at locations where unusual hazards would be created by the installation of such driveways. Additionally, project signage would be implemented consistent with Municipal Code Chapter 18.72, which aims to promote the safe movement of vehicles with adequate wayfinding. The existing dirt access road would be paved into a private street from Monte Vista Drive to provide access to the proposed residential driveways. Off-site circulation improvements would consist of the construction of a half width of Monte Vista Drive as a 2-Lane Light Collector along the project frontage. Neither of these project components is expected to create a sharp curve or dangerous intersection and both components would be an improvement upon existing conditions. Therefore, with the implementation of uniform development policies and standards, the project would have no new impacts and is consistent with the findings in the PEIR.

In addition, the staff report and Conditions of Approval explain the Project includes pedestrian safety and other improvements along Monte Vista Drive. These include construction of a 5-foot-wide sidewalk separated from the roadway (Condition of Approval, Land Development Engineering Condition 3(d)(2)), as well as an 8-foot shoulder that may function as a parking lane, bike lane, or shoulder. Sight distance will meet Caltrans criteria (Condition 3(k)). 09/23/2025 PH1 Page 342 of 386

Gatzke Dillon & Ballance LLP

L AWYERS

ADD TO PACKET
Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers
August 8, 2025

While a tragic accident occurred near the school over a decade ago, that incident is not attributable to this Project. The Project is not expected to create or exacerbate unsafe conditions; rather, it introduces safety-enhancing infrastructure for pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers.

Second, as to peak hour traffic volumes, CEQA no longer uses level of service (LOS) or peak-hour congestion as the metric for assessing transportation impacts. Under Senate Bill 743, the appropriate CEQA threshold is vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Therefore, peak-hour traffic volumes-particularly those associated with school pick-up/drop-off-are not relevant to the CEQA determination.

Third, independent of CEQA's VMT analysis, the applicant completed a Local Transportation Assessment (LTA), prepared by CR Associates in October 2024. Although the project generates fewer than 200 ADT and accordingly falls below the City's standard threshold for requiring an LTA in its Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines, an LTA was conservatively prepared to assess potential localized impacts.

The LTA was based on traffic counts taken on September 19, 2024 -when school was in session-and conservatively modeled a 20-home project, while only 19 units are proposed.

Contrary to the appellant's comment, peak hour isolates the hour with the heaviest traffic; there was no "averaging."
The LTA concluded that both Monte Vista Drive and the project intersection would operate at acceptable LOS under existing plus project conditions. As such, the Project would not materially affect local circulation or introduce adverse operational conditions.

In sum, any traffic safety concerns related to school operations are attributable to the school itself and are not peculiar to the Project or site. This small residential project does not substantially contribute to or exacerbate those conditions and, instead, would improve area safety through street, bike lane, and sidewalk improvements.

3.The 15183 Analysis Evaluates Transportation Impacts Using a VMT Metric The appellant argues that the City's CEQA Guidelines § 15183 analysis was flawed because it relied on Level of Service (LOS) instead of Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT). This is incorrect.

The Section 15183 Checklist confirms that a VMT analysis was prepared pursuant to CEQA and in accordance with the City of Vista's Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines ( adopted December 2020). As explained in the 15183 Checklist:

The City implemented the City of Vista Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines, which provide requirements for performing transportation studies for land development projects, in December 2020. According to the VMT Memo prepared for the project, the 09/23/2025 PH1 Page 343 of 386

Gatzke Dillon & Ballance LLP

L AWYERS

ADD TO PACKET
Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers
August 8, 2025

project is anticipated to generate approximately 190 ADT (Fehr and Peers 2024). For projects that are consistent with the General Plan and generate less than 1,000 ADT, the City Guidelines assume that VMT impacts would be less than significant. The project is consistent with the General Plan designation for the site, and traffic impacts would therefore be less than significant. As such, no new impact would result compared to the PEIR.

Thus, pursuant to the City's adopted thresholds and methodology, because the Project generates fewer than 1,000 average daily trips and is consistent with the General Plan, it qualifies for VMT screening and would have a less than significant impact. Accordingly, no new or more severe transportation impacts would occur beyond those already evaluated in the Program EIR, and no further VMT analysis was required. 1
b.The Project Complies with State Density Bonus Law
As a separate ground for appeal, the appellant asserts that the applicant and the City have not provided enforceable deed restrictions or affordability assurances for the two proposed very low-income units. This assertion is incorrect.

The Project's Conditions of Approval, under "General Planning Conditions," include the following requirements:

Affordable Units

9.The project shall construct two (2) for-sale single-family residences on Lots 8 and 13 of the Tentative Subdivision Map which shall be deed restricted for affordable units 1 Also note that by providing very low income housing, the Project would be expected to generate lower VMT than a comparable market-rate-only residential project. Low-income housing typically generates less VMT than market­ rate housing. Infill affordable housing projects also tend to improve the local jobs-housing balance, thereby shortening commute distances and further reducing regional VMT. See, e.g.:

Chapple et al. (2017) Developing a New Methodology for Analyzing Potential Displacement, available at https:/ /www .arb.ca.gov/research/apr/past/13-31 0.pdf; CAPCOA (2010) Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures, pp. 176-178, available at http://www.capcoa.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/ 11 /CAPCOA-Quantification-Report-9-14-Final. pdf.

Kamer and Benner (2016) The convergence of social equity and environmental sustainability: Jobs-housing fit and commute distance ("[P]olicies that advance a more equitable distribution of jobs and housing by linking the affordability of locally available housing with local wage levels are likely to be associated with reduced commuting distances").

Kamer and Benner (2016) The convergence of social equity and environmental sustainability: Jobs-housing fit and commute distance ("[P]olicies that advance a more equitable distribution of jobs and housing by linking the affordability of locally available housing with local wage levels are likely to be associated with reduced commuting distances").
09/23/2025 PH1 Page 344 of 386

Gatzke Dillon & Ballance LLP

L AWYERS

ADD TO PACKET
Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers
August 8, 2025

within the "Very Low Income" category. The two affordable units must be "for-sale" properties only, and said units shall not be rented.

10.Prior to Final Map recordation and issuance of a building permit, the developer shall provide the City with a regulatory agreement, in form acceptable to the City, obligating the owner of the project to only sell the two affordable units to eligible and qualified Very Low Income households, in compliance with Chapter 18.90 of the Vista Development Code, and the State Density Bonus Law (Gov. Code section 65915, etc.). No building permits shall be issued for the project until the Regulatory Agreement is fully executed by the developer and the City, and recorded against the Property. Rather than executing an agreement, the City can be made a third-party beneficiary of an agreement that otherwise complies with this condition, but evidence that such agreement has been recorded, with all required provisions, shall be provided to the City before the issuance of any building permits.

11.The two affordable units shall be of like-for-like construction consistent with the market rate units in the tract, utilizing interior and exterior features, fixtures, construction materials, and finishes equivalent to the project's seventeen (17) market­ rate units. This requirement shall be notated on the building plans ( construction drawings) submittals.

These conditions satisfy the requirements of State Density Bonus Law, which mandates that applicant must agree to ensure, and the City must ensure, that the units will be sold to an appropriately income-restricted person or family. (Gov. Code,§ 65915 (c)(2)(A).) Very low income affordability levels are set by statute per State Density Bonus Law, Gov. Code section 65915 (b )(1 )(B) and as defined in Section 50105 of the Health and Safety Code.

General Planning Condition 10 expressly requires such an agreement to be executed and recorded before any building permits are issued, ensuring enforceability of the affordability restrictions and full compliance with State law.
c.There Are No Fire Safety or Emergency Access Deficiencies The appeal claims the Project does not meet Vista Fire Code Section 503.2 emergency access requirements due to "24-foot streets" with on-street parking, and that the there is a lack of secondary access or turnarounds in a high fire hazard area. It also asserts the Project does not meet hose pull distance or sprinkler requirements. This claim is incorrect. 09/23/2025 PH1 Page 345 of 386

Gatzke Dillon & Ballance LLP

L AWYERS
Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers
August 8, 2025

ADD TO PACKET

1.The Project Provides Adequate Emergency Access and is Not Located in a High Fire Hazard Severity Zone
The appellant's claims regarding project street widths and emergency access are factually and legally incorrect. First, the Project's Site Development Plan includes a 40-foot-wide private street (curb-to-curb) and a cul-de-sac with a 45-foot curb radius. This design provides more than adequate clearance for emergency vehicles, providing for unobstructed 12-foot travel lanes each direction, while also accommodating on-street parallel parking. The proposed roadway improvements comply with applicable City standards. (Vista Fire Code, § 503.2.1.) In addition, the Fire Department's Conditions of Approval (No. 1 (a)-(h)) specifically require compliance with emergency access standards. Among other things, Fire Department Condition No. l(g) requires: "Minimum unobstructed paved width is 24 feet." Approval of the final Site Development Plan by the Planning, Engineering, Fire, and Public Works Departments is required before any building permits are issued, ensuring full compliance.

Second, the Project complies with all applicable dead-end road requirements. The cul­ de-sac provides a 45-foot radius-exceeding the 36-foot minimum paved turnaround requirement-and the cumulative dead-end road length of less than 467 feet is well within allowed limits. (Vista Fire Code,§§ 503.2.5, 503.2.5.1, 503.2.5.2.) Third, contrary to the appellant's assertion, no secondary access is required. Vista Fire Code section 503.1.2.1 authorizes, but does not require, the fire code official to mandate secondary access only for projects located within State or Local Responsibility Areas designated as high or very high fire hazard severity zones. In addition, secondary access is not required where turnaround standards are met. (Vista Fire Code, § 503 .1.2.1.) The Project complies with dead-end turnaround requirements, as discussed above.

Moreover, the Project is not located within any high or very high fire hazard severity zone.

CalFire's prior and updated Fire Hazard Severity Zone maps confirm the site is not within a moderate, high, or very high hazard area. 2 The Vista City Council introduced and adopted the updated CalFire maps by Ordinance on June 10, 2025, in accordance with state law, confirming that the Project lies outside any designated LRA or SRA hazard zone. 3 Accordingly, there is no factual or legal basis to require a secondary access for this Project. 2 https :// experience.arcgis. com/ experience/ 5065c99 8b4b0462 f9ec3 c6c226c6 l 0a9 /page/Compare-o Id-and-new-LRA­ FHSZ and https://calfire-
forestry. maps. arcgis. com/ apps/webappviewer/index .h tm I ?id=9 8 8d4 31a42 b24 2b2 9d8 9 5 97 ab693d008 3 City Council June 10, 2025 Minutes https://portal.laserfiche.com/Portal/DocView.aspx?id=2204988&repo=r- 3fOb2553
City Council Ordinance No. 2025-03 https://portal.las erfiche.com/Portal/DocView.aspx?id=2204043&repo=r- 3fOb2553
09/23/2025 PH1 Page 346 of 386

Gatzke Dillon & Ballance LLP

L AWYERS

ADD TO PACKET
Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers
August 8, 2025

In sum, the Project meets all applicable emergency access requirements, provides compliant turnaround design, and is not located in a designated high fire hazard area where secondary access could be required.

2.The Project Provides Adequate Fire Hydrants and Fire Sprinklers The appeal's claim that "several units ... appear to exceed the 150-foot hose pull distance from fire lanes, which would require fire sprinklers per California Fire Code§ 507.5," and that the Project allegedly "does not provide" such sprinklers, is both legally and factually incorrect.

California Fire Code§ 507.5 does not impose a 150-foot hose pull requirement. Instead, it provides:

Where a portion of the ... building hereafter constructed ... within a jurisdiction is more than 400 feet (122m) from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road ... on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided where required by the fire code official.

An exception allows this distance to increase to 600 feet for buildings equipped with an approved sprinkler system.

Here, the Project complies fully with these requirements. It includes both the installation of fire sprinklers and appropriately located hydrants, as required by the Fire Department's Conditions of Approval. Specifically:
•Condition No. 3 mandates: "Fire Sprinklers will be required to be installed in all new buildings. Plans shall be submitted to the Fire Department for review. The system shall comply with NFPA #13D Standard for Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems latest edition."
•Condition No. 4 requires: "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, it shall be the responsibility of the applicant to improve the system as needed."
The Site Development Plan identifies the location of required hydrants, and the Project will undergo final review by the Fire Department to ensure full compliance with all access, flow, and suppression standards.

Further, brush management, irrigated landscaping, and development in compliance with the regularly updated and stringent standards of the California Building Code and California Fire Code, would minimize fire risk related to the Project.
09/23/2025 PH1 Page 347 of 386

Gatzke Dillon & Ballance LLP

L AWYERS
Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers
August 8, 2025

ADD TO PACKET
In sum, because the Project is located outside any designated fire hazard severity zone and complies with all fire access, water supply, and building safety standards, it would not pose a risk to life or safety.
d.There Were No Procedural Defects or Public Notice Violations As an additional ground for appeal, the appellant contends that the City's failure to specifically notice "19 homes+ 16 AD Us+ 19 garage conversions" constitutes a violation of the Brown Act and due process. This claim is unfounded.

First, as explained above, the Project does not propose "19 garage conversions." This is pure speculation about hy pothetical future actions by future homeowners and is irrelevant to the City's consideration of the Project as proposed.

Second, the Brown Act requires only a "brief general description of each item of business" to be transacted or discussed at the meeting. (Gov. Code,§ 54954.2(a)(l).) The Planning Commission agenda met that standard. It identified the requested entitlements, the project applicant, general project scope, site location, and CEQA compliance:

PHI -P24-0139 -Monte Vista Residential -California West Communities The project applicant, California West Communities, is requesting approval of a Tentative Subdivision Map, a Site Development Plan, and a Density Bonus to construct 19 single­ family homes on a 6.4 7 acre site located at 1800 Monte Vista Drive (APN 181-022-05- 00). The project qualifies for exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 for projects that are consistent with a community plan or zoning.

The staff report provided additional detail, describing that 16 of the 19 lots would include ministerial accessory dwelling units (ADUs), including two very low-income units under SDBL:

The project proposes a Tentative Subdivision Map and Site Development Plan to construct 19 single-family residences along with 16 attached accessory dwelling units on sixteen of the nineteen lots, including two very low-income housing units, utilizing a density bonus as permissible under the State Density Bonus Law, California Government Code Section 65915.

As discussed, ADUs and JADUs are reviewed ministerially and are not subject to discretionary approval or public hearing. (Gov. Code, § 66323.) In a similar context, the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) has cautioned that holding public hearings for ministerial approvals may "create the perception of discretionary power where none exists" and improperly pressure decisionmakers to deny requests they are legally required to 09/23/2025 PH1 Page 348 of 386

Gatzke Dillon & Ballance LLP

L AWYERS

ADD TO PACKET
Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers
August 8, 2025

approve. 4 The City appropriately described the proposed AD Us in the staff report while correctly omitting them from the public hearing scope.
e.There Is No General Plan or Housing Element Inconsistency Considering State Housing Law
As a final basis for the appeal, the appellant contends that waiving the minimum lot size requirement results in smaller lots than those in surrounding neighborhoods, which allegedly undermines community character and renders the project inconsistent with General Plan Policy LU-1.3, as well as Housing Element policies relating to neighborhood compatibility and infrastructure adequacy.

First, it is unclear what "Policy LU-1.3" appellant is referencing. Policy 1.3 of the Land Use & Community Identity (LUCI) does not address lot size or community character. It instead focuses on the design of gathering places and activity centers, stating: "Ensure that public and private gathering places and activity centers are designed to provide a safe, comfortable environment for users, and incorporate features such as shade trees, benches, tables, adequate lighting, and visible links to public streets for enhanced security. "(Land Use & Community Identity Element, p. 2-3) This policy does not apply to the design or density of this residential subdivision. In any case, Project design and landscaping would provide a safe and welcoming environment.

Second, this argument fails because it relies on the application of a development standard -minimum lot size-that is requested to be waived as an incentive pursuant to the SDBL. Under state law, a standard waived under the SDBL is not "applicable" standard for purposes of evaluating a project's consistency with the General Plan or other local plans or ordinances. (Wollmer v. City of Berkeley (2011) 193 Cal.App.4th 1329, 1348-1349; West Adams Heritage Association v. City of Los Angeles (2024) 106 Cal.App.5th 395, 419-420.) SDBL mandates that a local agency shall grant density bonuses, incentives, waivers, and parking concessions to qualifying projects. These benefits are ministerial and do not require discretionary approval. (Gov. Code,§ 65915, subds. (b)(l), (e)(l), (f)(5), (j)(l ).) A core feature of the law is that it allows developments to exceed local standards-including those in a general plan-for the express purpose of producing affordable housing. (Bankers Hill 15 0 v. City of San Diego (2022) 74 Cal.App.5th 755, 769-770. 5)
4 California Department of Housing and Community Development, Technical Assistance Letter re: Discretionary Review of State Density Bonus Law Waiver Requests -City of Glendale (Feb. 5, 2024), https://www .hcd.ca.gov/sites/default/files/docs/planning-and-community/HAU/glendale-hau-346-ta-02052024.pdf. [recommending no public hearings be held on mandatory SDBL requests that "shall not require" discretionary approval.]
5 See also, Letter to Co unty of El Dorado, Cameron Park Housing Project-State Density Bonus Law and AB 2334 -Letter of Technical Assistance (March 9, 2023), p. 4, fn. 5. ElDoradoCounty-TA-030923.pdf [Explaining that a 09/23/2025 PH1 Page 349 of 386

Gatzke Dillon & Ballance LLP

L AWYERS
Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers
August 8, 2025

ADD TO PACKET
Courts have consistently held that standards waived or exceeded under the SDBL cannot serve as the basis for denying a project. In Wollmer, supra, 193 Cal.App.4th 1329, the Court held that waived zoning standards under SDBL are not "applicable" for purposes of General Plan or zoning consistency. (Id. at pp. 1348-1349.) In West Adams Heritage Association, supra, 106 Cal.App.5th 395, the Court concluded that a project's density in excess of a local plan-where authorized under SDBL-did not create a valid inconsistency with the plan. Because the deviation was "correct under state law," it could not be used to deny or condition the project. (Id. at pp. 419-420, 431-432.)
The Housing Accountability Act reinforces this principle. It prohibits a jurisdiction from finding a project inconsistent with any plan, policy, or standard due to the receipt of a density bonus, waiver, or similar benefit. (Gov. Code, § 65589.5, subd. (j)(3).) Thus, the Project's density and reduced lot sizes, authorized under the SDBL, cannot be used as a basis for finding General Plan inconsistency.

Third, aside from SDBL preemption, the Project is consistent with the City's General Plan under applicable legal standards. General plans are broadly framed policy documents reflecting "a range of competing interests." The question is not whether a project conflicts with an individual policy, but whether it is "compatible with, and does not frustrate," the general plan's goals as a whole. (Napa Citizens for Honest Government v. Napa County Bd. of Supervisors (2001) 91 Cal.App.4th 342, 378; Sierra Club v. County of Napa (2004) 121 Cal.App.4th 1490, 1510-1511.)
Here, the Project advances the General Plan and Housing Element goals, particularly with respect to increasing housing supply, expanding housing choice, and producing affordable housing. The Housing Element specifically identifies residential density bonuses as a key tool to expanding affordable housing:
"The City continues to offer residential density bonuses as a means of encouraging affordable housing development. In exchange for setting aside a portion of development as units affordable to lower-and moderate-income households, the City will grant a density bonus over the otherwise allowed maximum density, and up to four regulatory fundamental aspect of SDBL is it allows "developments to be inconsistent with the General Plan for the explicit purpose of producing affordable housing."]
09/23/2025 PH1 Page 350 of 386

Gatzke Dillon & Ballance LLP

L AWYERS
Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers
August 8, 2025

ADD TO PACKET
incentives and concessions. The City's density bonus regulation (municipal Code Chapter

18.90) will be amended to incorporate all recent changes to State density bonus law" (City of Vista Housing Element 2021-2029, p. 6-7.)
In addition, the Housing Element contemplates a diverse housing stock, including the production of ADUs and JADUs to provide affordable housing options for family members, friends, students, the elderly, in-home health care providers, the disabled, and others. (City of Vista Housing Element 2021-2029, p. 4-5.)
The Project is also consistent with the General Plan land use and development in the surrounding community. The site is zoned E-1 and land use designated Low Density Residential, allowing 13 base units and the Project's proposed 19 homes with the requested density bonus.

Land uses in the area transition from denser homes and the elementary school to the west and south to estate residential uses to the east and north. The Project would develop 4.69 acres of the

6.4 7 acre site fronting Monte Vista Drive to the south, leaving 1. 78 acres as undisturbed open space on the site's northern edge.

By creating new homes within walking distance of an elementary school-including two affordable homes for very low-income families-the Project helps ensure that more families, regardless of income, have access to safe, high-quality housing in a vibrant, connected neighborhood.

Further, the 15183 analysis describes Project consistency with other elements of the General Plan. The proposed Project accordingly aligns and is consistent with the General Plan, Housing Element, and surrounding community.

Finally, even if the Project were inconsistent with subjective policies relating to "community character," that would not be a valid basis for denial under the Housing Accountability Act (HAA). Under Government Code section 65589.5, subdivision (j)(l), a local agency may not disapprove or reduce the density of a housing development project that complies with all applicable, objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision standards in effect when the application was deemed complete. (Gov. Code,§ 65589.5 (j)(l), (j)(3), (h)(8).) The Project meets that threshold when the waivers and density bonus allowed under the State Density Bonus Law are properly accounted for.

For all these reasons, the Project is consistent with state and local housing law, and the appellant's claim of inconsistency is without merit.

II.The Requested Relief should be Denied.

Appellant has not demonstrated any legal error, factual deficiency, or evidentiary basis to overturn the Planning Commission's decision. The record reflects that the Project complies with 09/23/2025 PH1 Page 351 of 386

Gatzke Dillon & Ballance LLP

L AWYERS
Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers
August 8, 2025

ADD TO PACKET
the City's zoning and subdivision regulations, is consistent with the General Plan and Housing Element, qualifies for a CEQA exemption under Public Resources Code Section 21083.3/ Guidelines section 15183, meets relevant fire standards, was adequately noticed and meets all applicable requirements under the State Density Bonus Law and Housing Accountability Act.

The requested relief-reversal or modification of the Project's approval and rehearing based on preparation of an EIR for speculative, non-proposed development of 54 units -should therefore be denied.

III.Conclusion
This Project reflects the applicant's commitment to inclusive and equitable growth. By making room for 19 households-across varying income levels-in a safe, well-located community, the Project will help ensure that all families have a fair opportunity to live in a high­ quality neighborhood with easy school access.

The Project's approval and CEQA compliance are fully supported by the record before the City Council. Further topical responses to comments attached to this letter have been prepared by Helix, with support from Chen Ryan Associates, to address comments received prior to and at the Planning Commission hearing.

We respectfully request that the Council deny the appeal, affirm the Planning Commission's approval of the Project, and uphold the finding of CEQA exemption.

