cc 2025 AR 10/14 mar vista specific plan p24-0354 — Vista City Council, October 14, 2025

ACTION:
____________________________
Clerk/Secretary
Department: Community Development Item No: PH1
Prepared by:

Patsy Chow, Assistant Director of Community
Development Meeting Date: October 14, 2025
Approved by:

Joe Vacca, Director of Community Development
John Conley, City Manager Agenda Location: Public Hearing SUBJECT: MAR VISTA SPECIFIC PLAN ADOPTION (P24-0354)
RECOMMENDATION:

1.Open, conduct, and close a public hearing to receive testimony regarding Planning Case No. P24-0354, the Mar Vista Specific Plan.

2.Adopt City Council Resolution No. 2025- , approving a Negative Declaration for the Mar Vista Specific Plan area.

3.Adopt City Council Resolution No. 2025- , approving a General Plan Amendment amending Figure LUCI-2 for the Mar Vista Specific Plan Area.

4.Introduce and adopt City Council Ordinance No. 2025- , adopting the Mar Vista Specific Plan and approving a Zone Change from A-1 (Agricultural) to SPI (Specific Plan Implementation) for the Mar Vista Specific Plan Area.

CORRELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS: Relates to but does not directly support the following City Council goal(s): Homelessness & Housing
PRIOR ACTION: On June 22, 2021, adopted Resolution No. 2021-116, making application to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) for the annexation/reorganization of approximately 143 acres known as the Mar Vista Island (per Planning Case No. P21-0200) (Vote: 5-0). •On November 7, 2022, LAFCO passed and adopted Resolution No. 2022-014 per LAFCO File No.

RO21-04, making determinations, approving and ordering a reorganization and associated sphere of influence amendment for the Mar Vista Annexation.

PRIOR PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: On March 18, 2025, adopted Resolution Nos. 2025-05 and 2025-06, recommending City Council approval of a Negative Declaration for the Mar Vista Specific Plan, and recommending City Council approval of the Mar Vista Specific Plan with a General Plan Amendment amending Figure LUCI-2 and a Zone Change from A-1 (Agricultural) to SPI (Specific Plan Implementation) for the Mar Vista Specific Plan (Vote: 5-0, Looney and Hastings absent) (Vote: 5-0, Looney and Hastings absent).

The Planning Commission Staff Report and Minutes from March 18, 2025, are included as Exhibit 4.

STATEMENT ON THE SUBJECT: The project area consists of one hundred and eight (108) parcels, within a 143-acre area (Exhibit 6). The purpose of establishing the Mar Vista Specific Plan is to maintain the rural setting experienced by property owners while under County of San Diego jurisdiction, prior to City of Vista AGENDA
REPORT

CITY COUNCIL

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION

SUCCESSOR AGENCY

BUENA SANITATION DISTRICT

JOINT POWERS FINANCING AUTHORITY
Opened, conducted and closed the public hearing. Adopted the following: 1) City Council Resolution No. 2025-179. Vote: 5-0; 2) City Council Resolution No. 2025-180. Vote: 5-0; 3) City Council Ordinance No. 2025-09. Vote: 5-0

MEETING DATE: October 14, 2025 PAGE 2

SUBJECT: Mar Vista Specific Plan (P24-0354)

annexation. This is accomplished through adoption of substantially consistent development standards and permitted land uses as compared to those previously governing this neighborhood under the County of San Diego’s jurisdiction. The proposed Mar Vista Specific Plan would change the current zoning designation of this neighborhood from Agriculture (A-1) to the Specific Plan Implementation (SPI) zone pursuant to Chapter

18.20 of the Development Code. Additionally, an amendment to the Vista General Plan is needed to amend Figure LUCI-2 in the General Plan to designate these parcels as within the Mar Vista Specific Plan. The new SPI zone will continue to be consistent with the existing General Plan designation for the project site of Rural Residential (RR).

The following goals were established to guide the adoption of the Specific Plan area. The goals were generated using planning and land use analysis, the Vista General Plan, and discussions between the property owners and City staff. The Specific Plan goals include:

1. Provide for the establishment of a specific plan, consisting of 143 acres.

2. Create a plan that maintains the rural nature and characteristics of the existing neighborhood.

3. Maintain consistency between the Specific Plan land uses to those previously allowed under the A70 zoning designation under County of San Diego jurisdiction prior to City of Vista annexation.

LAND USE:

The goals of the Mar Vista Specific Plan are achieved through the document’s various land uses and development standards. As previously noted, the proposed Specific Plan area was previously zoned A70 (Agriculture) under the County of San Diego jurisdiction, prior to City of Vista annexation. To maintain these standards within the proposed Specific Plan, staff included many of the County standards and allowances under the A70 land use designation as part of the Specific Plan. Permitted land uses include single-family residential at a maximum density of one dwelling unit per acre, various animal uses such as animal raising, horse stables and animal keeping, as well as various agricultural uses.

DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS:

Maximum height for a primary residence will be two (2) stories or 35-feet, whichever is less. Off-street parking allowance will be a maximum of two (2) spaces per unit. Minimum setbacks would be maintained related to the following requirements: Front, 60-feet from street centerline; Side (Interior), 15-feet from the property line; Side (Exterior/Street), 35-feet from street centerline; and Rear, 25-feet from the property line.

Accessory structures will also be consistent with County of San Diego standards. Accessory structures include attached or detached garages, carports, storage buildings, workshops, offices, and other similar non-habitable uses. Size of accessory structures will be determined by lot size and whether it will be attached or detached from the main residence.

The proposed Specific Plan also takes into consideration and maintains consistency with County allowances for fences and walls, lighting, and cargo containers. Furthermore, animal keeping standards and enclosures are also permitted consistent with County regulations.

SEWER REQUIREMENTS:

MEETING DATE: October 14, 2025 PAGE 3

SUBJECT: Mar Vista Specific Plan (P24-0354)

and/or systems. Requirements for septic tanks/systems, and the allowance to have them or expand them, or the determination to require a connection to City of Vista sewer for health and safety reasons, derives fully and completely from the County DEH. Should a sewer connection be determined to be necessary, the property owner will work with City of Vista Engineering staff for further assistance.

STREET REQUIREMENTS:

The Mar Vista Specific Plan area is bound by Mar Vista Drive to the north and Buena Vista Drive to the west.

Both streets are currently designated as semi-rural streets in the City of Vista General Plan Chapter 3 - Circulation Element, which includes a maximum of 2-lanes. This designation will maintain the existing width of semi-rural roadways throughout the Specific Plan area to help retain the existing character of the neighborhood.

Miramar Drive, Marine View Drive, and Park Hill Road are local streets without a specific classification in the Circulation Element. The City will not widen these roads or install sidewalks. The City will not require these types of improvements in the case of new development on these streets either. This will ensure the existing rural character of the neighborhood. Park Hill Place, California Oak Drive, Auburn Woods Drive and Red Plum Lane are private roads, where the City does not have the responsibility for maintenance or improvements.

Specific Plan / General Plan Amendment
A General Plan Amendment is necessary to amend Figure LUCI-2 in the adopted General Plan to designate these parcels as within the Mar Vista Specific Plan. The existing and proposed General Plan designations are provided in Exhibit 2.

Zone Change
Upon approval of the Mar Vista Specific Plan, the zoning designation for the site will be changed on the Vista Zoning Map from Agriculture (A-1) to Specific Plan Implementation (SPI), thereby making the Mar Vista Specific Plan the regulatory document governing the land uses and future development of the properties within the site. The Specific Plan area zoning of SPI will continue to be consistent with the existing General Plan designation of Rural Residential (RR). The zoning and land uses of the Mar Vista Specific Plan will continue to be consistent with the surrounding residential land uses of A-1 (Agriculture) and E-1 (Estate). The Mar Vista Specific Plan has been prepared in accordance with the Vista Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 18.20, Specific Plan Implementation (SPI) Zone. The existing and proposed zoning designations are provided in Exhibit 3.

Planning Review. The Mar Vista Specific Plan has been prepared in accordance with the California Government Code statutory requirements for specific plans. It includes the following items mandated by California Government Code Section 65451:
a. A specific plan shall include a text and a diagram or diagrams which specify all of the following in detail:
1) The distribution, location and extent of the uses of land, including open space, within the area covered by the plan.
2) The proposed distribution, location, and extent and intensity of major components of public and private transportation, sewage, water, drainage, solid waste disposal, energy, and other essential facilities proposed to be located within the area covered by the plan and needed to support the land uses described in the plan.
3) Standards and criteria by which development will proceed, and standards for the conservation, development, and utilization of natural resources, where applicable. 4) A program of implementation measures including regulations, programs, public works projects, and financing measures necessary to carry out paragraph (1), (2), and (3). 10/14/2025 PH1 3 of 158

MEETING DATE: October 14, 2025 PAGE 4
SUBJECT: Mar Vista Specific Plan (P24-0354)
b.The Specific Plan shall include a statement of the relationship of the Specific Plan to the General Plan.

The adoption of the Mar Vista Specific Plan would achieve the goals identified for the document. The Specific Plan has been designed to maintain the rural nature and characteristics of the existing neighborhood by maintaining the rural nature of the community. Additionally, rural uses such as low-density residential units on large lots are maintained and included in the Specific Plan. Land uses and development standards that are closely associated with rural development would be permissible subject to development standards. Furthermore, the Specific Plan would maintain consistency between the Specific Plan land uses to those previously allowed under the A70 zoning designation under County of San Diego jurisdiction prior to City of Vista annexation.

The Planning Commission acts in an advisory capacity to the City Council regarding adoption of any specific plan and general plan amendments. On March 18, 2025, the Planning Commission made a recommendation of approval to the City Council on the Negative Declaration, the proposed Mar Vista Specific Plan, and associated General Plan Amendment.

Environmental Review. A Negative Declaration / Initial Study Checklist was prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code, Section 21000, et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Section 15000, et seq.). The document was available for a 20-day public review period from March 12, 2025 to April 1, 2025. The Planning Commission made a recommendation on the draft Negative Declaration and this project prior to the conclusion of the public review period in accordance with Title 14 CCR sec. 15025(c). One comment letter was received during that review period on March 31, 2025, and written responses have been prepared for the comment letter received.

As discussed above, the Mar Vista Specific Plan is a planning document for land use and development standards within the Mar Vista neighborhood. The Specific Plan does not propose any specific residential projects or construction, nor incentivize additional development. The Specific Plan maintains existing residential densities and development patterns and the Mar Vista Specific Plan area is nearly built out. As a result, and as further discussed in the Negative Declaration, no potentially significant impacts are anticipated.

Planning Commission Hearing. A public hearing was held at the Planning Commission on March 18, 2025, to consider the project. At the completion of the hearing, the Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the Mar Vista Specific Plan as outlined in the Planning Commission Resolution 2025-06 (Exhibits 5).

FISCAL IMPACT: There is no direct fiscal impact associated with the staff recommendation.

EXHIBITS:

1.City Council Resolution No. 2025- , approving a Negative Declaration for the Mar Vista Specific Plan area with Exhibit A

2.City Council Resolution No. 2025- , approving a General Plan Amendment amending Figure LUCI-2 for the Mar Vista Specific Plan Area with Exhibit A

3.City Council Ordinance No. 2025- , adopting the Mar Vista Specific Plan and approving a Zone Change from A-1 (Agricultural) to SPI (Specific Plan Implementation) for the Mar Vista Specific Plan Area with Exhibits A and B

4.March 18, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report and Minutes 10/14/2025 PH1 4 of 158

MEETING DATE: October 14, 2025 PAGE 5

SUBJECT: Mar Vista Specific Plan (P24-0354)

5. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2025-06, recommending City Council approval of the Mar Vista Specific Plan with a General Plan Amendment amending Figure LUCI-2 and a Zone Change from Agricultural (A-1) to Specific Plan Implementation (SPI) for the Mar Vista Specific Plan Area

6. Location Map

10/14/2025 PH1 5 of 158

RESOLUTION 2025-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CHARTERED CITY OF

VISTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE

ADOPTION OF THE MAR VISTA SPECIFIC PLAN
APPLICANT: CITY OF VISTA
PLANNING CASE P24-0354
The City Council of the Chartered City of Vista does resolve as follows:

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

A.The applicant, City of Vista, has submitted an application for approval of the Mar Vista Specific Plan with a General Plan Amendment amending Figure LUCI-2 and a Zone Change from Agricultural (A-1) to Specific Plan Implementation (SPI) for the Mar Vista Specific Plan Area (Project); and
B.An Initial Study and Negative Declaration was prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code, Section 21000, et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Section 15000, et seq.) to address the potential environmental impacts of the proposed Project; and
C.The Negative Declaration was made available for a 20-day public review period from March 12, 2025 to April 1, 2025; and D.A notice describing the proposed Project and the intent to adopt a Negative Declaration was duly mailed to all property owners within 500 feet of the property boundaries and it was published in the "Union Tribune," a newspaper of general circulation on or before March 11, 2025, to provide an opportunity for public comment on the Negative Declaration; and E.On March 18, 2025, the Planning Commission held a public hearing, duly noticed and conducted in the manner require by law, on the proposed Negative Declaration and Mar Vista Specific Plan with a General Plan Amendment amending Figure LUCI-2 and a Zone Change from Agricultural (A-1) to Specific Plan Implementation (SPI) for the Mar Vista Specific Plan Area, and at said public hearing every person wishing to address the Planning Commission regarding said Specific Plan, General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and Negative Declaration had an opportunity to do so; and
F.One comment letter was received regarding the information included in the Negative Declaration;
G.In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and the State CEQA Guidelines, the City Council has reviewed and considered said Specific Plan, General Plan Amendment, Zone Change and Negative Declaration, all written comments received and all comments presented at the public hearing in reaching its recommendation on the application.
10/14/2025 PH1 6 of 158
EXHIBIT 1

RESOLUTION NO. 2025-

CITY COUNCIL OF THE CHARTERED CITY OF VISTA
PAGE NO. 2

P24-0354 neg res

2. Action.

A. The above recitations are true and correct.

B. Based upon the Initial Study and the reports, comments and recommendations received, the City Council finds and determines that there is no substantial evidence in the record before it that the Project may have a significant effect on the environment.

C. The City Council, pursuant to Section 15074 of the State CEQA Guidelines, hereby recommends adoption of the Negative Declaration, included as Exhibit "A".

3. Adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a meeting of the City Council of the City of Vista held on October 14, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

WALTER CHUNG, CITY ATTORNEY

By:

JOHN FRANKLIN, MAYOR

ATTEST:

KATHY VALDEZ, CITY CLERK

By:

Exhibits:

A. Negative Declaration

APPROVED
Walter C. Chung
20250930150634
10/14/2025 PH1 7 of 158

4901-2860-3430, v. 1

NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
P24-0354
PROJECT NAME: Mar Vista Specific Plan (MVSP)
PROJECT LOCATION: The project site is located within the Mar Vista neighborhood, which comprises of one hundred and eight (108) parcels, within a 143- acre area, located south of Mar Vista Drive, west of Miramar Drive, east of Buena Vista Drive and north of California Oak Drive.

PROJECT APPLICANT: City of Vista
Community Development Department
Planning Division
200 Civic Center Drive
Vista, California 92084-6275
Raffi Mangassarian, Associate Planner
Community Development Department
(760) 643-5424
LEAD AGENCY: City of Vista
Community Development Department
Planning Division
200 Civic Center Drive
Vista, California 92084-6275
Contact: Raffi Mangassarian, Associate Planner
Community Development Department
(760) 643-5424
[email protected].

PUBLIC REVIEW
PERIOD: March 12, 2025 to April 1, 2025
This Negative Declaration and Initial Study Checklist have been prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code, Section 21000, et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Section 15000, et seq.). It is available for a 20-day public review period as shown above.

Comments regarding this Negative Declaration and Initial Study Checklist must be made in writing to Mr. Raffi Mangassarian, c/o Planning Division, 200 Civic Center Drive, Vista, California 92084-6275. All comments must be received in the Planning Division office no later than 5:00 p.m. on the last day of the public review period.
10/14/2025 PH1 8 of 158

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist

This page intentionally blank

10/14/2025 PH1 9 of 158

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Topic Page

Chapter 1 - Introduction ..................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

Overview ................................................................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.

Authority ................................................................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.

Scope ..................................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

Chapter 2 - Environmental Setting and Project Description Error! Bookmark not defined.

Project Overview ................................................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.

Environmental Setting and Surrounding Land Uses .......................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

Proposed Project Description............................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

Mar Vista Specific Plan Area Map........................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.

Chapter 3 – Initial Study Environmental Checklist ... Error! Bookmark not defined.

Project Information ............................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

Environmental Factors Potentially Affected ........................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.

Environmental Determination .............................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.

Evaluation Of Environmental Impacts ................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.

I. Aesthetics ........................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

II. Agriculture and Foresty Resources .................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.

III. Air Quality ......................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

IV. Biological Resources ....................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

V. Cultural Resources ........................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

VI. Energy ............................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

VII. Geology and Soils ........................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

VIII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions .......................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

IX. Hazards and Hazardous Materials ................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.

X. Hydrology and Water Quality ............................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.

XI. Land Use and Planning ................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

XII. Mineral Resources .......................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

XIII. Noise ............................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

XIV. Population and Housing ................................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.

XV. Public Services ................................................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.

XVI. Recreation ...................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

XVII. Transportation .............................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.

XVIII. Tribal Cultural Resources ............................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.

XIX. Utilities and Service Systems ........................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.

XX. Wildfire ............................................................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.

XXI. Mandatory Finding of Significance ............................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

Chapter 4 - References and List of Preparers ...... Error! Bookmark not defined.

10/14/2025 PH1 10 of 158

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist

This page intentionally blank

10/14/2025 PH1 11 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 1 - Introduction

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
1-1
Chapter 1

I NTRODUCTION
Overview

The City of Vista’s (City) Planning Division has prepared this Negative Declaration/Initial Study (ND/IS) to evaluate the potential environmental consequences associated with the Mar Vista Specific Plan. As part of the approval process the proposed project is required to undergo an environmental review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). One of the main objectives of CEQA is to disclose to the public and decision makers the potential environmental effects of proposed activities. CEQA requires that the lead agency prepare an Initial Study to determine whether an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Negative Declaration (ND), or a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) is needed. The City’s Planning Division, as the designated department to process the Project for the City of Vista, the lead agency, has determined that the Project is subject to CEQA and the preparation of an Initial Study is required.

An Initial Study is a preliminary analysis conducted by the lead agency, in consultation with other agencies (responsible or trustee agencies, as applicable), to determine whether there is substantial evidence that a project may have a significant effect on the environment. If the Initial Study concludes that the Project, with mitigation, may have a significant effect on the environment, an EIR should be prepared; otherwise the lead agency may adopt an ND or an MND. The resulting Initial Study and ND for this Project are intended as informational documents that are ultimately required to be adopted by the decision maker prior to project approval by the City.

Authority

The preparation of this ND/IS is governed by two principal sets of documents: CEQA (Public Resources Code Section 21000, et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations Section 15000, et seq.). Specifically, the preparation of an ND/IS is guided by the State CEQA Guidelines; Section 15063 describes the requirements for initial studies, and Sections 15070–15075 describes the process for the preparation of an ND. Where appropriate and supportive to an understanding of the issues, reference will be made to either the CEQA statute or State CEQA Guidelines. This ND/IS contains all of the contents required by CEQA, which includes a project description, a description of the environmental setting, analysis of potential environmental impacts, consistency with plans and policies, and names of preparers.

Scope

This ND/IS evaluates the proposed project’s effects on the following resource topics:
• aesthetics • mineral resources
• agricultural resources • noise
• air quality • population and housing
• biological resources • public services
• cultural and tribal cultural resources • recreation
• geology and soils • transportation
• greenhouse gas emissions • utilities and service systems • hazards and hazardous materials • wildfire
• hydrology and water quality
• energy
• land use planning
• mandatory findings of significance
10/14/2025 PH1 12 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 1 - Introduction

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
1-2

10/14/2025 PH1 13 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 2 – Environmental Setting and Project Description

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
2-1
Chapter 2

E NVIRONMENTAL S ETTING

AND P ROJECT D ESCRIPTION

Project Overview

The purpose of establishing the Mar Vista Specific Plan (the “Project”) is to maintain the rural setting experienced by property owners in the Mar Vista Specific Plan (“MVSP”) area while under County of San Diego jurisdiction, prior to City of Vista annexation. This is accomplished through adoption of similar development standards and permitted land uses in the Mar Vista Specific Plan as compared to those previously governing this neighborhood under prior County of San Diego jurisdiction. Therefore, zoning and development standards found within the Mar Vista Specific Plan document substantially mirror the same standards from the County of San Diego for the Specific Plan area.

The following is some background information regarding the history of annexation in the City of Vista and specifically background leading up to the annexation of the Mar Vista area:

From 1998 to 2004, the City of Vista established a moratorium on annexations due to uncertainty related to the passage of Proposition 218 in 1996. Proposition 218 was a voter initiative that added constitutional voter approval requirements for all local government taxes which previously did not exist. Based on the State Legislative Counsel’s opinion at the time, the City Council directed staff to further evaluate the effects of Proposition 218 on proposed annexations prior to consideration of any new annexation or reorganization requests.

On September 22, 1998, the City Council discussed the City’s annexation policy and directed staff to: (1) present a financial analysis for Council review on the cost of annexation; (2) seek relief from the State from annexation impediments caused by Proposition 218; (3) not to process any further annexations until Council resolves the impediments caused by Proposition 218; and (4) to process applications for annexation to sewer systems with an irrevocable offer to annex (Vote: 5- 0).

On November 12, 2002, the Buena Sanitation District Board of Directors approved Buena Sanitation District Resolutions 2002-27 and 2002-28, consenting to annexation of the Gamboni Ranch property into the Buena Sanitation District, and approving a Flow Transfer Agreement between the Buena Sanitation District and the City of Vista (Vote: 3-0, Campo absent, one vacancy).

On June 22, 2021, the City of Vista City Council adopted Resolution No. 2021-116 per Planning Case No. P21-0200, making application to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) for the annexation/reorganization of approximately 143 acres known as the Mar Vista Island. On November 7, 2022, LAFCO passed and adopted Resolution No. 2022-014 per LAFCO File No.