Attachments:

Respectfully submitted,
ls/Kimberly A. Foy
Kimberly A. Foy
of
Gatzke Dillon & Ballance LLP
1)Topical Responses to Public Comments Regarding the Monte Vista Housing Development Project
2)CVs for Chen Ryan Associates Transportation Consultants. 09/23/2025 PH1 Page 352 of 386

ADD TO PACKET
Attachment 1
09/23/2025 PH1 Page 353 of 386

H l llX en vi ran men ta I p I an n in g. inc.
date:
to:
organization:
from:
subject:

HELIX job number:

Message:
7578 El Cajon Blvd., Suite 200
La Mesa, CA 91942
e-mail: [email protected]
(619)462-1515 ext 260
Memo
July 29, 2025
Chris Winter, Senior Planner
City of Vista
Julie McCall, Principal Planner

ADD TO PACKET
Topical Responses to Public Comments Regarding the
Monte Vista Housing Development Project
02951.00042.001
CEQA does not require the preparation of written responses to public comments on a proposed CEQA exemption, including those made in relation to a proposed exemption under Public Resources Code section 21083.3 and CEQA Guidelines section 15183.

Nevertheless, the applicant has voluntarily prepared the following Topical Responses to Comments received prior to or during the City's Planning Commission hearing on the Monte Vista housing development project. These responses are provided to address environmental concerns raised by the public and to clarify how the Project complies with CEQA, applicable state housing laws, and local planning regulations.

The analysis and responses are supported by technical studies and substantial evidence contained in the administrative record.

Topical Response No. 1-Consistency with Land Use, Zoning, and Existing Community Comments were received that state the property is zoned E-1 (Estate Residential) and only permits 13 units, and that the applicant is improperly requesting or relying on a zone change to achieve higher density. Comments were received stating the project is not a ministerial or "by­ right" approval, and that the City has full discretion to deny the application. Other comments stated the project is inconsistent with the surrounding community.

In response, the Project Site is zoned E-1 (Estate Residential), which permits 13 dwelling units.

However, pursuant to State Density Bonus Law (SDBL), the applicant is entitled to request increased density and other development incentives or concessions in exchange for providing affordable housing. (Gov. Code§ 65915)
No zone change has been requested or is proposed as part of this Project. Instead, the project would include 2 very-low-income units, entitling it to a 50% bonus (up to 7 additional "bonus" 09/23/2025 PH1 Page 354 of 386

ADD TO PACKET H l llX Memo (cont.) en vi ran men ta I p I an n in g. inc. homes), incentives, waivers, and reduced parking standards. These SDBL benefits are mandatory and ministerial under SDBL. (Gov. Code,§ 65915, subds. (b)(l), (e)(l), (f)(5), (j)(l ).) The proposed 19-unit development reflects the application of SDBL to the baseline zoning and does not require a zone change per state law. (Gov. Code,§ 65915 (f)(5) Further, under Government Code section 66323, ADUs and JADUs that meet certain objective criteria are permitted by right and must be approved ministerially. The project includes 16 JADUs permitted by right and without a zone change under state law.

The City's discretion to deny or reduce the density of qualifying affordable housing projects is further limited Under the Housing Accountability Act ("HAA"; Gov. Code§ 65589.5). The HAA prohibits a jurisdiction from finding a project inconsistent with any plan, policy, or standard due to the receipt of a density bonus, waiver, or similar benefit. (Gov. Code, § 65589.5, subd. (j)(3).) The City may not disapprove or condition a housing project that complies with objective standards unless it makes specific written findings supported by substantial evidence that the project would result in an unavoidable, significant impact on public health or safety (as defined) that cannot be mitigated. No such impact has been identified.

Accordingly, there is no zone change associated with the Project, and its residential density is permissible under SDBL, ADU law, and state housing law. While the City retains discretion over design review and CEQA authority, its discretion over project approval is constrained by state housing law including SDBL, ADU law, and the HAA.

Finally, contrary to the comment, the project is consistent with the General Plan land use and development in the surrounding community. The site is zoned E-1 and land use designated Low Density Residential, allowing 13 base units and the Project's proposed 19 homes with the requested density bonus. Land uses in the area transition from denser homes and the elementary school to the west and south within the city of Vista to estate residential uses to the east and north which are within the County of San Diego. The Project would develop 4.69 acres of the

6.47-acre site fronting Monte Vista Drive to the south, leaving 1.78 acres as open space on the site's northern edge.

By creating new homes within walking distance of an elementary school-including two affordable homes for very low-income families-the Project advances General Plan and Housing Element goals related to expanding housing by helping to ensure that more families, regardless of income, have access to safe, high-quality housing in a vibrant, connected neighborhood.

For all of the reasons above, the Project is consistent with the site's existing zoning and General Plan designation, pursuant to applicable State housing laws. No inconsistency exists that would justify denial or reduction of the Project under CEQA or applicable local or state regulations. To the contrary, the Project is demonstrably compatible with the character and scale of the surrounding neighborhood. The EIR prepared for the City's General Plan (2012) evaluated residential buildout of this site and surrounding areas, and no substantial new environmental impacts would occur. Therefore, no further CEQA analysis of zoning consistency or land use impacts is required under CEQA Guidelines § 15183.
-2-
09/23/2025 PH1 Page 355 of 386

ADD TO PACKET H l llX Memo (cont.) en vi ran men ta I p I an n in g. inc.

Topical Response No. 2 -CEQA Analysis
The City received comments stating that the Project is being advanced without proper environmental review, despite concerns about traffic congestion (particularly around the elementary school), parking, lack of sidewalks and pedestrian safety, hillside runoff, and fire safety. These comments claim the Project avoids proper environmental review under CEQA and suggest that a full Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is required.

As explained in the Project's CEQA documentation, the City of Vista's General Plan EIR (certified in 2012) analyzed the potential environmental impacts associated with residential development on this site and throughout the planning area. The proposed Project is consistent with the General Plan, and no peculiar, off-site, cumulative, or new significant or more severe impacts have been identified that would require preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR under Public Resources Code section 21083.3 or CEQA Guidelines section 15183. Accordingly, the Project is exempt from further environmental review.

Traffic, School-Area Congestion, and Pedestrian Safety. Multiple commenters expressed concern about increased traffic, including congestion, traffic safety, and pedestrian safety nearby the elementary school.

In response, in terms of traffic congestion, CEQA no longer uses level of service (LOS) or peak­ hour congestion as the metric for assessing transportation impacts. Under Senate Bill 743, the appropriate CEQA threshold is vehicle miles traveled (VMT). A VMT analysis was prepared pursuant to CEQA and in accordance with the City of Vista's Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (adopted December 2020). The City Guidelines assume that VMT impacts would be less than significant for projects that are consistent with the General Plan and that generate less than 1,000 Average Daily Trips (ADT). Such projects are presumed VMT-reducing as locally serving or based on substantial evidence provided by the QPR Technical Advisory Committee supporting SB 743 implementation that VMT impacts of small projects would not be "significant."
As explained in the 15183 Checklist, this small housing project is consistent with the site's General Plan land use designation under State housing law and is anticipated to generate just 190 ADT. Accordingly, the Project is presumed to have a less than significant impact due to its small size and General Plan consistency and screens out of a full VMT assessment. As such, no new impact would result compared to the PEIR.

Separate from the VMT analysis prepared to support the CEQA exemption, the applicant completed a Local Transportation Assessment (LT A), prepared by CR Associates in October 2024. It identified no significant project impact, concluding that both Monte Vista Drive and the project intersection would operate at acceptable LOS under existing plus project conditions.

Existing volumes on Monte Vista Drive are approximately 5,194 ADT. Even with the Project's estimated 190 ADT, total volumes on Monte Vista Drive would remain well below its design -3-09/23/2025 PH1 Page 356 of 386

ADD TO PACKET H l llX Memo (cont.) en vi ran men ta I p I an n in g. inc. capacity of 8,800 ADT. Additionally, school-area traffic was evaluated based on existing patterns, and the incremental increase in Project-related trips is not expected to materially affect peak-period school circulation or create unsafe conditions.

Comments at the Planning Commission hearing further contended the traffic impacts of ADUs were not evaluated. However, the 1800 Monte Vista Residential -Supplemental Traffic Memorandum (June 16, 2025) prepared by expert transportation consultants CR Associates explained that the JADUs would be located within the building footprint of the primary residence and, for this and the other reasons outlined in the memorandum, any potential trips associated with the JADUs were accounted for within the Project's estimated 190 ADT.

Finally, in terms of transportation and pedestrian safety, the Project is not expected to create or exacerbate unsafe conditions; rather, it introduces safety-enhancing infrastructure for pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers. The Project would comply with the City's Municipal Code requirements related to streets, sidewalks, and driveway improvements-no hazards or dangerous conditions would be created.

In addition, the Project integrates a 5-foot-wide sidewalk separated from the roadway along its frontage (required as Condition of Approval, Land Development Engineering Condition 3(d)(2)), as well as an 8-foot shoulder that may function as a parking lane, bike lane, or shoulder. Sight distance will meet Caltrans criteria improve safety per Land Development Engineering Condition of Approval 3(k).

In sum, the 15183 Checklist correctly found no peculiar, off-site, cumulative, or new significant or more severe impacts have been identified that would require preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR under Public Resources Code section 21083.3 or CEQA Guidelines section 15183.

Parking Supply. Comments raised concerns regarding the adequacy of parking provided by the Project. As an initial matter, parking supply is generally considered a social impact, not an environmental one that is subject to CEQA. (San Franciscans Upholding the Downtown Plan v.

City & county of San Francisco (2002) 103 Cal.App.4th 656, 697.) Nonetheless, the Project exceeds both City and State parking requirements. Each home includes a two-car garage and a driveway that can accommodate two additional vehicles, for a total of four spaces per unit. In addition, the Project provides 19 on-street parking spaces, resulting in a total of 95 spaces-above the 86 spaces required by City code.

This exceeds the requirements of SDBL (Gov. Code§ 65915(p)), which limits parking to 2.5 spaces per unit for four-bedroom homes at the applicant's request. No additional parking is required for JADUs under Gov. Code§ 66334. Thus, the Project provides adequate parking, and no parking-related environmental impacts are anticipated. -4 -
09/23/2025 PH1 Page 357 of 386

ADD TO PACKET H l llX Memo (cont.) en vi ran men ta I p I an n in g. inc.

Hydrology and Runoff. Concerns about hillside runoff were also raised in public comments. A site-specific hydrology and drainage study was prepared for the Project. The proposed development includes stormwater infrastructure designed to capture and manage on-site runoff, consistent with current City and regional stormwater standards. No significant hydrology or water quality impacts are anticipated as a result of the Project.

Fire Safety. Concerns about fire safety were also raised in public comments, with commenters asserting the Project is located in a very high fire hazard severity zone.

In response, the Project is not located within any high or very high fire hazard severity zone.

CalFire's prior and updated Fire Hazard Severity Zone maps confirm the site is not within a moderate, high, or very high hazard area.1 The Vista City Council introduced and adopted the updated CalFire maps by Ordinance on June 10, 2025, in accordance with state law, confirming that the Project lies outside any designated LRA or SRA hazard zone.2 Further, the Project has been designed and conditioned for fire safety, including adequate emergency access, fire sprinklers, brush management, irrigated landscaping, and development in compliance with the regularly updated and stringent standards of the California Building Code and California Fire Code. (See Fire Department's Conditions of Approval.) Because the Project is located outside any designated fire hazard severity zone and complies with all fire access, water supply, and building safety standards, no new significant impacts or substantially more severe impacts have been identified that would require additional CEQA review.

Summary. All environmental issues raised in comments have been evaluated in accordance with CEQA. The Project is consistent with the City's General Plan and zoning regulations, and the environmental impacts associated with these issue areas were previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. No new significant impacts or substantially more severe impacts have been identified that would require additional CEQA review. As such, no further environmental documentation is required under CEQA, and the City appropriately applies CEQA Guidelines section 15183 to find the Project CEQA-exempt.
1 https :// experience.arcgis. com/ experience/ 5 065 c99 8b4b0462f9ec3 c6c226c61 0a9 /page/Compare-o ld-and-new-LRA­ FHSZ and https://calfire-
forestry. maps.arcgis. com/ apps/webappviewer/index.h tm l ?id=98 8d4 31a42b24 2b2 9d89 5 97 ab69 3 d008 2 City Council June 10, 2025 Minutes https://portal.laserfiche.com/Portal/DocView.aspx?id=2204988&repo=r- 3fDb2553
City Council Ordinance No. 2025-03 https://portal.laserfiche.com/Portal/DocView.aspx?id=2204043&repo=r- 3fDb2553
-5 -09/23/2025 PH1 Page 358 of 386

ADD TO PACKET
Attachment 2
09/23/2025 PH1 Page 359 of 386

EXPERIENCE
18 years

EDUCATION
BS, Civil Engineering,
San Diego State
University

ACCREDITATION
Professional Engineer
(Traffic), CA #TR2660

AF FILIATIONS
lnstitllte of
Transportation
Engineers (ITE) -Past
President (2023),
President (2022};
San Diego ITE Mobility
Task Force;
San Diego
ITE
Modeling
Subcommittee
Phuong Nguyen TE
Senior Traffic Engineer

ADD TO PACKET
Phuong Nguyen is a senior-level traffic engineering professional with extensive experience in delivering a wide range of transportation solutions. He has led and managed projects in areas such as parking plans, traffic operations, micro­ sim ulation, VMT mitigation strategies, and transportation impact analysis, as well as conceptual engineering for tr ansportation systems. Phuong's deep expertise enables him to develop innovative analysis methods and tools that enhance modeling, visualization, and traffic operations analysis. He is profici ent in the latest industry software, including VISSIM, Synchro/SimTraffic, Q-Free, and both Activity-Based and 4-Step travel demand models. Phuong's technical acumen, combined with his keen understanding of client needs, ensures the successful advancement of complex transportation projects.

RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
City of Vista Traffic Engineering On-Call, Vista, CA: Deputy Contract Manager and Task Order Manager-Over the past twenty years, staff at CRA has assisted the City of Vista in a variety of traffic engineering assessments.

Assignments have inc luded HSIP projects, traffic impact analyses of new development proposals, peer review, roadway speed studies, parking assessments, roadway operational and circulation studies, interchange improvements, traffic calming, and roadway design standards. CRA also participated in City Council/Pl anning Commission briefings and presentations.

City of San Marcos On-Call Traffic Engineering and Support Services San arcos, CA. Deputy Contract Manager and Task Order Manager -CRA is providing the City of San Marcos with a variety of traffic engineering services.

Task orders under this contract are anticipated for the preparation and peer review of traffic studies and operational analyses, signal timing update, adaptive signal pilot program, TMC development, cycle track feasibility studies and alternatives development, cost estimates, ITS evaluations, safety analysiis and countermeasure development, traffic calming evaluation and design, traffic engineering standards and guidelines development and manual updates, grant writing, plan checks, traffic calming guideline, TOM ordinance evaluation, staff report preparation and presentation to the Traffic Commission and City Council.

City of Solana Beach Traffic Engineering As-N eeded, Solana Beach, CA:

Project Manager-Since its founding, CRA has been a trusted traffic engineering partner for the City of Solana Beach, providing ongoing as-needed services to support the City's transportation goals. Through this on-call contract, CRA has delivered a wide range of technical expertise, including traffic impact assessments for City-led projects, and peer reviews of traffic studies submitted by private developers, and traffic calming evaluations to enhance safety and mobility for residents and businesses. Additionally, CRA has conducted parking analyses and coastal access evalL1ations, ensuring a balanced approach to managing local transportation challenges. Our continued partnership with the City reflects CRA's ability to provide responsive, data-driven solutions th at align with community needs and regulatory requiirements.
09/23/2025 PH1 Page 360 of 386

••• ADD TO PACKET
Phuong Nguyen TE
(Resume continued)
Oceanside General Plan Update and Smart and Sustainable Corridors Specific Plan, Oceanside, CA: Traffic Engineer-CRA is leading the development of the Circulation Element of the City of Oceanside General Plan update as well as a related planning effort, Smart and Sustainable Corridors Specific Plan (SSCSP), which focuses on three of the City's key thoroughfares. The SSC SP proposes revisioning these corridors to align with the City's Vision and Guiding Principles. For each corridor, land use, urban design, and mobility considerations are incorporated into the SSCSP. The SSCSP mobility recommendations are being prepared in conjunction with focused community engagement and seek to support the transformation of these corridors into Complete Streets.

Central Mobility Hub, San Diego, CA: Lead Traffic Engineer-CRA is leading the active transportation planning and traffic operations tasks for the Central Mobility Hub Comprehensive Multi modal Corridor Plan (CMCP). CRA's responsibilities include developing circulation concepts for bicycle, pedestrian, transit and vehicular access to the station, traffic operations assessments of various alternatives that account for transit services, light and heavy rail operations, at-grade rail crossings, and connections to the proposed automated people mover serving the airport.

Multimodal transportation within the airport and surrounding neighborhoods and connections with Coronado are also being analyzed. The CMCP findings will be incorporated into SANDAG's Regional Transportation Plan.

Bayshore Bikeway Barrio Logan , San Diego, CA: Traffic Engineer-CRA in collaboration with SAN DAG and Quality Infrastructure Corporation (QIC), took the Bayshore Bikeway -Barrio Logan Segment from concept to concrete. This urban bikeway project is constructing more than two miles of Class I bikeway along Harbor Drive between Park Boulevard and 32nd Street. Torno is leading portions of the traffic engineering design, which includes traffic signal modifications for six intersections within the area and street lighting improvements along the corridor.

The project is also implementing a "Request for Experimentation" through the California Traffic Control Devices Committee (CTCDC) and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to enhance pedestrian and bicyclist safety at these intersections. Diagnostic meetings are held with the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway (BNSF), San Diego Metropolitan Transit System (MTS), and City of San Diego for all the various crossings to ensure public safety.

La Mesa Boulevard Complete Streets Plan -Segment 1, La Mesa, CA: Lead Traffic Engineer-CRA is leading the development of the La Mesa Boulevard Complete Streets Plan which aims to improve La Mesa's public infrastructure and ensure safe, comfortable, and accessible mobility options for everyone. This Plan guides future investments in mobility improvements and street design through goals, policies, infrastructure, and programmatic recommendations. In collaboration with MTS, SAN DAG, and Caltrans, the project will redesign an auto-centric corridor into a balanced street that supports a vibrant mix of uses, increases neighborhood development opportunities, expands transportation choices, and improves connections to neighborhood destinations. Recommendations include First-Last Mile connections, mobility hub locations, and smart technologies.

Clairemont Complete Corridors, San Diego, CA: Traffic Engineer-CRA worked with SANDAG to develop solutions for two Clairemont community corridors: Clairemont Drive and Morena Boulevard. The focus of the project was to improve active transportation and Flexible Fleets access to the Trolley stations. The study offers an ideal opportunity to implement the Clairemont Community Plan Update's mobility element policies, Mid-Coast Mobility Hub strategies, and the 2021 Regional Plan Complete Corridors vision.

Morena Corridor Specific Plan, San Diego, CA: Traffic Engineer-CRA served as the mobility consultant for the Morena Corridor Specific Plan, responsible for developing alternatives to create a multimodal corridor. Traffic volumes were analyzed, leading to a recommended road diet along Morena Boulevard which provided for a two­ way cycle track adjacent to the rail corridor. Intersection curb extensions, high visibility crosswalks, lead pedestrian and bicycle intervals, and additional bicycle facilities further supported active transportation access to transit and mobility. CRA developed cross-sections, plan view concepts, and a 3-D rendering of the corridor, and prepared a Transportation Impact Analysis in support of environmental documentation. 09/23/2025 PH1 Page 361 of 386

EXPERIENCE
12 years

EDUCATION
BS, Civil Engineering,
Brigham Young
University

ACCREDITATION
Professional Engineer
(Civil), CA #C87664

AFFI LIATIONS
Orange County Traffic
Engineering Council
(OCTEC)-Board
Member
Institute of
Transportation
Engiineers (ITE) -
Member
Trevor Briggs PE
Senior Traffic Engineer

ADD TO PACKET
Trevor Briggs is a Senior Transportation Engineer at CR Associates (CRA) and has worked for public and private clients throughout southern Califomia. He has experience as a project manager or lead transportation engineer for projects related to parking analyses, traffic impact studies (LOS and VMT), traffic operations, safety evaluations, drive-through queui ng, corridor studies, conceptual desiign, as well as various traffic engineering design plans, such as:

Signing and Stripi ng, Traffic S ignal, Traffic Control, and ITS plans.

RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
City of San Marcos On-Call Traffic E ngineering and Support Services, San M arcos, CA: Senior Traffic Engineer-CRA is providing the City of San Marcos with a variety of traffic engineering services. Task orders under this contract are anticipated for the preparation and peer review of traffic studies and operational analyses, signal timing update, adaptive signal pilot program, TMC development, cycle track feasibility studies and alterna tives developme nt, cost estimates, ITS evaluations, safety analysis and countermeasure development, traffic calming evaluation and design, traffic engineering standards and guidelines development and manual updates, grant writing, plan checks, traffic calming guideline, TDM ordinance evaluation, staff report preparation and presentation to the Traffic Commission and City Council.

Suggested oute o Sc ool Map Updates Project, Irvine, CA: Senior Traffic Engineer-CRA has been contracted by the City of Irvine to update and develop Suggested Routes to School (SRTS) maps for 45 schools-comprising 31 existing map updates and 14 new maps-as part of the City's continued commitment to active transportation and student safety. The project encompasses a comprehensive review of existing condi1ions, development of new pedestrian and bicycle routes, and the creation of visually engaging, user-friendly SRTS maps supported by community and school district input. CRA will integrate technical analysis (including collision data, equity metrics, and multimodal network assessments) with stakeholder engagement to produce implementable, data­ driven recommendations for infrastructure improvements. Tasks include field data collection, outreach with school administrators and parents, and facilitation of citywide engagement. The final deliverables will support safer, more accessible travel for students and families, aligning with Irvine's Sustainable Mobility Plan and multimodal goals.

Pedestrian and Bicycle S fety Action Plans and afe Routes o Scho I Reports, Riverside, CA: Senior Traffic Engineer-The City of Riverside has contracted CRA to develop i ndividual ized P edestrian and Bicycle Safety Action Plans and customized Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Reports for 50 elementary and middle schools across the City. This comprehensive initiative-spanning stakeholder engagement, school site assessments, mobil ity analysis, and infrastructure planning-aims to enhance student safety and promote active transportation. Key project components include data-driven school-based mobility assessments, parent and student engagement through surveys and workshops, and the development of SRTS maps and action plans tailored to each school's specific needs. The final deliverables will feed into a citywide SRTS Master Plan, al igning infrastructure improvements, programmatic initiatives, and funding strategies to support lo�m pedestrian and bicycle safety goals. 09/23/2025 PH1 Page 362 of 386

••• ADD TO PACKET
Trevor Briggs PE
(Resume continued)
Norwalk Design Services for Local Streets Rehab Program, Los Angeles County, CA: Traffic Engineer-CR Associates is leading the Traffic Train Interface Study for the Los Angeles Metro Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2, analyzing interactions between the planned light rail extension and the existing roadway network using Vissim microsimulation modeling. Microsimulation is the most effective tool for evaluating the complex relationships between rail operations, vehicular traffic, pedestrians, and transit users along this corridor. The study includes traffic impact analysis, rail crossing evaluations, signal coordination, and multimodal integration to ensure safe and efficient operations. CRA assesses at-grade and grade-separated crossings, optimizing signal timing to minimize delays, and developing strategies to enhance pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicle safety at key intersections. The study will provide Metro with data-driven recommendations to improve rail operations, traffic flow, and multimodal connectivity while minimizing disruptions to local communities.

NewMark Merrill Retail Traffic Study*, Vista, CA: Lead Traffic Engineer-The project consists of the development of one coffee shop and fast-food restaurant, both with drive-through lanes. Trevor evaluated the trip generation estimates for the project, conducted an intersection Level of Service (LOS) analysis, prepared a VMT assessment, and analyzed the drive-through lane queuing capacities for the proposed project in coordination with City staff as part of the entitlement process.

Environmental Services On-Call, City of Menifee*, Menifee, CA: Lead Traffic Engineer-Trevor was the lead traffic engineer for the City of Menifee Environmental Services On-Call, which included preparing traffic studies, on behalf of the City of Menifee, for private development projects within the City. Trevor conducted intersection and roadway segment Level of Service (LOS) analyses, Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) screening and analyses, safety assessments, and site circulation review for various land use projects (industrial, residential, community churches and parks, etc.) within the City of Menifee. In addition, Trevor would attend Planning Commission and City Council hearings as a part of the on-call for the various projects.

MainPlace Mall Transformation*, Santa Ana, CA: Lead Traffic Engineer-An application was submitted in January 2019 for a specific plan to allow up to 1,900 residential units, 400 hotel rooms, 1,400,000 total square feet of commercial space, and up to 750,000 square feet of office space for the Main Place Mall. The project required approval of a zone change to create a new specific plan (SP No. 4 ), and an addendum to the original 1983 Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Trevor conducted a parking demand analysis to confirm adequate parking supply for the specific plan and a Level of Service (LOS) analysis at study intersections to confirm no new transportation impacts with the specific plan.

Speedway Commerce Center II Specific Plan EIR*, San Bernardino County, CA: Senior Traffic Engineer- The project consists of the development of six separate planning areas with up to 6,600,000 square feet of high-cube logistics and e-commerce uses with 261,360 sf of ancillary commercial uses, and approximately 98 acres of parking fields/drop lot areas. Trevor evaluated the trip generation estimates, included the application of passenger car equivalent factors for trucks, conducted the Level of Service {LOS) analysis at 72 study intersections, and reviewed the VMT analysis for the proposed Specific Plan.

Gerald Des mond Bridge Replacement*, Los Angeles County, CA: Traffic Engineer-The Gerald Desmond Bridge is a major access point to the Port of Long Beach from downtown Long Beach and surrounding communities, carrying 1-710 over the Port's Inner Harbor to Terminal Island. The replacement bridge included a six-lane, cable-stayed structure, with a 205-foot clearance to allow the newest generation of cargo ships to enter the Port. Kimley-Horn and Associates provided the preliminary design for ITS, traffic signals, and lighting for the project. Trevor provided construction support and design updates as needed. *Prior to CRA
09/23/2025 PH1 Page 363 of 386

ADD TO PACKET
From: Jennifer V Benitez
To: Kathy Valdez: Patsy Omw; John Conley: Doris Cal:vo; John Franklin: Katie Melendez: Jeffrey Fox; Dan O"Donnell:

Corinna Contreras
Subject: project p2.4-0139 1800 Monte vista drive.

Tuesday, August 12, 202.5 11:04:02 AM Date: I Some people who received this message don't often get email fro� I earn why this is important
Good morning council members and mayor,
I'm writing to let you know I am opposed to the project on 1800 Monte Vista Dr. I can't seem to understand how a project with the potential to be 54 dwellings can pass in our quiet fanning neighborhood. The project says over 6 acres but they are really only building on 5 because of steep de Ii e in back. I can go on but better to get to the legality of the project I want to focus on the Council's real authority and responsibility under state law-specifically the California Environmental Quality Act, or CEQA-to require a full Enviromnental Impact Repmt for this project.

The City's own 2025 CEQA Exemption Checklist argues that finther study can be skipped under Section 15183 by referencing an older citywide EIR. But that exemption only applies if there are truly no new or "peculiar" impacts that weren't folly analyzed befme.

The facts at hand show othe1wise:

The project density now vastly exceeds the original zoni.ng-19 homes and an expected 16 attached ADUs----doubling the residential footprint without any meaningful review of the resulting burdens. In addition the garnges can also be JADUs.

The focused traffic study only models trips for the prirna1y homes, ignoring the extra car trips, street parking demand, and congestion from ADUs and unsanctioned garage conversions. This dismissal especially threatens safety near Monte Vista Elementaiy during morning drop-off and afternoon pick-up.
•The L TA study itself admits the new dl'iveway "currently does not meet the required corner sight distance due to existing vegetation obsh'ncting the drive1·'s view to the east," with safety only "expected" to improve later if grading is done (LTA, p. 8). That means a rec,ogn.ized hazai·d for both drivers and pedestri.ans if and when the road opens.
•Ongoing concerns about flooding and duinage 1·emain unresolved and are only pape1·ed over in the checklist,despite clear evidence that more pave,d surfaces and more residents compound the risk.

Under CEQA, if there is substantial evidence that a project may cause significant envi1·onmental impacts, preparing an EIR becomes the legal requirement-not just an option. With these facts and the technical documentation city staff and consultants have raised, this Council has both the discretion and the duty to reject the claim of exemption and instruct staff to conduct a thorough, project-specific EIR.

Doing so not only protects the city from potential legal challenges, it ensures that all risks­ especially those we see in our eve1yday lives-are reviewed and properly mitigated before a project of this scale moves fo1ward.
09/23/2025 PH1 Page 364 of 386

Please use your authority to demand a real EIR and protect the future of our neighborhood. I have put my life savings into buying my property specifically in this area because it was 1/2 acre minimum. Also because it is surrounded by the nursery where no development was likely. according to owner)
Thank you.

Jennifer Benitez
Property owner on Giddings Ranch Rd .
09/23/2025 PH1 Page 365 of 386

From: LUCY FONSECA
To: John Franklin; Katie Melendez; Jeffrey Fox: Dan O"Donnell; Corinna Contreras; Kathy Valdez: Patsy Chow; John Conley: Doris CaIvo
Subject: Subject: August 12, 2025 Monte Vista Project — School Traffic Impact Study Incomplete and Unsafe Date: Monday, August 11, 2025 2:15:47 PM
You don't often get email from Learn wny s is mporan
Dear Mayor and City Council:

I am writing as a Vista resident to place on record my strong objection to the adequacy of the traffic study used for the Monte Vista Residential Project (P24-0139).

The Local Transportation Assessment (LTA) accepted by the City is fundamentally flawed in how it addresses — or fails to address — traffic generated by Monte Vista Elementary School.

The Problem
Monte Vista Elementary operates on a fixed bell schedule:

Start time: 8:00 AM
Dismissal: 2:18 PM
It is a simple, observable fact that vehicle traffic on Monte Vista Drive spikes sharply in the 20-30 minutes before and after these times. This is when cars are queued bumper -to -bumper, children are crossing, and congestion is at its peak. These surge" periods are short but intense — very different from a normal commute pattern.

The LTA, however, appears to rely on broad AM and PM time blocks, which average traffic counts across a full hour and therefore dilute the actual peak volumes. This is a textbook error in handling what traffic engineers refer to as a "special generator' a location like a school that produces unique, high -intensity bursts of traffic.

What's Missing
There is no evidence that dismissal period counts were even collected in the true 2:00-2:30 PM window.

Queue lengths, pedestrian conflicts, and sightline safety during these surges were not analyzed.

The ITE Trip Generation Manual explicitly states that schools require site - specific count windows — yet the City accepted a study that skipped this.

Why It Matters
The Staff Report's conclusion that there is "no significant pedestrian/bicycle safety impact" is not supported by substantial evidence if the underlying study fails to measure the only time windows when child pedestrian safety is most at risk.

What Should Happen
The City has both the legal authority and the duty under CEQA §15183 to require a 09/23/2025 PH1 Page 366 of 386

revised traffic analysis that:

1. Measures traffic during the actual 30-minute drop-off and dismissal surges.

2. Evaluates queue spillback, crosswalk safety, and sight distance at these exact times.

Without this, any approval would ignore well-known safety hazards in front of an elementary school — hazards that will worsen with this development.

Please correct this error before proceeding.

Sincerely,
Lucy Fonseca
Calle Sinaloa
Vista, CA 92084
09/23/2025 PH1 Page 367 of 386

From: Kristin Gulley
To: Public Comments; Kathy Valdez; Patsy Chow; ]ohn Conley, Doris Calvo: John Franklin; Katie Melendez; Jeffrey Fox. dodonellkvista.00v; Corinna Contreras
Subject: 12 August Council meeting PH 1 appeal of P24 0139 Monte Vista Residential Date: Monday, August ii, 2025 11:03:56 PM
Attachments: monte vista letter.docx
Some people who received this message don't often get email from imporan-
Kristin Gulley
Sunrise Circle
Vista, 92084
11 August 2025
To the Members of the Council:

Learn w niS is
Thank you for your careful work on behalf of this amazing city! I have visited Vista many times since the 1970s --staying with family in the home where I now live-- more frequently in the past dozen years, and lived here, a full year. In the years since my first childhood visit, I have watched and marveled at Vista's growth. What was once a sleepy, mostly rural community, a place for a cheaper motel night than ocean -kissing Carlsbad or Oceanside, is now a proud North County destination! The city's commitment to supporting arts and culture in community is reflected in the walkable Village and jewel of Brengle Terrace. Vista schools are well - supported, and signs of healthy growth exist alongside preservation efforts. Well done! We do need more housing in North County, and in Vista. Others will give you facts and figures addressing that need, but what I am seeing in terms of planned growth in the Alta Vista/Foothill area is cause for concern and redirection. The proposed development adjacent to Monte Vista Elementary is simply too large for the site. Sixteen of the nineteen units slated for construction already come with ADU, and existing state law allows all nineteen to also add one additional unit each. That adds up to fifty-four units on fewer than six acres, all pouring out onto Monte Vista Drive. If you have not already done so, please take a day or two to drive past Monte Vista Elementary at drop off and pick up times, and again for the after -school program pick up in the evening. The intersection at Monte Vista and Valley/York is chaotic and unsafe, even with a crossing guard. Parent behaviour is part of the problem —on a daily basis I see parents making u turns in the fire house driveway, pulling their small children out from between large, parked SUVs to dart across the street far from crosswalks or corners, parking illegally close to intersections, etc., etc. As it is, parents do not have enough parking available to them to safely manage pick up and drop off, and now, this new development will add more 09/23/2025 PH1 Page 368 of 386

families whilst removing some of the Monte Vista Drive street parking.

The number of cars wholly unconnected with Monte Vista Elementary will dramatically increase, adding to the traffic danger of that intersection and the neighborhood in general.

The developers will use a formula to calculate this traffic which assumes nineteen units, all with regular commute times, yet we all know this is a wild guess at best, and it does not account for up to fifty-four units, each with at least one vehicle per unit! If we are making assumptions, we might consider that these ADU might attract multigenerational families. I live in a multigenerational household where I serve as caregiver to my elderly parents (who are also deeply concerned about this proposed development!) and one of the facts of living with aging parents is the increase in traffic to the household—on any given day, we might have a visiting nurse, a physical therapist, a medication delivery, or medical supply delivery—that’s four additional “trips” to our doorstep right there—and made by people unfamiliar with the specific traffic flow. That might not seem like much—but if this proposed development is not downsized, the traffic along Monte Vista and Valley could lead to disturbing consequences! I know of at least one near-fatal car-pedestrian collision on Monte Vista involving a young student and his father being hit on their way into the school; we do not need another! I urge you to reconsider this proposed development, and to ask the developers to return to the council later with a scaled-back plan reducing the number of units on the site, and adding traffic mitigation/management to their proposal. Let’s keep growing Vista, but let’s do it with care for the current and future Monte Vista Elementary families, and for the safety of the whole community.

Respectfully,
Kristin Gulley
09/23/2025 PH1 Page 369 of 386

From: Corinna Contreras
To: Kathy Valdez
Subject: FW: Monte Vista Project (Case P24-0139)
Date: Tuesday, August 12, 2025 11:59:23 AM
Please include this in the record if you have not received a copy of the email already. Thank you! From: B Mayes
Date: Tuesday, August 12, 2025 at 11:27 AM
To: Corinna Contreras
Subject: Monte Vista Project (Case P24-0139)
You don't often get email from
important
Dear Council Member Contreras:

Learn why this is
I strongly oppose the Planning Commission's approval of Case P24-0139 on June 17, 2025, for the Monte Vista Residential project at 1800 Monte Vista Diive. The proposal for 19 single-family homes, 16 ADUs, and potential 19 garage conversions totaling 54 units on a 6.47 -acre E-1 zoned site raises significant concern:

Ntisleading Public Notice: The notice listed only 19 units, failing to disclose 16 ADUs and possible garage conversions, denying residents fair input.

Inadequate Affordable Housing: With just 2 affordable units for 54 potential units, the project falls short of Vista's 10-15% requirement and state expectations for ADU affordability.

Zoning Overreach: 54 units exceed typical E-1 limits (likely 1-4 unitslacre), suggesting the density bonus doesn't justify the scale.

Environmental Oversight: The CEQA §15183 exemption ignores the tripling of density's impact on traffic, infrastructure, and safety near the school, as the traffic study is insufficient.

This approval threatens our community's character and safety. I urge you to reverse or remand the decision for full disclosure, proper affordability measures, zoning compliance, and a thorough environmental review.

Sincerely,
B. Mayes
09/23/2025 PH1 Page 370 of 386

09/23/2025 PH1 Page 371 of 386

From: Corinna Contreras
To: Kathy Valdez
Subject: FW: Oppose Monte Vista Project (P24-0139) — Legal & Safety Concerns Date: Tuesday, August 12, 2025 12:01:23 PM
Please include this in the public record if you have not yet received a copy of this email Thank you! From: Rebecca Lutz
Date: Tuesday, August 12, 2025 at 12:00 PM
To: John Franklin , Jeffrey Fox [email protected]>, Corinna Contreras [email protected]>, Katie Melendez , Dan O'Donnell
[email protected]>, [email protected]
Subject: Oppose Monte Vista Project (P24-0139) — Legal & Safety Concerns You don't often get email frorri
mportan-
Council members,
Learn why this is
I urge you to delay or deny approval of the Monte Vista project (P24-0139) based on the following documented deficiencies:
t. Fire Access Width Violation
The Fire Department's own Condition of Approval states:

Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed improved width of not less than 24 feet." (Fire COA, p. 2)
The approved civil plans (Sheet C3.1) show multiple private drive sections only 20.0 feet wide. This violates fire safety requirements and creates legal exposure under the Housing Accountability Act's health & safety exception.

2. Uncounted ADU/JADU Traffic
The project includes 16 attached ADUs (Staff Report, p. 56), yet both the Traffic Study (p. 7) and Staff Report base trip generation only on 19 single-family homes.

Under CEQA, foreseeable uses must be analyzed — omitting traffic from 16 ADUs (and potentially 19 garage-to-JADU conversions) understates impacts.

3. Pending Water & Sewer Approvals
The Staff Report clearly states VID water service and DEHQ sewer approvals are still pending and required before grading or building permits (Staff Report, pp. 198-200).

Approving now without secured utilities is premature and risky.

4. CEQA §15188 Misuse
The Staff Report claims no "project -specific significant impacts" (p. 59) — yet the traffic 09/23/2025 PH1 Page 372 of 386

analysis omits ADU trips entirely. CEQA requires review of the “whole of the action,” meaning all foreseeable units and impacts. By ignoring ADUs and JADUs in its traffic and parking analysis, this undermines the legal basis for claiming a CEQA 15183 exemption.

5. Traffic Underestimation: The traffic study and staff report counted trips for only 19 single-family homes, ignoring the 16 attached ADUs already in the plans — plus the fact that any garage can be legally converted to an additional JADU under state law. That means dozens more households and vehicles than analyzed.

6. School Zone Risk: No analysis was done for school peak-hour traffic or pedestrian safety at Monte Vista Elementary, even though the project driveway is within the school’s traffic influence area.

These issues are not minor — they are fundamental legal and safety deficiencies in the record.

Please require correction and re-analysis before approval.

Sincerely,
Rebecca Ponchetti
York Dr; Vista, CA 92084
09/23/2025 PH1 Page 373 of 386

From: FRANK SLOAT
To: Kathy Valdez: Jeffrey Fox
Subject: Monte Vista Costera Hills Development
Date: Tuesday, August 12, 2025 11:24:05 AM
You don't often get email frorr Learn wny n -s is mporan- Good evening, Council Members,
My name is Frank Sloat, and I've lived on Monte Vista for forty years. My grandson attends Monte Vista, a great school that's been at the heart of our community for generations.

I understand there's a housing shortage and I agree that we need thoughtful solutions.

However, the Costera Hills Group proposed development, as it stands, needs to be reconsidered.

Here's why:

First, the plan would remove a significant amount of green space — space where families gather, kids play, and the community connects. Green space isn't just nice to have —it helps absorb rainwater, reduce flooding, and prevent erosion. We already see erosion problems near the school's eastern embankment, where runoff brings mud into the parking lot. Removing even more green space will make those problems worse.

Second, the proposed density combined with the option of only one exit is a safety concern. In the event of a fire or other emergency, the bottleneck that could occur could be disastrous.

Third, pedestrian and bicycle safety must be addressed. Every day, I see families walking their children down Monte Vista to school without sidewalks or bike lanes to protect them from speeding cars. Adding continuous sidewalks to Foothill and designated bike lanes is not optional —it's essential.

This isn't about opposing housing —it's about making sure new development is safe, sustainable, and in harmony with our community's needs. We can build more homes without sacrificing safety, green space, and quality of life.

I urge you to require the developer to address these issues before moving forward. Let's choose responsible planning that works for everyone in Vista —now and for the future.

Thank you,
Frank Sloat
Yahoo Mail: Search. Organize. Conquer
09/23/2025 PH1 Page 374 of 386

From: Steve Kwo San Dieu°
To: Public Comments
Cc: Kathy Valdez: Patsy Chow; John Conley; Doris Calvo; John Franklin: Katie Melendez: Jeffrey Fox; Dan fl"Donnell:

Corinna Contreras
Subject: 1800 Monte Vista Dr project, better for 9 homes riot 19 Date: Tuesday, August 12, 2025 11:51:02 AM
Attachments: 1000039124.ipq
1000039119.ioa
111110(139125.1K1
10t1i10391.2b.1 oa
1000039127.mo
A
Please reduce the footprint of the 1800 Monte Vista Dr project. I'm at Monte Vista Dr. I can see directly into the proposed development and 19 homes will be a grave mistake.

Some people who received this message don't often get email from imporan-
Learn w t is is
I'm not even addressing the adjacent Monte Vista Elementary School issues for an accident waiting to happen and the neighboring impact on response times for Fire Station #2.

I'm one of many neighbors ardently opposed to the oversize and scope of the housing development. Scale it back ASAP. This is a slippery slope of over development in our area and a potential for congestion, frustration and disgruntled neighbors and constituents. I'm fairly new to Vista and a huge draw is for the large footprint of 1.58 acres and respectful and welcoming neighbors. I immediately met Paul at 1863 Monte Vista Dr at Erika at 1875, Noah and new family at 1885, Steve and Renee on Loma Vista Way and my business partner and beach volleyball pal Steve Bitgood at 1110 Loma Vista Way. Bob and family at 1831 Monte Vista Dr have the longest history and he's directly across the street. Seek his advice and counsel, please. He's a straight shooter and deserves the respect of his long history and family's legacy being one of the first families here.

At the very least, conduct a traffic study. On a normal May school morning before the 8am school start, I've included some screenshots. Not good for any 911 emergency, students being dropped off during "rush hour," nor the impact of another set of pictures when the nursery gets 18 wheeler deliveries daily! Be very careful, as the 19 homes will cascade into potential traffic chaos. And I haven't even mentioned the 45 to 60mph straightaway uphill and downhill for speedsters any given day and night.

Wishing you good compromises in the near and distant future_ I've been in San Diego County 30 plus years and I hope you all do the right thing today and tomorrow. One small suggestion is open Monte Vista Dr to two lanes at the project point, but limit to 8 to 11 homes and perhaps all involved will meet at a good compromise.

Respectfully submitted,
Ste hen
FYI, for quickest response, please text or call me. Thanks in advance. 09/23/2025 PH1 Page 375 of 386

11:30 oGiIG •0 5Guc
X 6 < - , •
4 Add more photos from other
y places?
Import from Facebook, Canon, your
computer, and more
X
09/23/2025 PH1 Page 376 of 386

11:32 0 Al•
E vista
lit recent 10 (.Best match)
A
Thu, May 29
0 5Guc
O
Add more photos from other
y places?
Import from Facebook, Canon, your
computer, and more
X
09/23/2025 PH1 Page 377 of 386

09/23/2025 PH1 Page 378 of 386

09/23/2025 PH1 Page 379 of 386

11:32 ,,Q •95G.,,0
Add to Move to
album Archive
Delete
from
device
Fri, May 30, 2025 • 7:57 AM
Add a caption...

Albums
Create Ord
pho
Shared Tree and weed
abatement Monte Vista D...
316 items
Tree trimming project May 2025
s Monte Vista Dr Vista CA 9...

Effects
EWE 1
0 K09/23/2025 PH1 Page 380 of 386

From:

To:

Subject:

Date:

Maria Jolliff
Public Comments
City Council Meeting Agenda Item PH1
Tuesday, August 12, 2025 1:40:10 PM

ADD TO PACKET
Dear Mayor and Council Members,
I am aware of the State Density Bonus Law that is being used as a loophole to build a highly dense Monte Vista Project in what would otherwise be Estate zoning. I am aware of all the work the city staff has so diligently done to ensure the Planning Commission and City Council have what they need to evaluate this project. On paper this fills a housing need and follows the laws. In reality this contributes to urban sprawl and increases the number of cars on the roads in an area that residents are greatly concerned about.

I believe that the state laws were well intentioned. I'm certain that these laws need amendment as we face climate extremes of drought and wildfire. Transportation is now the leading emitter of CO2 in the US, and other emissions are either greenhouse gases, unhealthy pollution, or both. Car emissions are associated with asthma and children are more vulnerable. Building a development in an area 4 miles from a grocery, 1.6-1.9 miles from light rail, with no bus route, and inconsistent sidewalks and bike lanes makes it the car­ dependent definition of urban sprawl.