RO21-04, making determinations, approving and ordering a reorganization and associated sphere of influence amendment for the Mar Vista Annexation.

The proposed Mar Vista Specific Plan would change the current zoning designation of this neighborhood from Agriculture (A-1) to the Specific Plan Implementation (SPI) zone pursuant to Chapter 18.20 of the Development Code. Additionally, an amendment to the Vista General Plan is 10/14/2025 PH1 14 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 2 – Environmental Setting and Project Description

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
2-2
needed to amend Figure LUCI-2 in the General Plan to designate these parcels as within the Mar Vista Specific Plan. The new SPI zone will continue to be consistent with the existing General Plan designation for the project site of Rural Residential (RR) as the MVSP will continue to maintain the rural setting experienced by property owners. Furthermore, the zoning designation under the County of San Diego jurisdiction for the Mar Vista neighborhood was Agricultural (A70) prior to city annexation, which closely mirrored the City of Vista prior zoning designation of Agricultural (A-1).

Existing Environmental Setting

Vista is a largely built-out, predominantly low-density residential community located seven miles inland from the Pacific Ocean in northern San Diego County. Clusters of urbanizing higher density developments are scattered throughout its central portion. The city is located in rolling topography of the western foothills of the San Marcos Mountains, with elevations ranging from approximately 200 feet to about 750 feet above mean sea level (AMSL). Pleasant views are found from various points throughout the city with some higher elevations offering captivating vistas of the Pacific Ocean to the west. In addition to the pleasing topography of the mountains and hills, Vista is lushly vegetated from the low level creek beds to the steep slopes of the foothills, which also contributes to the overall beauty of the community. The city also has two major creeks that flow through its boundaries, Buena Vista Creek, Agua Hedionda Creek, and Buena Creek.

Although only incorporated in 1963, Vista has a rich history. In the early part of the 20th Century, Vista was a popular area for visitors; people traveled from all over San Diego County for picnic outings and to enjoy the oak groves, large ranches and farms. By the 1920s, Vista was primarily an agricultural community and a prominent stop on the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway route between Escondido and Oceanside. Until 1970, when State Route (SR) 78 was constructed, Vista remained a relatively small community of less than 25,000 residents. Since then Vista‘s population has grown rapidly. The current population is more than triple its size at the time of incorporation.

The Mar Vista neighborhood consists of 108 parcels, within 143-acres, generally located south of Mar Vista Drive, east of Buena Vista Drive, north of Lupine Hills Road, and west of State Route 78.

The project area is approximately 143 acres in size and includes properties addressed off of Mar Vista Drive, Miramar Drive, Marine View Drive, Hillcrest Drive, Hilo Way, Park Hill Road, Park Hill Place, California Oak Drive, Auburn Woods Drive and Red Plum Lane. This neighborhood is primarily built out with single-family dwellings and related accessory uses on large residential lots.

The existing land uses surrounding the MVSP area consist of single-family residential uses. Low density residential uses are located to the north, south and east, and rural residential uses to the north and west. The area is characterized by hillsides and rolling hills with single-family residential development throughout. The elevation of the Specific Plan area ranges from approximately 420 feet MSL to the north down to 360 feet MSL to the west, to 520 feet MSL to the south and east.

The existing residential character and land uses of the surrounding area present important influences upon the Specific Plan area setting. The surrounding land uses adjacent to the MVSP area include E-1 (Estate) and A-1 (Agriculture) to the north and west, E-1 (Estate) to the east, and the Shadowridge Specific Plan area to the south.

The proposed development standards are consistent with the County of San Diego A70 (Agriculture) development standards. This includes minimum lot sizes of one acre and maximum density at one dwelling unit per acre. Additional consistent standards include setbacks, parking, and height limits. Maximum height for a primary residence will be two (2) stories or 35-feet, 10/14/2025 PH1 15 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 2 – Environmental Setting and Project Description

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
2-3
whichever is less. Off-street parking allowance will be a maximum of two (2) spaces per unit.

Minimum setbacks would be maintained related to the following requirements: Front, 60-feet from street centerline; Side (Interior), 15-feet from the property line; Side (Exterior/Street), 35-feet from street centerline; and Rear, 25-feet from the property line.

Project Description

The MVSP will be applicable to a 143-acre area located in the central area of the City of Vista, California. Once adopted, the MVSP will serve as a regulatory document by setting forth the required zoning, development and design standards for the Mar Vista neighborhood. The Project site will be designated SPI, Specific Plan Implementation, on the City of Vista Zoning Map. All plans and permits will be reviewed for consistency with the requirements of this Specific Plan.

The Project does not change General Plan designations, create any zoning entitlements, approve any development projects, and is not anticipated to result in any new development intensification.

Should any conflicts arise between the MVSP regulations and existing City policies, procedures, ordinances or the City of Vista Development Code (Development Code), the provisions of the MVSP shall prevail. Additionally, any definitions found in Vista Development Code Chapter 18.02 shall apply to this Specific Plan, unless otherwise stated. Whenever a standard or regulation is not set forth in the Specific Plan, the pertinent sections of the City of Vista Development Code shall apply. If any term, provision or condition of the Specific Plan is found to be invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of the document shall remain in effect.

The following goals were established to guide the adoption of the MVSP. The goals were generated using planning and land use analysis, the policies and standards of the Vista General Plan and discussions between the property owners and City staff. The MVSP goals include:

(1) Provide for the establishment of a specific plan, consisting of 143 acres. (2) Create a plan that maintains the rural nature and characteristics of the existing neighborhood.
(3) Maintain consistency between the Specific Plan land uses to those previously allowed under the A70 zoning designation under County of San Diego jurisdiction prior to City of Vista annexation.

10/14/2025 PH1 16 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 2 – Environmental Setting and Project Description

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
2-4

MAR VISTA SPECIFIC PLAN AREA

10/14/2025 PH1 17 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 3 – Initial Study Environmental Checklist

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
3-1
Chapter 3

I NITIAL S TUDY

E NVIRONMENTAL C HECKLIST

Project Information

Project Title: Mar Vista Specific Plan (MVSP)

Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Vista
Community Development Department
Planning Division
200 Civic Center Drive
Vista, CA 92084-6275

Contact Person and Phone Number: Raffi Mangassarian, Associate Planner / City of Vista Community Development Department
(760) 643-5424

Project Location: Mar Vista Annexation Area

Project Applicant: City of Vista
Community Development Department
Planning Division
200 Civic Center Drive
Vista, California 92084-6275

Contact Person and Phone Number: Raffi Mangassarian, Associate Planner Community Development Department
(760) 643-5424

Description of Project: See Chapter 2, Project Description.

Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: See Chapter 2, Project Description.

10/14/2025 PH1 18 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 3 – Initial Study Environmental Checklist

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
3-2
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected

As indicated by the checklist on the following pages of the Initial Study, there are no environmental factors potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a potentially significant impact.

Environmental Determination

On the basis of the initial evaluation of the attached Initial Study:

I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that although the project could have a significant effect on the environment there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.

3/11/25
_________________________________________ __________________________ Raffi Mangassarian, Associate Planner Date
City of Vista, Community Development Department

10/14/2025 PH1 19 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 3 – Initial Study Environmental Checklist

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
3-3

Evaluation Of Environmental Impacts

1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project- specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on- site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.
3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. “Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
4) “Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less than Significant Impact.” The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from “Earlier Analyses,” as described in (5) below, may be cross- referenced).
5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration.

Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation based on the earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,” describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.
7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or 10/14/2025 PH1 20 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 3 – Initial Study Environmental Checklist

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
3-4
individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 9) The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance.

I. Aesthetics

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic
vista?
b. Substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a
state scenic highway?

c. Substantially degrade the existing visual
character or quality of the site and its
surroundings?

d. Create a source of substantial light or glare,
which would adversely affect day or nighttime
views in the area?

DISCUSSION

The MVSP will maintain development and land use regulations for the Mar Vista planning area that are consistent with those under the County of San Diego’s jurisdiction prior to City of Vista annexation, and will not result in any aesthetics impacts. a. Scenic vistas are typically categorized as either panoramic views (visual access to a large geographic area) or focal views (visual access to a particular object, scene, setting, or feature of interest). For example, uninterrupted views of the Pacific Ocean, or San Marcos Mountains may be considered a panoramic scenic vista. The Project does not include alterations to existing height limitations or property development standards, and does not create any zoning entitlements, nor propose or approve any development or construction activities, nor introduce any new land uses that would result in an adverse effect related to visual character. Hence the Project does not create any physical changes to the environment that could impact scenic vistas. Therefore, there will be no impact related to scenic vistas.
b. Currently, there are no official or eligible state scenic highways within the city boundaries.

However, the City has identified several locally important scenic roads, including portions of: 1) Foothill Drive; 2) Warmlands Avenue; 3) Mar Vista Drive; 4) Buena Vista Drive; 5) Cypress Drive; 6) Alta Vista Drive; 7) Tiger Tail Road; and 8) Sunset Drive. A portion of two of these streets, Mar Vista Drive and Buena Vista Drive, border the MVSP. However, there are no proposed changes to the land uses, height limitations or property development standards that currently exist along these streets.

The Project does not create any zoning entitlements, nor propose or approve any development or construction activities, nor introduce any new land uses that would result in an adverse effect related to visual character. Although the MVSP is accessed directly by Buena Vista Drive and Mar Vista Drive, the proposed MVSP does not include changes to development standards that might 10/14/2025 PH1 21 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 3 – Initial Study Environmental Checklist

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
3-5
affect scenic resources. Therefore, there will be no impact related to scenic resources. c. The existing residentially zoned lots within the Mar Vista Specific Plan area are mostly built out and are considered to be rural residential/very low density housing, at a maximum density of one dwelling unit per acre. The Project does not include alterations to existing height limitations or property development standards, hence the Project does not create any physical changes to the environment that could impact the existing visual character or quality of public view of the site and its surroundings. The Project also does not create any zoning entitlements, nor propose or approve any development or construction activities, nor introduce any new land uses that would result in an adverse effect related to visual character. Therefore, there will be no impact related to existing visual character or quality of public view of the site and its surroundings. d. As the proposed MVSP development standards, land uses, or residential allowances remain consistent with those under County of San Diego jurisdiction prior to City of Vista annexation, adoption of the MVSP does not create any physical changes to the environment that could create a source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect daytime or nighttime views in the area. The Project also does not create any zoning entitlements, nor propose or approve any development or construction activities, nor introduce any new land uses that would result in an adverse effect related to visual character. Therefore, there will be no impact related to a source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect daytime or nighttime views in the area.

II. Agriculture and Forestry Resources

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?

b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
c. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code
section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public
Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined by Government
Code Section 51104(g))?

d. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
e. Involve other changes in the existing environment,
which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to nonagricultural use?

DISCUSSION

a. The area within and surrounding the MVSP is zoned Agriculture (A-1) and Estate (E-1), which does allow for agricultural uses. The California Department of Conservation, Division of Land Protection, lists Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, and Farmland of Statewide Importance under the general category of “Important Farmland”. The Extent of Important Farmland Map Coverage 10/14/2025 PH1 22 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 3 – Initial Study Environmental Checklist

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
3-6
maintained by the Division of Land Protection indicates that the Project Area has no Farmland.1 Therefore, the proposed Project would not convert any Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to non-agricultural use, and no impact would occur. b. The MVSP will maintain development and land use regulations for the Mar Vista planning area that remain consistent with those under the County of San Diego’s jurisdiction prior to City of Vista annexation, The Project does not change General Plan designations, create any zoning entitlements, or approve any development projects, and is not anticipated to result in new development that would conflict with or change existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act Contract. As such, the Project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or conflict with a Williamson Contract. Therefore, no impacts would occur. c. The Project Area is not zoned for forest land or timberland. Accordingly, the proposed Project would not conflict with forest land or timberland zoning or result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. Therefore, no impact would occur. d. See response to c., above. Forest land is defined as “land that can support 10-percent native tree cover of any species, including hardwoods, under natural conditions, and that allows for management of one or more forest resources including timber, aesthetics, fish and wildlife, biodiversity, water quality, recreation, and other public benefits.” Timberland is defined as “land...which is available for, and capable of, growing a crop of trees of any commercial species used to produce lumber and other forest products, including Christmas trees.” CA Pub. Res. Code sec. 4526. The Project Area does not consist of any forest land or timberland. Therefore, there would be no impact.
e. See responses to a. through d., above. The Project Area does not contain Farmland identified by the State of CA Department of Conservation, Division of Land Resource Protection as Unique Farmland8. Moreover, the Project does not change zoning or General Plan designations, create any zoning entitlements, approve any development projects, or introduce any new land uses, and is not anticipated to result in new development that would involve other changes in the existing environment which could result in the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use or the conversion of forest land to non-forest use. Therefore, no impacts would occur.

1 California Department of Conservation. 2022. Important Farmland Maps compiled by the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) pursuant to Section 65570 of the California Government Code

10/14/2025 PH1 23 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 3 – Initial Study Environmental Checklist

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
3-7
III. Air Quality

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
b. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is
non-attainment under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard?

c. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
d. Result in other emissions (such as those leading to
odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of
people?

DISCUSSION

a. All new development is subject to the “clean air” requirements of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the California Air Resources Board (CARB), and the County of San Diego Air Pollution Control District (SDAPCD). A project is deemed in conflict with air quality plans when it results in population and/or employment growth that exceeds growth estimated in the Regional Air Quality Strategy (RAQS), which is based in part on the General Plan of jurisdictions within San Diego County. However, as discussed in the Project Description of this document, the Project is not proposing to intensify any existing land uses or residential development beyond existing conditions.

As a result, implementation of the Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan and no impacts would result. b. A significant impact would occur if a proposed project would violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. The SDAPCD has jurisdiction over air quality programs in the City. The SDAPCD does not provide quantitative thresholds for determining the significance of emissions from Project-related construction or mobile sources.

However, the SDAPCD specifies air quality impact analysis trigger levels for new or modified stationary sources (SDAPCD Rules 20.2 and 20.3). If these incremental levels are exceeded, an air quality impact analysis must be performed. For CEQA purposes, the screening level thresholds can be used to demonstrate that a project’s total emissions would not result in a significant impact on air quality.

Because the air quality impact analysis screening thresholds do not include VOCs, the screening levels for VOCs used in this analysis are from the South Coast Air Quality Management District.

San Diego County Air Pollution Control District Pollutant Thresholds Pollutant Pounds/Day
CO 550
NOx 250
PM10 100
PM2.5 551
SOx 250
Lead 3.2
VOC 752
Source: County of San Diego 2007.

Notes: CO = carbon monoxide; NOx = nitrogen oxides; PM10 = respirable particulate matter; PM2.5 = 10/14/2025 PH1 24 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 3 – Initial Study Environmental Checklist

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
3-8
fine particulate matter; SOx = sulfur oxides;
VOC = volatile organic compound
The Project Area is a built-out environment surrounded by existing facilities and residential buildings, and traffic impacts that would have been included in the applicable air quality plan. The Project does not propose or approve any development project, does not change General Plan designations, create any zoning entitlements, nor introduce any new land uses that would result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard. Therefore, the Project would result in no impacts.
c. A sensitive receptor is a person in the population who is particularly susceptible to health effects due to exposure to an air contaminant. As described above in a. and b., above, the Project does not propose or approve any development project or ground disturbing activity, nor does it change any existing land uses that would increase exposure to air contaminants. The Project does not incentivize or disincentivize construction of new development, therefore, it is not reasonably foreseeable that the Project will expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.

Thus, the Project would result in no impacts.
d. Odor emissions can result from land uses such as agricultural uses, wastewater treatment plants, food-processing plants, chemical plants, composting, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding. However, odors from these types of uses would be localized and generally confined to the immediate area surrounding a project site. A proposed development would also utilize typical construction techniques, and the odors would be typical of most construction sites and temporary in nature. Since no construction activity or development is proposed or approved as part of this Project, it is not anticipated to cause an odor nuisance. Furthermore, the Project does not change General Plan designations, create any zoning entitlements, nor introduce any new land uses that would result in odor emissions that could adversely affect a substantial number of people, and is not anticipated to result in new development that would result in other emissions. Therefore, the Project would result in no impacts.

10/14/2025 PH1 25 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 3 – Initial Study Environmental Checklist

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
3-9
IV. Biological Resources

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?

b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies, and
regulations or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?

c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands (including, but not limited to
marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other
means?

d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?

e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?

f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan (HCP), Natural Community
Conservation Plan (NCCP), or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan?

DISCUSSION

a. The Project does not propose changing any existing land uses that would result in such impacts or approve any new development. The degree of development expected with the implementation of the Project is expected to be minimal and a result of existing conditions in place prior to Project implementation. Existing residential lots, most that are 0.5-acres or larger, are already developed with a single dwelling. The Project area does not lie within sensitive habitat areas, nor does it include any creeks or rivers that traverse through the area. As such, would have no substantial adverse effect, either directly or indirectly through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CA Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Therefore, the Project would result in no impacts. b. The Project area is largely built out and located in a developed residential area and does not contain any sensitive biological resources. Therefore, the Project would have no adverse effects on riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities in these areas. Moreover, the Project by itself does not propose or approve any development and would not change existing land uses that could result in substantial adverse effects on a riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community. Any discretionary development that separately occurs pursuant to the MVSP would require its own individual environmental review. Thus, the Project would not result in a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities 10/14/2025 PH1 26 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 3 – Initial Study Environmental Checklist

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
3-10
identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or United States Fish and Wildlife Service, within the Project Area or in the surrounding area, and no impacts would occur.
c. The Project area does not contain any wetlands, coastal/tidal wetlands or inland/non-tidal wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. 2Additionally, the proposed Project does not approve or propose any development project, nor does it modify any City regulations that would adversely affect federally protected wetlands. Therefore, the proposed Project will not have any effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means, and no impact will occur. No impacts. d. Wildlife corridors are land segments that connect two or more large habitat areas and provide a habitat for movement of animals between those areas. There are no wildlife corridors or regional wildlife linkages in the Project area. Additionally, there are no bodies of water in which fish are present in the Project area. Further, the Project does not propose or approve a development project or any construction activity. The Project does not change General Plan designations, create any zoning entitlements, approve any development projects, or introduce any new land uses that impact species movement, wildlife corridors or wildlife nursery sites. Therefore, the Project by itself is not anticipated to result in new development that would interfere with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors or impede the use of nature wildlife nursery sites. Therefore, no impact results. e. A significant impact would occur if a proposed project would be inconsistent with local regulations pertaining to biological resources. The Project by itself would not conflict with any policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. Further, the Project does not propose or approve any development project or any construction activity. Any future development project in the Project area would be required to comply with all policies and ordinances protecting biological resources. Therefore, the Project does not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, and no impact would occur.
f. The Project area does not fall within any identified Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan.

Therefore, the Project would not conflict with the provisions of any adopted conservation plan, and no impacts would occur.

2 United States Environmental Protection Agency. April 25, 2024. What is a Wetland? | US EPA ( https://www.epa.gov/wetlands/what-wetland)
10/14/2025 PH1 27 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 3 – Initial Study Environmental Checklist

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
3-11
V. Cultural Resources

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defined in
§15064.5?

b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant
to §15064.5?

c. Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries?

DISCUSSION

a. Section 15064.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines state that a “historical resource” is defined as: (1) a resource listed in, or determined to be eligible by the State Historical Resources Commission, for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources; (2) a resource listed in a local register of historical resources or identified as significant in an historical resource survey meeting certain state guidelines; or (3) an object, building, structure, site, area, place, record or manuscript that a lead agency determines to be significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California, provided that the lead agency's determination is supported by substantial evidence in light of the whole record; in addition, (4) the fact that a resource is not listed in, or determined to be eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, not included in a local register or historical resources, or identified in an historical resources survey does not preclude a lead agency from determining that the resource may be an historical resource. A significant impact would occur if a proposed project would substantially alter the environmental context of or remove identified historical resources. The Project is not proposing to intensify any existing land uses or residential development beyond existing conditions, and does not propose or approve any development or construction activity that could result in the demolition or removal of any structure that may be historically significant. Therefore, the Project would result in a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource and no impacts would occur. b. Section 15064.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines defines significant archaeological resources as resources that meet the criteria for historical resources or resources that constitute unique archaeological resources. The Project does not propose or approve any development project or ground disturbing activity. The Project will not increase new building construction that would require excavation or grading as the purpose of the Project is to maintain existing development standards and land uses in the Project area. As such, the Project will not result in a substantial adverse change in the significant of an archaeological resource and no impacts would occur. c. A significant impact would occur if previously interred human remains would be disturbed during excavation of a project site. Human remains could be encountered during excavation and grading activities associated with a proposed project. However, the Project does not propose or approve any specific development. As such, no construction activities or ground disturbing activities are anticipated and no human remains would be disturbed because of the Project. Therefore, no impacts would occur.

10/14/2025 PH1 28 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 3 – Initial Study Environmental Checklist

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
3-12
VI. Energy

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Result in potentially significant
environmental impact due to wasteful,
inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of
energy resources, during project
construction or operation?

b. Conflict with or obstruct a state or local
plan for renewable energy or
energy efficiency?

a. The Project does not change General Plan designations, propose or approve any development projects or construction activity, and is not anticipated to result in new development that would result in potentially significant environmental impacts due to waste, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources. Any future new development or construction activity in the Project area would remain subject to California State Building Codes, California Green Building Standards Code (see Vista Development Code Chapter 16.30), and energy efficiency standards of the California Energy Code (see Vista Development Code Chapter 16.26). The Project area is primarily built out with single-family dwellings and related accessory uses on large residential lots. Any future new development in the Project area would not exceed the density permitted in the Land Use Element is not expected to significantly change existing site conditions related to demand for energy consumption. The nature of these land uses, which will continue with Project implementation, are also unlikely to result in any impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of enegery resources during proejct construction or operation. Therefore, the Project would result in no impact to energy resources.
b. A significant impact would occur if a proposed project were to conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. See discussion in a. above. The Project does not propose or approve specific development or construction activity and existing conditions are not expected to significantly change related to demand for energy consumption.