Residents are concerned about an increase in traffic where there are already Failed Intersections and they fear for the safety of families at Monte Vista Elementary. When I enquired during the Planning Commission about the documented Failed Intersections, it sounded like the existing context did not count, but only new infrastructure is to be mitigated.

I ask that you please consider whether it might be appropriate to delay a vote and have traffic staff work with the community so that even if we cannot prevent urban sprawl we have at least ensured the safety of the families here. I ask that you bring this up with Catherine Blakespeare and Laurie Davies, as I have, to little response, that we might find a solution which enables housing without causing further acceleration of climate change through sprawl.

Thank you,
Maria Jolliff
09/23/2025 PH1 Page 381 of 386

09/23/2025 PH1 Page 382 of 386
EXHIBIT 3

09/23/2025 PH1 Page 383 of 386

Location Map
File No. P24-0139
1800 Monte Vista Drive
09/23/2025 PH1 Page 384 of 386
EXHIBIT 4

Exhibit 5
Project Plans – Full Size
(Limited Distribution)
09/23/2025 PH1 Page 385 of 386
EXHIBIT 5

P24-0139

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING OF THE

VISTA CITY COUNCIL

VICINITY LOCATION
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the Chartered City of Vista, California, will hold a public hearing in the Vista Civic Center Council Chambers, 200 Civic Center Drive, Vista, on Tuesday, September 23, 2025, at 5:30 PM, to receive and consider all evidence and reports presented at said hearing and/or obtained previously relative to the following matter:

P24-0139 – Monte Vista Residential – California West Communities An appeal of a Tentative Subdivision Map, Site Development Plan, and Density Bonus to construct 19 single-family homes on a 6.47 acre site located at 1800 Monte Vista Drive (APN 181-022-05-00). The project was considered by the City Council on August 12, 2025, and continued to the meeting of September 23, 2025. The project qualifies for exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 for projects that are consistent with a community plan or zoning.

NOTE: If you challenge this project in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Vista at, or prior to, the publi c hearing.

ALL INTERESTED PARTIES ARE INVITED to participate and express opinions on the matter outlined above. QUESTIONS regarding the above should be directed to the Planning Division, City Hall, 200 Civic Center Drive, Vista, Monday through Thursday, 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., or by telephoning the City’s Planning Division at (760) 639 -6100. If you wish to send correspondence, the mailing address is: City of Vista, Planning Division, 200 Civic Center Drive, Vista, CA 92084.

Monte Vista Dr
Ra
n
g
e

V
i
e
w

R
d

Gi
d
d
i
n
g
s

R
a
n
c
h

R
d

Project Site:
1800 Monte Vista Drive
09/23/2025 PH1 Page 386 of 386EXHIBIT 6

Date: September 23, 2025
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Chris Winters, Senior Planner
Joseph Vacca, Community Development Director
Subject: PH1. Appeal of P24-0139, Monte Vista Residential, Addition of Fire Department Condition No. 5
The following Fire Department Condition No. 5 was included in the Conditions of Approval attached as Exhibit A to the August 12, 2025 City Council Resolution for P24- 0139. However, this Condition of Approval was not included in the City Council Resolution for the September 23, 2025, meeting.

5.Construction Standards:

Due to the proximity of the development to a Wildland Urban Interface area, the homes will be required to be built with materials and construction methods for exterior wildfire exposure to include Class A roofs, ember resistant vents, enclosed eves, multi pane windows, and fire resistive decking.

A landscaping plan consisting of fire-resistant vegetation will be required.

The revised Conditions of Approval which include Fire Department Condition No. 5 are attached to this memorandum to serve as Exhibit A to the September 23 City Council Agenda Report for item PH1. Appeal of P24-0139, Monte Vista Residential.

Attachment: Exhibit “A” Conditions of Approval

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

1 P24-0139

EXHIBIT “A”

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
P24-0139
California West Communities

PROJECT: A Tentative Subdivision Map, a Site Development Plan, and a Density Bonus to construct 19 detached single-family homes on a 6.47-acre site located at 1800 Monte Vista Drive (APN 181-022-05-00).

A. SCOPE OF PROJECT
This project consists of a proposal to construct 19 single-family residences, including two very low-income housing units, using a density bonus. The site would be divided into 21 lots, consisting of 19 residential lots that would range in size from 5,855 square feet to 50,685 square feet. The two remaining lots would contain a stormwater treatment basin and a private street to provide access to each of the proposed residences. The project Site Development Plan and a Tentative Subdivision Map 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. SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN

1. Prior to any building permit issuance, a final Site Development Plan site plan shall be signed by representatives of the Planning Division and Engineering, Fire and Public Works Departments. The final Site Development Plan shall not be signed until all conditions precedent to issuance of a building permit have been completed.

2. The final Site Development Plan shall show compliance with all conditions and other applicable regulations.

D. PHASING OF SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN

1. This project may not be phased and must be constructed as per Exhibit “B”.

E. EXPIRATION OF SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN/TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP

1. This Tentative Subdivision Map shall expire at 11:59 p.m. on the third anniversary of the date of adoption of this Resolution unless a Final Map is recorded or a building permit is issued.

2. Two one-year extensions may be granted by the City Planner.

F. LAND DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING

1. General

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

2 P24-0139

a. Except for the access point shown on the Tentative Map (P24-0139), vehicular access rights from Monte Vista Drive shall be relinquished to the City from all abutting lots.

b. 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.

c. 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 City Engineer. Prior to issuance of any building permits, the public improvement plans shall be approved by the City Engineer and bonded for.

d. A Homeowners Association “HOA” shall be formed for this project to address the maintenance of private facilities including the frontage streetlights along Monte Vista Drive within the City right of way. The owner/developer shall submit the disclosure together with two sets of CC&Rs and the Final Map to the City Engineer for review prior to the approval of the grading plan. The CC&Rs shall be recorded immediately after or concurrently with the Final Map recordation. The CC&Rs shall address the maintenance of open space areas, down-sloped areas visible from a collector level or above roadway not readily maintained by the property owner, private street, streetlights, monument signage, common area (and inaccessible non-common area) landscaping, private drainage systems (including detention BMP basins), access roads, 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. These areas shall be indicated on the grading plan and maintained by the owner/developer, a “HOA”, or a management company. The open space and common areas maintained by “HOA” shall be shown on the Final Map and the CC&Rs.

e. The approval of the Tentative Map shall not mean that closure, vacation or the abandonment of any public street, right of way, easement, or facility is granted or guaranteed to the owner/developer. Section 66434(g) or 66445(j) of the Government Code may be applied at the discretion of the City Engineer. If not applied, the owner/developer 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.

f. Where proposed off-site improvements, including but not limited to slopes, public utility facilities, and drainage facilities, are to be constructed, the owner/developer shall, at his own expense, obtain all necessary

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

3 P24-0139

easements or other interests in real property and shall dedicate the same to the City as required. The owner/developer 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.

Additionally, the City, may at its sole discretion, require that the owner/developer 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 owner/developer, as applicable.

g. The owner/developer 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, San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board (including NPDES), and San Diego County Health Department, prior to the issuance of grading permit.

h. The owner/developer 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.

i. 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, 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 Land Development Engineer.

j. 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 shall 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 to implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) concurrent with the commencement of grading activities. SWPPP should include construction pollution prevention and pollution control measures. The owner/developer 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.

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

4 P24-0139

k. Prior to granting occupancy and release of grading security, the engineer of record must submit copy of “As-Built” drawings, finish grade certification letter and soils compaction report to City inspector assigned to the project for final approval. The plan must include changes bubbled on the plan and labeled as delta. Once “As-Built” changes are approved by the city, the original plan set must be amended to reflect those changes.

l. 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 Engineer.

2. Grading
a. Prior to any grading of any part of the project, a comprehensive soil 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 City of Vista Municipal Code (VMC), approved by the City Engineer. The report required herein shall:

1. Include all standard information as required by the City’s Grading Ordinance.

2. Evaluate existing site constraints.

3. Provide any mitigation measures as necessary.

4. Provide recommendations for back-cuts for the construction of retaining walls. These recommendations shall include a time limit so that the back-cuts can remain in place without creating a stable backfill.

5. If temporary shoring is required, the geotechnical consultant shall provide necessary geotechnical parameters and recommendations, including maximum cuts and time limits.

6. Address the feasibility of long-term infiltration of stormwater runoff on-site, and if subdrains will be required for any proposed infiltration BMPs.

7. Provide any special construction techniques as deemed necessary.

b. If the project involves demolition of an existing structure and surface improvements, the grading and erosion control plans shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of a demolition permit. No demolition shall be permitted without an approved erosion control plan and security.

c. A precise grading plan including private improvement and erosion control measures shall be prepared, reviewed, secured and approved along with building pad certification prior to the issuance of building permits. The grading plan shall be prepared by a California Registered Civil Engineer.

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

5 P24-0139

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.

d. The owner/developer shall monitor, supervise and control all construction and construction-supportive activities, to prevent these activities from causing a public nuisance, including but not limited to, insuring strict adherence to the following:

1. 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.

4. For any off-site borrow or disposal site, if located within City limits, a separate grading plan and permit are required. If the borrow or disposal site is located outside of the City, the owner/developer shall provide evidence of receipt of required permits/authorizations. A haul route shall be submitted and approved by the City Engineer.

5. The owner/developer shall identify a construction manager and provide a telephone number for any inquiries or complaints from residents regarding construction activities. The telephone number shall be posted at the site readily visible to any interested party during site preparation, grading and construction.

6. Trucks shall be spaced to discourage a convoy effect. There shall be no staging of hauling trucks on any streets adjacent to the project, unless specifically approved as a condition of an approved haul route.

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

6 P24-0139

e. Grading and drainage facilities shall be designed and installed to adequately accommodate the local storm water runoff and run-on and shall be in accordance with the City's Development Code and as approved by the City Engineer. Drainage facilities shall include an on-site detention basin to attenuate the peak flows resulting from a 100-year storm event down to a level equal or less than the pre-development flow. Stormwater runoff and run-on shall not additionally burden adjacent properties, creek, or existing storm drains facilities. The Hydraulic/Hydraulic Study must include recommendations for upsizing of the existing storm drain structures as required by the City Engineer.

f. The grading for the project shall be performed under the observation of a registered civil/geotechnical engineer whose responsibility shall be to coordinate site inspection and testing to ensure compliance with the approved grading plan.

g. Include cost estimates for on-site and off-site grading, erosion, and public improvement plans, based on the current County of San Diego Department of Public Works, Land Development Division’s Unit Price List. h. Provide at least two cross sections through the property and as indicated by the City Engineer.
i. Incorporate all recommendations pursuant to the Hydrology/Hydraulic Report prepared for the project.

j. The owner/developer shall ensure that rerouting the existing offsite run-on stormwater along southeast of the property line will not adversely impact on the existing public and private drainage facility and property. Any existing drainage facility that is connected to, shall be analyzed and take into account any additional inflows.

k. Depict the location of existing or proposed easements within the property boundary.

l. The methods for providing temporary erosion control during the construction phase of the project, complete with the inclusion of standard grading and erosion control notes on the plans. The erosion control methods and devices must be per CASQA.

m. Prior to issuance of grading permits the owner/developer must provide a letter from any easement holder authorizing the proposed improvements within the existing easement.

n. If shoring is required, the shoring design plan with structural calculations shall be submitted to the Building Division and shown on grading plan as

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

7 P24-0139

reference. The following note shall be added to the plans: “Unless a shorter duration is recommended by the geotechnical engineer, the proposed temporary shoring shall remain for no longer than 60 calendar days. At the conclusion of the originally allotted time, 30-day extensions may be obtained if acceptable to the City Engineer and the project geotechnical consultant. At the conclusion of the permitted time period, the temporary shoring shall be replaced with an approved permanent structure in accordance with the structural and geotechnical engineer’s recommendation.”.

o. The perpetuation of survey monuments is required and intended to protect both public and private property rights in accordance with federal and state law. Monument perpetuation shall be performed with every Grading Plan and Street Improvement Plan. A land surveyor shall, upon completion of the Grading Plan and Improvement Plan, reset any monuments that have been destroyed due to the construction of the project shall be reset per the Final Map or reset with a post-construction Corner Record or Record of Survey with the County Surveyor.

p. The owner/developer shall place a covenant on the title sheet of the grading plan and non-title sheet of the final map agreeing to the following:
“The present or future owner/developer shall indemnify and hold harmless the City of Vista, its officers, agents, and employees from any and all liabilities or claims arising from any landslide that is caused in whole or in part by owner’s/developer’s development on the site”.

q. The owner/developer shall place a covenant on the title sheet of the grading plan and non-title sheet of Final Map agreeing to the following: “The present or future owner/developer shall indemnify and hold harmless the City of Vista, its officers, agents, and employees from any and all liabilities or claims arising from any flooding that is caused in whole or in part by owner’s/developer’s development of the site.”

r. It is the responsibility of the owner/developer to evaluate and determine that all soil imported as part of this development is free of hazardous and contaminated material as defined by the city and the County of San Diego Department of Environmental Health. Exported or imported soils shall be properly screened, tested, and documented regarding hazardous contamination.

s. Unless an appropriate barrier is approved on a landscape plan, a minimum 42-inch-high barrier, approved by the City Engineer, shall be provided at the top of all slopes whose height exceeds 20 feet or where the slope exceeds 4 feet and is adjacent to any streets.

t. Provide the City of Vista with a certification from each public utility and each public entity owning easements within the proposed project stating that:

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

8 P24-0139

(a) they have received from the owner/developer a copy of the proposed tentative map; (b) they object or do not object to the filing of the map without their signature; (c) in case of a street dedication affected by their existing easement, they will sign a "subordination certificate" or "joint-use certificate" on the map when required by the governing body. In addition, the owner/developer shall furnish proof to the satisfaction of the City Engineer that no new encumbrances have been created that would subordinate the City's interest over areas to be dedicated for public road purposes since the submission of the project.

u. Prior to the issuance of any grading, improvement or building permits for a model complex, a construction-phasing plan for the entire project shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Services Director, City Engineer and Building Official. All improvements shall be under construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to the issuance of building permits.

All public and private improvements including landscaping and offsite streets or arterials that are found to be required to serve the model complex shall be completed prior to the issuance of any certificates of occupancy.

3. Public Improvements
a. Prior to recordation of the Final Map the required public improvement plans shall be approved by the City Engineer and covered by a development 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.

b. All public improvements are required at the time of 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 the realignment of overhead utilities shall be completed prior to the issuance of any Certificate(s) of Occupancy.

c. The street Improvement plan for Monte Vista Drive shall be prepared and submitted by a California Registered Civil Engineer for plan check and approval of the City Engineer.

d. Monte Vista Drive shall be improved as follows to the satisfaction of the City Engineer:

1. The required right of way width is 60 feet (30 feet from the property line to the centerline). Right of way dedication is required if the distance from the property line to the centerline is less than 30 feet.

2. The required pavement width shall be 20 feet from the centerline to the face of the curb, and 10 feet parkway including 5 feet wide

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

9 P24-0139

sidewalk. The required minimum pavement sections shall be 4- inch asphaltic concrete over 8-inch class II aggregate base.

3. Transition of the existing curb to the proposed curb at the southeast corner of the property shall be constructed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Traffic Engineer.

4. An application for right of way dedication shall be made along the property frontage on Monte Vista Drive as depicted on the Tentative Map that shall be shown on the Final Map, and precise grading and public improvement plan sets.

e. Street name signs and traffic control devices, street striping shall be installed to City standards and as required by the City Engineer and the Traffic Engineer.

f. All right-of-way alignments, exact geometrics and widths shall be improved as depicted in the approved Tentative Parcel Map and as required by the City Engineer.
g. In the Hydrology and Hydraulic Report, the calculations and details demonstrate that there will be overloaded grate inlet along Monte Vista Drive, because of rerouting of the existing storm water run-on along the southeast of the property boundary. The existing downstream grate inlet and connected storm drainpipes shall be upsized in a manner that is not detrimental, including flooding and erosion, to surrounding properties, as determined and approved by the City Engineer.

h. City streetlights shall be installed along Monte Vista Drive property frontage under the City’s LS-2 rate schedule, per the City of Vista Standards. The owner/developer shall pay all applicable fees, energy charges, and/or assessments and privately maintain said streetlights on all public or privates’ streets within and along the project boundary.

i. The 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.

j. Pavement sections for private streets, driveways and parking areas within the project boundary shall be based upon approved soil tests and traffic indices and the City Private Street Design Standards. The pavement design is to be prepared by the owner/developer's soil engineer and must be approved by the City Engineer, prior to paving.

k. Sight distance requirements at the proposed entry to the site shall conform to the CalTrans intersectional sight distance criteria. Landscaping features such as slopes, fencing, retaining walls, trees, shrubs, and signage shall be designed to conform to the CalTrans sight distance criteria.

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

10 P24-0139

l. The existing overhead utility lines in the public right of way along Monte Vista Drive project boundary shall be realigned by relocating the existing power pole at the southeast corner of the property line accommodating the new sidewalk, curb and gutter. All new extension services for the development of the project, including, but not limited to, electrical, cable and telephone, shall be placed underground per the City Municipal Code and as required by the City Engineer.

m. The City of Vista does not provide water service for projects within the city limits. A separate submittal and/or permit, fees, bonds, agreements and other conditions may be required to be attained by Vista Irrigation District (VID).

n. Domestic private water lines shall be designed and inspected by the State of California certified person. The owner/developer must provide plan review and inspections services for private water lines as part of the engineering review and construction process.

4. Stormwater
a. The owner/developer shall prepare and submit an Operations & Maintenance (O&M) Plan to the Land Development Division with the first submittal of engineering plans. The O&M Plan shall be prepared by the owner/developer’s Civil Engineer. It shall be directly based on the project’s Storm Water Quality Management Plan (SWQMP) previously deemed complete by the City Engineer. The O&M Plan shall be deemed complete 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 responsible parties designated 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 permit, and any other necessary elements per the City of Vista BMP Design manual Chapter 7. Additionally, the O&M Plan shall contain exhibits clearly identifying the parties responsible for managing and maintaining the onsite facilities shown on the exhibit.

b. The owner/developer 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 (BMP) features identified in the project’s deemed complete Storm Water Quality Management Plan (SWQMP), 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 staff training, inspection and maintenance of all BMP features on an annual basis. The

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

11 P24-0139

project proponent shall complete and maintain O&M forms to document all maintenance activities. Parties responsible for the O&M plan shall retain records on 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 Agreement shall include a copy of executed on-site and off-site access easements necessary for the operation and maintenance of BMP features that shall be binding on the land throughout the life of the project to the benefit of the party responsible for the O&M of BMP features, until such time that the storm water BMP requiring access is replaced, satisfactory to the City Engineer.

e. The project shall provide a separate sheet as part of the grading plan showing all construction BMP features. This construction BMP sheet shall be phased as needed and required by the City of Vista, alterations and updated plans may be required during construction. Additional BMP features requested by the City of Vista shall be implemented before the next rain event.

f. The BMP described in the project’s complete Storm Water Quality Management Plan (SWQMP) shall not be altered in any way, shape or form without formal approval by the project’s final approving authority.

g. This project will be required to implement post construction BMP features 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 indicate 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 features as required by City Engineer.

h. All post construction BMP features 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 features as constructed are in conformance with the deemed complete SWQMP and Hydrology & Hydraulics reports and that all water quality requirements have been satisfied.

i. The owner/developer shall comply with the provisions of National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction Activity (General Permit) Water Quality Order Number R9-2013-0001. The General Permit continues in force and effect until a new General Permit is issued or the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) rescinds this General Permit. Only

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

12 P24-0139

those owner/developers authorized to discharge under the expiring General Permit are covered by the continued General Permit. Construction activity subject to the General Permit includes clearing, grading, and disturbances to the ground such as stockpiling, or excavation that result in land disturbances of equal to or greater than one acre. The owner/developer shall obtain coverage under the General Permit by submitting a Notice of Intent (NOI) and obtaining a Waste Discharge Identification Number (WDID#) from the SWRCB. In addition, coverage under the General Permit shall not occur until an adequate SWPPP is developed for the project as outlined in Section A of the General Permit.

The site specific SWPPP shall be maintained on the project site during construction. The SWPPP shall be provided, upon request, to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), the SWRCB, the RWQCB, City of Vista, and other applicable governing regulatory agencies.

The SWPPP is considered a report that shall be available to the public by the RWQCB under section 308(b) of the Clean Water Act. The provisions of the General Permit and the site specific SWPPP shall be continuously implemented and enforced until the owner/developer obtains a Notice of Termination (NOT) for the SWRCB. The owner/developer is required to retain records of all monitoring information, copies of all reports required by this General Permit, and records of all data used to complete the NOT for all construction activities to be covered by the General Permit for a period of at least three years from the date generated. This period may be extended by the request of the SWRCB and/or RWQCB.

5. Miscellaneous

1. 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.

2. Water line 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.

3. A Right-of-Way permit shall be required prior to commencement of any work within the City right-of-way.

G. SEWER AND WATER UTILITIES

1. The proposed Residential development project is within the City of Vista Sewer Service Area (V27) as determined by the current ‘2017-Sewerage Master Plan’ and the ‘Sewer Facility Maps’. An existing 8-in PVC (Dwg-3378, 2000-Yr) public sewer main along Monte Vista Drive is available for connection.

2. The Residential development proposed density is in compliance with the current General Plan and zoning requirements. Therefore, the Project

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

13 P24-0139

proposed sewer capacity is within the allowable sewer capacity for these parcels as determined by the current ‘2017-Sewerage Master Plan’.

3. Commitment to provide sewer services is made by the 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.

4. Developer shall extend/ install approximately 150-lf of off-site public sewer main along Monte Vista Drive. In addition, the developer shall install approximately 500-LF of public sewer main to provide sewer service to the proposed residential development.

5. Construction Sewer Improvement Plans (‘PRIVATE AND PUBLIC’) are to be designed and prepared by a Registered Professional Civil Engineer, per Public Standards and/or as directed by the City Engineer.

6. Design criteria:
a. Sewer main to be 8” PVC (SDR35 GREEN); pipe 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; Pipe to have a minimum cover of 84cinches over the pipe; installation of a standard sewer manhole is required at the most upstream end of the pipe.
b. Each lot shall have a separate, individual, dedicated gravity flow, private sewer lateral and a standard “TWO-WAY” cleanout fronting and connecting into the public sewer main. Long installation of laterals will not be permitted. Show a ‘PRIVATE SEWER LATERAL & CLEANOUT’ Table on the plans per City Standard Dwg SWR-24.

Maintain a 5-ft min. separation – maintain same separation with all other UG utilities too In addition, maintain 5-ft separation between manhole edge and laterals.

c. Install standard 60-inch sewer – maintain a 300-ft maximum separation. Install a manhole concrete apron around the most upstream manhole.

7. Sewer manhole #V27(3C) at the intersection of Monte Vista Drive and Tres Ninos Corte is available for connection of the proposed public sewer main.

8. Developer shall hire a qualified California Registered Land Surveyor or Engineer to survey and certify the invert elevation of the existing sewer manholes #V27(3C). The ‘Survey Manhole Certification’ shall be submitted to the Sanitation Engineer, prior to approval of the Grading and Improvement Plans. The certificate shall be in a formal letterhead and include:

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

14 P24-0139

a) Letter date, survey date, city approved Benchmark, manhole IDs, top of rim and invert elevations, X, Y, Z coordinates for each manhole, signature and stamped – Attach a PDF and digital CAD file of the surveyed manholes.

9. The existing public sewer manhole #V27(3C) at the intersection of Monte Vista Drive and Tres Ninos Corte is to be reconstructed per City Standards, and as directed by the City Engineer or his representative.

10. The project site had two buildings connected to a private septic system. The buildings were demolished a few years ago. The septic system is to be shown on the grading plans as ‘to be removed’ per county standards, and as recommended by the soils engineer.

11. Adjacent parcels APN 181-022-12-00 and 181-022-10-00 (1848 Monte Vista Dr) are currently served by an existing active private septic system. These parcels are outside the City of Vista Jurisdictional boundary. The County has set back and reserve area requirements for proposed cut slopes and retaining walls near septic systems.

12. The county can provide a ‘Potential Sewage Migration Influence/Boundary Map’ of the existing active private septic leach layouts to avoid exposing migrating sewage along proposed cut slopes. Developer shall contact the County Department of Environmental Health and Quality (DEHQ) for any cut slope restrictions impacting the adjacent septic systems. Below is the link to the County of San Diego’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) http://www.sdcounty.ca.gov/deh/water/lu_septic_systems.html ,

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

14. Should the DEHQ Official determine that the adjacent septic systems would be adversely impacted by the proposed development grading, developer would be required to abandon the private septic system and connect the adjacent parcel/building to public sewer.

15. Connection of the impacted adjacent parcels into the public sewer requires parcels 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. Developer to contact San Diego LAFCO for additional fees/charges and requirements.

16. All City and LAFCO fees/charges related to annexation and sewer connection as a result of damage to the adjacent septic system shall be paid by the developer.

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

15 P24-0139

17. Should the developer choses to avoid grading within the DEHQ determined ‘‘Potential Sewage Migration Influence/Boundary’, developer shall delineate this boundary as a ‘Restricted Sewage Migrating Zone’ – no planting or grading will be permitted within this boundary. This Restriction can only be removed once the adjacent private septic system are abandoned and parcels are connected to public sewer.

18. Prior to the approval of the Grading and/or Improvement Plans, developer/ engineer shall provide a written clearance from the DEHQ stating their findings and recommendations.

19. Construction and inspection of the ‘private’ sewer main is to be done per Public Standards and/or as directed by the City Engineer, including Pre- & Post-CCTV inspection. All sewer work done without proper inspection will be rejected.

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

“AS BUILTS”

PROJECT ENGINNER

RCE EXP DATE
REVIEWED BY:

INSPECTION: DATE:

SANITATION: DATE:

NOTE: AS-BUILTS WILL BE SIGNED UPON:
• VACATION OF ALL SURPLUS EASEMENTS
• COMPLETION OF LANDSCAPE WORK
• POST-CCTV INSPECTION OF ALL SEWER FACILITIES

21. This project does NOT qualify for public sewer reimbursement. All costs incurred for installation of the ‘off-site’ public sewer facilities shall be borne by the developer.

22. 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 2025- .

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

16 P24-0139

b) ALL PUBLIC UTILITY 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 CREATED BY THIS FINAL MAP SHALL BE SUBJECT TO THE ‘VSD RESTRICTIONS FOR SEWER & DRAINAGE
EASEMENTS’, DOC#1991-0433396, RECORDED AUGUST 23, 1991. d) ALL PARCELS SHALL BE SUBJECT TO A RECORDED
‘COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS’ (CC&RS)
DOC#2025- , RECORDED , 2025.
e) PUBLIC STREETS AND UTILITY EASEMENTS DEDICATED AND

REJECTED HEREON SHALL REMAIN PRIVATE EASEMENTS TO

BE CONVEYED WITH EACH LOT WITHIN THIS MAP UNTIL CITY OF VISTA ACCEPTS THE OFFER OF DEDICATION.
f) ALL PARCELS CREATED BY THIS FINAL MAP SHALL BE SUBJECT TO THE ‘RESTRICTED GRADING ZONE’ SHALL BE PROTECTED
AND SUBJECT TO A RECORDED ‘PRIVATE MAINTENANCE’ DOC
#2025- , REC’D: /2025.
g) SOILS REPORT/ GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT
PREPARED BY , DATED ; IS ON FILE IN THE CITY
OF VISTA.
h) HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC REPORT PREPARED BY ,
DATED ; IS ON FILE IN THE CITY OF VISTA.
i) WATER QUALITY TECHNICAL REPORT PREPARED BY ,
DATED ; IS ON FILE IN THE CITY OF VISTA.

23. Statewide General Discharge Requirements for Sanitary Systems Compliance:
a) 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.

24. 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: [email protected]
H. BUILDING AND STRUCTURAL

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

17 P24-0139

1. All construction and designs are to comply with the model codes adopted by the City of Vista at the time permit applications are filed, and construction documents are submitted for plan check.

2. All proposed new construction shall be fire sprinklered.

3. All new units must be provided with a photovoltaic system as required by the Energy Code at the time of submittal.

4. The project needs to comply with the requirements of the California Green Building Code.

I. FIRE DEPARTMENT

1. Fire Department Access:
a. Private residential driveways and roadways that provide access to not more than two single family dwellings or dwelling lots are required to be a paved minimum unobstructed width of 16 feet and a minimum 13’6” vertical clearance.

b. 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.

c. 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.

d. All gates serving residential multifamily 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.

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

f. 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

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

18 P24-0139

being brought on site. Complete paving is required prior to building final inspection.

g. 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 interior roadways are designated "fire access roadways" or "fire lanes". Roadway shall be marked per CFC Sec. 901.4 and CVC Sec. 22500.1. Minimum unobstructed paved width is 24 feet.

h. Grades on private roads and driveways serving as fire access roadways may not exceed twenty percent (20%). Roadways with grades exceeding fifteen percent (15%) must be paved in 3 ½” of concrete with a deep broom finish perpendicular to the direction of travel.

2. Street Address Numbers:

Permanent residential three-dimensional street numbers, minimum 4 inches in height and placed upon a background of contrasting color, shall be provided on the street side of the building at the highest point and furthest projection of the structure. The address shall be visible from the street and shall not be obstructed in any manner.

3. Fire Sprinklers:

Fire Sprinklers will be required to be installed in all new buildings.

Plans shall be submitted to the Fire Department for review. The system shall comply with NFPA #13D Standard for Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems latest edition.

4. Hydrants & Waterlines:

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, it shall be the responsibility of the applicant to improve the system as needed.

5. Construction Standards:

Due to the proximity of the development to a Wildland Urban Interface area, the homes will be required to be built with materials and construction methods for exterior wildfire exposure to include Class A roofs, ember resistant vents, enclosed eves, multi pane windows, and fire resistive decking.

A landscaping plan consisting of fire-resistant vegetation will be required.

J. PUBLIC WORKS

1. For any streetlights installed for the project, all information on the streetlights

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

19 P24-0139

shall be submitted to Keith Gardner in Public Works before or at completion of project. Information needed: streetlight head and pole specifications, and owner information.

K. SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT

1. Front residential entry doors and storage room doors shall be steel-clad or solid wood construction. There shall be no glass installed within 40-inches of the front door deadbolt.

2. Front entry doors shall be equipped with a 180-degree door viewer.

3. All outward opening exterior doors shall be provided with hinge stud kits, welded hinges, or setscrew hinge pins.

4. Sliding glass windows/doors shall be secured with a supplemental lock and anti-lift device.

5. Use graffiti-resistant paint or anti-graffiti coatings on walls, benches, light poles, signs, etc.

6. Locate common mailboxes in a well-lit, secure area.

7. The Use "see-through" fences (e.g., vertical-design wrought iron or welded mesh) instead of solid walls or hedges for boundaries where privacy or environmental noise mitigation is not needed.

8. Landscaping shall be situated so as to maximize observation, while providing the desired degree of aesthetics (for example, planted shrubs maintained at a maximum height of three feet; the tree canopy should not descend any lower than 6 to 8 feet).

9. Luminaires shall have vandal resistant fixtures if accessible, or be not less than eight feet in height from ground level.

10. LED lighting is recommended throughout the project.

11. During construction, security and or video surveillance cameras should be used on site to prevent theft.

12. Caution: Security devices and systems described in this notice may not meet all applicable fire and life safety standards in effect for the particular occupancy type. Please contact the Crime Prevention Unit at 760-940-4353 if you have any questions regarding the above security measures and recommendations.

L. VISTA IRRIGATION DISTRICT (VID)

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

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

20 P24-0139

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.

3. All Grading and Improvement plans are required to be submitted to the 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 Waterline(s). d. All lots being created must be adjacent to a public water main and served through individual water meter(s) and/or RPDA(s).

5. Specific Easements (ref. Vista Irrigation District Standard Drawing 5-1) may be necessary for public waterline extensions and the existing waterline. 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. L91 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 an existing ¾” water meter (Acct 1125-0590).

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

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

21 P24-0139

is made for water service.

11. A water supply study is required to determine available domestic service pressures, fire flow availability, on-site and/or off-site system improvements required to serve the project. The owner is to contact the District’s Engineering Department to make arrangements for the study. This water supply study is required prior to submitting plans for review.

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.

13. 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 a 30-inch size waterline in Monte Vista Drive with a maximum hydraulic gradient of 837 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.

14. 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.

For any questions regarding the above VID conditions, please phone (760) 597-3116.

M. VISTA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

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.

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

22 P24-0139

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 phone.

N. PLANNING INFORMATION AND CONDITIONS
Landscaping Project-Specific Conditions:

1. Provide landscaping, including planting and irrigation, within the offsite graded area of Monte Vista Elementary School. Include the landscaping in the project HOA landscape installation and maintenance area, unless a letter of acceptance and intention to provide long term landscape maintenance is provided to the City by the school district.

2. Install reinforced straw mat on all slopes 4:1 or greater, including within the offsite graded area slope.

3. Vines shall be installed from 5 gallon containers.

4. Design one of the following approved street trees for Monte Vista Drive.

Street trees with a standard trunk spaced at 25’-35’ on center. Provide root barriers to all street trees at 10 long by 2 feet deep. Use one of the following:
• Brisbane Box (Lophostemon confertus)
• Crape myrtle (Lagerstroemia indica cultivar)
• Jacaranda (Jacaranda mimosifolia)
• Fruitless olive (Olea europaea fruitless cultivar)
• African Sumac (Rhus/Searsia lancea)
• Australian Willow (Geijera parviflora).

Landscaping Standard Conditions:

1. Except where noted above, the landscape construction drawings shall be consistent with the landscape conceptual plans 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 requirements of 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.

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.

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

23 P24-0139

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, erosion, detect irrigation system failure, and be consistent with the originally approved design installation;
b. Replacement of missing, 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, weeding and maintaining turf areas; f. Replacement of mulch yearly and as necessary;
g. 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

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

24 P24-0139

observation of the landscaping and irrigation system by the City no sooner than one year from 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. Natural cut of shrubs is encouraged over hard pruning of shrubs and ground covers.

12. All screening shrubs shall be maintained at a height that effectively screens the area that they were planted to obscure (ex: walls, parking areas, trash enclosures, loading areas, etc.).

13. Organic fertilizers and soil amendments with reduction of herbicides and pesticides are encouraged.

14. Retaining Walls:
a. Retaining walls equal to or greater than five feet in height shall be designed as plantable walls as required by the City’s Landscape Manual. i) A minimum of 30 percent of the total cells on walls shall be plantable cells.
ii) All plantable cells shall be planted with vines that will provide permanent, full coverage of the wall face at maturity. This requirement may be modified by the City Planner if he or she determines that full wall coverage can be achieved within a similar timeframe. In no case shall less than 30 percent of the total wall cells be planted. iii) The above requirements apply to the entire height of the wall and are not limited to those portions greater than five feet in height. iv) Permanent drip irrigation shall be provided to all cells. v) Provide self-attaching vines at the base of the wall spaced at 5 feet on center.
b. Retaining walls less than five feet in height are encouraged, though not required, to be plantable. If they are not plantable, they shall either be built with decorative block or stucco-finished to match buildings on site.

General Planning Conditions:

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

25 P24-0139

1. All proposed fence and wall (including retaining wall) details and materials shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Planner. Razor wire, barbwire, chain-link fencing, and unfinished precision block CMU walls are not permitted.

2. Building plans, architectural elevations, floor plans, building colors and materials shall conform to Exhibit “B” and be consistent with any material samples/colors submitted by the applicant to the City and on file in the Planning Division.

3. The building setbacks and separation shall conform to Exhibit “B” (project plans).

As a density bonus project that provides 2 affordable units out of 19 total units, the project is eligible for three concessions (incentives) to develop the project, plus unlimited waivers. The applicant requests concessions for (1) deviation from the E-1 zoning standards for side yard setbacks within the lots (5 feet instead of the 10 foot setback that would otherwise be required, (2) reduction of the E-1 zone minimum lot size (to provide a minimum lot size of 5,800 square feet where 0.5 acre would otherwise be required), and (3) to waive the requirement for the undergrounding of existing overhead utility lines along the project frontage. The applicant requests one waiver for the front setback requirement to be reduced to 40 feet from centerline of the street, where 50 feet from centerline of the street would otherwise be required per the E-1 zone.

4. All subsequent development permits, including but not limited to building and grading, shall be in compliance with the site plan, floor plan(s) and elevations in Exhibit “B”. All contemplated changes must be submitted and approved by the Planning Division prior to construction. Any changes constructed without authorization by the Building and Planning Divisions may be cause to withhold occupancy until the matter is rectified.

5. 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.

6. Prior to final Site Development Plan signature by the Planning Division, a Notice of Land Use Restriction in a form approved by the City Planner and City Attorney, shall be recorded. It shall set forth the terms of this Resolution.

7. The project shall provide off-street parking facilities (enclosed two-car garages) and areas (guest parking on driveways) as shown on the Site

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

26 P24-0139

Development Plan.

8. All above ground mechanical equipment for utilities shall be completely screened from public view. At a minimum, equipment boxes and HVAC units shall be painted with a neutral color and screened with landscaping compatible with adjacent landscaped areas. The equipment’s owner and the City Planner shall approve all screening designs prior to permitting.

Affordable Units

9. The project shall construct two (2) for-sale single-family residences on Lots 8 and 13 of the Tentative Subdivision Map which shall be deed restricted for affordable units within the “Very Low Income” category. The two affordable units must be “for-sale” properties only, and said units shall not be rented.

10. Prior to Final Map recordation and issuance of a building permit, the developer shall provide the City with a regulatory agreement, in form acceptable to the City, obligating the owner of the project to only sell the two affordable units to eligible and qualified Very Low Income households, in compliance with Chapter 18.90 of the Vista Development Code, and the State Density Bonus Law (Gov. Code section 65915, etc.). No building permits shall be issued for the project until the Regulatory Agreement is fully executed by the developer and the City, and recorded against the Property.

Rather than executing an agreement, the City can be made a third-party beneficiary of an agreement that otherwise complies with this condition, but evidence that such agreement has been recorded, with all required provisions, shall be provided to the City before the issuance of any building permits.

11. The two affordable units shall be of like-for-like construction consistent with the market rate units in the tract, utilizing interior and exterior features, fixtures, construction materials, and finishes equivalent to the project’s seventeen (17) market-rate units. This requirement shall be notated on the building plans (construction drawings) submittals.

Lighting

12. A photometric lighting plan shall be submitted and reviewed for outdoor lighting. Light levels onsite and offsite, including on all driveways, parking areas, and pedestrian walkways, shall comply with the requirements of the City of Vista Development Code. Manufacturers cut sheets shall be submitted along with the building construction drawings for all exterior lights including wall packs.

Environmental
The project Conditions of Approval include the PEIR Mitigation Measures identified in the CEQA 15183 Checklist dated April 2025 which are hereby made a part of these Conditions of Approval. The project shall abide by these mitigation measures, which include measures related to Cultural Resources, Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas, Noise, and Biological Resources as specified in the 15183 Checklist dated April 2025.

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

27 P24-0139

Conditions 13 through 26 below (Standard Environmental Conditions), and the CEQA 15183 Checklist (April 2025) Conditions of Project Approval below, and the project Mitigation Measures below, shall be noted on all applicable construction documents, including demolition plans, grading plans, etc.

Standard Environmental Conditions
Grading BMPs:

13. During grading activities, the on-site construction superintendent shall ensure implementation of standard best management practices (BMPs) to reduce the emission of fugitive dust, including but not limited to the following actions:

A. Water any exposed soil areas a minimum of twice per day, or as allowed under any imposed drought restrictions. On windy days or when fugitive dust can be observed leaving the construction site, additional water will be applied at a frequency to be determined by the on-site construction superintendent.

B. Graded areas on slopes will provide temporary hydroseeding and irrigation of cleared vegetation and graded slopes as soon as possible following grading activities in areas that will remain in disturbed condition (but will not be subject to further construction activities) for a period greater than three months during the construction phase.

C. Pave or periodically water all on-site access points or apply chemical stabilizer to construction sites.

D. Securely cover all transported material to prevent fugitive dust.

E. Operate all vehicles on the construction site at speeds less than 15 miles per hour.

F. Cover all stockpiles that will not be utilized within three days with plastic or equivalent material, to be determined by the on-site construction superintendent, or spray them with a non-toxic chemical stabilizer.

14. The following actions shall be implemented throughout construction to minimize emissions of O3 precursors (NOx and VOCs):

A. Turn off all diesel-powered vehicles and gasoline-powered equipment when not in use for more than five minutes.

B. Use electric or natural gas-powered construction equipment in lieu of gasoline or diesel-powered engines, where feasible.

C. Require 10 percent of construction fleet to use any combination of diesel catalytic converters, diesel oxidation catalysts, diesel particulate filters, and/or CARB-certified Tier III equipment or better.

D. Support and encourage ridesharing and transit incentives for the construction crew.

15. The following measures would ensure that architectural coatings comply with SDAPCD Rule 67:

A. Use pre-coated/natural colored building materials.

B. Use water-based or low VOC coatings with a VOC content of 100 grams per liter or less.

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

28 P24-0139

C. Use spray equipment with high transfer efficiency, such as the electrostatic spray gun method or apply coatings using manual tools, such as paintbrushes, hand rollers, trowels, spatulas, daubers, rags, or sponges.

Hazardous Materials

16. The project applicant and/or owner shall provide literature in the sales or leasing center with information on what materials may be considered hazardous, and the proper disposal of household hazardous materials. The literature should include the address for the City’s Household Hazardous Waste Collection Facility located at 1145 East Taylor Street. Additionally, any refuse storage areas shall include signage listing common hazardous materials and information on proper disposal, including the address for the City’s Household Hazardous Waste Collection Facility.

17. Equipment storage, fueling, and staging areas shall be located either off-site or on-site, in an area with minimal risks of direct drainage into the City’s storm drain system. These designated areas shall be located in such a manner as to prevent any runoff from entering the storm drain system. All necessary precautions shall be taken to prevent the release of cement or other toxic substances into the storm drain system and downstream surface waters. All project related spills of hazardous materials shall be reported to appropriate entities including, but not limited to, the City of Vista, County of San Diego, USFWS, CDFW, RWQCB, and shall be cleaned up immediately and contaminated soils removed to approved disposal areas.

Energy Efficiency:

18. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant and/or contractor shall demonstrate that the project shall exceed the requirements of Title 24 of the California Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and/or Non-residential Buildings. These requirements shall be incorporated into the project to reduce indirect emissions from energy use in the project area, including O3 precursors.

Cultural Resources Monitoring:

19. Cultural resource monitoring shall be conducted on the site to provide for the identification, evaluation, treatment, and protection of any cultural resources that are affected by or may be discovered during the construction of the proposed project. The monitoring shall consist of the full-time presence of a Qualified Archaeologist and a TCA (traditionally and culturally affiliated) Native American Monitor for, but not limited to, any clearing or grubbing of vegetation, tree removal, demolition and/or removal of remnant foundations, pavements, abandonment and/or installation of infrastructure; grading or any other ground disturbing or altering activities, including the placement of any imported fill materials (note: all fill materials shall be absent of any and all cultural resources); and related road improvements, including, but not limited to, the installation of infrastructure, and the realignments and/or expansions to South (S.) Santa Fe Avenue and/or Mercantile Street. Other tasks of the monitoring program shall include the following:

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

29 P24-0139

A. The requirement for cultural resource monitoring shall be noted on all applicable construction documents, including demolition plans, grading plans, etc.

B. The Qualified Archaeologist and TCA Native American Monitor shall attend all applicable pre-construction meetings with the Contractor and/or associated Subcontractors to present the archaeological monitoring program.

C. The Qualified Archaeologist shall maintain ongoing collaborative consultation with the TCA Native American Monitor during all ground disturbing or altering activities, as identified above. The Applicant, and/or Owner, and/or Grading Contractor shall notify the Director of Community Development, preferably through e-mail, of the start and end of all ground-disturbing activities.

D. The Qualified Archaeologist and/or TCA Native American Monitor may halt ground-disturbing activities if archaeological artifact deposits or cultural features are discovered. In general, ground-disturbing activities shall be directed away from these deposits for a short time to allow a determination of potential significance, the subject of which shall be determined by the Qualified Archaeologist and the TCA Native American Monitor, in consultation with the San Luis Rey Band.

Ground disturbing activities shall not resume until the Qualified Archaeologist, in consultation with the TCA Native American Monitor, deems the cultural resource or feature has been appropriately documented and/or protected. At the Qualified Archaeologist’s discretion, the location of ground disturbing activities may be relocated elsewhere on the project site to avoid further disturbance of cultural resources.

E. The avoidance and protection of discovered unknown and significant cultural resources and/or unique archaeological resources is the preferable procedure for the proposed project. If avoidance is not feasible, a Data Recovery Plan may be authorized by the City as the Lead Agency under CEQA. If data recovery is required, then the San Luis Rey Band shall be notified and consulted in drafting and finalizing any such recovery plan.

20. Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit, and subject to approval of terms by the City, the Applicant, and/or Owner, and/or Contractor shall enter into a Pre-Excavation Agreement with the San Luis Rey Band, a TCA tribe. A copy of the agreement shall be included in the Grading Plan Submittals for the Grading Permit. The purpose of this agreement shall be to formalize protocols and procedures between the Applicant, and/or Owner, and/or Contractor, and the San Luis Rey Band for the protection and treatment of, including but not limited to, Native American human remains, funerary objects, cultural and religious landscapes, ceremonial items, traditional gathering areas and cultural items, located and/or discovered through a monitoring program in conjunction with the construction of the proposed project, including additional archaeological surveys and/or studies, excavations, geotechnical investigations, off-site infrastructure installation,

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

30 P24-0139

grading, and all other ground disturbing activities.