Any new future development in the Project area will be required to comply with all applicable state and local renewable energy or energy efficiency requirements, including California State Building Codes, California Green Building Standards Code, and energy efficiency standards of the California Energy Code. Therefore, the Project will not conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur.

10/14/2025 PH1 29 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 3 – Initial Study Environmental Checklist

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
3-13
VII. Geology and Soils

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:

i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State
Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special Pub 42.

ii. Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?

iv. Landslides?
b. Result in substantial soil erosion, or the loss of topsoil? c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the
Project, and potentially result in on- or off-site
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction
or collapse?

d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18- 1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating
substantial risks to life or property?

e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal
systems where sewers are not available for the
disposal of waste water?

f. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature?

DISCUSSION

a. i. As stated in the GP 2030 Program Environmental Impact Report (PEIR), in terms of geology the city is primarily underlain by mid-Cretaceous tonalite of the Peninsular Ranges batholith.

Other geological formations found in the city include Gabbro (mid-Cretaceous age), metasedimentary and metavolcanic rocks (likely Mesozoic age), and Santiago Formation (middle Eocene age). According to the California Department of Conservation Special Studies Zone Map, no portion of the Project area is located in an Earthquake fault zone as determined by the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act. 3The Project does not propose construction nor approve a development project. Therefore, grading, excavation, and fault endangering activities associated with new development are not anticipated. The Project would not expose people or structures to potential adverse effects resulting from the rupture of known earthquake faults. Thus, there would be no impact related to personal injury or death or resulting in property damage due to a fault rupture would occur. No impacts would occur.

3 https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/eqzapp/ 10/14/2025 PH1 30 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 3 – Initial Study Environmental Checklist

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
3-14
ii. A significant impact would occur if a proposed project would cause personal injury or death or result in property damage as a result of seismic ground shaking. Like the entire Southern California region, earthquake ground shaking is the principal geologic hazard that could affect the city. However, the Project does not change General Plan designations, create any zoning entitlements, approve any development projects, or introduce any new land uses that would result in strong seismic ground shaking or exacerbate existing environmental conditions to potentially cause or exacerbate strong seismic ground shaking. In addition, all future development in the Project Area is required to comply with all relevant California Building Code (CBC) seismic standards.4 Compliance with the CBC would include the incorporation of: 1) seismic safety features to minimize the potential for significant effects as a result of earthquakes; 2) proper building footings and foundations; and 3) construction of the building structure so that it would withstand the effects of strong ground shaking. In addition, the City’s Building Department would review the building plans through building plan checks, issuance of a building permit, and inspection of the building during construction, which would ensure that all required CBC seismic safety measures are incorporated into the building. Further, applications for residential projects that require a Tentative Subdivision Map, Tentative Parcel Map, or Site Development Plan require the submittal of a preliminary geotechnical report and grading plan, which are reviewed and approved by the City’s Land Development Engineer.5 Implementation of the proposed Project does not trigger new development or construction and is not expected to induce development or otherwise alter existing development patterns. Grading, excavation, and activities associated with increasing strong seismic ground shaking are not anticipated. Therefore, less than significant impact would occur.
iii. A significant impact may occur if a proposed project site is located within a liquefaction zone. Liquefaction is the loss of soil strength or stiffness due to a buildup of pore- water pressure during severe ground shaking. Soil liquefaction occurs when loose, saturated, granular soils lose their inherent shear strength due to excess water pressure that builds up during repeated movement from seismic activity. Factors that contribute to the potential for liquefaction include a low relative density of granular materials, a shallow groundwater table, and a long duration and high acceleration of seismic shaking. The California Department of Conservation’s Seismic Hazard Zones Map shows no portion of the Project area in a liquefaction zone. 6The Project does not propose or approve any development project or ground disturbing activity. The Project maintains existing conditions and does not incentivize further development activity. Any future development activity in the Project area would continue to be required to comply with current seismic design provisions of the CBC, which incorporates relevant provisions related to protection against liquefaction. Compliance with the CBC would include the incorporation of: 1) seismic safety features to minimize the potential for significant effects as a result of earthquakes; 2) proper building footings and foundations; and 3) construction of the building structure so that it would withstand the effects of strong ground shaking. In addition, the City’s Building Department would review the building plans through building plan checks, issuance of a building permit, and inspection of the building during construction, which would ensure that all required CBC seismic safety measures are incorporated into the building. Further, applications for residential projects that require a Tentative Subdivision Map, Tentative Parcel Map, or Site Development Plan require the submittal of a preliminary geotechnical report and grading plan, which are reviewed and approved by the City’s Land Development Engineer. Therefore, less than significant impact would occur.

4. The CBC incorporates relevant sections of the Uniform Building Code of the International Conference of Building Officials.

5. The City reviews every housing development proposal to assess the potential for geologic and other hazards, and could require the preparation of geotechnical reports for any jurisdictional application. 6 https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/eqzapp/ 10/14/2025 PH1 31 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 3 – Initial Study Environmental Checklist

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
3-15
iv. Landslides are movements of large masses of rock, and/or soil. Landslide potential is generally the greatest for areas with steep and /or high slopes, low shear strength, and increased water pressure. A significant impact would occur if a proposed project would be implemented on a site that would be located in a hillside area with unstable geological conditions or soil types that would be susceptible to failure when saturated that would suggest potential for sliding. The Project does not propose or approve any development project or any ground disturbing activity that would result in a landslide. According to the California Department of Conservation, the Project Area contains no landslide zones 7. Therefore, the Project will have no impact as it relates to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving landslides. Therefore, no impacts would occur. b. A significant impact would occur if construction activities or future uses would result in substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil. Erosion is the movement of rock and soil from place to place and is a natural process. Significant erosion typically occurs on steep slopes where stormwater and high winds can carry topsoil down hillsides. Erosion can be increased greatly by earthmoving activities or where erosion control measures are not used. The Project maintains existing land use and development conditions and does not propose or approve any specific development project. Construction of future development projects that would result in ground surface disturbance during site clearance, excavation, and grading and could create the potential for soil erosion would be subject to the City’s Grading and Erosion Control Ordinance (Grading Ordinance). As required under the Grading Ordinance, the recommendations in a geotechnical report must be followed during grading and site preparation activities. Precise grading and engineering plans must be submitted for plan check and approval to the Land Development Engineer prior to final approval of the Grading Permit for the project. Potential short-term erosion impacts during the construction phase of any proposed residential developments would be prevented through implementation of a grading and erosion control plan and employment of Best Management Practices (BMPs), which is required in accordance with the Grading Ordinance, and the Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance (Stormwater Ordinance) (codified in Municipal Code Chapter 13.18). Potential long-term erosion impacts would be prevented through compliance with the City’s Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (or SUSMP) of the Stormwater Ordinance and the requirements of the Municipal Storm Water Permit (San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) Order R9-2015-0001), which necessitate the implementation of certain post-construction (or permanent) BMPs. Grading operations are also checked and approved in the field by City inspectors before final acceptance is issued. As a result, with the incorporation and adherence to the recommendations of the geotechnical report in project design and construction as required by the City’s Grading Ordinance, and adherence to the requirements of the Grading Permit, the Grading Ordinance, and the Stormwater Ordinance potentially significant impacts from seismic activity, geologic or soil instability, or expansive soils would be reduced to less than significant levels. Therefore, no impact would occur with respect to erosion or loss of topsoil.
c. A significant impact would occur if a proposed project would be implemented on a site that would be located in a hillside area with unstable geological conditions or soil types that would be susceptible to failure when saturated. According to the California Department of Conservation’s Seismic Hazard Zones Map, the Project Area is not located within landslide hazard zones and is not susceptible to liquefaction.8 The proposed Project does not propose or approve development or any ground disturbing activity and does not authorize new land uses. The Project does not approve any construction or ground disturbing activity that could expose people or structures to

7 https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/eqzapp/

8 https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/eqzapp/

10/14/2025 PH1 32 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 3 – Initial Study Environmental Checklist

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
3-16
soil that is unstable or that would become unstable, or to the potential effects resulting from landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse. Therefore, no impacts would occur.
d. A significant impact would occur if a proposed project would be built on expansive soils without proper site preparation or design features to provide adequate foundations for project buildings, thus posing a hazard to life and property. The proposed Project does not propose or approve any development project or any ground disturbing activity, the proposed Project would likely result in no impact to creating direct or indirect risks to life or property. In addition, as noted above, under the Grading Ordinance the recommendations in a geotechnical report must be followed during site preparation and grading activities. Further, any proposed residential structures in the Project area would be required to be constructed in compliance with CBC seismic safety standards. Therefore, no impacts would occur.
e. The Project area is fully located in a developed area which includes existing public infrastructure for wastewater disposal systems. The use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems would not be required. The Project does not propose or approve specific development. Therefore, the proposed Project would result in no impacts to soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. No impacts would occur.
f. Paleontological resources include fossil remains or traces of past life forms, including both vertebrate and invertebrate species, as well as plants. Paleontological resources are generally found within sedimentary rock formations. A significant impact may occur if a project destroys a unique paleontological resource site or unique geologic feature. The Project does not involve any development project, construction or ground disturbing activity that would directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature. There, the Project would result in no impacts.

VIII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?

b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?

DISCUSSION

a. Greenhouse gases (GHG) are gaseous constituents of the atmosphere, both natural and human generated, that absorb and emit radiation at specific wavelengths within the spectrum of terrestrial radiation emitted by the earth’s surface, the atmosphere itself, and by clouds. GHG has been recognized to contribute to global climate change. Predicted effects of global climate change include sea level rise, water supply changes, changes to ecosystems and habitat, and human health effects.

The determination of significance is governed by CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.4, which states that “the determination of the significance of greenhouse gas emissions calls for a careful judgment by the lead agency consistent with the provisions in Section 15064. A lead agency 10/14/2025 PH1 33 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 3 – Initial Study Environmental Checklist

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
3-17
should make a good-faith effort, based to the extent possible on scientific and factual data, to describe, calculate or estimate the amount of greenhouse gas emissions resulting from a Project.

A lead agency shall have discretion to determine, in the context of a particular project, whether to [use a quantitative model or qualitative model].” In turn, CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.4(b), clarifies that a lead agency should consider “whether the project emissions exceed a threshold of significance that the lead agency determines applies to the project.” Therefore, consistent with CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.4, the GHG analysis for the Project appropriately relies on a threshold based on the exercise of careful judgment and believed to be appropriate in the context of this Project.

The City adopted an updated Climate Action Plan (CAP) in October 2021. The CAP includes targets to reduce Citywide GHG emissions by four percent below 2012 levels by 2020 and by 42 percent below 2012 levels by 2030. The City would meet its 2020 emissions reduction target without additional City-level action based on existing activities and trends. However, to meet the City’s 2030 reduction target, additional actions beyond those implemented at the federal and state level are required. The CAP identifies strategies and measures to reduce GHG emissions Citywide from a variety of emissions categories to meet the City’s 2030 target. CAP consistency is anticipated to be determined through a CAP Consistency Review Checklist (Checklist). The Checklist would contain GHG reduction measures applicable to development projects that are required to be implemented on a project-by-project basis to ensure that the specific emissions targets identified in the CAP are achieved. Once the process for determining project consistency is adopted, the CAP would be a qualified plan that may be used for the specific purpose of streamlining the CEQA analysis of GHG emissions for subsequent projects.

Since the process for determining consistency with the CAP is not yet available, the City has adopted interim guidance for evaluating individual development projects based on the statewide emissions reduction targets and the previous CAP (City of Vista 2016). In accordance with the City’s guidance, if total project annual GHG emissions are less than 1,185 MTCO2e, then a project would not generate GHG emissions that would have a significant impact on the environment. As the Project does not include any specific development projects and continues to maintain the existing housing policies and standards within the Mar Vista neighborhood, implementation of the Project is not anticipated to trigger this significance threshold or contribute, directly or indirectly, to a significant impact due to GHG emissions. Less than significant impact. b. See response to a., above. The California legislature passed Senate Bill (SB) 375 to connect regional transportation planning to land use decisions made at a local level. SB 375 requires the metropolitan planning organizations to prepare a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) in their regional transportation plans to achieve the per capita GHG reduction targets. In addition, SB 743, adopted September 27, 2013, encourages land use and transportation planning decisions that reduce Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT), which contribute to GHG emissions, as required by AB 32.

Consistent with these applicable plans, policies or regulations, the Project’s land uses and development standards do not incentivize intensification of existing, established land uses, and do not propose or authorize any development that would be greater than the existing density of one dwelling unit per acre. The Project, therefore, would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHG emissions. No impacts would occur.

10/14/2025 PH1 34 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 3 – Initial Study Environmental Checklist

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
3-18
IX. Hazards and Hazardous
Materials

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport,
use or disposal of hazardous materials?

b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into the
environment?

c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one-quarter mile
of an existing or proposed school?

d. Be located on a site which is included on a list
of hazardous materials sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the
environment?

e. For a Project located within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport
or public use airport, would the Project result
in a safety hazard for people residing or
working in the Project area?

f. Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?

g. Expose people or structures, either directly or
indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or
death involving wildland fires?

DISCUSSION

a. A significant impact would occur if a proposed project would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials.

The Project would not specifically result in the transport, use, and disposal of construction related hazardous materials, as no specific development or construction activity is proposed or approved.

The Project does not propose or approve any activities that would result in the use or discharge of unregulated hazardous materials and/or substances, or create a public hazard through transport, use, or disposal. Future development and building permit activity in the Project area would be required to comply with all applicable local, state and federal regulations governing the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials. With compliance to applicable standards and regulations and adherence to manufacturer’s instructions related to hazardous materials, no impacts would occur.
b. A significant impact would occur if a proposed project created a significant hazard to the public or environment due to a reasonably foreseeable release of hazardous materials. The Project 10/14/2025 PH1 35 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 3 – Initial Study Environmental Checklist

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
3-19
does not approve or propose any specific development or construction or excavation activity and is not expected to alter existing development or development patterns. Therefore, the Project does not approve or propose activities that could result in the release of hazardous materials into the environment, and would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. Therefore, no impacts would occur. c. There are approximately 21 schools of the Vista Unified School District (VUSD) located within city limits, as well as several private schools. However, there are no schools within one-quarter mile of the Project area. As noted above, the Project does not approve or propose any new development and would not lead to any new activity that routinely transports hazardous materials or handle acutely hazardous materials. Moreover, any future development project in the Project area may include the use of those hazardous materials that are typically necessary for construction of new developments (e.g., paints, building materials, cleaners, fuel for construction equipment, etc.) where construction activities would involve routine transport, use and disposal of construction- related hazardous materials. Considering no schools are located within one-quarter mile of the Project area, no impacts would occur.
d. A significant impact would occur if the project site is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. The California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) maintains a database (EnviroStor) that provides access to detailed information on hazardous waste permitted sites and corrective action facilities, as well as existing site cleanup information. EnviroStor also provides information on investigation, cleanup, permitting, and/or corrective actions that are planned, being conducted, or have been completed under DTSC’s oversight. A review of the EnviroStor website showed that there are no cleanup sites located in the Project Area. 9Additionally, the Project would not produce any impact causing a significant hazards risk to the public. The Project does not propose or approve specific development or ground disturbing activity and would not authorize or expand any new or allowable land uses that result in hazardous materials sites. Any future development that occurs in the Project area would be required to comply with existing regulations related to hazardous materials. Therefore, the Project by itself would result in no impacts related to hazardous materials sites. e. The closest airports to the Project area are the Oceanside Municipal Airport and the McClellan Palomar Airport in Carlsbad, which are governed by airport land use plans adopted by the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) of the San Diego County Regional Airport Authority. The airport land use plans are intended to provide for reasonable, safe, and efficient use of the airport as a public transportation facility and as a base for aviation and aviation-related operations, and to protect the municipal environment from the effects of aircraft noise. The Project area is not located within the adopted airport land use plans for these two airports and, therefore, no impacts would occur.
f. The City of Vista joined with other cities and the County of San Diego in preparing the Multi- Hazard Mitigation Plan for San Diego County, California. This multi-jurisdictional effort details emergency response procedures for the City and includes preventative policies. Construction and operational activities related to future residential development would comply with all applicable policies in the plan. The Project would not require the closure of any public or private streets and would not impede emergency vehicle access to the Project area or surrounding area. The Project does not propose or approve any specific development project, nor alter development patterns.

Therefore the Project would not impair or interfere with implementation of the adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan and no impacts would occur.

9 https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/map/?global_id=60002866%20 10/14/2025 PH1 36 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 3 – Initial Study Environmental Checklist

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
3-20
g. Based on the most recent Fire Hazard Severity Zones Map prepared by the California Department of Forest and Fire Protection’s Fire and Resource Assessment Program (January, 2024), the Project area does not contain Very High, High and Moderate Fire Hazard Areas within its’ boundaries. The Project also does not propose or approve any specific development or construction activities. Thus, the Project is not anticipated to increase risk or expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires. Prior to the issuance of any building permits for any future development pursuant to the Project, developments would be reviewed by the City of Vista Fire Department to ensure any new development is designed and constructed to conform with all applicable City of Vista Fire Code regulations protecting it from wildfires. Therefore, this would result in a less than significant impact.

X. Hydrology and Water Quality

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade
surface or ground water quality?

b. Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that the project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the basin?

c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river or through the addition of
impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i. result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off- site;
ii. substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on-
or off-site;
iii. create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater
drainage systems or provide substantial additional
sources of polluted runoff; or
iv. impede or redirect flood flows?

d. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
e. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water
quality control plan?

DISCUSSION

a. A significant impact would occur if a development discharges water that does not meet the quality standards of agencies which regulate surface water quality and water discharge into storm water drainage systems, or does not comply with all applicable regulations as governed by the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) or the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The City of Vista’s Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance (Stormwater Ordinance) (Chapter 13.18 of the Vista Development Code), which is based on the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit issued by the RWQCB, requires that all new development and redevelopment activities comply with the storm water pollution 10/14/2025 PH1 37 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 3 – Initial Study Environmental Checklist

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
3-21
prevention requirements contained in the City’s Storm Water Standards Manual. These prevention measures, or Best Management Practices (BMPs), would be selected from the Manual and implemented during construction and post-construction activities. The selected BMPs would be applied to reduce pollutants to the maximum extent possible.

For example, short-term erosion impacts during the construction phase of any future residences developed under the proposed MVSP would be prevented through implementation of a grading and erosion control plan. The plan is required in accordance with the City’s Grading and Erosion Control Ordinance (Grading Ordinance), and the Stormwater Ordinance (and based on the State NPDES General Permit to Discharge Storm Water Associated with Construction Activities). The erosion control plan would include construction BMPs such as:
• Silt Fence, Fiber Rolls, or Gravel Bag
• Check Dams
• Street Sweeping and Vacuuming
• Storm Drain Inlet Protection
• Stabilized Construction Entrance/Exit
• Vehicle and Equipment Maintenance, Cleaning, and Fueling • Hydroseed, Soil Binders, or Straw Mulch
• Material Delivery and Storage
• Stockpile Management
• Spill Prevention and Control
• Waste Management for Solid, Liquid, Hazardous and Sanitary Waste, and Contaminated Soil.

The erosion control plan must be submitted to the Land Development Engineer for plan check and approval prior to final discretionary approval of a project. Further, in accordance with the City’s SUSMP, as required by the Municipal Storm Water Permit (San Diego RWQCB Order R9-2015- 0001), all new and significant redevelopment projects that fall into one of 11 categories are considered “priority” projects. The priority project determination would be made during the discretionary permit application process. If a project is determined to be a “priority” project, it is required to incorporate post-construction (or permanent) Low Impact Development (LID) site design, source control, and treatment control BMPs into the project’s design to reduce pollutants to the maximum extent possible. The implementation of all proposed construction and post-construction BMPs would reduce, to the maximum extent feasible, all anticipated primary and secondary pollutants of concern and conditions of concern.

Moreover, the Project does not propose or approve any specific development and does not produce any point source discharge (discharge of polluted water from a single point such as sewage outflow pipe). The Project is not anticipated to result in substantial new development or change General Plan designations, create any zoning entitlements, approve any development projects, or introduce any new land uses that would result in a violation of any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality.

Therefore, due to the nature of the project and that any future development must comply with the Grading Ordinance, Stormwater Ordinance, and/or SUSMP (and other applicable State, regional and local NPDES regulations), the Project would result in a less than significant impact related to water quality standards and waste discharge requirements and would not otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality.
b. A significant impact would occur if a proposed project would substantially deplete groundwater or interfere with groundwater recharge. Potable water would be supplied by the Vista Irrigation District (VID), which draws its water supplies, including groundwater, from sources outside the City of Vista. The Project does not propose or approve any specific development project, nor change permitted land uses that would substantially deplete groundwater or interfere with groundwater recharge as it would not introduce new development in the City other than as already 10/14/2025 PH1 38 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 3 – Initial Study Environmental Checklist

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
3-22
allowed under the current permitted land uses. Therefore, it is anticipated that the Project would not require direct additions or withdrawals of groundwater. There would be no impact on groundwater supplies or groundwater recharge.
c. A significant impact would occur if a proposed project would substantially alter the drainage pattern of an existing stream or river so that erosion or siltation would result. In general, the Project area is mostly built out with residential uses. There are no natural waterways and streams located in the Project area. In addition, the proposed Project does not propose or approve specific development, nor does it intensify or change any land uses that would result in erosion or siltation.