21. Prior to the release of the Grading Bond, a Monitoring Report and/or Evaluation Report, which describes the results, analysis and conclusions of the cultural resource monitoring efforts (such as, but not limited to, the Research Design and Data Recovery Program) shall be submitted by the Qualified Archaeologist, along with the TCA Native American Monitor’s notes and comments, to the City’s Director of Community Development for review and approval.

22. All cultural materials that are associated with burial and/or funerary goods will be repatriated to the Most Likely Descendant as determined by the Native American Heritage Commission per California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98.

23. Recovered cultural material of historic significance shall be curated with accompanying catalog, photographs, and reports to a San Diego curation facility that meets federal standards per 36 CFR Part 79. Recovered cultural material of tribal cultural significance shall be repatriated as stipulated in the pre-excavation agreement as described above.

24. As specified by California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, if human remains are found on the project site during construction or during archaeological work, the person responsible for the excavation, or his or her authorized representative, shall immediately notify the San Diego County Coroner’s office by telephone. No further excavation or disturbance of the discovery or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains (as determined by the Qualified Archaeologist and/or the TCA Native American Monitor) shall occur until the Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code 5097.98. If such a discovery occurs, a temporary construction exclusion zone shall be established surrounding the area of the discovery so that the area would be protected (as determined by the Qualified Archaeologist and/or the TCA Native American Monitor), and consultation and treatment could occur as prescribed by law. As further defined by State law, the Coroner would determine within two working days of being notified if the remains are subject to his or her authority. If the Coroner recognizes the remains to be Native American, he or she shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours. The NAHC would make a determination as to the Most Likely Descendent. If Native American remains are discovered, the remains shall be kept “in situ” (in place), or in a secure location in close proximity to where they were found, and the analysis of the remains shall only occur on-site in the presence of the TCA Native American Monitor.

Noise:

25. The project is required to comply with the City’s Municipal Code Title 8 Health and Safety, under Chapter 8.32 Noise Control, which addresses

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

31 P24-0139

construction noise through the adoption of the County of San Diego’s noise regulations. County Code Sections 36.408 and 36.409 restricts the operation of construction equipment between 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on Sundays and holidays, and except for emergency work, operating construction equipment that exceeds an average level of 75 decibels for an eight‐hour period, between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. measured at the property line.

The construction contractor shall implement the following measures to minimize short-term noise levels caused by construction activities. Measures to reduce construction/demolition noise shall be included in contractor plans and specifications submitted for review prior to receiving a Grading and/or Demolition Permit, and shall include, but not be limited to, the following:

A. Properly outfit and maintain construction equipment with manufacturer- recommended noise-reduction devices to minimize construction- generated noise.

B. Operate all diesel equipment with closed engine doors and equip with factory recommended mufflers.

C. Use electrical power to operate air compressors and similar power tools, if possible.

D. The noise level requirement would apply to the equipment on the job or related to the job, including but not limited to trucks, transit mixer, or transient equipment that may or may not be owned by the contractor.

E. Select quieter alternate equipment for a particular task if feasible (e.g. use a backhoe instead of an excavator; choose a generator specially designed for quiet operation over a standard model, etc.).

F. Prohibit idling engines, particularly near sensitive receivers (e.g., homes, schools, hospitals, libraries, etc.)
G. Conduct noisy operations off-site if possible (e.g. rock crushing).

H. Maintain equipment in good operational condition to minimize noise emissions; lubricate moving parts to eliminate squealing and reduce engine load, tighten cabinet panels to stop vibration, maintain noise- control features such as exhaust mufflers and vibration dampers.

I. Locate staging and maintenance areas away from sensitive receivers; perform equipment maintenance off-site if feasible.

J. The grading/demolition or general contractor shall designate a “construction liaison” that will be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. A telephone number for the liaison shall be conspicuously posted at the construction site. The liaison will determine the cause of the noise complaints (e.g., starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and institute reasonable measures to correct the problem. If a resolution is not found, the contractor shall hire and retain a Qualified Noise Consultant to conduct noise monitoring for the activity that is the source of the complaint. The Qualified Noise Consultant shall document any construction noise violations (including all measurements and calculation data), the measures selected by the contractor to reduce noise levels to the maximum extent feasible, and verification that the selected measure(s) were implemented and whether they were successful or not. A copy shall be sent to the City Planner and City Engineer for their respective files.

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

32 P24-0139

K. At least one week prior to the start of demolition and/or grading/excavation activities, the grading/demolition or general contractor shall notify all adjacent residential property owners (or other noise sensitive land uses) that are located within 50 feet of the property line of the construction of the anticipated start of construction. The notification shall describe the activities anticipated, provide dates and hours, and provide contact information of the construction liaison, with a description of a noise complaint and response procedure.

Migratory Bird Treaty Act:

26. The clearing and grubbing of, and construction adjacent to, sensitive habitats shall occur outside of the breeding season for general birds, including raptors (January 15 to September 15). The City may waive this condition, provided that the following additional avoidance measures are taken. If the construction activities cannot avoid the bird breeding season, a qualified biologist shall be retained to conduct a pre-construction nesting bird survey within seven days prior to the activities to confirm the presence or absence of active bird nests.

If no active bird nests are found by the qualified biologist, then the activities shall proceed with the reassurance that no violation to the MBTA and CFGC would occur. If an active bird nest is found by the qualified biologist, then vegetation removal and/or trimming activities at the nest location and within 300 feet for passerine birds and 500 feet for raptors shall not be allowed to occur until the qualified biologist has determined that the nest is no longer active. Buffers may be reduced only at the discretion of the qualified biologist, depending on the bird species and construction/vegetation removal activities required in the vicinity of the active nest.

27. Development Service Fees:

The proposed project will require development fees to be paid at the time of building permit issuance. The fee schedule is available at the Development Services Division and from the city’s website.

28. Public Services:

Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the project applicant shall contact the Vista Unified School District to determine the applicable statutory fee for public school services.

29. Violation of Conditions
Should violations of conditions be reported to the City, the City may take action pursuant to Section 18.74.280 of the Development Code.

30. Indemnification:
a. 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

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

33 P24-0139

challenge.

b. 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, 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.

c. 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.

CEQA 15183 Checklist (April 2025) Conditions of Project Approval:

COA-BI-1. The project shall adhere to the site-specific measures identified in the Biological Resources Letter Report, which provides the site-specific measures to implement PEIR mitigation measures M-BI-1, M-BI-3, and M-BI-5 according to the habitat assessments conducted pursuant to PEIR mitigation measures M-B-1 and M-B-3.

COA-C-1. Archaeological and Tribal cultural resource mitigation monitoring shall be conducted to provide for the identification, evaluation, treatment, and protection of any cultural and tribal resources that are affected by or may be discovered during the construction of the proposed project. The monitoring shall consist of the full-time presence of a Qualified Archaeologist and a traditionally and culturally affiliated (TCA) Native American Monitor associated with a TCA tribe for, but not limited to, any clearing or grubbing of vegetation, tree removal, demolition and/or removal of remnant foundations, pavements, abandonment and/or installation of infrastructure; grading or any other ground-disturbing or altering activities, including the placement of imported fill materials (note: all fill materials shall be absent of any cultural resources); and related off-site road improvements or utility installations. Other tasks of the monitoring program shall include the following:
• The requirement for cultural resource mitigation monitoring shall be noted on all applicable construction documents, including demolition plans, grading plans, etc.
• The Qualified Archaeologist and TCA Native American Monitor shall attend all applicable pre-construction meetings with the Contractor and/or

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

34 P24-0139

associated Subcontractors.
• The Qualified Archaeologist shall maintain ongoing collaborative consultation with the TCA Native American monitor during all ground-disturbing or ground-altering activities, as identified above.
• The Qualified Archaeologist and/or TCA Native American monitor may halt ground-disturbing activities if cultural or tribal cultural resources are discovered. In general, ground-disturbing activities shall be directed away from these deposits for a short time to allow a determination of potential significance, the subject of which shall be determined by the Qualified Archaeologist and the TCA Native American monitor, in consultation with the Consulting Tribes for the project. Ground disturbing activities shall not resume until the Qualified Archaeologist, in consultation with the TCA Native American monitor, deems the tribal cultural resource or feature has been appropriately documented and/or protected.
• At the Qualified Archaeologist's discretion, the location of ground-disturbing activities may be relocated elsewhere on the project site to avoid further disturbance of cultural resources.
• The avoidance and protection of discovered unknown and significant cultural and tribal cultural resources and/or unique tribal resources is the preferable mitigation for the proposed project. If avoidance is not feasible a Data Recovery Plan may be authorized by the City as the Lead Agency under CEQA. If data recovery is required, then the Consulting Tribes shall be notified and consulted in drafting and finalizing any such recovery plan.

COA-C-2. Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit, and subject to the approval of terms by the City, the Applicant or Owner, and/or Contractor shall enter into a Pre- Excavation Agreement with a TCA tribe. A copy of the signed Agreement shall be forwarded to the City Planner. The purpose of this agreement shall be to formalize protocols and procedures between the Applicant or Owner, and/or Contractor, and the TCA tribe for the protection and treatment of, but not limited to, such items as Native American human remains, funerary objects, cultural and religious landscapes, ceremonial items, traditional gathering areas, and cultural items located and/or discovered through the cultural resource mitigation monitoring program in conjunction with the construction of the proposed project, including additional archaeological surveys and/or studies, excavations, geotechnical investigations, soil surveys, grading, or any other ground-disturbing activities.

COA-C-3. Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit, the Applicant or Owner, and/or Contractor shall provide a written and signed letter to the City's Director of Community Development, stating that a Qualified Archaeologist and a TCA Native American Monitor have been retained at the Applicant or Owner and/or Contractor's expense to implement the monitoring program, as described above and/or in the pre-excavation agreement. A copy of the letter shall be included in the Grading Plan Submittals for the Grading Permit.

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

35 P24-0139

COA-C-4. Prior to the release of the Grading Bond, a Monitoring Report and/or Evaluation Report, which describes the results, analysis, and conclusions of the cultural resource mitigation monitoring efforts (such as, but not limited to, a Research Design, Data Recovery Program, etc.) shall be submitted by the Qualified Archaeologist, along with the TCA Native American monitor's notes and comments, to the City's Director of Community Development for approval.

COA-C-5. The landowner shall relinquish ownership of all tribal cultural resources collected during the cultural resource mitigation monitoring conducted during all ground-disturbing activities, and from any previous archaeological studies or excavations on the project site to the TCA tribe for respectful and dignified treatment and disposition in accordance with the Tribe's cultural and spiritual traditions. All tribal cultural materials that are associated with burial and/or funerary goods will be repatriated to the Most Likely Descendant as determined by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) per California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98.

COA-C-6. Any historic, non-tribal cultural resources that are recovered shall be examined in the archaeological laboratory to determine whether they warrant cataloging, analysis, and curation, or if documentation of such resources is adequate to mitigate impacts. Resources that are cataloged and analyzed shall be curated at an appropriate repository, such as the San Diego Archaeological Center.

COA-C-7. As specified by California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, if human remains are found on the project site during construction or during archaeological work, the person responsible for the excavation, or his or her authorized representative, shall immediately notify the San Diego County Coroner's office by telephone. No further excavation or disturbance of the discovery or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains (as determined by the Qualified Archaeologist and/or the TCA Native American monitor) shall occur until the Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code 5097.98. If such a discovery occurs, a temporary construction exclusion zone shall be established surrounding the area of the discovery so that the area would be protected (as determined by the Qualified Archaeologist and/or the TCA Native American monitor), and consultation and treatment could occur as prescribed by law. As further defined by State law, the Coroner would determine within two working days of being notified if the remains are subject to his or her authority. If the Coroner recognizes the remains to be Native American, he or she shall contact the NAHC within 24 hours. The NAHC would make a determination as to the Most Likely Descendent. If Native American remains are discovered, the remains shall be kept in situ ("in place'') or in a secure location close to where they were found, and the analysis of the remains shall only occur on-site in the presence of a TCA Native American monitor.

COA-N-1. The project applicant must demonstrate compliance of the proposed heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) equipment with the property line noise limits provided in Vista Municipal Code Section 8.32.040 for internal property lines in the E-1 zone.

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

36 P24-0139

Mitigation Measures:

M-A Q-1a: Construction Dust Control Measures. Future developments shall undergo development review, including CEQA review, and shall evaluate project-specific impacts. Future construction activities shall be required to adhere to SDAPCD Rules and Regulations. These rules include, but are not limited to, rules pertaining to visible emissions (Rule 50), limiting nuisance activities (Rule 51), reducing particulate matter (Rule 52), controlling dust and fumes (Rules 54), fugitive dust control (Rule 55), and limits to the VOC content of architectural coatings (Rule 67).

Depending on the magnitude of emissions from construction activities, the city may also require measures to reduce or limit exhaust emissions. For ground disturbance activities for any future development in the city, the onsite construction superintendent shall ensure implementation of standard BMPs to reduce the emission of fugitive dust, including, but not limited to:

• Water any exposed soil areas a minimum of twice per day, or as allowed under any imposed drought restrictions.
• On windy days or when fugitive dust can be observed leaving the construction site, additional water will be applied at a frequency to be determined by the onsite construction superintendent.
• Provide temporary hydroseeding and irrigation of cleared vegetation and graded slopes as soon as possible following grading activities in areas that will remain in disturbed condition (but will not be subject to further construction activities) for a period greater than three months during the construction phase.
• Pave or periodically water all on-site access points or apply chemical stabilizer to construction sites.
• Securely cover all transported material to prevent fugitive dust. • Operate all vehicles on the construction site at speeds less than 15 miles per hour.
• Cover all stockpiles that will not be utilized within three days with plastic or equivalent material, to be determined by the on-site construction superintendent, or spray them with a non-toxic chemical stabilizer.

M-A Q-1b: Construction Exhaust Control Measures. The following measures shall be implemented throughout construction to minimize emissions of ozone (O3) precursors (nitrogen oxides [NOx] and volatile organic compounds [VOCs]):

• Turn off all diesel-powered vehicles and gasoline-powered equipment when not in use for more than five minutes.
• Use electric or natural gas-powered construction equipment in lieu of gasoline or diesel-powered engines, where feasible.
• Use modified equipment incorporating such measures as cooled exhaust gas recirculation or lean-NOX catalysts.
• Require 10 percent of construction fleet to use any combination of diesel catalytic converters, diesel oxidation catalysts, diesel particulate filters, and/or CARS-certified Tier III equipment or better.

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

37 P24-0139

M-A Q-1c: Construction Architectural Coating Measures. The following measures shall be used to minimize emissions of VOCs (an 03 precursor) and ensure compliance with SDAPCD Rule 67:

• Use VOC-free coatings.
• Limit volume usage per day verified with detailed record keeping. • Rent or purchase VOC Emission Reduction Credits.

M-B I-1: Habitat Assessment and Focused Surveys for Special Status Species. Prior to the issuance of any grading, building, or other construction permit for undeveloped parcels in the project area, a habitat assessment shall be conducted for the parcel to determine whether the potential exists for special-status species to occur. If the habitat assessment identifies potentially suitable habitat for threatened and endangered species, focused surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist to determine their presence or absence.

If threatened and endangered species are observed/detected, project specific mitigation measures shall be developed to mitigate impacts on threatened and endangered species to below a level of significance. Specific measures shall include, but are not limited to:

• Early consultation with the wildlife agencies (i.e., USFWS, CDFG) for ESA- and CESA-listed species to ensure avoidance to the greatest extent feasible and appropriate "take" authorization.
• Provision of a qualified biological monitor on site during all earth disturbing activities to ensure avoidance of impacts on listed species. • The use of fencing or flagging to identify sensitive areas that support the listed species and to ensure that the areas are protected from direct and indirect impacts.
• Implementation of noise reduction measures (e.g., noise attenuation structures) within habitats occupied by listed avian species, and noise monitoring during the breeding season.
• Identification and transplantation of listed plant species populations in accordance with best practices.
• Avoidance of the breeding seasons for listed species such as:
o Arroyo toad-March 1 to September 30
o Least Bell's vireo-March 1 to September 30
o Willow flycatcher (all subspecies)-March 1 to September 30 o Coastal California gnatcatcher-March 1 to September 30

If no threatened or endangered species are observed or detected during focused surveys, but potentially suitable habitat for nonthreatened and non-endangered plant or wildlife species is present, a site-specific determination shall be made as to whether the potential impacts are significant based on the degree of threat and the size of the population/ occupied habitat to be impacted. Focused surveys may be required in order to make a significance determination, depending on the species to be impacted and the size of the project. The measures

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

38 P24-0139

described above shall be employed as appropriate.

M-B I-2: Bird Nest Avoidance. If construction activities occur between January 15 and September 15, a preconstruction survey (within seven days prior to construction activities) shall be conducted by a qualified biologist to determine if active nests are present within or adjacent to the area proposed for development in order to avoid the nesting activities of breeding birds/raptors. The results of the surveys shall be submitted to the City ( and made available to the Wildlife Agencies, upon request) prior to initiation of any construction activities.

If nesting activities within 200 feet of the proposed work area are not detected, construction activities may proceed. If nesting activities are confirmed, construction activities shall be delayed within an appropriate buffer (e.g., 300-feet) from the active nest until the young birds have fledged and left the nest or until the nest is no longer active as determined by a qualified biologist. The size of the appropriate buffer shall be determined by a qualified biologist based on field conditions. The results of all biological monitoring shall be submitted to the City ( and made available to the Wildlife Agencies, upon request). The Wildlife Agencies are available for consultation regarding nesting status and appropriate buffers. Also, at no time is take of California Full Protected species permitted (Fish and Game Code §3511).

M-B 1-3: Habitat Assessment/Biology Report. Prior to the initiation of future development projects within the project area, a habitat assessment shall be conducted when warranted in areas undisturbed by prior development to determine whether sensitive natural communities (including riparian vegetation) are present. If the habitat assessment identifies sensitive natural communities, a biological report shall be prepared to address impacts on sensitive natural communities resulting from the proposed future project. The report shall identify mitigation measures to reduce all significant impacts to below a level of significance. Mitigation measures shall include, as determined appropriate by a qualified biologist in consultation with the wildlife agencies:
• Early consultation with the wildlife agencies to ensure maximum avoidance of sensitive habitats, as feasible.
• Provision of a qualified biological monitor on site during all earth-disturbing activities to ensure avoidance of sensitive habitats.
• The use of fencing or flagging to identify and avoid sensitive areas and to ensure that the areas are protected from direct and indirect impacts. • Appropriate siting of staging areas within developed or disturbed areas, ensuring such areas are outside of existing sensitive habitats. • Avoidance of the avian breeding seasons if riparian or other sensitive habitat supports breeding birds, or other special-status species. • Provision of mitigation at a minimum of a 1:1 ratio to ensure no net loss of sensitive habitat. Consultation with the wildlife agencies or professional best practices may result in higher ratios.

M-B1-5: Avoidance and Minimization Measures for Continued Wildlife Movement. If the habitat assessment described in Mitigation Measure M-81-3 identifies that a

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

39 P24-0139

specific development project will interfere substantially with wildlife movement or established wildlife corridors, avoidance and minimization measures shall be developed that ensure the continued movement of wildlife through a specific corridor or area. Measures shall be specific to each project and be determined by a qualified biologist during project design; however, the following minimization measures shall be incorporated where appropriate, as determined by a qualified biologist:

• Project design shall be sensitive to wildlife movement and, if a corridor is determined to be located on site, the project shall be designed to avoid segmentation of the corridor and the continued viability of the corridor. • Street lighting shall be designed such that it does not increase the overall ambient lighting and glare in the natural area. This may be accomplished by designing street lighting with internal baffles to direct the lighting towards the ground and so there is a zero side angle cut off to the horizon. • Potential noise, motion, and human intrusion impacts shall be minimized by incorporating setbacks, berms, or walls into the project design. Construction- related noise shall be mitigated consistent with the city's Noise Ordinances by limiting construction activities to daytime hours and requiring construction equipment to be equipped with mufflers.
• Plant species acceptable for the project's landscaping must not be considered an invasive species by the California Invasive Plant Council (http:/ / www.cal-ipc.org/ip/inventory /index.php).
• When culverts are included in a project design within areas known to be used as wildlife crossings, they shall be placed in locations suitable for use by wildlife and shall be sized and shaped such as to facilitate wildlife movement through the culvert.

M-CR-1a: Prior to the issuance of any construction permits, including but not limited to a grading permit, for any future development project proposed under the GP Update, the NAHC and local tribes shall be contacted and consulted by a Professional Archaeologist approved by the City. If the NAHC and/or local tribes indicate in a written response that the site of the proposed project many potentially contain Native American resources, a pedestrian survey (i.e., physical walk over) shall be conducted by a Professional Archaeologist and a local Native American monitor. Should the pedestrian survey identify Native American cultural resources, the Professional Archeologist shall, in consultation with the Native American monitor, make an immediate written evaluation of the significance and appropriate treatment of the resource, including any avoidance measures, additional testing and evaluation, or data recovery plan. In addition, the Professional Archaeologist, in consultation with the Native American monitor, shall also include in the written determination whether the potential presence of subsurface resources requires archaeological and/ or Native American monitoring during site grading or other ground disturbing activities. If construction monitoring is required, Mitigation Measure M-CR-1b shall be implemented.

M-C R-1b: Prior to the issuance of any grading and/ or excavation permit for any future development project within the GP Update area that has been identified as

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

40 P24-0139

having the potential to contain subsurface cultural resources, the project applicant shall provide written evidence to the City Planner that the applicant has retained a City-approved Professional Archaeologist and Native American monitor, if appropriate, to observe grading and excavation activities for the presence of cultural materials. If any cultural materials are found, work in the area shall be halted so that the significance of the find can be evaluated. A significant discovery may require additional evaluation and mitigation; however, any such additional requirements would be site specific and would be determined at the time of discovery by the Professional Archaeologist and Native American monitor. A postconstruction monitoring report shall be prepared and submitted to the City Planner at the completion of grading and/or excavation activities.

M-C R-2: Paleontological Monitoring. Monitoring during construction grading or trenching shall be required for projects that would excavate to a depth often feet or more, or that propose a total cut amount of 1,000 cubic yards or more. Prior to the issuance of any grading and/ or excavation permit, the project applicant must provide written proof to the City Planner that a Professional Paleontologist has been retained to observe all earth-disturbing activities. All fossil materials recovered during mitigation monitoring shall be cleaned, identified, cataloged, and analyzed in accordance with standard professional practices. The results of the field work and laboratory analysis shall be submitted in a technical report and the entire collection transferred to an approved facility.