Significant alterations to existing drainage patterns within the Project area and surrounding area would not occur as a result of the Project. As discussed in a. above, future development that occurs in the Project area would be required to comply with all federal, state and local regulations regarding stormwater runoff. Compliance with these regulatory measures would reduce the amount of surface water runoff in the Project area after a storm event. In addition, compliance with construction related BMPs and/or the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) would control and minimize erosion and siltation on or off-site. The Project area does not contain any major or known creeks, rivers or waterways that are subject to flooding. Moreover, the Project does not construct any structures that would impede flood flows within a 100 year flood plain. Therefore, it is not anticipated that the Project would result in impacts related to stormwater drainage patterns that would cause flooding, contribute to excess polluted runoff, on- or off-site erosion or siltation impeding or redirecting of flood flows, as such, there would be no impact. d. A significant impact would occur if a proposed project would be located within an area susceptible to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or inundation. A seiche is an oscillation of a body of water in an enclosed or semi-enclosed basin, such as a reservoir, harbor, or lake. The Project area is not located in an area where it would be susceptible to a seiche. A tsunami is a great sea wave produced by a significant undersea disturbance. The Project area is not in the Coastal Zone and is not susceptible to a tsunami or possible inundation. The Project does not propose or approve any specific development, construction, or ground disturbing activity. Therefore, it is not anticipated that the Project would release pollutants due to Project inundation in flood hazard, tsunami or seiche zones, no impacts would occur.
e. A significant water quality impact may occur if a project is not consistent with water quality control plans or sustainable groundwater management plans. The Project does not propose or approve any specific development or construction activity. Thus, existing conditions are not expected to significantly change or cause a conflict with or obstruct the implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan. Any future development in the Project area would continue to be subject to all applicable state or local water quality control plans or sustainable groundwater management plans. Therefore, the Project would result in no impacts related to implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan.

XI. Land Use and Planning

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Physically divide an established community?
b. Cause a significant environmental impact due to a
conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?

10/14/2025 PH1 39 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 3 – Initial Study Environmental Checklist

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
3-23

DISCUSSION

a. A significant impact would occur if a proposed project was sufficiently large or configured in such a way so as to create a physical barrier within an established community. A physical division of an established community is caused by an impediment to through travel or a physical barrier, such as a new freeway with limited access between neighborhoods on either side of the freeway, or major street closures. The Project does not propose or approve any specific development or construction activity. Additionally, the Project does not involve any street vacation or closures or result in development of new thoroughfares or highways which would divide established communities. Therefore, no impact would occur as it relates to the physical division of an established community.
b. A significant impact may occur if a project is inconsistent with the General Plan (GP 2030) or zoning designations currently applicable to the project site, and would cause adverse environmental effects, which the GP 2030 and zoning are designed to avoid or mitigate. In the City of Vista, the GP 2030 serves as the City’s strategy for long-term growth and sets the citywide context to help guide the update of the specific General Plan Elements. The City’s Land Use Element includes goals and land use policies to guide the physical development of specific areas throughout the City. The project area consists of one hundred and eight (108) parcels, within a 143-acre area. Parcels within the Project area have minimum lot sizes ranging from one-half acre to one acre in size or greater. The Project area has a current General Plan land use designation of Rural Residential (RR), which will remain after project implementation. The Project would change the current zoning designation of the Project area from Agriculture (A-1) to the Specific Plan Implementation (SPI) zone. As discussed in GP 2030, both the A-1 and SPI zones are considered consistent with the RR land use designation. The purpose of the Project is to maintain the land uses and development standards currently within the Mar Vista neighborhood, which is rural, low- density single-family residences, with minimal agricultural uses. The Project’s proposed land uses and development standards would also remain compatible with existing land uses within the vicinity.

The Project would support the goals and policies adopted in the GP 2030 as it is consistent with City of Vista General Plan LUCI Goal 2, to preserve and enhance the characteristics and features of neighborhoods that share common development patterns, topography, major streets and zoning patterns, as the Project adopts development standards and land uses that maintain existing residential densities and development patterns as compared to the current A-1 zone and the prior County of San Diego’s A70 (Agriculture) zone. Additionally, the Mar Vista Specific Plan is consistent with City of Vista General Plan LUCI Goal 3, to preserve and protect existing residential neighborhoods from actions, activities, or land uses that may have an adverse impact upon the enjoyment of the residential living environment, as the Specific Plan preserves the existing natural and agricultural setting of the Mar Vista neighborhood with a minimum lot size of one-acre and minimum density of one dwelling unit per acre. Further, the Mar Vista Specific Plan does not propose any specific development projects or construction, nor incentivize additional development. As the Specific Plan will remain consistent with existing development standards and patterns, consistency will remain between land uses within the Specific Plan area and the surrounding residential land uses that are zoned A-1 (Agriculture) and E-1 (Estate). The Project would also maintain a desirable, transitional land use between more intense high-density residential uses to the south and less intense, lower density residential uses to the north, west and east. Therefore, the Project will not conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. No impacts would occur.

10/14/2025 PH1 40 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 3 – Initial Study Environmental Checklist

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
3-24

XII. Mineral Resources

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation

Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?

b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?

DISCUSSION

a. A significant impact would occur if a proposed project would result in the loss of availability of known mineral resources of regional value or locally important mineral resource recovery sites.

The Project does not propose or approve specific development or construction. Therefore, the Project would not result in the loss of availability of any known mineral resource that would be of value to the region, and no impact would occur.
b. A significant impact would occur if a proposed project would result in the loss of availability of known mineral resources of regional value or locally important mineral resource recovery sites delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan. As discussed in a. above, there are no portions of the Project area that are designated as a mineral resource as delineated in the City’s General Plan Conservation Element. Therefore, the Project would result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site as delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan, and no impact would occur.

XIII. Noise

Would the project result in:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent
increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?

b. Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels?
c. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan, or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?

DISCUSSION

a. The City of Vista has established policies and regulations concerning the generation and control of noise that could adversely affect its citizens and noise-sensitive land uses. The Citywide noise regulations are included in the Vista Municipal Code Chapter 8.32 (Noise Ordinance), which 10/14/2025 PH1 41 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 3 – Initial Study Environmental Checklist

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
3-25
sets forth presumed day/night ambient noise levels. The Project does not propose or approve specific development or construction. However, the construction of future single-family residences, or accessory structures in the Project area may exceed permitted noise levels. However, pursuant to the City’s noise abatement criteria, construction activities are limited to Monday through Saturday between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. The maximum permissible noise level for construction activities is 75 dBA measured over eight hours of continuous construction. Any future development in the Project Area would need to comply with the City’s Noise Ordinance. Thus, the Project is not anticipated to result in substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the Project more than the City’s noise regulations. Therefore, the Project will result in a less than significant impact in ambient noise levels. b. A significant impact may occur if a project were to generate excessive vibration during construction or operation. Construction activities can generate varying degrees of vibration, depending on the construction procedures and the type of construction equipment used. The operation of construction equipment generates vibrations that spread through the ground and diminish with distance from the source. Unless heavy construction activities are conducted extremely close (within a few feet) to the neighboring structures, vibrations from construction activities rarely reach the levels that damage structures. The Project does not propose or approve any specific development project, or operational use of any equipment, and does not include construction activities. Therefore, the Project is not expected to generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels, and no impacts would occur. c. A significant impact would occur if the proposed project would expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels from a public airport or public use airport. The closest airports to the Project area are the Oceanside Municipal Airport and the McClellan Palomar Airport in Carlsbad, which are governed by airport land use plans adopted by the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) of the San Diego County Regional Airport Authority. The Project area is not located within the adopted airport land use plans for these two airports and therefore the Project is not expected to expose people residing or working in or patronizing the Project area to excessive noise levels. As such, the Project would have no impact.

XIV. Population and Housing

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through an extension of roads or other infra-
structure)?

b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?

DISCUSSION

a. A significant impact would occur if a proposed project would induce substantial population growth by locating new development such as homes, businesses, or infrastructure, with the effect of substantially inducing unplanned growth that would otherwise not have occurred as rapidly or in as great a magnitude. The Project does not propose or approve any specific development projects or construction activities and would not induce substantial population growth in an area directly or indirectly. Implementation of the Project would not induce growth beyond existing land use and 10/14/2025 PH1 42 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 3 – Initial Study Environmental Checklist

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
3-26
development conditions. Additionally, the Project does not propose extending or adding any roads or other infrastructure that would induce such growth. No resulting increase in residential population resulting from the Project is anticipated. Therefore, a less than significant impact related to population growth would occur.
b. A significant impact would occur if a proposed project displaced a substantial quantity of existing residences or a substantial number of people or housing units necessitating construction of replacement housing elsewhere. The Project maintains existing conditions related to land uses and development, which would not result in displacement of any existing housing or people necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Therefore, no impacts would occur.

XV. Public Services

Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or
other performance objectives for any of the following public services:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Fire protection?
b. Police protection?
c. Schools?
d. Parks?
e. Other public facilities?

DISCUSSION

a. The City of Vista Fire Department is responsible for providing fire prevention, protection, and emergency medical services to the Project Area. A significant impact would occur if the City of Vista Fire Department requires the addition of a new fire station or the expansion, consolidation, or relocation of an existing facility to maintain services. The Project does not propose or approve any specific development and will maintain existing development and land use standards in the Project area. As a result, any future development under the Project is accounted for with respect to the planning and budgeting of public services, and it would neither create capacity or service level problems nor result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for fire protection. Therefore, no impact would occur. b. The San Diego County Sheriff is responsible for providing police protection services to the Project area. A significant impact would occur if the San Diego County Sheriff could not adequately serve a proposed project, necessitating a need for a new or physically altered station to maintain acceptable service rations, response times or other service objectives. The Project does not propose or approve any specific development and will maintain existing development and land use standards in the Project area. As a result, any future development under the Project is accounted for with respect to the planning and budgeting of public services. Since the Project is not anticipated to increase the demand for police services or create the need for new or expanded police stations, no impact would occur.
10/14/2025 PH1 43 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 3 – Initial Study Environmental Checklist

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
3-27
c. The Project area is located within the boundaries of the Vista Unified School District (VUSD).

A significant impact would occur if a proposed project would include substantial employment or population growth, which could generate a demand for school facilities that would exceed the capacity of the school district. There are no schools located within the Project area. The Project would not introduce any new population into the area to require the construction of new or physically altered school facilities since the Project does not propose or approve any specific development project. Further, conformance to California Government Code Section 65995 is deemed to provide full and complete mitigation of impacts to school facilities from new development from impact fees.

Therefore, no impact would occur.
d. The City of Vista Department of Recreation & Community Services (RCS) is responsible for the provision, maintenance, and operation of public recreational and park facilities and services in the City. A significant impact would occur if a proposed project exceeded the capacity or capability of the local park system to serve the proposed project resulting in the need for new or physically altered park. The Project does not propose or approve any specific development and does not directly or indirectly increase population in the Project area. Therefore, it is not anticipated that the Project would create unplanned capacity or service level problems or result in substantial physical impacts associated with the provision or new or altered parks facilities. Accordingly, no impact would occur.
e. A significant impact would occur if a proposed project resulted in substantial employment or population growth that could generate a demand for other public facilities, which exceed the capacity available to serve the project area, necessitating new or physically altered public facilities.

The Project does not propose or approve any specific development and will maintain existing development and land use standards for the Project area. As a result, any future development under the Project is accounted for with respect to the planning and budgeting of public services. Since the Project is not anticipated to generate a demand for other public facilities, no impact would occur.

XVI. Recreation
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?

b. Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of recreational
facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?

DISCUSSION

a. A significant impact would occur if a project resulted in substantial population growth that would generate a demand for recreation and park services such that substantial physical deterioration of the park facilities would occur or be accelerated. The purpose of the Project is to maintain what is currently existing within the Mar Vista neighborhood, which is rural or low-density single-family residences, with minimal agricultural uses. The City’s long-range plans to maintain and create new parks are contained in its GP 2030 Open Space Element. Adoption of the Project would not create a demand for new parks beyond those currently anticipated and planned. The Project does not propose or approve any development or uses that would directly or indirectly increase population in the Project area that would increase the use of existing and regional parks or other 10/14/2025 PH1 44 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 3 – Initial Study Environmental Checklist

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
3-28
recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facilities would occur or be accelerated. As such, the Project would have no impact. b. A significant impact would occur if a project included recreational facilities or required the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. The City’s long-range plans to maintain and create new parks are contained in its GP 2030 Open Space Element. Adoption of the Project would not create a demand for new parks beyond those currently anticipated and planned. The Project, by itself, does not propose or approve any development or uses which would require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. As such, the Project would have no impact.

XVII. Transportation

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy
addressing the circulation system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?

b. Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3?
c. Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?

d. Result in inadequate emergency access?

DISCUSSION

a. A significant impact may occur if a project would conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy designed to maintain adequate effectiveness of an overall circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities. The Circulation Element of GP 2030 offers a set of policies and programs for the City and aims to provide streets that are safe and convenient for all users. The purpose of the Project is to maintain what is currently existing within the Mar Vista neighborhood, which is rural or low-density single-family residences, with minimal agricultural uses.

The Project does not propose or approve any specific development or changes to the circulation system within the Project area. As a result, the Project is not expected to generate significant traffic impacts that would conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy, related to transportation.

Therefore, the Project would result in no impact.
b. A significant impact may occur if a project's Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) substantially increase compared to existing counts. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b) states that land use projects that indicate VMT exceeding an applicable threshold of significance may indicate a significant impact. CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b) states that transportation projects that reduce, or have no impact on, VMT should be presumed to cause a less than significant transportation impact. The purpose of the Project is to maintain what is currently existing within the Mar Vista neighborhood, which is rural or low-density single-family residences, with minimal agricultural uses. The Project does not propose or approve any specific development or changes to the circulation system within the Project area. Therefore, the Project is not expected to generate significant traffic impacts and would not conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3. The Project’s impact would be less than significant. c. A significant impact would occur if a proposed project included new roadway design or 10/14/2025 PH1 45 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 3 – Initial Study Environmental Checklist

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
3-29
introduces a new land use or project features into an area with specific transportation requirements, characteristics, or project access or other features designed in such a way as to create hazardous conditions. No hazardous design features or incompatible land uses would be introduced with the Project that would create significant hazards to the surrounding roadways. The Project does not propose construction nor approve any development, thus no increase in hazards due to geometric design features or incompatible uses would occur to local vehicular circulation routes and patterns, or impede public access or travel on any public rights of way. The Project would result in no impacts related to traffic hazards.
d. A significant impact may occur if a project design does not provide emergency access meeting the requirements of the Fire Department or threatens the ability of emergency vehicles to access and serve a project site or adjacent uses. The Project would not require the closure of any public or private streets and would not impede emergency vehicle access to the Project area or surrounding area. The Project does not propose or approve any specific development or change or expand any land uses that would result in inadequate emergency access. The Project would not require the closure of any public or private streets, would not impede emergency vehicle access, would not impede access to the City’s designated disaster routes, and would not impair the City’s emergency response plan. Therefore, no impact would occur.

XVIII. Tribal Cultural Resources

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Would the project cause a substantial
adverse change in the significance of a tribal
cultural resource, defined in Public Resources
Code section 21074 as either a site, feature,
place, cultural landscape, sacred place, or object
with cultural value to a California Native American
tribe, and that is:

i. Listed or eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources, or in a local
register of historical resources as defined in
Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or

ii. A resource determined by the lead
agency, in its discretion and supported by
substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant
to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public
Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the
criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public
Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency
shall consider the significance of the resource to
a California Native American tribe.

10/14/2025 PH1 46 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 3 – Initial Study Environmental Checklist

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
3-30

a. A substantial adverse change to a Tribal Cultural Resource (TCR), as defined in Public Resources Code section 21074, is a significant effect on the environment under CEQA. In compliance with Assembly Bill (AB) 52 and Senate Bill (SB) 18, the City, as the lead agency, is responsible for conducting government to government consultation with California Native American Tribes.

AB 52 requires lead agencies to evaluate a project’s potential to impact TCRs, and establishes a formal notification and consultation process for California Native American Tribes as part of CEQA. TCRs include sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American Tribe that are eligible for inclusion in the California Register or included in a local register of historical resources. AB 52 also gives lead agencies the discretion to determine, supported by substantial evidence, whether a resource qualifies as a TCR. Under AB 52, consultation is required upon request by a California Native American tribe that has previously requested that the City provide it with notice of such projects, and that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of a project. Lead agencies must provide notice inviting consultation to California Native American tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of a proposed project if the Tribe has submitted a request in writing to be notified of the proposed projects. A tribe must respond in writing within 30 days of the lead agency’s AB 52 notice. The City, as lead agency, sent AB 52 Tribal Consultation Notices on March 11, 2025, to the following California Native American Tribes via certified mail:

Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians; San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians; and Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians.

SB 18 requires lead agencies to contact and consult with California Native American Tribes prior to making a decision to adopt a specific plan. The tribal organizations eligible to consult have traditional lands in the lead agency’s jurisdiction and are identified by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). A tribe must respond within 90 days of the lead agency’s SB 18 notice. The City, as lead agency, sent SB 18 Tribal Consultation Notices on March 11, 2025, to the following California Native American Tribes via certified mail: Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians; Barona Group of the Capitan Grande; Campo Band of Diegueno Mission Indians; Ewiiaapaayp Band of Kumeyaay Indians; Iipay Nation of Santa Ysabel; Inaja-Cosmit Band of Indians; Jamul Indian Village; Juaneno Band of Mission Indians
Acjachemen Nation – Belardes; Juaneno Band of Mission Indians Acjachemen Nation 84A; La Jolla Band of Luiseno Indians; La Posta Band of Diegueno Mission Indians; Manzanita Band of Kumeyaay Nation; Mesa Grande Band of Diegueno Mission Indians; Pala Band of Mission Indians; Pauma Band of Luiseno Indians; Pechanga Band of Indians; Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma Reservation; Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians; San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians; San Pasqual Band of Diegueno Mission Indians; Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians; Sycuan Band of the Kumeyaay Nation; and Viejas Band of Kumeyaay Indians. The City will complete the tribal consultation process for both AB 52 and SB 18 prior to City Council adoption of the ND and Project.

The Project does not propose or approve specific development or construction activity, and the continuation of existing development conditions are not expected to significantly impact TCR.

The Project area is primarily built out with single-family dwellings and related accessory uses on large residential lots. Any future new development in the Project area would not exceed the density permitted in the Land Use Element is not expected to significantly change existing site conditions.

Any discretionary development that separately occurs after Project implementation would require its own CEQA environmental review that will evaluate impacts to TCRs. Based on the nature of the Project, the City does not anticipate receiving responses from the contacted tribes that would entail impacts to TCRs. Therefore, the project would result in a less than significant impact. b. See response to a. above. Further, any future development projects in the Project area 10/14/2025 PH1 47 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 3 – Initial Study Environmental Checklist

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
3-31
requiring a Negative Declaration, Mitigated Negative Declaration or an Environmental Impact Report will need to comply with AB 52 and conduct the necessary research and/or prepare the necessary reports to determine if the individual development project would cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a TCR. The Project does not approve or propose any development project, requires no ground disturbing or any other related construction activity, and does not induce development. Therefore, the proposed project will result in no impacts.

XIX. Utilities and Service Systems

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or
storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the construction or
relocation of which could cause significant
environmental effects?

b. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry and multiple dry
years?

c. Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider, which serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity to serve the
project’s projected demand in addition to the
provider’s existing commitments?

d. Generate solid waste in excess of State or local
standards, or in excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of
solid waste reduction goals?

e. Comply with federal, state, and local management
and reduction statutes and regulations related to
solid waste?

DISCUSSION

a. A significant impact would occur if a proposed project would exceed water consumption or wastewater generation to such a degree that the capacity of facilities currently serving the project site would be exceeded. The purpose of the Project is to maintain what is currently existing within the Mar Vista neighborhood, which is rural or low-density single-family residences, with minimal agricultural uses. The Project does not propose or approve specific development. As such, existing conditions are not expected to significantly change related to public facilities. Future development projects would be reviewed on a case-by-case basis and depending on the scope of the development project would be subject to its own environmental review. Therefore, the proposed Project would not increase the demand for water and the generation of wastewater, consequently increasing the demand of treatment facilities compared to existing conditions such that physical expansion of the treatment facilities or construction of a new treatment facility may be required.

Additionally, the Project would not increase consumption of electrical power and natural gas such that existing supply facilities may need to be expanded or relocated. Similarly, telecommunications facilities would not need to be expanded or relocated as the Project does not propose or approve development. As such, the Project does not propose nor will it require construction of new water, 10/14/2025 PH1 48 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 3 – Initial Study Environmental Checklist

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
3-32
wastewater treatment, storm water drainage facilities, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunication facilities or expansion of existing facilities. Thus, the Project does not propose or approve any development, and it is not anticipated to significantly alter existing development or development patterns. No impact would occur.
b. A significant impact would occur if a proposed project increased water consumption or wastewater generation to such a degree that the capacity of facilities currently serving the project site would be exceeded. The purpose of the Project is to maintain what is currently existing within the Mar Vista neighborhood, which is rural or low-density single-family residences, with minimal agricultural uses. The Project does not propose or approve specific development and existing conditions are not expected to significantly change related to demand for water supplies. New development in the Project area would not exceed the density permitted in the Land Use Element.

Water service would be provided to future residences by VID through its existing and projected supply, which includes a variety of water sources such as imported, local surface, groundwater and recycled water. Thus, the Project would be consistent with the anticipated Citywide growth, and the Project demand for water is not anticipated to require new water supply entitlements and/or require the expansion of existing or construction of new water treatment facilities beyond those already considered in planning projections applicable to the Project area. Therefore, it is not foreseeable that there would be insufficient water supplies available to serve the Project area and future development in the Project area during the normal, dry, and multiple dry years. Less than significant impacts would occur.
c. See response in b. above. The Project is not anticipated to impact population growth in the City of Vista since the Project itself does not propose or approve any development project and does not significantly alter existing development patterns. The City’s two sanitation agencies, Vista Sanitation District and the Buena Sanitation District, as well as the Encina wastewater treatment facility operate in accordance with applicable wastewater treatment requirements of the RWQCB.

Future development in the Project area would be required to design their wastewater systems to comply with these treatment requirements. In addition, future development projects would be responsible for the payment of development impact fees for the maintenance of existing sewer facilities and expansion of facilities in accordance with the City’s Sewer Master Plan Update (2017).

Therefore, a less than significant impact will occur as it relates to adequate capacity to serve the Project’s projected demand for wastewater treatment and the provider’s existing commitment. d. EDCO Disposal is responsible for the collection, disposal, and recycling of solid waste within the City, including the Project area. Any future development in the project area may generate construction waste materials including wood, paper, glass, plastic, metals, cardboard and green wastes. Solid waste generated by future development in the Project area would either be hauled to Sycamore Landfill in San Diego, which has a permitted capacity of 2,500 tons per day (tpd) and an average daily intake of 900 tpd, or disposed of at the Palomar Waste Transfer Station in Carlsbad, which has a permitted daily capacity of 2,250 tpd. Either of these solid waste facilities is capable of accommodating the solid waste generated by such future development. However, the Project itself does not propose or approve specific development and does not alter existing development or development patterns. Therefore, the Project is expected to have a less than significant impact related to the generation of solid waste in excess of State or local standards, exceed the capacity of local infrastructure or impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals. e. A significant impact may occur if a project would generate solid waste that was not disposed of in accordance with applicable regulations. The Project does not significantly alter existing development or development patterns. The Project does not propose or approve any specific development or construction that would generate solid waste – also see explanations in a., b., c., and d. above. Any future development projects in the Project area would be required to comply with all federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. All applicable regulations 10/14/2025 PH1 49 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 3 – Initial Study Environmental Checklist

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
3-33
would ensure that the impact to reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste is less than significant. Less than significant impact.

DISCUSSION

a. The GP 2030 Safety Element addresses public protection from unreasonable risks associated with natural disasters (e.g., fires, floods, earthquakes) and sets forth guidance for emergency response. However, the Project does not significantly alter existing development or development patterns. The Project also does not propose or approve development, nor does it modify any existing regulations regarding permanent street closures which may directly or indirectly impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. The Project does not include construction that would impact street frontages or access along evacuation routes. The Project does not include amendments that alter the City’s adopted emergency response or XX. Wildfire
If located in or near state
responsibility areas or lands
classified as very high fire
hazard severity zones, would the
project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporate
d
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a. Substantially impair an adopted
emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?

b. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and
other factors, exacerbate wildfire
risks, and thereby expose project
occupants to, pollutant
concentrations from a wildfire or the
uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?

c. Require the installation or
maintenance of associated
infrastructure (such as roads, fuel
breaks, emergency water sources,
power lines or other utilities) that
may exacerbate fire risk or that may
result in temporary or ongoing
impacts to the environment?

d. Expose people or structures to
significant risks, including
downslope or downstream flooding
or landslides, as a result of runoff,
post-fire slope instability, or
drainage changes?

10/14/2025 PH1 50 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 3 – Initial Study Environmental Checklist

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
3-34
emergency evacuation plans. Should development occur in the Project Area such construction and development would be required during construction to comply with construction management plans that would be implemented to ensure adequate circulation and emergency access. As such, the Project is anticipated to result in a less than significant impact to an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.
b. Based on the most recent Fire Hazard Severity Zones Map prepared by the California Department of Forest and Fire Protection’s Fire and Resource Assessment Program (January, 2024), the Project area does not contain Very High, High and Moderate Fire Hazard Areas within its’ boundaries. Additionally, the Project does not propose or approve a specific development project and does not intensify or change any land uses that exacerbate wildfire risks nor does it alter existing development or development patterns, including in Wildfire Hazard Areas. Any future development in the Project area would be evaluated for wildfire safety, including the ability of emergency vehicles to access the site, ease of evacuation, exacerbation of fire risk, and proximity to areas prone to flooding or landslide, as part of the standard City development review process.

Therefore, impacts would be less than significant relative to slope, prevailing winds and other factors that could exacerbate wildfire risks and expose Project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire. c. The Project does not propose or approve any specific development or construction. Given the Project’s scope, no impacts would occur that would require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment. Thus, the Project would result in no impact. d As discussed in b. above, the Project does not contain Very High, High and Moderate Fire Hazard Areas within its’ boundaries. Further, the Project does not propose or approve development and does not significantly alter existing development or development patterns. Therefore, it is anticipated that the Project will result in a less than significant impact as it relates to exposure of people or structures to significant risks - including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes.

10/14/2025 PH1 51 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 3 – Initial Study Environmental Checklist

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
3-35
XXI. Mandatory Findings of Significance

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-
sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the number or restrict the
range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?

b. Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable (“Cumulatively
considerable” means that the incremental effects of
a project are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future
projects)?

c. Does the project have environmental effects, which
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?

DISCUSSION

a. Based on the analysis in this Initial Study, the Project would not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, or reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal.

Compliance with existing regulations would reduce impacts to less than significant levels. b. Based on the analysis in this Initial Study, the Project will not result in any individually significant impacts. Further, the Project does not propose or approve any specific development or construction and maintains the pattern of existing development and land uses, and is not anticipated to result in substantial new development. As such, the Project will not result in any significant impacts or cumulatively considerable impacts. Therefore, no impact results. c. Based on the analysis in this Initial Study, the Project would not have an environmental effect that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings directly or indirectly. No other impacts have been identified that would result in adverse effects. No impacts would occur.

10/14/2025 PH1 52 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 4 – References and List of Preparers

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
4-1
Chapter 4

REFERENCES

AND LIST OF PREPARERS

Individuals and Organizations Consulted

Raffi Mangassarian, Associate Planner, City of Vista
Patsy Chow, Assistant Director of Community Development, City of Vista Michael Ressler, City Planner, City of Vista

References

Section 15150 of the State CEQA Guidelines permits an environmental document to incorporate by reference other documents that provide relevant data. The documents listed below are hereby incorporated by reference. The pertinent material is summarized throughout this Initial Study where that information is relevant to the analysis of impacts of the proposed project. All referenced documents that are starred * are on file and available for review at the City of Vista Planning Division office located at 200 Civic Center Drive, Vista, California.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Accessed February 2025 1 United States Environmental Protection Agency. April 25, 2024. What is a Wetland? | US EPA ( https://www.epa.gov/wetlands/what-wetland)

California Department of Conservation. 2022. Important Farmland Maps compiled by the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) pursuant to Section 65570 of the California Government Code

California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology. 1982 reprinted 1993.

Mineral Land Classification: Aggregate Materials in the Western San Diego County Production-Consumption Region. Special Report 153.

California Department of Conservation, California Geology Survey, Accessed March 2025 Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, Cal Fire, Accessed March 2025 https://www.fire.ca.gov/

California Air Resources Board (CARB), Accessed February 2025 https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/
County of San Diego Air Pollution Control District (SDAPCD), Accessed February 2025 https://www.sdapcd.org/content/sdapcd/air-quality.html
City of Vista. 2025. GIS City-Wide Map - http://gis.cityofvista.com/vista . Accessed January.

City of Vista. Various. Municipal and Development Codes.

City of Vista. 2010. General Plan Background Report - Geology, Soils and Mineral Resources.

Accessed, March 2025.
10/14/2025 PH1 53 of 158

City of Vista Chapter 4 – References and List of Preparers

Mar Vista Specific Plan P24-0354 March 2025 Negative Declaration/Initial Study Checklist
4901-2860-3430, v. 1
4-1
Vista General Plan 2030 | City of Vista

ENVIROSTAR Database, Accessed March 2025
https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/map/?global_id=60002866%20 U.S. Soil Conservation Service, Dept. of Agriculture. 1993. Soil Service Manual.

Preparer

Raffi Mangassarian
Associate Planner, Community Development Dept., City of Vista

10/14/2025 PH1 54 of 158

RESOLUTION NO. 2025-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CHARTERED CITY

OF VISTA, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT AMENDING GENERAL PLAN FIGURE LUCI-2 FOR THE

MAR VISTA SPECIFIC PLAN AREA
The City Council of the City of Vista does resolve as follows:

1. Findings. The City Council hereby makes the following findings:

B. On June 22, 2021, the City of Vista City Council adopted Resolution No. 2021-116 per Planning Case No. P21-0200, making application to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) for the annexation/reorganization of approximately 143 acres known as the Mar Vista Island. On November 7, 2022, LAFCO passed and adopted Resolution No. 2022-014 per LAFCO File No. RO21-04, making determinations, approving and ordering a reorganization and associated sphere of influence amendment for the Mar Vista Annexation.

C. The City of Vista intends to adopt the Mar Vista Specific Plan for the Mar Vista Island, which is an 143-acre project area, consisting of one-hundred and eight (108) parcels located south of Mar Vista Drive, west of Miramar Drive, east of Buena Vista Drive and north of California Oak Drive.

D. On March 18, 2025, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 2025- 05, recommending City Council approval of the Negative Declaration with the finding that there is no substantial evidence in the record before it that the project may have significant impact on the environment.

E. On March 18, 2025, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed project and adopted Planning Commission Resolution No. 2025-06, recommending City Council approval of the proposed Mar Vista Specific Plan with a General Plan Amendment amending Figure LUCI-2 and a Zone Change from Agricultural (A-1) to Specific Plan Implementation (SPI) for the Mar Vista Specific Plan Area, consistent with Government Code Section 65855.

F.The City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on the requested General Plan Amendment on October 14, 2025, and at said public hearing, staff reports, both written and oral were received in evidence and all persons desiring to speak on the proposed project were heard. At the conclusion of said hearing, after consideration of all evidence presented, the City Council reached a decision on the matter as set forth below.
10/14/2025 PH1 55 of 158
EXHIBIT 2

RESOLUTION NO. 2025 –

CITY COUNCIL OF THE CHARTERED CITY OF VISTA
PAGE 2

2. Action.

A. The above recitations are true and correct.

B. For the following reasons, the City Council hereby amends the General Plan by amending Figure LUCI-2, as proposed by the applicant and depicted in Exhibit “A”.

1. The requested amendments are consistent with the General Plan of the City of Vista, and every element thereof, for the following reasons:

a. The proposed Mar Vista Specific Plan is consistent with City of Vista General Plan LUCI Goal 2, to preserve and enhance the characteristics and features of neighborhoods that share common development patterns, topography, major streets and zoning patterns, as the Specific Plan adopts development standards and land uses that maintain existing residential densities and development patterns as compared to the current A-1 zone and the prior County of San Diego’s A70 (Agriculture) zone.

b. The Mar Vista Specific Plan is consistent with City of Vista General Plan LUCI Goal 3, to preserve and protect existing residential neighborhoods from actions, activities, or land uses that may have an adverse impact upon the enjoyment of the residential living environment, as the Specific Plan preserves the existing natural and agricultural setting of the Mar Vista neighborhood with a minimum lot size of one-acre and minimum density of one dwelling unit per acre. Further, the Mar Vista Specific Plan does not propose any specific development projects or construction, nor incentivize additional development. As the Specific Plan will remain consistent with existing development standards and patterns, consistency will remain between land uses within the Specific Plan area and the surrounding residential land uses that are zoned A-1 (Agriculture) and E-1 (Estate). The proposed Specific Plan would also maintain a desirable, transitional land use between more intense high-density residential uses to the south and less intense, lower density residential uses to the north, west and east.

c. The proposed Zone Change for the Mar Vista Specific
Plan area from Agriculture (A-1) to the Specific Plan Implementation (SPI) zone, as required under Vista Development Code Chapter 18.20, will remain consistent with the current General Plan land use designation of Rural Residential (RR).

C. The City Council authorizes the City Planner to make the appropriate changes to the General Plan at the time the subject amendment takes effect.

[Continued on next page]

10/14/2025 PH1 56 of 158

RESOLUTION NO. 2025 –

CITY COUNCIL OF THE CHARTERED CITY OF VISTA
PAGE 3

3. Adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a meeting of the City Council of the City of Vista held on October 14, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

WALTER CHUNG, CITY ATTORNEY

By:

JOHN FRANKLIN, MAYOR

ATTEST:

KATHY VALDEZ, CITY CLERK

By:

Exhibits:

A. General Plan Figure LUCI-2 Map Amendment

APPROVED
Walter C. Chung
20250930151500

10/14/2025 PH1 57 of 158

RESOLUTION NO. 2025 –

CITY COUNCIL OF THE CHARTERED CITY OF VISTA
PAGE 4

General Plan Figure LUCI-2 Amendment

EXISTING

PROPOSED

10/14/2025 PH1 58 of 158

ORDINANCE NO. 2025-

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CHARTERED

CITY OF VISTA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE MAR VISTA

SPECIFIC PLAN AND APPROVING A ZONE CHANGE FROM
AGRICULTURAL (A-1) TO SPECIFIC PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
(SPI) FOR THE MAR VISTA SPECIFIC PLAN AREA
The City Council of the City of Vista does ordain as follows:

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

B.On June 22, 2021, the City of Vista City Council adopted Resolution No. 2021-116 per Planning Case No. P21-0200, making application to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) for the annexation/reorganization of approximately 143 acres known as the Mar Vista Island. On November 7, 2022, LAFCO passed and adopted Resolution No. 2022-014 per LAFCO File No.

RO21-04, making determinations, approving and ordering a reorganization and associated sphere of influence amendment for the Mar Vista Annexation.

C.The City of Vista intends to adopt the Mar Vista Specific Plan for the Mar Vista Island, which is an 143-acre project area, consisting of one-hundred and eight (108) parcels located south of Mar Vista Drive, west of Miramar Drive, east of Buena Vista Drive and north of California Oak Drive.

D.On March 18, 2025, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 2025-05, recommending City Council approval of the Negative Declaration with the finding that there is no substantial evidence in the record before it that the project may have significant impact on the environment.

E.On March 18, 2025, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed project and adopted Planning Commission Resolution No. 2025-06, recommending City Council approval of the proposed Mar Vista Specific Plan, General Plan Amendment and Zone Change, consistent with Government Code Section 65855.

F.Pursuant to chapters 18.06, 18.20 and 18.50 of the Vista Development Code, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on the 10/14/2025 PH1 59 of 158
EXHIBIT 3

ORDINANCE 2025-

CITY COUNCIL OF THE CHARTERED CITY OF
VISTA PAGE NO. 2

requested Mar Vista Specific Plan and Zone Change on October 14, 2025, and at said public hearing, staff reports, both written and oral were received in evidence and all persons desiring to speak on the proposed project were heard. At the conclusion of said hearing, after consideration of all evidence presented, the City Council reached a decision on the matter as set forth below.

2. Mar Vista Specific Plan.

A. The Mar Vista Specific Plan, as reflected in Exhibit “A”, is hereby adopted.

3. Zone Map Change.

A. The Zoning Map, as reflected in Exhibit “B”, is hereby amended to conform with the Zone Change from Agricultural (A-1) to Specific Plan Implementation (SPI) for the Mar Vista Specific Plan Area .

4. Severability. If any word, sentence, paragraph, or other portion of this ordinance is deemed to be invalid or unenforceable for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, the City Council declares its intent that all remaining words, sentences, paragraphs or portions of the ordinance not held to be invalid or unenforceable shall remain in full force and effect, and shall be so construed, as if the original ordinance did not contain the invalid or unenforceable language.

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

[Continued on next page]

10/14/2025 PH1 60 of 158

ORDINANCE 2025-

CITY COUNCIL OF THE CHARTERED CITY OF
VISTA PAGE NO. 3

6. Adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a meeting of the City Council held on October 14, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

Exhibits:

A. Mar Vista Specific Plan
B. Zone Change Map

APPROVED
Walter C. Chung
20251006090505

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

WALTER CHUNG, CITY ATTORNEY

By:

JOHN FRANKLIN, MAYOR

ATTEST:

KATHY VALDEZ, CITY CLERK

By:

10/14/2025 PH1 61 of 158

ORDINANCE 2025-

CITY COUNCIL OF THE CHARTERED CITY OF
VISTA PAGE NO. 4

Exhibit B Proposed Zone Change Map

EXISTING

PROPOSED

10/14/2025 PH1 62 of 158

Mar Vista Specific Plan
Adopted ___________(adoption date)
By City Council Ordinance
No. 2025-___
Prepared by:

City of Vista Community Development Department
10/14/2025 PH1 63 of 158

2 | P a g e

MAR VISTA SPECIFIC PLAN

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION
A. History 3
B. Purpose 4
C. Physical Setting 4
D. Public Outreach 4
E. Authorization 4
F. Applicability 5
G. Specific Plan Goals 6
H. Figure 1 – Local Vicinity Map 6
I. Figure 2 – General Plan Map 7
CHAPTER 2 - LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
A. General Description 8
B. Land Uses Permitted 8

1. Intent

2. Permitted Uses
C. Development Standards 11

1. Matrix

2. Height Limits
D. Accessory Use Regulations 12
E. Sewer Requirements 15
F. Street Requirements 15
CHAPTER 3 – ADDITIONAL STANDARDS
A. Fences and Walls 16
B. Lighting 18
C. Cargo Containers 19
D. Animal Keeping 19
E. Commercial Agriculture Operations 26
F. Landscaping Design 27
G. Architectural Design 27
CHAPTER 4 – REVIEW PROCESS
A. Overview 28
CHAPTER 5 – FINANCING AND INFRASTRUCTURE
A. Sewer System 29
B. Water System 29
C. Stormwater and Drainage System 29
D. Circulation System 30
E. Financing 30

Mar Vista Specific Plan Map – Figure 3 31

DEFINITIONS 32

10/14/2025 PH1 64 of 158

3 | P a g e

CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION

A. HISTORY

The Mar Vista Island area is located within Vista’s Sphere of Influence, and therefore is included in the City’s General Plan. The General Plan land use designation for this area is Rural Residential (RR), which permits a density of one dwelling unit per acre. The corresponding zoning for the RR General Plan land use designation is Agriculture (A-1) Zone, which also permits a maximum density of one dwelling unit per acre. The previous County zoning of this area was A70, which was a County agricultural designation allowing a density of one dwelling unit per acre. Because the Mar Vista Island area had no pre-zoning established, the zoning designation of A-1 upon annexation was completed in accordance with the City’s RR General Plan designation and Development Code Section 18.06.090. The A-1 Zone is consistent with the County’s prior A70 Zone in terms of permitted housing density. The A-1 zoning is recognized in the annexation resolution that was previously recommended by staff and approved by City Council.

With adoption of this document, the Mar Vista Specific Plan, development standards, permitted land uses, and other standards previously governing this neighborhood under County of San Diego jurisdiction, will be memorialized within this document. The General Plan designation for this neighborhood will continue to be Rural Residential (RR), while the zone will be identified as the Mar Vista Specific Plan Implementation Zone (SPI). 10/14/2025 PH1 65 of 158

4 | P a g e

B. PURPOSE

The purpose of establishing the Mar Vista Specific Plan is to maintain the rural setting experienced by property owners while under County of San Diego jurisdiction, prior to City of Vista annexation. This is accomplished through adoption of similar development standards and permitted land uses as compared to those previously governing this neighborhood under prior County of San Diego jurisdiction. Therefore, Zoning and Development standards found within the Mar Vista Specific Plan document substantially mirror the same standards from the County of San Diego for the Specific Plan area.

The zoning designation under the County of San Diego jurisdiction for the Mar Vista neighborhood was Agricultural (A70) prior to city annexation, which closely mirrors the City of Vista zoning designation of Agricultural (A-1).

C. PHYSICAL SETTING

The Mar Vista neighborhood consists of 108 parcels generally located south of Mar Vista Drive, east of Buena Vista Drive, north of Lupine Hills Road, and west of State Route 78. The project area is approximately 143 acres in size and includes properties addressed off of Mar Vista Drive, Miramar Drive, Marine View Drive, Hillcrest Drive, Hilo Way, Park Hill Road, Park Hill Place, California Oak Drive, Auburn Woods Drive and Red Plum Lane. The Specific Plan area is reflected in Figures 1, 2 and 3 of this document.

The existing land uses surrounding the Specific Plan area consist of single-family residential uses. Low density residential uses are located to the north, south and east, and rural residential uses to the north and west. The area is characterized by hillsides and rolling hills with single- family residential development throughout. The elevation of the Specific Plan area ranges from approximately 420 feet MSL to the north down to 360 feet MSL to the west, to 520 feet MSL to the south. The existing residential character and land uses of the surrounding area present important influences upon the Specific Plan area setting.

D. PUBLIC OUTREACH

A letter was sent to the affected property owners on November 26, 2024 to advise of the City’s proposal to establish a Specific Plan document for this Mar Vista area. Staff held an in-person community meeting on December 11, 2024 to gather input and respond to residents’ inquiries regarding the drafting of this Specific Plan document.

E. AUTHORIZATION

The Specific Plan has been prepared in accordance with the California Government Code statutory requirements for specific plans. It includes the following items mandated by California Government Code Section 65451:
10/14/2025 PH1 66 of 158

5 | P a g e

(1) A specific plan shall include a text and a diagram or diagrams which specify all of the following in detail:
(a) The distribution, location and extent of the uses of land, including open space, within the area covered by the plan.
(b) The proposed distribution, location, and extent and intensity of major components of public and private transportation, sewage, water, drainage, solid waste disposal, energy, and other essential facilities proposed to be located within the area covered by the plan and needed to support the land uses described in the plan.
(c) Standards and criteria by which development will proceed, and standards for the conservation, development, and utilization of natural resources, where applicable.
(d) A program of implementation measures including regulations, programs, public works projects, and financing measures necessary to carry out paragraph (a), (b), and (c).
(2) The Specific Plan shall include a statement of the relationship of the Specific Plan to the General Plan.

In conjunction with approval of the Specific Plan, an amendment to the Vista General Plan is not required as it will continue to be consistent with the existing General Plan designation of Rural Residential (RR).

Upon approval of the Mar Vista Specific Plan, the zoning designation for the site will be changed on the Vista Zoning Map to Specific Plan Implementation (SPI), thereby incorporating the Mar Vista Specific Plan as the regulatory document governing the land uses and future development of the properties within the site. The Mar Vista Specific Plan has been prepared in accordance with the Vista Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 18.20, Specific Plan Implementation (SPI) Zone.

F. APPLICABILITY

The Specific Plan is applicable to a 143-acre area located in the central area of the City of Vista, California. The Specific Plan serves as a regulatory document by setting forth the required zoning, development and design standards for the Mar Vista neighborhood. The project site will be designated SPI, Specific Plan Implementation, on the City of Vista Zoning Map. All plans and permits will be reviewed for consistency with the requirements of this Specific Plan.

Should any conflicts arise between the Specific Plan regulations and existing City policies, procedures, ordinances or the City of Vista Development Code (Development Code), the provisions of the Specific Plan shall prevail. Additionally, any definitions found in Vista Development Code 18.02, shall apply to this Specific Plan, unless otherwise stated. Whenever a standard or regulation is not set forth in the Specific Plan, the pertinent sections of the City of Vista Development Code and/or the A-1 (Agriculture) zoning standards shall apply.. If any term, provision or condition of the Specific Plan is found to be invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of the document shall remain in effect.