M-N-1: Construction Noise Reduction. Construction noise is unavoidable and could adversely affect nearby residents. However, the noise would be temporary and limited to the duration of the construction. The following measures shall be incorporated into project contract specifications to minimize construction noise impacts:

M-N-1a: Noise-Reducing Features. All noise-producing construction equipment and vehicles using internal combustion engines shall be equipped with mufflers; air-inlet silencers where appropriate; and any other shrouds, shields, or other noise reducing features in good operating condition that meet or exceed original factory specification. Mobile or fixed "package" equipment (e.g., arc-welders and air compressors) shall be equipped with shrouds and noise-control features that are readily available for that type of equipment.

M-N-1b: Use of Electrical Equipment. Electrically powered equipment shall be used instead of pneumatic or internal combustion powered equipment, where feasible.

M-N-1c: Location of Equipment and Support Areas. Material stockpiles and mobile equipment staging, parking, and maintenance areas shall be located as far as practicable from noise-sensitive receptors.

M-N-1d: Speed Limits. Construction site and access road speed limits shall be established and enforced during the construction period.

M-N-1e: Signal Limits. The use of noise-producing signals, including horns, whistles, alarms, and bells, shall be for safety warning purposes only.

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

41 P24-0139

M-N-1f: Use of Audio Equipment. No project-related public address or music system shall be audible at any adjacent receptor.

M-N-1g: Resolution of Complaints. The onsite construction supervisor shall have the responsibility and authority to receive and resolve noise complaints. A clear appeal process for the owner shall be established prior to construction commencement to allow for resolution of noise problems that cannot be immediately solved by the site supervisor.

M-PS-2: VUSD Fees. All future projects under the GP Update would be required to pay statutory fees for public school services. Project applicants shall contact the VUSD to determine the current and appropriate statutory fee for each future project proposed in the project area.

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

ADD TO PACKET
From: Jeannette Lizarraua
To: Public Comments
Subject: PH1. Appeal of P24-0139, Monte 'Vista Residential (CC) Date: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 1:56:37 PM
You don't often get emabl from
Dear City of Vista Council and staff,
Pa rn why ti
s
s
m o
an
I am writing to request clarification regarding the proposed Monte Vista Residential project (19 DU + 16 ADU).
• The project is not located in a VMT efficient area, and the Transportation impact Analysis Guidelines (Dec. 2020) identify pedestrian, bicycle, transit, and vehicle modes for discussion. However, the analysis did not reference Circulation Element priorities for Monte Vista, including its designation as a third priority bikeway project (Table CE -6), proposed Class II bikeways (Figure CE -4), third priority for pedestrian facilities (Table CE -7), and a proposed hiking trail (Figure CE -6). Can you confirm why these elements were omitted? As well as the current conditions of those elements within the report. • Did staff determine whether VUSD is authorized to charge an impact fee to the applicant for the ADUs pursuant to Gov. Code §66000?
• Staff noted that state law requires ADUs to be approved ministerially, not subject to CEQA or traffic analysis, and excluded from subdivision public notices. What state code is this based on?
• The plan appears inconsistent with General Plan CE Policies 1.11 and 1.12. Please confirm if this is consistent with those.
• Are the rear setbacks required to meet the 20 -ft standard per citywide fire and safety requirements?
• Gov. Code §66314(a) states that ADU allowances are subject to water/sewer adequacy and traffic/public safety impacts. How is this being addressed given the location: a low - density lot adjacent to a moderate fire hazard zone, lacking sidewalks, on a 2 -lane road through a high fire severity area without an established evacuation plan? • Finally, is the project in compliance with the North County MHCP (adopted by SANDAG in 2003)? If not, what mitigation measures are being requested by staff? Thank you for your attention to these questions. I look forward to your response.

PH1

Best regards,
Jeannette Lizarraga

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

ADD TO PACKET
From: MonteVistaDriveGroup
To: John Franklin; Katie Melendez; Corinna Contreras; Dan C"Donnell: Jeffrey Fox; Kathy Valdez: John Conley Subject: Monte Vista (P21-0139): Urgent Need for Complete Record and Legal Clarity Before September 23 Vote Date: Sunday, September 21, 2025 8:09:12 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn way th-s is mDoran, Dear Mayor Franklin, Councilmembers, City Clerk Valdez, and City Manager Conley, On behalf of more than 65 Monte Vista households, we respectfully urge the City to slow down and ensure full legal and public -safety compliance before taking action on the Monte Vista Residential Project (P24-0139).

We recognize that several of you are working hard to balance state housing law with the City's obligations under CEQA, public safety requirements, and Vista's own Climate Action Plan.

Our goal here is simple: to help protect the community —and the Council itself —from costly mistakes or unintended risks.

Key Outstanding Deficiencies
• Reasonably Foreseeable Units (CEQA):

CEQA requires environmental review to include reasonably foreseeable impacts —not just the base application. Additional ADUs„ JADUs, and garage conversions are all probable in this subdivision. Controlling case law (Laurel Heights, Communities for a Better Environment, others) confirms that omitting foreseeable units leaves the review legally vulnerable.
• Climate Action Plan Consistency (CAP):

The City's 2019 CAP is a legally adopted. CEQA plan. Yet the record contains no completed CAP consistency checklist or supporting technical data. Courts have invalidated approvals for this exact failure.
• Wildfire Evacuation and School Safety:

Monte Vista Elementary is a "special generator" in evacuation planning. In an emergency, parents will converge on the school at the same time residents are trying to flee. Without a professional evacuation study and enforceable mitigation, this creates gridlock risk and exposes the City to liability.
• Transparency for Decisionmakers:

Council deserves to vote on a complete record —including objective data, specific mitigation measures, and direct answers to these deficiencies. Anything less puts your decision at risk of challenge and undermines public confidence.

What We Are Asking For
Before any vote, please ensure the record includes:
• A written analysis and rationale for buildout assumptions, including ADUs/JADUs.

PH1

A completed CAP checklist with technical backup for public and Council review.

An independent, modeled evacuation study with enforceable mitigation.

A plain-language legal memo from the City Attorney specifically addressing CEQA and CAP requirements.

If Council still intends to approve despite these gaps, then at the very least please require CalWest to enhance the project with tangible community benefits: expanded green space, public trails, and substantial tree canopy restoration. These are the minimum improvements needed to make this development acceptable to the neighborhood.

If these steps cannot be completed before the hearing, we respectfully request a continuance so the Council can make a fully informed, lawful, and community-protective decision.

This isn’t about opposition for its own sake—it’s about ensuring the City, its residents, and its elected leaders can move forward with confidence in both the safety and legality of the decision.

Thank you for your time, your service, and your attention to these critical details.

Sincerely,
Keith Andrew
On behalf of the Monte Vista Drive Group

From:Christopher Winters
To:Kathy Valdez; Kallison Leahy
Cc:Joseph Vacca; Michael Ressler
Subject:FW: Monte Vista project (P24-0139)
Date:Monday, September 22, 2025 11:22:30 AM
Attachments:image001.png
Hi Kathy, please provide this email below from Scott Martin with my response to the City Council for PH1 tomorrow.

Thank you,

Chris Winters
Senior Planner
(760) 643-5394

From: Christopher Winters
Sent: Monday, September 22, 2025 11:21 AM
To:

Cc: Carlos Bonilla
Subject: RE: Monte Vista project (P24-0139)

Hello Scott,

The project entitlement plans include a concept landscape plan that has been reviewed and conditioned for compliance with the City’s landscape regulations and design standards. The plans include street trees along Monte Vista fronting the project and along the proposed private street that would serve the residences. If the project is approved by the Council, subsequent construction plans submittals will include landscape construction drawings that would include the street trees and other trees/landscaping throughout the project.

By copy of this email, I have added Cal West’s project manager, Carlos Bonilla, for review and response to your questions #1 and #2 below.

Respectfully,

Chris Winters
Senior Planner
City of Vista
Community Development Department
200 Civic Center Drive
Vista, CA 92084

You don't often get email from Learn why this is important (760) 643-5394
[email protected]
logo

From: Scott Martin
Subject: Monte Vista project (P24-0139)

Hi Chris,

We spoke some time ago regarding the Monte Vista project over the phone and saw each other at each of the last two hearings.

I am hesitant to ask, but I was wondering if the applicants have made any changes to their plans with regards to landscaping?

So far, I see no concessions for safety or use of plantlife to mitigate the visual impact of this massive project (the top ridge height will be over 55’ above Monte Vista)

They met with us in-person twice and have had to sit through our suggestions several times at the city. I’m hoping they took something we said seriously and weren’t misleading when they said they cared.

What are the city requirements for landscape for a project like this?

To be specific, we’ve asked for:

1. a parkway along Monte Vista so that the new sidewalk that children would use everyday is not adjacent the busy street.

Lot #1 is the largest of the plots and could easily be reduced

to allow for this without impacting the quantity of homes.

2. properly sized trees and at a quantity as to begin to obscure the million-dollar track homes from Monte Vista and reduce the impact of looking down the uninspired service road
connecting the track homes. The 5’ setbacks and reduced front yard setbacks will ensure that this will look like solid building massing of outdated architecture.

I trust you are doing the best you can and asking for as much as possible from them, so this is no way a frustration directed at you.

Thanks, Chris.

Best,

Scott R. Martin
(
Landscape Architect
Lic# 6061

Gatzke Dillon & Ballance LLP

L A W Y E R S
2762 Gateway Road
Carlsbad, California 92009
760.431.9501
760.431.9512 gdandb.com T
F
September 22, 2025
By E-Mail
Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers
City of Vista
City Clerk
200 Civic Center Drive
Vista, CA 92084
[email protected]
Re: September 23, 2025, City Council Meeting, Monte Vista Project (P24-0139) (APN 181-022-05-00)
Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers:

We write on behalf of the applicant for the Monte Vista Residential project (the “Project”) regarding the administrative appeal (the “appeal”) filed by Keith Andrew “on behalf of the Monte Vista Drive Group” (the “appellant”). The appeal challenged the Planning Commission’s June 17, 2025 approval of this housing development project.

The Project is planned to develop nineteen high-quality homes—serving households across a range of incomes—in a safe, well-planned neighborhood close to schools, services, and jobs. By pairing thoughtful design with fire-safety and environmental measures that meet and exceed objective standards, the Project would offer families a lasting place to call home and strengthen Vista’s ability to provide housing opportunities for all who contribute to the community.

On August 12, 2025, the City Council held a public hearing on the appeal, closed public comment, and voted to continue the matter solely to confirm that the Project poses no fire-safety concerns and complies with applicable fire standards. Since then, City staff and the Vista Fire Department have conducted a thorough re-examination and again verified that the Project is designed to meet—and in many respects exceed—every objective fire-safety requirement. The applicant now returns with these findings in hand, ready to move forward after the month-long review.

I.Comprehensive Fire-Safety Review Confirms Compliance with All Standards Comprehensive review by City staff, the Vista Fire Department, and independent experts demonstrates that the Project meets – and in many respects exceeds – objective fire-safety and emergency-response standards. City staff and the Vista Fire Department have reconfirmed the Project’s compliance with every applicable fire code requirement. The Department again

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers
September 22, 2025

Gatzke Dillon & Ballance LLP

L A W Y E R S
reviewed emergency access, water supply, hydrant locations, and sprinkler plans, confirming that all adopted conditions of approval—requiring features including minimum 24-foot unobstructed fire lanes, NFPA-13D automatic interior sprinklers in every dwelling, and operational hydrants prior to construction—remain fully enforceable and would be satisfied by the Project.

Independent Fire Protection Planning experts at Dudek evaluated the Project site’s wildfire potential and evacuation risk, and confirmed that the site is “not susceptible to wildfire,” that the Project will comply with and exceed applicable City, Fire Code, and California Building Code Standards, and that it presents no significant evacuation risk. As documented in the attached Fire Protection Due Diligence Assessment for the Monte Vista Project prepared by Dudek (Aug. 22, 2025), the Project site lies outside all CAL FIRE–designated Fire Hazard Severity Zones (moderate, high, or very-high). Despite not being subject to its requirements, CalWest has voluntarily committed to incorporate Chapter 7A construction features typically required only in high- or very-high hazard areas. These rigorous measures ensure that new homes strengthen—rather than strain—Vista’s shared safety infrastructure, giving residents confidence that growth and preparedness go hand in hand.

In addition, environmental planners at the City and Helix Environmental Consulting confirmed that the Project is exempt from further environmental review because it is consistent with the City’s General Plan, for which a program EIR was certified, meaning that potential environmental effects were already comprehensively analyzed and mitigated at the citywide planning level. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21083.3; CEQA Guidelines, § 15183.) This includes full consideration at the program level of impacts related to emergency response and wildfire safety.

In sum, the month-long re-examination by City staff, the Vista Fire Department (including the Fire Marshal), and independent fire protection experts reaffirmed the original conclusion: the Project is designed to meet and exceed all objective fire-safety standards. With the sole grounds for the continuance now resolved, we respectfully request that the Council approve the Project.

II. State Housing Laws Provide a Clear Legal Pathway for Approval Beyond fire safety, the Project satisfies the requirements of California’s housing laws, which ensure that cities like Vista can meet housing needs while applying objective local standards. In doing so, Vista can help assemble the “housing puzzle” our region faces—adding a crucial piece of well-located, attainable housing that supports economic vitality and reduces long commutes for local workers.

State housing laws, including SB 330, the Housing Accountability Act (“HAA”; Gov.

Code, § 65589.5), State Density Bonus Law (“SDBL”; Gov. Code, § 65589.5), and Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) law (Gov. Code, § 66323), establish the governing framework for this

Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers
September 22, 2025

Gatzke Dillon & Ballance LLP

L A W Y E R S
decision. These statutes reflect California’s shared commitment to ensure that every city— including Vista—does its fair share to create homes families can afford. They are designed not to diminish local control but to guarantee that local standards are applied objectively and predictably, so that growth is both orderly and fair. Enacted to address the statewide housing shortage, these laws provide clear limits on local discretion where necessary to achieve that goal, while still leaving cities responsible for applying their own objective, advance-adopted standards.

A. Mandatory Density Bonus and Accessory Unit Approvals Because the Project includes two very-low-income homes, it is entitled to a density bonus and related incentives, concessions, and waivers under Government Code section 65915. When these criteria are met, a local agency shall grant the bonus and requested incentives and must waive any development standard that would physically preclude construction of the project at the allowed density or with those incentives, unless one of the statute’s narrow and inapplicable exceptions applies. (§ 65915, subds. (b), (d), (e) [local government “shall grant” density bonuses, incentives, concessions, and waivers].) California courts—including the Fourth District Court of Appeal in Bankers Hill 150 v. City of San Diego (2022) 74 Cal.App.5th 755—have confirmed that, when a project qualifies under SDBL, the City must consider it at the density and with the incentives, waivers, and design proposed, and may not withhold SDBL benefits, impose unlawful conditions, or require redesign.

In addition, sixteen of the nineteen homes include attached JADUs. State law directs that “a local agency shall ministerially approve” one ADU and one JADU per lot, and ministerial approvals are exempt from CEQA (Gov. Code § 66323, subd. (a)(1), CEQA Guidelines § 15268 (a)(1)) Accordingly, these JADUs are processed ministerially and are not subject to discretionary review by the Council.

B. Housing Accountability Act: Required Findings; No Denial or Density Reduction on Subjective Grounds
For any remaining discretionary step, the HAA provides a clear and narrow standard.

Under Government Code section 65589.5, subdivision (j), the City may deny or reduce the density of the Project only if it makes written findings, supported by a preponderance of the evidence in the record, that the project would cause a “specific, adverse impact” on public health or safety. The statute narrowly defines such an impact as a significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact based on objective standards in effect when the application was deemed complete (here, the date the SB 330 application was submitted), and further requires a finding that no feasible mitigation is available other than denial or lower density. (Gov. Code § 65589.5, subd. (j)(1)(A)–(B).)

Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers
September 22, 2025

Gatzke Dillon & Ballance LLP

L A W Y E R S
In California Renters Legal Advocacy & Education Fund v. City of San Mateo (2021) 68 Cal.App.5th 820, the court explained that the HAA “cabins the discretion of a local agency to reject proposals for new housing” and requires application of clear, objective standards adopted in advance—subjective notions of neighborhood “character” or concerns not grounded in objective standards cannot support denial. (Id. at p. 844.) Because the applicant submitted a preliminary application under SB 330 (Gov. Code § 65941.1), the application was “deemed complete” on the date of that preliminary application filing. The Project is therefore entitled to be reviewed solely under the objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision standards in effect on that preliminary-application date, and later- adopted requirements do not apply. After thorough review, neither City staff nor independent experts have identified any evidence that would here satisfy the statute’s stringent criteria for denial or density reduction.

III. Consequences of Non-Compliance with State Housing Laws Observing the HAA and SDBL not only fulfills the City’s legal duty but also protects public resources by avoiding unnecessary litigation and costly penalties—allowing Vista to focus on community priorities instead of courtroom disputes.

If the Council were to improperly deny or condition the Project or its requested density bonus benefits, the HAA and SDBL provide clear remedies. A court may order approval of the Project as proposed. It may also award the applicant its reasonable attorney’s fees and costs of suit. (Gov. Code § 65589.5, subd. (k)(1)(ii); § 65915, subd. (d)(3).) Continued noncompliance could then expose the City to monetary penalties of at least $10,000 per housing unit, with those fines multiplied—up to fivefold—if the court finds bad faith. (Gov. Code § 65589.5, subds. (k)(1)(B), (l).)
Together, these provisions mean that an unlawful denial or unlawful conditions could lead to directed Project approval, recovery of attorney’s fees and costs, and, in the event of noncompliance with a court order, significant statutory fines. Observing the HAA and DBL therefore protects the City from avoidable litigation and substantial financial exposure.

IV. Conclusion
The Project has been thoroughly reviewed by City staff, the Vista Fire Department, independent fire-protection experts, and environmental consultants, and has been shown to meet and exceed all objective fire-safety and environmental standards. It also satisfies the requirements of the HAA, SDBL, ADU law, and SB 330, and is entitled to the full protections those statutes provide.

Approval of this Project affirms Vista’s commitment to planning for its own future— expanding housing choices for local workers and families, strengthening the city’s economy, and

Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers
September 22, 2025

Gatzke Dillon & Ballance LLP

L A W Y E R S
preserving the high quality of life residents value—while reflecting the applicant’s dedication to inclusive and equitable growth. By providing nineteen new homes at a range of income levels in a safe, well-located neighborhood, it ensures that families of all incomes have a fair opportunity to live near schools, jobs, and services.

With the sole grounds for the continuance now resolved, the Council has a clear and legally supported path forward. State housing law calls for approval of the Project as proposed.

For these reasons, we respectfully request that the City Council deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission’s approval of the Monte Vista Residential Project.

Respectfully submitted,
/s/Kimberly A. Foy

Kimberly A. Foy
of
Gatzke Dillon & Ballance LLP

Attachments:

1. Fire Protection Due Diligence Assessment for the Monte Vista Project, prepared by Dudek (Aug. 22, 2025)

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
To: Jeb Hall, Cal West Living
From: Dudek Fire Protection Planning Team, Noah Stamm
Subject: Fire Protection Due Diligence Assessment for the Monte Vista Project, Vista, California Date: August 22, 2025
Attachment(s): Attachment 1 – Project Vicinity Map
Attachment 2 – Project Location Map
Attachment 3 – Project Site Plan
Attachment 4 – Fire Hazard Severity Zones Map
Attachment 5 – Fire History
Attachment 6 – Evacuation Zone
Introduction
Dudek was retained by Cal West Living to provide a Fire Protection Due Diligence assessment for the Monte Vista Project in Vista, CA (e.g. the Project) within the jurisdiction of the Vista Fire Protection District (VFPD). The assessment analyzes the wildland fire environment and what is required by fire code with regards to wildfire preparedness and evacuation. VFPD has adopted the 2022 California Fire Code (CFC) with Appendices as adopted and amended the 2023 San Deigo County Consolidated Fire Code and has various guidelines for reference, available on the VFPD Fire Prevention Bureau website.

Project Description
The Project is proposed on a 6.47-acre site at 1800 Monte Vista Drive in the City of Vista in the northern portion of the County of San Diego (County). The site is comprised of one parcel with Assessor’s Parcel Number 181-022-05-00.

Existing development on the site includes two vacant, single-family residences with surrounding accessory structures.

Since the preparation of this memo letter and the Project’s technical studies began, the homes were demolished.

The Project site has a General Plan land use designation of Low Density Residential (LD) and is zoned as Estates Residential (E-1). The project site is at the eastern edge of the City, bordered by land to the north and east that is within unincorporated San Diego County but within the City sphere of influence. Land uses surrounding the site include single-family residential to the north, east, and south; Monte Vista Elementary School to the west; and open space to the north. Refer to Attachment 1, Project Vicinity Map and Attachment 2, Project Location Map.

The Project proposes a Site Development Plan and a Tentative Subdivision Map to construct 19 single-family residential homes, including two very low-income housing units, using a density bonus. The existing residences on the site have been demolished, and the site would be divided into 21 lots. The 19 residential lots would range in size from 5,855 square feet (SF) to 50,685 SF. The two remaining lots would contain a stormwater treatment vault and a private

MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: FIRE PROTECTION DUE DILIGENCE ASSESSMENT FOR THE MONTE VISTA PROJECT, VISTA, CA

2 AUGUST 2025

street to provide access to each of the proposed residences. Refer to Attachment 3, Site Plan. Each residential lot would contain a single-family residence with an enclosed two-car garage. The proposed building designs would feature a variety of elevational treatments, including offsets, decks, trellises, and rooflines, to provide both vertical and horizontal interest. The buildings would be constructed as typical Type V structures, and the buildings would not exceed 32 feet in height.

Analysis of Wildfire Potential
The Project site is located in an area that has been designated as not being located in a Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ) by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) – Office of the State Fire Marshal (OSFM), see Attachment 4 – Fire Hazard Severity Zones. Fire hazard designations are based on topography, vegetation, and weather, amongst other factors. By not being designated as a FHSZ, CalFire’s modeling supports that the Project is not susceptible to wildfire. Fire code requirements related to protecting structures from a wildfire are required only when a Project is in a FHSZ, which the Project is not, therefore the Project will not be required to build structures to Chapter 7A of the California Building Code (CBC) or to provide Fuel Modification Zones/vegetation management. CAL FIRE has published new FHSZs in 2025, and the Project area remains non - designated.

Fire history is another important consideration in determining if a Project Area will be subjected to wildfire. As indicated in Attachment 5 – Fire History Exhibit, no fires have occurred in the Project area. The most recent fires within 5 miles of the Project were over 40 years ago, likely before development of the area. The Project area does not interface with open space and will remove vegetated areas in favor of modern strictures, paved roadways, and landscaped areas. Furthermore, the Project received a “Conditions of Approval” letter from the City of Vista, where each of the City Departments have reviewed the Project site Development Plan and provided list of requirements the project needs to comply with, including the City’s Building Department and the VFPD. The Building Department noted:

1. All construction and designs are to comply with the model codes adopted by the City of Vista at the time permit applications are filed, and construction documents are submitted for plan check. Project complies.