10/14/2025 PH1 67 of 158

6 | P a g e

G. SPECIFIC PLAN GOALS

The following goals were established to guide the adoption of the Specific Plan area. The goals were generated using planning and land use analysis, the Vista General Plan and discussions between the property owners and City staff. The Specific Plan goals include:

(l) Provide for the establishment of a specific plan, consisting of 143 acres. (2) Create a plan that maintains the rural nature and characteristics of the existing neighborhood.
(3) Maintain consistency between the Specific Plan land uses to those previously allowed under the A70 zoning designation under County of San Diego jurisdiction prior to City of Vista annexation.

LOCAL VICINITY – FIGURE 1

10/14/2025 PH1 68 of 158

7 | P a g e

CITY OF VISTA GENERAL PLAN MAP – FIGURE 2

Mar Vista
Specific
Plan Area
MLD
LD
LD
MD
LD
RR
RR
RR
Lupine Hills Drive
10/14/2025 PH1 69 of 158

8 | P a g e

CHAPTER 2 - LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS

A. GENERAL DESCRIPTION

The entire Specific Plan area is zoned Mar Vista Specific Plan. This designation denotes the allowable land uses and development standards for this neighborhood. The Specific Plan area provides for detached single-family residential uses, as well as various agricultural uses. The development standards embodied in the Specific Plan are intended to create a residential community that is consistent with the purpose and meets the goals stated in the Specific Plan.

Although the development standards in the Specific Plan are unique to the subject neighborhood, they are consistent with the standards found within the County of San Diego land use designation of A70.

All State of California laws and regulations applicable to charter cities, including those laws which pertain to housing, shall be permitted within this Specific Plan. This includes, but is not limited to, developments pertaining to Senate Bill 9 (SB 9) for Two-Unit Housing Developments subject to Vista Development Code (VDC) Chapter 18.96 and Assembly Bill 68 (AB 68) for Accessory Dwelling Units per VDC Chapter 18.31.

B. LAND USES REGULATIONS

The maximum number of residential units is one (1) residential unit per lot. However, additional units may be permitted pursuant to State Housing Laws. Additionally, accessory uses such as pools, hot tubs, gazebos, covered/uncovered patios, barbeques, fire pits/places, waterfalls, waterslides, accessory dwelling units (ADU), guesthouses, and animal keeping are permitted subject to the regulations within this document.

1. Intent

The provisions of this section, shall be known as the Land Use Regulations. These land uses are intended to preserve areas currently utilized primarily for animal keeping, agricultural crop production and low-density housing development. Additionally, a limited number of small farm animals may be kept and agricultural products raised on the premises, as further described herein.

2. Permitted Uses

The following use types are permitted:

a. A one-family dwelling on each lot or building site.
b. Accessory buildings and uses as defined by VDC Sections 18.02.045, 18.02.050 and 18.02.055, including, but not limited to the following buildings or structures: private garages, radio and television receiving antennas, windmills, silos, tank houses, work-shops, barns, offices, coops, animal keep structures and other accessory or incidental to the primary uses permitted by this section.
c. Guesthouses provided the required setbacks for a single-story structure shall 10/14/2025 PH1 70 of 158

9 | P a g e

comply with VDC Section 18.58.270; two-story structures of which the guest house is a part shall comply with the setbacks of the main building.
d. Home occupations
e. Fruit trees, nut trees, vines and nurseries for producing in-ground trees, vines and other horticultural stock.
f. Agricultural crops

1. Horticulture (all types, including cultivation and storage)

2. Tree Crops

3. Row and Field Crops

4. Packing and Processing: Limited
g. Greenhouses
h. Flower and vegetable gardening
i. Animal raising, poultry and animals may be kept on site within the properties within this Specific Plan, subject to the conditions of Chapter 3 – Animal Keeping of this Specific Plan.
j. Processing for market of crops raised on the premises, or on other property owned or leased by the processor.
k. One stand for the display and sale of only those products produced on the premises, or on other property owned or leased by the vendor, as permitted by this title; provided, that it does not exceed an area of 300 square feet, and is located not nearer than 15 feet to any street, highway, or right-of-way. Please see additional standards in Chapter 3 (E)(a)(1), of this Specific Plan.
l. Farm employee housing, provided no such housing is located closer than 50 feet to any side or rear boundary of the lot or parcel of land on which it is located. m. Residential care homes, provided no more than six persons, exclusive of the owner or manager and their family, are housed or otherwise cared for on any one building site.
n. The following uses, provided a special use permit is obtained in accordance with Title 18 of the VDC:

1. Agriculture Sales in exceedance of Section 2.k, above

2. Horticulture Sales in exceedance of Section 2.k, above

3. Packing or processing plants for farm crops, provided no such plant is situated closer than 50 feet to any site or rear boundary of the lot or parcel of land on which it is located.

4. Farm labor camps on lots or parcels of land with a minimum area of four acres, provided no such camp is situated closer than 50 feet to any side or rear boundary or the lot or parcel of land on which it is located. 5. Public stables 6. Horse Stable: More than 10 horses per acre of usable area, more than 10 acres of usable area or more than 100 horses

7. Residential care or Group care homes where more than six persons, exclusive of the owner or manager and their family, are housed or otherwise cared for on any one building site, subject to the provisions of VDC Section 18.58.100. 8. Borrow pits and quarries for rock, sand, gravel, decomposed granite or soil 9. Cemeteries upon the issuance of a permit pursuant to City ordinance 10. Churches 10/14/2025 PH1 71 of 158

10 | P a g e

11. Rescue missions and temporary revival churches 12. Shooting ranges, including pistol, rifle, trap and skeet ranges o. The following uses, provided a minor use permit is obtained in accordance with the provisions of Title 18 of the VDC: 1. Kennels 2. Specialty Animal Raising: Wild or Undomesticated (See Chapter 3 – Animal Keeping of this Specific Plan) 3. Specialty Animal Raising: Other (Excluding Birds or Aquaponics, See Chapter 3 – Animal Keeping of this Specific Plan) 4. Horse Stable: a. Ten horses per acre of usable area, up to a maximum of 5 acres of useable area and a maximum of up to 50 horses. b. Ten horses per acre of usable area, of more than 5 acres and up to a maximum of 10 acres of useable area and between 50-100 horses total 5. Cottage industries 6. Agriculture packing and processing (general, support) 7. Raising of chinchillas 8. Clubs and lodges 9. Aviaries 10. Parks 11. Public buildings and uses 12. Radio and television transmitters 13. Recreational Facilities 14. Schools 15. Skateboard ramps exceeding six feet in height subject to City Council Policy 300-16. p. Transitional housing for battered/abused women and children. Limited to six or fewer adults with unlimited dependent children. The use must be operated or authorized by a government agency.
q. Employee housing
r. Supportive housing, subject to development standards applicable to residential uses under this Specific Plan. 10/14/2025 PH1 72 of 158

11 | P a g e

C. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS

Development standards noted below shall apply to all parcels within this Specific Plan.

1. Matrix

DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS MATRIX
Building Type Detached Single-Family Residential
Minimum Lot Size One acre
Maximum Density One dwelling unit per acre/lot
Minimum Setbacks
Front
Side (Interior)
Side (Exterior / Street)
Rear

60 ft. from street centerline
15 ft. from property line
35 ft. from center line
25 ft. from property line

Maximum Floor Area (Residential) None Maximum Floor Area Ratio None
Maximum Lot Coverage None
Maximum Building Height Two (2) stories or 35 ft., whichever is less (see additional requirements in Chapter 2, section C.2
- Height Limits)
Off-Street Parking Two (2) spaces per unit
Signs Signs must comply with City of Vista Sign
Ordinance, VDC Chapter 18.52.

Accessory Structures Refer to Chapter 2 for development standards Fences and walls Refer to Chapter 3 for fence and wall requirements Lighting Refer to Chapter 3 for lighting standards

a. Architectural pop-outs, such as bay windows, fireplaces, stairs and colonnades at stairs, may encroach two (2) feet into side yard (interior) or street side (exterior) yard setbacks. The above encroachments are limited to only one side yard per lot. Overhangs/eaves shall be a minimum of three (3) feet setback from property lines. A six-(6) foot distance shall be maintained between eaves on adjacent buildings. b. Roofed, but otherwise unenclosed, patios which are attached to and a part of the main building may extend or project into the required rear setback; provided, that such patio shall not exceed fifty (50) percent of the area of the required setback. In no case should a patio extension or projection be located closer than five (5) feet from the side or rear property line. Decks 10/14/2025 PH1 73 of 158

12 | P a g e

requiring a building permit for construction shall be subject to the same setback regulations as the main residence/property setbacks.

2. Height Limits

TITLE AND PURPOSE
The purpose of these provisions is to establish the maximum height of buildings and other structures within the Specific Plan area.

PERMITTED EXEMPTIONS FROM HEIGHT LIMITS
The following structures shall be exempt from the maximum height provisions of an applicable height designator:
a. Radio and television receiving antennas no more than 200 feet in height of the type customarily used for home radio and television receivers. b. Transmitting antennas, no more than 200 feet in height used by licensed amateur (ham) or citizens band radio operators.
c. Flagpoles no more than 50 feet in height.

D. ACCESSORY USE REGULATIONS

TITLE AND PURPOSE
The provisions of this section shall be known as the Accessory Use Regulations. The purpose of these provisions is to establish the relationship among the principal and accessory uses and the criteria for regulating accessory uses.

ACCESSORY USES ENCOMPASSED BY PRINCIPAL USE
In addition to the principal uses expressly included in the Permitted Uses section, the Specific Plan area is subject to such regulations that shall be deemed to include such accessory uses which are specifically identified by these Accessory Use Regulations; and such other accessory uses which are necessarily and customarily associated with, and are appropriate, incidental and subordinate to, such principal uses. It shall be unlawful to establish or maintain any accessory use and/or accessory structure on any lot where there is no lawfully established principal use on the same lot.

ACCESSORY USES SUBJECT TO CONTROLS
Accessory uses shall be controlled in the same manner as the principal uses within this Specific Plan, except as otherwise provided by these regulations.

ACCESSORY USE/STRUCTURE SETBACKS
Accessory uses and structures shall meet the following setbacks, except that because of slope, a private garage accessory to a dwelling, may intrude into the front yard if it meets the following conditions: is not built closer than 10 feet from any rear or side lot line; and the proposed garage location is the only practical one for the garage. If the half of a lot that abuts a street from which garage access is taken has a slope of greater than one foot rise or fall over a seven foot distance or the slope is such that this half of the lot is more than four feet above or below the established street elevation, the garage may be built to within ten feet of the front 10/14/2025 PH1 74 of 158

13 | P a g e

lot line and the Director of Community Development or his/her designee finds that it would not be a hazard to pedestrian or vehicular safety. The above exception is not intended to allow a garage to be located within the front yard setback if it replaces a pre-existing garage that has been converted, or is proposed to be converted, to another use nor to allow a second garage on property where there is an existing garage.

- Front: 60 ft. from street centerline
- Side (Interior): 10 ft. from property line
- Side (Exterior): 35 ft. from street centerline
- Rear: 10 ft. from property line

In addition, no detached accessory building shall be located with walls closer than 3 feet or eaves closer than 2 feet from interior side or rear property lines. No detached accessory building exceeding 1,000 square feet in area shall be located within a required setback. Also, the combined area of all detached accessory buildings having any portion within the required setback shall not exceed 1,000 square feet.

No detached accessory building walls shall be closer than 6 feet to any main building walls or other accessory building walls on the same lot or building site and no detached accessory building eaves shall be closer than 4 feet to any main building eaves or other accessory building eaves on the same lot or building site. When the distance between either the walls or eaves of a detached accessory building and a main building or living unit are less than specified in this section, the buildings are deemed attached for the purpose of determining setbacks and both must meet the setbacks prescribed for a main building.

RESIDENTIAL AND AGRICULTURAL USE TYPES

1. Subject to the restrictions and limitations specified, the following accessory buildings and uses shall be permitted:

a. Metal detached accessory buildings may be permitted subject to Zoning Administrator approval in accordance with VDC Section 18.64.030. Metal accessory structures shall be architecturally compatible with the main residence by incorporating other materials to its exterior such as, but not limited to, wood/cement siding, paint, stucco, or any other material deemed architecturally compatible.

b. Attached private garages and carports, storage buildings, workshops, offices and other similar non-habitable uses.

1. The total area allowed on a lot shall be limited to 25% of the living area of principal residence, or as follows, whichever is greater:

Lot Size (gross)

Attached Accessory Structure area
< 1 ac 1,000 sf
10/14/2025 PH1 75 of 158

14 | P a g e

1 ac - <2 ac 1,500 sf
2 ac - <4 ac 2,000 sf
4 ac or larger 3,000 sf

2. If the portion of the structure in which the attached garage or carport is located is more than one story in height, that portion not used for the shelter or storage of vehicles shall be designed and used as an integral part of the principal residence or approved habitable use such as a guesthouse.
c. Detached Pool houses, Art or Music Studios, and Recreation Rooms. One detached pool house, art or music studio, or recreation room is permitted, provided the structure meets main building setbacks and is not designed for use as a guest living quarters or commercial use. Only one electric service drop and one electric meter to serve both the main dwelling and structure allowed by this subsection will be permitted. The size of detached pool houses, art or music studios, and recreation rooms shall be combined with the total allowable square footage of detached private garages and carports, storage buildings, workshops, and other similar non- habitable structures for purposes of size limitations specified in the accessory structure size matrix below in section (h)(1), for attached and detached structures. d. Children's Playhouses, Patios, Porches, and Gazebos. T h e s e structures may encroach into required accessory structure setbacks but are limited to 12 feet in height. e. Radio and Television Receiving Antennas, Dish Antennas. f. Greenhouses.
g. Silos, Windmills and Tank Houses.
h. Detached Private Garages and Carports, Storage Buildings, Workshops, offices, Barns, Agricultural Buildings and other similar non-habitable uses (non-commercial). Only one electric service drop and one electric meter to serve both the main dwelling and structure allowed by this subsection will be permitted. The combined area of all such structures, together with the structures authorized by subsection b above, shall be limited as follows:

1. The total area of all detached accessory structures shall be limited to 25 percent of the living area of the principal residence, or as follows, whichever is greater:

Lot Size (gross) Detached Accessory Structure Size

< 1/2 ac

1,450 sf
< 1 ac 2,000 sf
1 ac - <2 ac 3,000 sf
2 ac - <4 ac 4,000 sf
4 ac - <8 ac 5,600 sf
10/14/2025 PH1 76 of 158

15 | P a g e

8 ac - <12 ac 6,400 sf
12 ac - <16 ac 7,200 sf
16 ac or more 8,000 sf

2. Limited to one story not to exceed 12 feet maximum height.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, may have 2 stories and a height not exceeding 24 feet if the accessory structure meets the main building setbacks. Furthermore, a one story accessory structure designed to store a recreational vehicle (RV) may exceed 12 feet in height, not exceeding 16 feet, if the accessory structure meets the main building setbacks.

3. Additional height may be permitted through a Zoning Clearance under VDC Chapter 18.71, if the following additional findings are made: (i) there are special circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved that would make strict application of the requirements infeasible or impractical; and (ii) the additional height will not adversely affect: (1) the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity; or (2) property or improvements in the vicinity. Such Zoning Clearances shall not involve a noticed public hearing but are discretionary and appealable under VDC section 18.04.150.
i. Offices.
j. Coops and Aviaries. Coops and aviaries shall meet the setbacks for Animal Enclosures found within this Specific Plan and shall be included in the total square footage allowed pursuant to subsection h above.
k. Guesthouse. One guesthouse is allowed on a legal lot. Guesthouses shall comply with all of the following requirements:

1. The total floor area of a guesthouse shall not exceed thirty percent (30%) of the square footage of the primary dwelling up to a maximum of 700 square feet. Additional area, up to 50% of the square footage of the primary dwelling, may be permitted with the approval of a Plot Plan.

2. Only one electric meter to serve both the main dwelling and guesthouse will be allowed.

E. SEWER REQUIREMENTS

City of Vista will not require property owners to connect to sewer upon adoption of this Specific Plan, however, City staff will work with property owners when the time comes should sewer connection be needed for further development or as otherwise determined by the County of San Diego Department of Environmental Health and Quality (County DEH). County DEH is the agency that is responsible for permitting, installing and maintaining septic tanks and/or systems.

Requirements for septic tanks/systems, and the allowance to have them or expand them, or the determination to require a connection to City of Vista sewer for health and safety reasons, derives fully and completely from the County DEH. Should a sewer connection be determined to be necessary, the property owner will work with City of Vista Engineering staff for further assistance.

10/14/2025 PH1 77 of 158

16 | P a g e

F. STREET REQUIREMENTS

The Mar Vista Specific Plan area is bound by Mar Vista Drive to the north and Buena Vista Drive to the west. Both streets are currently designated as Semi-Rural Street in the City of Vista General Plan Chapter 3 - Circulation Element, which includes a maximum of 2-lanes. This designation will maintain the existing width of semi-rural roadways throughout the Specific Plan area to help retain the existing character of the neighborhood.

Miramar Drive, Marine View Drive and Park Hill Road are local streets without a specific classification in the Circulation Element. The City will not widen these roads or install sidewalks.

The City will not require these types of improvements in the case of new development on these streets either. This will ensure the existing rural character of the neighborhood. Park Hill Place, California Oak Drive, Auburn Woods Drive and Red Plum Lane are private roads, where the City does not have the responsibility for maintenance or improvements.

CANNON ROAD

Cannon Road currently terminates just east of S. Melrose Drive, under the County of San Diego jurisdiction. There is no intent, now or in the future, to extend Cannon Road through the Mar Vista Specific Plan, planning area. This Specific Plan is not being prepared as a catalyst for extending Cannon Road into this planning area.

10/14/2025 PH1 78 of 158

17 | P a g e

CHAPTER 3 – ADDITIONAL STANDARDS

A. FENCES AND WALLS

PERMITTED FENCES, WALLS, GATES AND ENTRY STRUCTURES.

No fence, wall, gate or entry structure shall be permitted unless it conforms to the criteria set forth below, except that the Planning Commission or the City Planner as a condition of approval of a matter under their jurisdiction, may require that a fence, wall or entry structure be constructed to a height greater than otherwise permitted by this section in order to mitigate against potential adverse effects.
a. Solid Fences and Walls. Solid fences and walls are permitted at the following locations provided they conform to the height limitations shown below.

1. Within Front or Exterior Side Yard main building setbacks. Permitted up to a maximum height of 42 inches.

2. Within Rear or Interior Side Yard setbacks. Permitted up to a maximum height of 72 inches.
b. Open and Freestanding Fences and Walls. Open fences and walls are permitted at the following locations provided they conform to the material specifications and height limitations shown below.

1. Within Front or Exterior Side Yard. Permitted up to a maximum height of 42 inches, except as follows:
a. On lots of one (1) gross acre or larger in size, open fences consisting of woven or barbed wire, wrought iron, pipe corral, or rails may be 72 inches high.

Posts, pilasters or other support elements for such fences or walls shall not exceed 24 inches in any horizontal measurement, shall be spaced a minimum of 8 feet apart (edge to edge), and shall not exceed a height of 72 inches. Razor wire and barbed wire attached to supports constructed at an angle to the vertical, are permitted only as a security measure for the purpose of protecting high-value agricultural uses, or animal keeping only.

2. Within Rear or Interior Side Yards. Permitted up to a maximum height of 72 inches.
c. Tennis Court Fencing and Lighting. Tennis court fencing exceeding the height otherwise allowed by this Section, but not greater than twenty (20) feet in height, and lighting standards not greater than twenty (20) feet in height may be permitted on lots of one (1) gross acre or larger in size.
d. Gates and Gate Entry Structures on Individual Lots or Building Sites. Gates, not exceeding 12 feet in height, and gate entry structures on individual lots or building sites are permitted. Gate entry structures on individual lots or building sites shall meet the criteria shown below. Where the City of Vista Fire Department requires additional restrictions; the most restrictive requirements shall apply.

1. Front, Rear, Interior or Exterior Side Yard. Permitted, provided no higher than 12 feet and located a minimum of 20 feet from the nearest edge of any public road right-of- way or private road easement which intersects the access to the gate entry structure. Support elements designed as entry structures on either side of a fence opening that provides vehicular access may extend a horizontal distance of not more than 15 feet on both sides of the opening and may not exceed 12 feet in height for more than a distance of 6 feet on either side of the opening. Such entry structures may incorporate a gate house not exceeding 12 feet in height, but 10/14/2025 PH1 79 of 158

18 | P a g e

may not bridge the entryway.

2. For Fire Protection Access, gate entry structures shall provide a minimum vertical clearance of 13 feet, 6 inches for vehicles, or a height deemed necessary by the City of Vista Fire Marshall.
e. Gates and Gate Entry Structures Across Private Road Easements. Gates not exceeding 12 feet in height, and gate entry structures across private road easements are permitted.

Gate entry structures on private road easements shall meet the criteria shown below.

1. Gate entry structures shall not exceed a height of 12 feet at any point; and

2. Gate entry structures shall be located at least 50 feet from any road right- of-way or road easement which intersects the gated access; and

3. Gate entry structures shall not extend a horizontal distance of more than 15 feet on either side of the gate opening. For Fire Protection Access, gate entry structures shall provide a minimum vertical clearance of 13 feet, 6 inches for vehicles, or as determined by the City of Vista Fire Department.

4. Prior to issuance of a building permit, written consent shall be obtained for the gate or gate entry structure, and submitted to the Community Development Department (on a form satisfactory to the Department), from all owners of property with access rights across the private road easement upon which the gate is to be installed. f. Lighting. Lights and/or decorative fixtures may be placed on the top of pilasters or fence posts on both sides of each entry, at property corners, and elsewhere along a fence or wall spaced a minimum of 40 feet apart. Such fixtures may extend 12 inches above the top of the supporting post or they may extend up to a height equal to the width of a supporting pilaster (or post), to a maximum of 24 inches, whichever is greater. See lighting standards below under section (h)(2).
g. Fences and Walls for Animal Enclosures. The location of fences and walls which confine animals shall conform to the Animal Regulations – Chapter 3, Section D in this document.
h. Exceptions.