2. All proposed new construction shall be fire sprinklered. All new structures throughout the Project site will include the installation of NFPA 13D Automatic Interior Fire Sprinkler Systems.

3. All new units must be provided with a photovoltaic system as required by the Energy Code at the time of submittal. All new structures throughout the Project site will comply.

4. The project needs to comply with the requirements of the California Green Building Code. All new structures throughout the Project site will comply.

MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: FIRE PROTECTION DUE DILIGENCE ASSESSMENT FOR THE MONTE VISTA PROJECT, VISTA, CA

3 AUGUST 2025

And the Fire Department provided the following:

1. Fire Department Access:
a) Private residential driveways and roadways that provide access to not more than two single family dwellings or dwelling lots are required to be a paved minimum unobstructed width of 16 feet and a minimum 13’6” vertical clearance. The Project complies. b) 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. The Project complies; no roadway design features are proposed. c) 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. The Project complies; no gates proposed. d) All gates serving residential multifamily 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 Project complies; no gates proposed.
e) All fire access roadways must be maintained unobstructed and drivable by fire apparatus throughout the construction process. If the roadway becomes undriveable, a Stop Work Order will be requested until access is restored. The Project complies and the roadway will be constructed to Vista Fire Department standards.
f) 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. The Project complies
g) 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 interior roadways are designated "fire access roadways" or "fire lanes". Roadway shall be marked per CFC Sec. 901.4 and CVC Sec. 22500.1. Minimum unobstructed paved width is 24 feet. The Project complies. h) Grades on private roads and driveways serving as fire access roadways may not exceed twenty percent (20%). Roadways with grades exceeding fifteen percent (15%) must be paved in 3 ½” of concrete with a deep broom finish perpendicular to the direction of travel. The Project complies

2. Street Address Numbers:

Permanent residential three-dimensional street numbers, minimum 4 inches in height and placed upon a background of contrasting color, shall be provided on the street side of the building at the highest point

MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: FIRE PROTECTION DUE DILIGENCE ASSESSMENT FOR THE MONTE VISTA PROJECT, VISTA, CA

4 AUGUST 2025

and furthest projection of the structure. The address shall be visible from the street and shall not be obstructed in any manner. The Project complies

3. Fire Sprinklers:

Fire sprinklers will be required to be installed at the site in all new buildings. Plans shall be submitted to the Fire Department for review. The system shall comply with NFPA #13D Standard for Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems latest edition. The Project complies; all new structures throughout the Project site will include the installation of NFPA 13D Automatic Interior Fire Sprinkler Systems

4. Hydrants & Waterlines:

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, it shall be the responsibility of the applicant to improve the system as needed. The Project will comply with this standard.

Evacuation Analysis
The Project itself is not expected to change the evacuation abilities of the surrounding community due to its low projected population, the low probability of wildfire, and the roadway circulation in the area wherein evacuating residents have many options to choose from while evacuating. The Project proposes to construct 19 single-family residential homes, including two very low-income housing units, using a density bonus; the average number of people per household in the City of Vista is 3.19 persons1 and the average number of vehicles is two per household2. This equates to 60 persons total and 38 potential evacuating vehicles, although it is likely that households will use one vehicle to evacuate. This is contextualized by relating the Project to the evacuation area. San Diego County maps evacuation zones across the county, in which the Project area is within SDC-0571, see Attachment 6 – Evacuation Zone. SDC-0569 contains a total of 8 parcels before the addition of the Project. At a rate of two evacuating vehicles per Parcel, this would mean up to 16 evacuating vehicles generated from the Project area. As related to the evacuation area, the Project population adds to the total population, which is not expected to overburden the evacuation routes from the area.

Roadway circulation for the Project and the Evacuation Area is considered to be sufficient for multiple evacuation scenarios. Evacuation area residents have access to SR 78, via South Santa Fe Avenue (S14) and Monte Vista Drive, each of which connect with many cross-streets allowing emergency managers and evacuees the ability to choose multiple evacuation routes to avoid hazards.

Conclusions
In summary, the Proposed Project is not within a Fire Hazard Severity Zone, is not in an area with Fire History, and does not interface with open space. Further, the Project removes all fuels in favor of modern structures, paved areas, and landscaping. As a result of the roadway circulation and the relatively low addition of occupants constituted by the Project, the Project is not anticipated to overburden the existing evacuation infrastructure.

1 Vista 2030 Housing Element Page 2-8
2 https://datausa.io/profile/geo/vista-ca/

AUGUST 2025

Attachment 1 – Project Vicinity Map

Project Boundary
0 2,0001,000
Feet
Da
t
e
:

4 /
3 /
2 0
2 5

U
s
e
r
:

l
t
e
r
r
y

P
a
t
h
:

Z:\P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
j
1 8
1 4
9 0
0 \
F
i
r
e
D
a
t
a
.
a
p
r
x
M
a
p
:

P
r
o
j
e
c
t

L
o
c
a
t
i
o
n

L
a
y
o
u
t
:

A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t

1 P
r
o
j
e
c
t

A
r
e
a
San Clemente
Temecula
Solana Beach
Encinitas
San Diego
Carlsbad
Oceanside
Santee
Poway
San Marcos
Escondido
Vista
Del Mar
ÄÆ78
ÄÆ56
ÄÆ79
ÄÆ67
ÄÆ76
§¨¦15
S a n D i e g o
C o u n t y
Project Site
SOURCE: USGS National Map 2025
Monte Vista Project, Vista, California
Project Vicinity Map
ATTACHMENT 1
Project Site

AUGUST 2025

Attachment 2 – Project Location Map

0 2,0001,000
Feet
SOURCE: Aerial (SanGIS, 2023); Helix Environmental Planning Monte Vista Project, Vista, California
Project Location Map
ATTACHMENT 2
Monte Vista Dr
ValleyDr
Ra
n
g
e

V
i
e
w

R
d
Tre
s

N
i
n
o
s

C
t
e
El C
r
u
e
r
o

C
t
Gid
d
i
n
g
s

R
a
n
c
h

R
d
Project Site
City/County Municipal Boundary
Monte Vista
Elementary School
Open Space
Single-Family Residential
Single-Family Residential
Single-Family Residential
CIT
Y

O
F

V
I
S
T
A
SA
N

D
I
E
G
O

C
O
U
N
T
Y

AUGUST 2025

Attachment 3 – Project Site Plan

SOURCE: BHA, Inc. (2024)
Monte Vista Project, Vista, California
Proposed Site Plan
ATTACHMENT 3

AUGUST 2025

Attachment 4 – Fire Hazard Severity Zones

Cit
y

o
f

C
a
r
l
s
b
a
d
Cit
y

o
f

O
c
e
a
n
s
i
d
e
CityofCarlsbad
CityofVista
Cit
y

o
f

O
c
e
a
n
s
i
d
e
Cit
y

o
f

V
i
s
t
a
City

o
f

O
c
e
a
n
s
i
d
e
City

o
f

V
i
s
t
a
City o
f

O
c
e
a
n
s
i
d
e
Cit
y

o
f

S
a
n

M
a
r
c
o
s
City of Vista
City of Vista
CityofVista
0 4,0002,000
Feet
Da
t
e
:

4 /
3 /
2 0
2 5

U
s
e
r
:

l
t
e
r
r
y

P
a
t
h
:

Z:\P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
j
1 8
1 4
9 0
0 \
F
i
r
e
D
a
t
a
.
a
p
r
x
M
a
p
:

C
A
L
F
I
R
E

F
i
r
e

H
a
z
a
r
d

S
e
v
e
r
i
t
y

Z
o
n
e

M
a
p

L
a
y
o
u
t
:

A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t

2 C
A
L
F
I
R
E

F
i
r
e

H
a
z
a
r
d

S
e
v
e
r
i
t
y

Z
o
n
e

M
a
p
Project Boundary
LRA FHSZ (March 2025)
Very High
High
Moderate
Fire Hazard Severity Zones in State
Responsibility Area - Effective April 1,
2024
Very High
High
Moderate
SOURCE: ESRI BASEMAPS (Accessed: 2025); CAL FIRE (Accessed 2025) Monte Vista Project, Vista, California
CAL FIRE Fire Hazard Severity Zone Map
ATTACHMENT 4

Project Site

AUGUST 2025

Attachment 5 – Fire History

City of Carlsbad
City of Oceanside
Cit
y

o
f

C
a
r
l
s
b
a
d
Cit
y

o
f

O
c
e
a
n
s
i
d
e
CityofCarlsbad
CityofVista
Cit
y

o
f

C
a
r
l
s
b
a
d
CityofEscondido
City of Escondido
CityofOceanside
CityofVista
CityofOceanside
CityofVista
City

o
f

O
c
e
a
n
s
i
d
e
CityofOceanside
Ci t y ofOceanside
City of San Marcos
CityofSanMarcos
CityofVista
City of Vista
City of Vista
0 4,0002,000
Feet
Project Boundary
5-Mile Buffer
City Boundary
California Fire Perimeters
(1950+)

DECADES
1950 - 1959
1960 - 1969
1970 - 1979
1980 - 1989
1990 - 1999
2000 - 2009
2010 - 2019
2020 - 2023
SOURCE: ESRI BASEMAPS (Accessed: 2025); CAL FIRE (Accessed 2025) M onte Vista Project, Vista, California
Fire History Map
ATTACHMENT 5
Project Site

AUGUST 2025

Attachment 6 – Evacuation Zone

ATTACHMENT 6
SAN DIEGO COUNTY EVACUATION ZONE SDC-0571
Monte Vista Project, Vista, California
Project Site

ADD TO PACKET
From: Jeani Cressy
To: Kathy Valdez
Subject: Monte Vista Project —Please Apply Vista's Climate Action Plan Date: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 11:01:28 AM
You don't often get email from
.arn w
�y tn-s is imoortan
Dear City Clerk Valdez,
As a Vista resident, I am deeply concerned that the Monte Vista project (P24-0139) is moving forward without applying the City's 2019 Climate Action Plan (CAP).

The CAP is not optional it is a legally adopted CEQA document that requires a consistency checklist and technical backup for every project. This analysis has not been completed or made available to the public. Courts have invalidated project approvals for this exact failure.

Why adopt a Climate Action Plan if it is ignored at the first real test? Residents need confidence that the City's own commitments to greenhouse gas reduction and sustainable planning are being honored.

Please do not approve this project until the CAP checklist and technical analysis are completed, included in the record, and available for review. At a minimum. this step is necessary to protect both the community and the Council from legal and environmental risk.

Thank you for addressing this critical requirement before any vote is taken.

Sincerely,
Jeani Cressy and Paul Campbell
Vista Residents
PI -11

Kristin Gulley
Sunrise Circle
Vista, 92084

22 September 2025
To the Members of the Council:

Vista has much to recommend it; it is a North County gem with well-tended parks, good schools, a charming and art-filled downtown village, vibrant and diverse neighborhoods, and a strong sense of community. Thank you for your part in making Vista such a wonderful place to live!

All of Vista’s charms make the need for housing an important concern, and I do not doubt that balancing the city’s needs in this area is a difficult task. Tomorrow you will decide what to do with the proposed development adjacent to Monte Vista Elementary, and I urge you to continue to ask the developers to address concerns that have already been raised—traffic safety, fire safety, and good stewardship of the environment and the neighborhood.

The proposed development is too large for the site. We have established that it could include up to fifty-four units once all JADU and ADU are included—all on fewer than six acres, all pouring out onto Monte Vista Drive, and all not in compliance with CEQA. The intersection at Monte Vista and Valley/York is chaotic and unsafe at the best of times; during a fire or other emergency requiring evacuation, the consequences could be deadly for residents and schoolchildren.

The number of cars wholly unconnected with Monte Vista Elementary will dramatically increase, adding to the traffic danger of that intersection and the neighborhood in general. The formula used to calculate traffic flow assumes nineteen units, all with regular commute times, yet we all know this is a wild guess at best, and it does not account for up to fifty-four units, each with at least one vehicle per unit! Consider, too, that new development on Santa Fe, where traffic hazards and parking shortages already exist will also bring more traffic past Monte Vista Elementary. I know of at least one near-fatal car-pedestrian collision on Monte Vista involving a young student and his father being hit on their way into the school; we do not need another! VIDA’s move to the Rancho Minerva site on Foothill has also brought a traffic increase to the neighborhood, with parent drop off and pick ups leading to lengthy delays along Foothill, and cars turning onto Monte Vista as they leave the neighborhood and pick up speed. Again, consider the perils of these traffic increases in a fire emergency.

In terms of good stewardship of both the environment and the neighborhood character, please consider that the proposal does not feature a Climate Action Plan (CAP) consistency checklist and technical backup as required according to the Vista 2019 CAP, which is a legally adopted CEQA document that the City should review before any decision is made. Should the City choose to dismiss this requirement, I urge Council to require CalWest to scale back the plan, reducing the number of units on the site. In addition, I urge you to require the addition of traffic mitigation/management to the proposal, and to require additional landscaping/greenscaping on the site— such as meaningful and useful green space, trails, trees with tree canopy, etc., to make the site more enjoyable for its new tenants and more compatible with the surrounding neighborhood.

Let’s keep growing Vista, but let’s do it with care for the current and future Monte Vista Elementary families, and for the safety of the whole community.

Respectfully,
Kristin Gulley

From: Jennifer Jacobs
To: CitvCouncil(alvista.uov Public Comments
Cc: Kathy Valdez
Subject Monte Vista residential Project - Please vote NO Date: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 9:39:33 AM
i
Good morning Vista City Councilmembers,
Some people who received this message don't often get email frord Learn w imporan-
l15 s
I urge you to vote NO tonight on the controversial Monte Vista housing project. As a parent of two young children, with intimate knowledge of the chaos that is school pick-up and drop- off, I believe it is dangerous to add this many houses in a school zone that overlaps with a fire risk zone. You would be putting little lives at risk.

Further, I don't believe this project should have been granted CEQA 15183 exemption, which should only apply when there are no "specific effects which are peculiar to the project or its site." This project DOES involve peculiar effects due to the unique and dangerous overlap of school and wildfire risk zones, as mentioned above. I urge you to require a complete environmental review for this project with a thorough assessment of these peculiar site - specific risks.

Thank you,
Jennifer Schauble

From: Ben Madden
To: Kathy Valdez
Subject: Monte vista public comment in opposition to development Date: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 9:30:52 AM
i You don't often get email frorr
Hi
Here is my public comment .

I am opposed tot he proposed housing development near Monte vista for several reasons :

Learn w2yt
1-s is -mpo
an

1.) No CEQA or EIR has been completed. Considering this area is a quality, low disturbance zone that has not been previously developed - I find this troubling. This area is quality coastal sage scrub habitat. There is evidence of monarch butterfly's, yearly nesting bird suitability, and a potential jurisdictional drainage and waterway that has not been accounted for.

2.) Traffic and congestion near elementary school. This area is already congested with school traffic and a one way in one way out housing development will excacerbate and already bad situation and present safety risks to children coming and leaving school

3.) Vista residents need more public spaces and parks. Why not turn this into a recreational space using minimal funds and providing much needed open spaces in an already nual area, low density area.

Thank you
Ben Madden
Ben Madden

From: Jill Martin
To: John Franklin; Katie Melendez; Corinna Contreras; Dan 0"Donnell; Jeffrey Fox; Kathy Valdez: John Conlev Subject; Monte Vista Project — City Must Comply with Its Own CAP Date: Monday, September 22, 2025 9.37:59 PM
i You don't often get email frorr
Learn wly
'lV5
mporan
Dear Mayor Franklin, Councilmembers, City Clerk Valdez, and City Manager Conley, As a Vista resident, I am very concerned that the Monte Vista project (P24-0139) is moving forward without compliance with the City's own 2019 Climate Action Plan (CAP).

The CAP is not a guideline or policy preference it is a legally adopted CEQA document. CEQA requires a formal CAP consistency checklist and supporting technical data in the record. To my knowledge, that analysis has not been completed or made available.

This omission is not a small detail. Courts across California have invalidated project approvals for this exact failure. If Vista ignores its own CAP, the City risks legal challenge and undermines the credibility of the plan itself. Why adopt a CAP if it will be ignored the first time it applies?
Please do not approve this project until the CAP checklist and technical backup are completed, published, and reviewed. At minimum, this step is required for the City to comply with CEQA and its own adopted climate policies.

Thank you for addressing this clear legal obligation before any vote is taken.

Sincerely,
Ji11 Martin
Vista Resident

YI M B Y L aw
226 1 M ar k et Str eet ST E 10416
San Fr ancisco, CA 9 4114
h ello @ yim bylaw .or g

1 9 /22/2025

City of Vista
City Council
200 Civic Center Dr ive
Vista, Califor nia

publiccom m ents@ vista.gov

R e: 1800 -1802 M onte Vista Dr ive Appeal, I tem PH 1

Dear Vista City Council,

YI M B Y L aw is a 501( c) 3 non -pr ofit cor por ation, whose m ission is to increase the accessibility and affor dability of housing in Califor nia. YI M B Y L aw sues m unicipalities when they fail to com ply with state housing laws, including the H ousing Accountability A ct ( H AA) . City Council has an obligation to abide by all r elevant state housing laws when evaluating the above captioned pr oposal, including the H AA. Should the City fail to follow the law, YI M B Y L aw will not hesitate to file suit to ensur e that the law is enfor ced.

T his developm ent will consist of 19 single fam ily hom es, with 2 deed r estr icted for ver y -low - incom e households. T he pr oject has alr eady r eceived appr oval fr om the P lanning Com m ission, but has been appealed to this Council. W e wr ite to encour age the cor r ectly dr afted r esolution denying said appeal and appr oving the T entative Subdivision M ap, Site Developm ent Plan, and Density B onus waiver s.

As accur ately r eflected in the staff r epor t, the pr oject com plies with the City Gener al Plan, objective standar ds/Design Guidelines, and applicable zoning r egulations. T his pr oject m eets with the appr oval of the Fir e Depar tm ent, City M anager ’ s Office, and office of Com m unity Developm ent.

A Density B onus is being sought in or der for the Pr oject pr oponent to be gr anted waiver s to which they ar e entitled under Califor nia state Density B onus L aw, California Gover nm ent Code § 6 59 15( e) , so long as ther e ar e no specific, adver se im pacts, upon hea lth, safety, or the

YI M B Y L aw, 226 1 M ar k et Str eet ST E 10 4 16 , San F r an cisco, CA 9 4 114 2 physical envir onm ent, and ther e ar e no feasible m ethods to satisfactor ily m itigate or avoid the specific adver se im pacts. T he H AA, § 6 5589 .5 ( j) ( 3) specifies that the r eceipt of a density bonus does not constitute a valid basis on which to find a pr oposed housing developm ent pr oject is inconsistent, not in com pliance, or not in confor m ity, with an applicable plan, pr ogr am , policy, or dinance, standar d, r equir em ent, or other sim ilar pr ovision.

W ith the r equested concessions and/or waiver s available under State Density B onus L aw, the above -captioned pr oject is zoning and gener al plan com pliant. T her efor e, your local agency m ust appr ove the application, or else m ak e findings to the effect that the pr oposed pr oject would have an adver se im pact on public health and safety, as descr ibed above. Should the City fail to com ply with the law, YI M B Y L aw will not hesitate to tak e legal action to ensur e that the law is enfor ced.

I am signing this letter both in m y capacity as the E xecutive Dir ector of YI M B Y L aw, and as a r esident of Califor nia who is affected by the shor tage of housing in our state, and would be eligible to apply for r esidency in the pr oposed housing developm ent p r oject.

Sincer ely,

Sonja T r auss
E xecutive Dir ector
YI M B Y L aw

From: Cesar R
To: John Franklin; Katie Melendez; Corinna Contreras; Dan O"Donnell: Jeffrey Fox; Kathy Valdez: John Conley Cc: Free Yahoo; Oscar Ramirez: Adrel Ramirez. Nicolet Ramirez; Omer Acikel• Lisa Scott: MO Rvass:
almenopsOcox.net: Alexandra Martin. Q C V
Subject Notice to Please Frx or Delay Monte Vista Residential (P24-0139) Date: Monday, September 22, 2025 11:40:03 PM
You don't often get email from
Learn w
nis is imporant
Dear Councilmembers, Mayor Franklin, City Clerk Valdez, and City Manager Conley:

As a Vista resident, I'm asking you not to approve the Monte Vista project (P24-0139) until the record is complete and safety obligations are met.

Evacuation & School Safety: Monte Vista Elementary is a "special generator." In an emergency, parents will converge on the school at the same time families try to evacuate from Monte Vista Drive. That gridlock risk has not been professionally modeled or mitigated.
• CEQA - Foreseeable Units: The review omits likely ADUs/JADUs and garage conversions. CEQA requires analyzing reasonably foreseeable units; skipping them leaves the analysis incomplete.
• Climate Action Plan: The City's 2019 CAP requires a consistency checklist and technical backup. Those materials have not been provided in the public record.

Project Construction Specific Safety Study and Plan: Meeting Cal -OSHA, EPA, CofSD, and other applicable regulating agencies.

Project Specific Environmental Ecological Study: Evaluating and identifying the potential effects on the ecosystem.
• Project Specific Environmental Ecological Mitigation f Monitoring Plan:

Mitigating and monitoring the potential effects of this project on the ecosystem.

Please delay the vote until the above items, an independent evacuation study, the CAP checklist (with backup), and a written rationale on buildout/ADUs are produced and reviewed.

If the City still intends to approve, at minimum require CalWest to add meaningful community benefits — expanded green space, public trails, substantial tree canopy, add to / contribute to road improvements, add to ! contribute to City's emergency and safety infrastructure — to reduce impacts and make the project livable.

Thank you for addressing these issues before any vote is taken.

Sincerely,
Oscar R. Vass
Vista Resident

September 22, 2025
Dear Mayor and Councilmembers,
On behalf of the North San Diego County REALTORS®, a trade association representing over 5,000 real estate professionals and industry partners across the region, I’m writing to encourage your continued commitment to expanding housing opportunities in Vista.

We are facing a historic shortage of housing in San Diego County. With the median home price now over $1 million, far too many families are being priced out of the market. As a city, Vista has a key role to play in addressing this crisis —and in making homeownership attainable for more residents.

While I understand the Council must weigh each proposal on its merits, I want to express our general support for efforts that add for-sale housing and expand the housing supply for working families. Policies and projects that responsibly grow our housing inventory are essential to keeping Vista successful, accessible, and equitable for families at all income levels.

Homeownership is more than a transaction. It builds equity, stability, and community investment. When we create more pathways to ownership, we create stronger, more connected neighborhoods—and a more resilient future for Vista.

Thank you for your leadership on this critical issue, and for your ongoing work to balance today’s housing needs with the long-term future of our city.

Respectfully submitted,
Taylor Thompson
Vice President of Government Affairs
North San Diego County REALTORS®

ADD TO PACKET
PH1
Received after 2:00 pm on 9/23/2025