1. Fences, Walls and Gate Entry Structures on Individual Lots. Under the Zoning Clearance procedure in VDC Chapter 18.71, the City may approve an exception to the applicable criteria in Chapter 3 – Additional Requirements – Fences and Walls (including animal enclosures or tennis court fences). T h e a p p l i c a n t s h a l l p r o v i d e notice of the Zoning Clearance application to all property owners within a distance of 300 feet from the applicant's property. The City may approve the application provided the following findings are made: (i) there are special circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved that would make strict application of the requirements infeasible or impractical; and (ii) the proposed structure will not adversely affect: (1) the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity; or (2) property or improvements in the vicinity. Such Zoning Clearances shall not involve a noticed public hearing but are discretionary and appealable under VDC section 18.04.150.

2. Gate Entry Structures and Gate Houses on Private Easements. Under the Zoning Clearance procedure in VDC Chapter 18.71, the City may approve an exception to the applicable criteria otherwise specified in this Section (A)(e), for gate entry structures and gate houses on a private easement. The applicant shall provide notice of the Zoning Clearance application to all property owners having legal access to the easement upon which the gate entry structure or gate house will be located. The City may approve the application provided the following findings are made: (i) there are special circumstances or conditions applicable to the 10/14/2025 PH1 80 of 158

19 | P a g e

property involved that would make strict application of the requirements infeasible or impractical; and (ii) the proposed structure will not adversely affect: (1) the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity; or (2) property or improvements in the vicinity. Such Zoning Clearances shall not involve a noticed public hearing but are discretionary and appealable under VDC section 18.04.150.

3. Lighting. Under the Zoning Clearance procedure in VDC Chapter 18.71, the City may approve an exception to the applicable criteria otherwise specified in Chapter 3 – Additional Requirements – Fences and Walls for lighting provided the following findings are made: (i) there are special circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved that would make strict application of the requirements infeasible or impractical; and (ii) the proposed lighting will not adversely affect: (1) the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity; or (2) property or improvements in the vicinity. Such Zoning Clearances shall not involve a noticed public hearing but are discretionary and appealable under VDC section 18.04.150. i. Administrative Exceptions for Additional Fence or Wall Height. An administrative exception for fence heights up to 7 feet 6 inches in interior side yard setbacks or in rear yard setbacks not abutting a public or private street, private thoroughfare, or alley, may be granted provided the following requirements are met:

1. Written consent is obtained for the proposed additional fence height, and submitted to the Community Development Department (on a form satisfactory to the Department), from all owners of contiguous property (including owners of parcels or lots across any street or alley from the site proposed for fencing).

2. An application form shall be submitted and a processing/record-keeping fee shall be collected at the time an administrative exception for additional fence height is requested.

3. Any decision by the Community Development Department Director pursuant to this section shall be final.
j. Open Fences With Razor Wire or Barbed Wire at Top - Calculation of Fence Height. Where open fences 72 inches in height or greater are permitted, razor wire and barbed wire attached to support elements extending from the top of an open fence at an angle from the vertical are permitted except where said razor wire and barbed wire are not permitted in Subsection b.1.a. of this Section. The portion of the fence consisting of razor wire or barbed wire attached to support elements extending from the top of an open fence at an angle from the vertical, shall not be used in calculating the height of such a fence provided the vertical height of said razor wire and/or barbed wire shall not exceed 2 feet.

B. LIGHTING

LIGHTING PERMITTED IN REQUIRED YARDS.

Lighting permitted in required yards shall be subject to either the requirements of Title 18 of the VDC, or shall be subject to the following regulations, whichever is more restrictive:
a. Illumination Only. Lights shall be used for the purpose of illumination only, and not designed for or used as an advertising display.
b. Horizontal Cutoff. Luminaires shall be so designed and shielded by horizontal cutoff to eliminate all light directed above the horizontal. The lower edge of the luminaire's housing shall extend below the entire light source and all glassware so that any light emitted 10/14/2025 PH1 81 of 158

20 | P a g e

above the horizontal is eliminated. Light-directing refractors shall be considered to be light sources.
c. Light Trespass. The illumination of adjacent premises by spill light shall not exceed a value of 0.2 foot candles measured in the horizontal or vertical plane at a point three feet above grade level and five feet inside the adjacent property. This measurement shall be taken15 minutes after the initial start up of the fixture. d. Minimum Height. Lights illuminating vehicular areas shall be mounted at least 12 feet above the ground.
e. Minimum Spacing. Lighting poles shall be spaced at least 50 feet apart; provided, however, that at least 2 poles may be located on each building site. f. Removal. Poles and lights shall be removed at the owner's expense when property on which they are located is taken for street widening.

C. CARGO CONTAINERS

a. A cargo container may be allowed in the Specific Plan area if it meets the following restrictions:

1. It is located on property so as to comply with all primary building setbacks.

2. It is only used for storage.

3. There is a legal primary use on the property where it is located.

4. The property is not maintaining any violations of this Specific Plan, or applicable VDC requirements.

5. The exterior is painted a solid color pursuant to a list of colors approved by the Community Development Department Director and the selected color matches as closely as possible with the surrounding natural environment.

6. The square footage of the cargo container when added to the square footage of accessory structures on the property does not exceed the maximum allowable square footage for accessory structures under this Specific Plan document.

7. On sites where the primary use of the property is residential the following additional restrictions shall apply:
i. A cargo container shall only be allowed if it is not visible from any roadway that runs along the parcel.
ii. On sites of less than 2 acres of net lot area: (A) the footprint of a cargo container shall not exceed 320 square feet in area, (B) only one cargo container is allowed and (C) the total time the site can have a cargo container located on it during any 5 year period is 180 days.
b. Cargo containers are allowed on private property temporarily to store building materials and/or construction tools during construction pursuant to an active building permit.

D. ANIMAL KEEPING

TITLE AND PURPOSE.

The purpose of these provisions is to further describe permitted animal uses and prescribe associated regulations for all properties within this Specific Plan area. This section will regulate the total number of animals permitted, animal enclosures, setbacks, and development standards.

10/14/2025 PH1 82 of 158

21 | P a g e

ANIMAL SCHEDULE.

The Animal Schedule is incorporated into this section, and all references to this section shall include references to it.

Animal Schedule

ANIMAL USE TYPE
(See Note 4) Restrictions and Density Range
ANIMAL SALES AND SERVICES:

HORSE STABLE
(see Horse keeping and Horse
Stable Section Below)
Boarding of and riding lessons for up to 3 horses not owned by the property owner
10 Horses per acre of usable area, of more than 5 acres, and up to a maximum of 10 acres of usable area and between 50-100 horse + Minor Use Permit
10 Horses per acre of usable area, up to a maximum of 5 acres of usable area and a maximum of up to 50 horses
+ Minor Use Permit
More than 10 horses per acre of useable area, more than 10 acres of usable area or more than 100 horses
+ Special Use Permit

KENNELS (see Note 1)

MUP required
ANIMAL RAISING (see Note 6)
(a) Animal Raising Projects
(see Section Below)

Minimum ½ acre+ by Zoning Clearance

(b) Small Animal Raising
(includes Poultry)

Permitted
10/14/2025 PH1 83 of 158

22 | P a g e

(See Note 2)
8 acres + permitted
1 acre or less: 2 animals
1 to 8 acres: 1 per ½ acre

ANIMAL USE TYPE
(See Note 4)
Restrictions and Density Range
(d) Horse keeping (other than
Animal Sales and Services:

Horse Stable)
(see Section Below)

Permitted
(e) Specialty Animal Raising:

Bees
(See Note 5)
Permitted
(f) Specialty Animal Raising:

Wild or Undomesticated
(See Note 3)
Zoning Clearance
(g) Specialty Animal
Raising: Other (Excluding
Birds or Aquaponics)
25 specialty animals + by Zoning Clearance
(h) Specialty Animal Raising:

Birds
Permitted
(i) Racing Pigeons Permitted

Notes:

1. Dogs and cats not constituting a kennel and up to two pot-belly pigs are accessory uses subject to the Accessory Use Regulations and are not subject to the animal enclosure setbacks.

2. Grazing of horses, bovine animals and sheep permitted provided no buildings, structure, pen or corral shall be designated or used for housing or concentrated feeding of animals, and the number of such animals shall not exceed 1 animal per ½ acre of land.

3. One wild or undomesticated animal, kept or maintained in conformance with State and local requirements, is an accessory use subject to the Accessory Use 10/14/2025 PH1 84 of 158

23 | P a g e

Regulations.

4. The number of animals allowed is per legal lot. This number shall not apply to the keeping of earthworms.

5. Additional regulations are applicable to beekeeping, see Vista Municipal Code Chapter 6.16 – Bees.

6. All poultry and animals shall be kept and maintained in such a manner as to prevent offensive odors, flies, dust, noise and other nuisances.

7. Failure to maintain poultry and animals in such manner shall constitute a public nuisance and a misdemeanor pursuant to VDC Chapter 18.82.

ANIMAL ENCLOSURE SETBACK TABLE.

Notwithstanding the provisions of an applicable setback designator, enclosures containing the animal use types shall have the minimum setbacks specified in the Animal Enclosure Setback Table. The Animal Enclosure Setback Table is incorporated into this section, and all references to this section shall include references to it. Animals subject to the Animal Setback Table must be confined within an appropriate enclosure. A pasture containing a minimum of 1 acre for use as a riding area or grazing area, having no interior fencing and not used as an animal enclosure for the permanent keeping of an animal is exempt from the animal enclosure setback requirements. Stables, barns, agricultural buildings and other structures located adjacent to or within an animal enclosure must meet both animal enclosure setbacks and setback regulations.

ANIMAL

ENCLOSURE

LOCATION

ANIMAL ENCLOSURE SETBACKS
Distance from Street
Center Line

Same as for standard building setback (See Note a)
Distance from Interior
Side Lot Line

10 feet
Distance from Rear
Lot Line

10 feet

Notes:
a. Refer to applicable setback designator and setback schedule in the Development Standards Matrix in this Specific Plan.

KENNELS
In addition to the regulations contained in the Animal Enclosure Setback Table, all kennels shall be subject to the following regulations:
a. Restrictions On Use:

1. The premises shall be kept in a clean and sanitary manner by the daily 10/14/2025 PH1 85 of 158

24 | P a g e

removal of waste and by the use of spray and disinfectants to prevent the accumulation of flies, the spread of disease or offensive odor.

2. Kennels shall conform to all applicable local (including County) and State regulations, including but not limited to noise abatement and control, and animal.

3. Animal odors shall not be detectable beyond the lot lines of the property wherein the kennel is located.

4. Dust and drainage from the kennel enclosure shall not create a nuisance or a hazard to adjoining property or uses.

5. The kennel enclosure shall be screened by a nontransparent fence of a minimum six feet in height.

6. Grooming services for the animals being boarded may be allowed as an accessory use provided the grooming services are conducted indoors and the grooming area is limited to 500 square feet in area.
b. Additional Setback Requirements:

1. No kennel shall be erected and maintained:
i. Within 50 feet of any interior side lot line.
ii. Within 25 feet of any rear lot line; provided, however, where the rear lot line is parallel with and contiguous to an alley, such structures may be erected, placed or maintained up to such rear lot line.

ANIMAL RAISING PROJECTS.

Animal raising projects shall be subject to the following regulations:
a. Limits. Such project is limited to the keeping, raising and breeding of domesticated animals for State or Nationally recognized youth organizations such as 4-H, Future Farmers of America (FFA) or other similar youth organization projects. Animal raising projects are a permitted use (by-right) provided the total number and the type(s) of animals on the premises are allowed by the Animal Schedule.
b. Minor Use Permit. If the total number of animals on the premises would exceed the number allowed by Animal Schedule, a Minor Use Permit shall be obtained to permit the animal raising project. In addition to the findings required under VDC section 18.66.030.C, the following additional findings shall be made for the Minor Use Permit:

HORSE STABLE AND HORSE KEEPING
The Horse Stable and Horse Keeping use types are permitted in designated areas per the Animal Schedule, and may be subject to the approval of a Minor Use Permit or a Special Use Permit, as specified below.
a. Specific Plan allows for a Horse Stable as follows:

1. Boarding of and riding lessons for up to 3 horses not owned by the property owner, on any property with the above animal designators is permitted without the need for a Minor or Special Use Permit. No other equine uses, such as breeding, riding academies or events are allowed with the Horse Stable. All structures, animal enclosures and uses are subject to all other regulations of this ordinance including the following limitations:
a) Ten horses per acre of usable area, up to a maximum of 5 acres of useable area and a maximum of up to 50 horses may be allowed with a Minor Use Permit. b) Ten horses per acre of usable area, of more than 5 acres and up to a maximum of 10 acres of useable area and between 50-100 horses total may be allowed 10/14/2025 PH1 86 of 158

25 | P a g e

upon approval of a Minor User Permit.
c) More than ten horses per acre of usable area, more than 10 acres of usable area or more than 100 horses shall require a Special Use Permit. d) The total number of horses and the usable acreage for horses calculated shall include both those horses allowed pursuant to horse keeping as well as the Horse Stable and all of the combined areas for both use types.

2. Usable area. Any plot plan required for a permit shall clearly indicate the usable area for a project. The usable area as noted in the Animal Schedule shall be the area used by all horses on the lot or a combination of contiguous lots including structures, animal enclosures, riding arenas, corrals, stalls and paddocks used by horses. The usable area shall not include driveways, road easements, parking areas, areas within the animal enclosure setbacks, pastures exempt from animal enclosure setbacks, residences, other accessory structures, landscaping, areas with active agriculture and other areas where horses would not be permanently kept on the property.

3. Horse Events. The temporary gathering of additional people and horses for a horse event, show or competition shall be considered an Outdoor Entertainment Event and may be allowed in compliance with the Temporary Use Regulations. However, additional events or time restrictions may be allowed as part of a Minor Use Permit or Special Use Permit for a Horse Stable.
b. Restrictions On Horse Stable and Horse Keeping Uses:

1. A Horse Stable or Horse Keeping shall conform to the regulations contained in Vista Municipal Code 8.32 – Noise Control.

2. Dust and odors from the Horse Stable or Horse Keeping shall not create a nuisance or a hazard to adjoining properties.

3. A Horse Stable or Horse Keeping use shall conform to applicable the standards and regulations for the humane treatment of equine animals found in local (including County) and State codes, including, but not limited to, State Health and Safety Code.

4. A Horse Stable or Horse Keeping use shall maintain the use subject to standard best management practices for equine uses in compliance with the City’s Grading and Stormwater Ordinances.
c. A Horse Stable shall comply with the following requirements:

Manure Management

1. Vista Municipal Code Chapter 13.18 as applicable.

2. Vista Municipal Code Chapter 8.40 as applicable.

3. The stable shall be kept in a clean and sanitary manner by the daily removal of manure to a manure management area from all usable horse areas to prevent the accumulation of flies, the spread of disease or offensive odor.

4. Manure shall be kept in the manure management area in a covered or enclosed bin or container unless being composted. Manure shall be removed from the property a minimum of every other week or properly composted onsite.

5. The manure management area shall meet Animal Enclosure setbacks.

6. Manure shall not cause any harsh odors or nuisances to surrounding properties.

10/14/2025 PH1 87 of 158

26 | P a g e

Fire Protection

7. The interior of electrical appliances, such as fans and heaters, shall be kept clean.

8. Industrial grade extension cords are allowed only if the use of extension cords is unavoidable, for example for a temporary event. Extension cords shall not be used as a permanent electrical conduit.

9. Hay shall be stored in an enclosed building, a covered area or a covered bin, meeting Animal Enclosure and Main Building setbacks, and may consist of only dry, well- cured hay.

10. Rags and cloths used to clean tack and hooves shall be stored in an orderly fashion within an enclosed building or covered bin that meets the Animal Enclosure and Main Building setbacks. Bedding materials shall also be stored in the same location.

11. All wiring and electric cords shall be properly run and installed with insulated wiring routed and strung through metal conduits.

12. Light fixtures shall have a caged enclosure to prevent damage and sparking.

13. Large structures over 1000 square feet in area shall meet a minimum fire separation setback of 50 feet to reduce risk of fire between structures.

14. Hydrants shall be installed near each barn or main structure with sufficient hoses for watering all potential fire areas.

15. The electrical system shall allow for the power to be shut off to each building, without losing power to the water pumps.

16. Stables shall have a written fire plan and evacuation plan, which includes the limitations above and shall post it onsite for employees and visitors.

Vector Control

17. County of San Diego vector control requirements, as applicable.

18. Recognizing the natural drainage on a property, structures permitted as part of a horse stable shall be located away from any locations that collect water. Feed, waste, standing water (water troughs), and other items attractive to vectors must regularly be cleared and cleaned.

19. Feed/grain areas must be covered and swept, droppings must be picked up daily, and manure piles, if not removed from the lot, must be routinely turned or tilled into pastures to prevent fly breeding areas.

20. Automatic fly spray devices or strips shall be utilized in building or structure areas.

21. To prevent vector infestations, all areas that would allow for standing water to collect, must be designed to fully drain within 72 hours. Water features such as ponds related to a horse stable must be stocked with mosquito fish. d. Equine Living Area. An equine shall be provided with adequate living facilities including an enclosed paddock, corral or stall for keeping. Such area shall be located within an animal enclosure or stable. Paddocks, corrals or stalls shall have enough room for the equine to move about and lay down without restriction.
e. A Horse Stable may include an office, employee break area, full bathroom and other associated areas or structures related to a commercial use. f. Sign. One sign is allowed for a Horse Stable at the entrance to the property to identify the stable or ranch name only. The sign shall comply with applicable requirements of 10/14/2025 PH1 88 of 158

27 | P a g e

VDC Chapter 18.52 and shall not be illuminated.
g. Outdoor Lighting. Outdoor lighting is allowed for an animal enclosure or stable.

However, as noted, other than security lighting, the stable area shall not be illuminated between 10pm and dawn. Lighting must comply with lighting standards noted within this document, or per illumination requirements per Title 18 of the VDC, whichever is more restrictive. h. Setbacks. Additional setbacks shall be required for a Horse Stable as follows:

1. All storage areas of materials related to the horse stable use and parking shall meet the Animal Enclosure setbacks, this includes trailer parking, loading and delivery areas, hay storage, etc.

2. Any structure permitted as part of a Horse Stable that is over 1,000 square feet in area shall meet the standard setbacks and additionally meet a minimum 25 foot setback from all property lines. Such structures include barns, hay barns, covered arenas, covered riding areas, stables and other structures.

3. On a lot or a combination of lots under the same ownership of less than 5 acres in area, Animal Enclosures and all structures associated with a Horse Stable shall be a minimum 50 feet from the nearest residence on any adjacent property under separate ownership.

E. COMMERCIAL AGRICULTURE OPERATIONS

Subject to the restrictions and limitations specified, the following accessory buildings and uses shall be permitted in zones where commercial agriculture operations are permitted. The commercial agriculture use must be the principle use of the property. a. On-Site Agricultural and/or Horticulture Sales. The on-site agricultural and horticultural sales use type is an accessory use on premises with a principle commercial agricultural operation where horticulture, tree crops, row and field crops are produced or animals raised for the production of milk, honey, wool, fleece or fur, and incidental retail or wholesale sales of the products produced on the premises or items related to the products raised are allowed, as specified herein:

1. Roadside Sales of Agricultural Products. Operation of an agricultural stand for the display and sale of agricultural products produced on the premises shall be permitted only as follows:
i. Agricultural stands are permitted only on lots one acre or larger. ii. Said stand shall be located no nearer than 15 feet from the edge of any street or highway right-of-way.
iii. Said stand shall be operated by the owner or tenant of the property upon which the stand is located,
iv. Agricultural products produced on other premises owned or leased by the same property owner or tenant may be displayed and sold from said stand. v. The total roofed area of said stand, including all areas used for display or storage for all products, shall not exceed 300 square feet. vi. No agricultural produce shall be sold from a motorized vehicle. vii. Cold storage shall be allowed only when accessory to the on-site farming operation and used only for storage of crops grown by the person(s) farming the parcel. viii. Incidental sale of items related to the sale or use of agricultural products (not to exceed 10 percent of the stand area), including horticultural products, may also 10/14/2025 PH1 89 of 158

28 | P a g e

take place provided any applicable health regulations are complied with. ix. No commodities other than those listed above may be sold from a produce stand except as allowed by Food and Agricultural Code section 47050. x. A produce stand may sell only those ornamental plants that are grown on the same lot as such stand is located.

F. LANDSCAPE DESIGN

Landscaping shall comply with the City of Vista Landscape Manual and its provisions. This may include, but not be limited to, erosion control, slope stabilization, bio basins, private yards, retaining walls, or any other landscape designs.

G. ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN

Architectural conformity shall be reviewed and determined by the City of Vista Planning Department. The rural nature and agricultural lifestyle of this neighborhood, through the Specific Plan, shall be maintained. New and/or remodeled homes shall continue to provide architecturally compatible residential home designs that utilize multiple high-quality materials, floor plans, roof designs, that continue to compliment and enhance the neighborhood.

10/14/2025 PH1 90 of 158

29 | P a g e

CHAPTER 4 - REVIEW PROCESS

A. Overview

A land use is permitted by right, permitted subject to a Plot Plan, Zoning Clearance, Minor Use Permit, Special Use Permit, or prohibited, as identified in Chapters 2 and 3 of this document. The approval process for discretionary land use permits shall follow those described in Title 18 of the VDC.

10/14/2025 PH1 91 of 158

30 | P a g e

CHAPTER 5 – FINANCING AND INFRASTRUCTURE

Public improvements associated with the Mar Vista Specific Plan consist primarily of infrastructure improvements, such as sewer, water, and storm water system improvements, and improvements to the circulation system, including streets and sidewalks. The public improvements within the Specific Plan area are part of separate citywide infrastructure plans that layout the master plans for age and condition-related improvements, as well as capacity- related improvements. Each of these areas is discussed below.

A. Sewer Systems

The Specific Plan area is located within the City of Vista sewer system. The city adopted a Sewer Master Plan in 2017, which establishes the planned upgrades to the sewer system. Sewer system upgrades are split into two primary categories: (1) age and condition- related improvements; and (2) capacity-related improvements. Projects within both categories are located within the Specific Plan area, and are planned for implementation based on the City's ability to incorporate such improvements within other capital projects or construct as stand-alone capital projects based on need.

Although no major development, nor intensification, is planned for the Specific Plan area, all sewer system improvements needed to accommodate the area are identified and ranked in the Sewer Master Plan. Such projects are financed through the sewer fees charged for connection and services, as well as other capital funds available through the City's Capital Improvement Program.

B. Water System

Water is provided to the Mar Vista Specific Plan area by the Vista Irrigation District (VID), who owns and maintains all water-related infrastructure within the City. VID adopted an Urban Water Management Plan, which establishes the planned upgrades to the water distribution system throughout the city, including the Mar Vista Specific Plan area.

Water system upgrades are planned for implementation based on the ability to incorporate such improvements within other capital projects, or construct as stand-alone capital projects based on need.

C. Stormwater and Drainage System

The storm water systems serving the City of Vista, inclusive of the Specific Plan area, consists of a combination of public and private facilities that tie into the Buena Vista Creek drainage basin. The City prepared a Drainage Master Plan Update in 2009, which assessed the condition and capacity of the public drainage system. The Master Plan outlines several facilities throughout the city that are in need of upgrades due to capacity or condition, and provides a framework for financing and implementing improvements to these facilities. Financing for future improvements to the drainage system will be provided through a combination of drainage fees from private development within the Specific Plan, capital funds, grants, and other sources. 10/14/2025 PH1 92 of 158

31 | P a g e

D. Circulation System

The circulation system serving the Specific Plan area includes a combination of streets, sidewalks, and transit facilities. Planned improvements to the circulation system within the Specific Plan area are programmed and financed through the City's Capital Improvement Program.

E. Financing

Any necessary financing may be accomplished through the use of various funding sources, including private funding, capital funds, development impact fees, grants, enterprise funds, and other available financing mechanisms.

10/14/2025 PH1 93 of 158

32 | P a g e

MAR VISTA SPECIFIC PLAN ZONE MAP – FIGURE 3

10/14/2025 PH1 94 of 158

33 | P a g e

DEFINITIONS

Note – For definitions of terms not included in this section, see City of Vista Development Code Chapter 18.02.

Agriculture: Shall mean the production of goods such as food, fibers or feed by the systematic growing and harvesting of plants, animals and other life forms. Typical forms of agriculture include cultivation of land and raising of livestock.

Agriculture, Packing and Processing: Packing and Processing refers to packing and processing of fresh agricultural products and does not include cooking, canning, tanning, rendering and reducing operations which are general industrial uses. Following are categories of Packing and Processing use types:

1. Limited. The customary preparation for market of fresh produce, flowers, feed, fiber, milk, eggs, rabbits, poultry and other similarly sized small or specialty animals raised for human consumption, produced on the same premises as the packing and processing operation. These products shall be considered to be produced on the same premises if they are solely grown or produced on land owned or operated by the same person who owns or operates the packing and processing facility.

2. General. The customary preparation for market of fresh produce, flowers, feed, fiber, milk, eggs, rabbits, poultry and other similarly sized small or specialty animals raised for human consumption, produced on premises other than that upon which the packing and processing operation is located.

3. Support. Fabrication, assembly, reconditioning and sale of boxes, cartons, crates and pallets for handling and transporting crops provided this use is secondary to agricultural or horticultural production on the premises.

Animal Enclosure: An area surrounded on all sides by a fence, corral, pen, pipe, post, rail, wall or other barrier (or a combination) for the keeping of animals, including but not limited, to chickens, horses and cattle. An agricultural building, stable or barn located within or adjacent to an Animal Enclosure, is not considered an Animal Enclosure. An Animal Enclosure may be covered or uncovered and may have a solid wall on more than one side. A fenced pasture of one acre or larger for use as a riding or grazing area, but not for the permanent keeping of animals, is not considered an Animal Enclosure.

Animal, Large: Limited to bovine animals, sheep, goats, swine, ostriches, emus, llamas and alpacas.

Animal Raising: Use type refers to premises where animals are fed or kept for personal use, animal products, animal increase, or value increase, by the owner or occupant of the premises.

Typical uses include horsekeeping for personal use and chicken or cattle ranches.

10/14/2025 PH1 95 of 158

34 | P a g e

Animal Raising Projects: Such project is limited to the keeping, raising and breeding of domesticated animals for 4-H, FFA or other similar youth organization projects. Animal raising projects are a permitted use (by-right) provided the total number and the type(s) of animals on the premises are allowed by the applicable zone animal designator.

Animal, Small: Poultry, rabbits, chinchillas, hamsters, and other small, domesticated animals other than a large animal or specialty animal.

Animal, Specialty: Including, but not limited to, fish (not related to aquaponics), furbearing animals, wild or undomesticated animals, amphibians, insects and birds, other than large or small animals.

Aquaculture: A form of agriculture devoted to the controlled growing and harvesting of fish, shellfish, and plants in marine, brackish, and fresh water and as defined in the Food and Agriculture Code.

Aquaponics: A form of agriculture which combines aquaculture (raising of fish) with hydroponics (growing plants in water) in a symbiotic, closed-loop system.

Aviary: Enclosure that is large enough for the keeping of birds.

Barn: A building used for the shelter of livestock raised on the premises, the storage of agricultural products produced or consumed on the premises, or the storage and maintenance of farm equipment and agricultural supplies used for the agricultural operations on the premises. A barn may be located within or adjacent to an Animal Enclosure, but a barn is not considered an Animal Enclosure. A Barn is considered an accessory residential or agricultural use.

Bird: An avian species other than poultry.

Commercial Agriculture: Shall mean a routine and ongoing enterprise associated with a farm, grove, dairy, or other agricultural business, and shall include:

1. The cultivation and tillage of soil; crop rotation; fallowing for agricultural purposes; the production, cultivation, growing, replanting and harvesting of any agricultural commodity including viticulture, vermiculture, apiculture, or horticulture;

2. The raising of livestock, bees, fur bearing animals, fish or poultry, and dairying for sale;

3. Any practices performed by a farmer on a farm as incident to or in conjunction with farming operations, including the preparation for retail sale, delivery to storage or to market, or delivery to carriers for transportation to market; or

4. Ordinary pasture maintenance and renovation and dry land farming operations consistent with rangeland management and soil disturbance activities. 10/14/2025 PH1 96 of 158

35 | P a g e

All such activities must be consistent with the economics of commercial agricultural operations and other similar agricultural activities. Commercial Agriculture does not include animal raising, crops or agriculture for personal consumption.

Coop: A cage or pen for confining poultry.

Cottage Industry: The production of goods or the provision of services in conjunction with a single detached dwelling. These limited commercial and industrial uses shall only be used in conjunction with a primary dwelling on the same parcel and that said uses, although more extensive than home occupations, do not significantly alter or disturb the residential or rural nature of the premises or the surrounding community.

Enclosure: The degree that the storage and display of goods may be open and/or visible from public rights-of-way. The following are enclosure types:

1. Drive-In: Designed or operated so as to enable persons to receive a service or to purchase or to consume goods while remaining onsite within a parked motor vehicle.

2. Enclosed: A roofed structure contained on all sides by walls which are pierced only by windows, vents, or customary entrances and exits.

3. Open: Unroofed or not contained on all sides by walls which are pierced only by windows, vents, or customary entrances and exits.

4. Semi-Enclosed: Contained on at least 50 percent of its perimeter by walls which are pierced only by windows, vents, or customary entrances and exits. The open sides of partially open structures shall not be visible from any public right-of-way.

Fence, Open: A fence (and the gates in such fence) which permits direct vision through at least 80 percent of any one square foot segment of fence surface.

Fence, Solid: A fence (and the gates in such fence) constructed of solid material through which no visual images or light may be seen. Openings in such fence (and its gates when closed) shall not exceed 2 percent of any one square foot segment of the fence's surface which is more than 8 inches above the ground.

Fence, View-Obscuring: A fence (and the gates in such fence) whose surface is covered by solid or opaque material through which no visual images may be seen. Openings in such a fence (and its gates when closed) shall not exceed 20 percent of any one square foot segment more than 8 inches above the ground, nor shall any opening exceed one-half inch in width. Woven wire or chain link fences containing slats are not view- obscuring fences.

Horse: A horse is an equine that has reached the age of 12 months. The definition of a horse or equine also includes donkey, mule or burro.

10/14/2025 PH1 97 of 158

36 | P a g e

Horsekeeping: The keeping of horses in a building or in an animal enclosure on premises where the horses are owned by the owners or the occupants of the premises, and where no horses are kept for commercial purposes. Horses allowed under Horsekeeping are an agricultural use.

Horses kept for hire, breeding, boarding, raising, riding or performing for commercial purposes are considered part of a Horse Stable.

Horse Stable: A stable consisting of, but not limited to, animal enclosures, riding arenas, corrals, paddocks, pens and/or other structures used for the boarding, breeding, raising, rehabilitation, riding training and/or performing of horses, by the owners, occupants or persons other than the owners or the occupants of the premises, for commercial purposes. See Animal Schedule for allowed zones and uses. For the private use of horses by the owner or occupants of a premises, see Horsekeeping.

Horticulture: Practice of growing, managing, cultivating plans, fruits, vegetables, flowers and any other cultivar.

Hydroponics: A form of agriculture in which plants are grown in water or an inert supportive medium and as defined in the Food and Agricultural Code.

Livestock: An animal raised for food or other products. Typical examples include cattle, poultry and pigs. Animals raised for pleasure, exhibition or racing shall not be considered livestock.

Living Area: The floor area under the roof of a dwelling unit that is contained within the interior surface of its perimeter walls, except Living Area does not include garages or attics and basements not designed, intended, and constructed for human habitation.

Lot Area, Net: The gross area of a parcel minus:

1. The area of any street right-of-way,

2. Any fenced flood control or walkway easement. The area within any trail easement dedicated pursuant to the County Trails Program shall not be subtracted from the gross area of a parcel to calculate the Net Lot Area.

3. Irrevocable offers of dedication when the property is within a Village classification of the General Plan; and

4. The area contained in the panhandle of a panhandle lot when the lot is in a zone where the minimum required lot size is 10,000 square feet or less.

Nurseries: A place where plants are propagated and grown to a desired size. Nurseries contain plants for sale for gardening, forestry, conservation biology, rather than agriculture. Nurseries sell to the general public, wholesale or retail.

10/14/2025 PH1 98 of 158

37 | P a g e

Pot-Belly Pig: A domesticated miniature Vietnamese, Chinese or Asian pot-bellied or pot-belly pig not exceeding one hundred twenty-five pounds in weight and not exceeding eighteen inches in height measured at the shoulder.

Private Garage: An accessory building or an accessory portion of the main building, designed and/or used for the shelter or storage of vehicles owned or operated by the occupants of the main building.

Row and Field Crops: Use type refers to premises primarily devoted to the cultivation for sale at wholesale of agricultural products grown in regular or scattered patterns such as vines, field, forage and other plant crops intended to provide food or fibers.

Silo: A tower or pit on a farm used to store grain or winter food for cattle in the form of fermented feed known as silage.

Tank House: Enclosed structure used for storage of water systems, pipes, meters, etc., for a private residential pool.

Tree Crops: Use type refers to premises primarily devoted to the cultivation for sale at wholesale of tree-grown agricultural products such as avocados, walnuts and citrus fruits.

Windmill: A device which converts the kinetic energy of the wind into a useable form of mechanical energy.

Workshop: A room or building attached or detached from a primary dwelling unit, in which goods are manufactured or repaired for the sole purpose and private use of the property owner.

10/14/2025 PH1 99 of 158

1 PLANNING COMMISSION

STAFF REPORT

PUBLIC HEARING
MARCH 18, 2025
P24-0354
REQUEST: Adoption of the Mar Vista Specific Plan
APPLICANT: City of Vista
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution 2025- , recommending City Council approval of a Negative Declaration for the Mar Vista Specific Plan
Adopt Resolution 2025 - , recommending City Council approval of the Mar Vista Specific Plan with a General Plan Amendment amending Figure LUCI-2 and a Zone Change from A-1 (Agricultural) to SPI (Specific Plan Implementation) for the Mar Vista Specific Plan Area
LOCATION: The Mar Vista neighborhood, which comprises of one hundred and eight (108) parcels, within a 143-acre area, located south of Mar Vista Drive, west of Miramar Drive, east of Buena Vista Drive and north of California Oak Drive.

LAND AREA: The proposed Specific Plan area is 143-acres.

KEY ISSUES: Is the project consistent with the General Plan? 10/14/2025 PH1 100 of 158
EXHIBIT 4

2 I. BACKGROUND:

RO21-04, making determinations, approving and ordering a reorganization and associated sphere of influence amendment for the Mar Vista Annexation.

The residents of the Mar Vista neighborhood were concerned that the land uses and standards that they enjoyed for decades under County of San Diego jurisdiction would not continue to be permitted under the City of Vista jurisdiction, once annexation was completed. However, the City of Vista made commitments to the residents that the City would maintain consistency with the County of San Diego standards related to land uses and development standards, via adoption of the Mar Vista Specific Plan. In keeping that commitment, the Vista Community Development Department began the process of developing the Mar Vista Specific Plan.

To ensure resident support for the Mar Vista Specific Plan, a letter was sent to the affected property owners on November 26, 2024, to advise of the City’s proposal to establish a Specific Plan document for the Mar Vista Island area. Staff held an in-person community meeting on December 11, 2024, in the Council Chambers at Vista Civic Center, to gather input and respond to residents’ inquiries regarding the drafting of this Specific Plan document. There were approximately twenty-one attendees, with eleven residents who wished to speak. Staff has responded to all comments and questions received at the community meeting and posted all responses on the city’s website at www.cityofvista.gov . At the community meeting, staff detailed the pertinent sections of the document related to land uses, accessory structures, animal standards, agricultural uses and other uses previously permitted under the County of San Diego A70 (Agriculture) designation. Residents were supportive of the adoption of the Mar Vista Specific Plan considering the characteristics of their neighborhood and uses were being maintained.

10/14/2025 PH1 101 of 158

3 The Mar Vista Island area was located within Vista’s Sphere of Influence and is included in the City’s General Plan. The General Plan land use designation for this area is Rural Residential (RR), which permits a density of one dwelling unit per acre. The corresponding zoning for the RR General Plan land use designation is Agriculture (A-1) Zone, which also permits a maximum density of one dwelling unit per acre. The previous County of San Diego zoning of this area was A70 (Agricultural), which was a County agricultural designation allowing a density of one dwelling unit per acre. Because the Mar Vista Island area had no pre-zoning established, the zoning designation of Agricultural (A-1) upon annexation was completed in accordance with the City’s RR General Plan designation and Development Code Section 18.06.090. The A-1 Zone is consistent with the County’s prior A70 Zone in terms of permitted housing density. The A-1 Zone is recognized in the City of Vista Council Resolution No. 2021-116.

With adoption of the Mar Vista Specific Plan, the City of Vista will adopt development standards, permitted land uses, and other standards that are substantially consistent with those previously governing this neighborhood under County of San Diego jurisdiction. The General Plan designation for this neighborhood will continue to be Rural Residential (RR), while the zone will be identified as the Specific Plan Implementation Zone (SPI). The zoning under the Mar Vista Specific Plan will maintain that current maximum density of one dwelling unit per acre.

II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION:

The project area consists of one hundred and eight (108) parcels, within a 143-acre area. The purpose of establishing the Mar Vista Specific Plan is to maintain the rural setting experienced by property owners while under County of San Diego jurisdiction, prior to City of Vista annexation. This is accomplished through adoption of substantially consistent development standards and permitted land uses as compared to those previously governing this neighborhood under County of San Diego jurisdiction. The proposed Mar Vista Specific Plan would change the current zoning designation of this neighborhood from Agriculture (A-1) to the Specific Plan Implementation (SPI) zone pursuant to Chapter 18.20 of the Development Code..

Additionally, an amendment to the Vista General Plan is needed to amend Figure LUCI-2 in the General Plan to designate these parcels as within the Mar Vista Specific Plan. The new SPI zone will continue to be consistent with the existing General Plan designation for the project site of Rural Residential (RR).

1. Provide for the establishment of a specific plan, consisting of 143 acres.

2. Create a plan that maintains the rural nature and characteristics of the existing neighborhood.

3. Maintain consistency between the Specific Plan land uses to those previously allowed under the A70 zoning designation under County of San Diego jurisdiction prior to City of Vista annexation.

LAND USE:

4 one dwelling unit per acre, various animal uses such as animal raising, horse stables and animal keeping, as well as various agricultural uses.

DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS:

In addition to land uses, the proposed development standards are consistent with the County of San Diego A70 (Agriculture) development standards. This includes minimum lot sizes of one acre and maximum density at one dwelling unit per acre. Additional consistent standards include setbacks, parking, and height limits. Maximum height for a primary residence will be two (2) stories or 35-feet, whichever is less. Off-street parking allowance will be a maximum of two (2) spaces per unit. Minimum setbacks would be maintained related to the following requirements: Front, 60-feet from street centerline; Side (Interior), 15-feet from the property line; Side (Exterior/Street), 35-feet from street centerline; and Rear, 25-feet from the property line.

SEWER REQUIREMENTS:

City of Vista will not require property owners to connect to sewer upon adoption of this Specific Plan. City staff will work with property owners should sewer connection be needed for further development or as otherwise determined by the County of San Diego Department of Environmental Health and Quality (County DEH). County DEH is the agency that is responsible for permitting, installing and maintaining septic tanks and/or systems. Requirements for septic tanks/systems, and the allowance to have them or expand them, or the determination to require a connection to City of Vista sewer for health and safety reasons, derives fully and completely from the County DEH. Should a sewer connection be determined to be necessary, the property owner will work with City of Vista Engineering staff for further assistance.

STREET REQUIREMENTS:

The Mar Vista Specific Plan area is bound by Mar Vista Drive to the north and Buena Vista Drive to the west. Both streets are currently designated as semi-rural streets in the City of Vista General Plan Chapter 3 - Circulation Element, which includes a maximum of 2-lanes. This designation will maintain the existing width of semi-rural roadways throughout the Specific Plan area to help retain the existing character of the neighborhood. Where possible, landscaped medians, street trees, and/or landscaped buffers along sidewalks may be required by adopted standards in the future to improve the appearance of the public rights-of-way.

Miramar Drive, Marine View Drive, and Park Hill Road are local streets without a specific classification in the Circulation Element. The City will not widen these roads or install sidewalks.

10/14/2025 PH1 103 of 158

5 III. ENVIRONMENTAL
A Negative Declaration and Initial Study Checklist have been prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code, Section 21000, et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Section 15000, et seq.). The document is available for a 20-day public review period from March 12, 2025 to April 1, 2025.

The Planning Commission may make a recommendation on the draft Negative Declaration and this project prior to the conclusion of the public review period. Title 14 CCR sec. 15025(c)).

IV. ANALYSIS
The Mar Vista Specific Plan has been prepared in accordance with the California Government Code statutory requirements for specific plans. It includes the following items mandated by California Government Code Section 65451:
a. A specific plan shall include a text and a diagram or diagrams which specify all of the following in detail:
1) The distribution, location and extent of the uses of land, including open space, within the area covered by the plan.
2) The proposed distribution, location, and extent and intensity of major components of public and private transportation, sewage, water, drainage, solid waste disposal, energy, and other essential facilities proposed to be located within the area covered by the plan and needed to support the land uses described in the plan.
3) Standards and criteria by which development will proceed, and standards for the conservation, development, and utilization of natural resources, where applicable.
4) A program of implementation measures including regulations, programs, public works projects, and financing measures necessary to carry out paragraph (1), (2), and (3).
b. The Specific Plan shall include a statement of the relationship of the Specific Plan to the General Plan.

The adoption of the Mar Vista Specific Plan would achieve the goals identified for the document.

The Specific Plan has been designed to maintain the rural nature and characteristics of the existing neighborhood by maintaining the rural nature of the community. Additionally, rural uses such as low-density residential units on large lots are maintained and included in the Specific Plan. Furthermore, land uses and development standards that are closely associated with rural development would be permissible subject to development standards. Furthermore, the Specific Plan would maintain consistency between the Specific Plan land uses to those previously allowed under the A70 zoning designation under County of San Diego jurisdiction prior to City of Vista annexation.

A General Plan Amendment is necessary to amend Figure LUCI-2 in the General Plan to designate these parcels as within the Mar Vista Specific Plan. Upon approval of the Mar Vista Specific Plan, the zoning designation for the site will be changed on the Vista Zoning Map from Agriculture (A-1) to Specific Plan Implementation (SPI), thereby making the Mar Vista Specific 10/14/2025 PH1 104 of 158

6 Plan the regulatory document governing the land uses and future development of the properties within the site. The Specific Plan area zoning of SPI will continue to be consistent with the existing General Plan designation of Rural Residential (RR). The zoning and land uses of the Mar Vista Specific Plan will continue to be consistent with the surrounding residential land uses of A-1 (Agriculture) and E-1 (Estate). The Mar Vista Specific Plan has been prepared in accordance with the Vista Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 18.20, Specific Plan Implementation (SPI) Zone.

The Planning Commission acts in an advisory capacity to the City Council regarding adoption of any specific plan and general plan amendments. Therefore, staff recommends the Planning Commission make a recommendation of approval to the City Council on the Negative Declaration, the proposed Mar Vista Specific Plan, and associated General Plan Amendment.

The Commission may include any additional modifications or adjustments to the proposed Specific Plan in their recommendation to the City Council, provided that any recommended adjustments comply with State law.

V. CONCLUSIONS AND REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION:

The project meets the requirements of the City’s Development Code pursuant to Chapters

18.06, 18.20 and 18.50, and is consistent with the General Plan subject to approval of the requested General Plan Amendment. Therefore, staff is requesting that the Planning Commission recommend City Council approval of a Negative Declaration for the adoption of the Mar Vista Specific Plan and approval of the Mar Vista Specific Plan with a General Plan Amendment amending Figure LUCI-2 and a Zone Change from Agriculture (A-1) to Specific Plan Implementation (SPI) for the Mar Vista Specific Plan Area.

Respectfully submitted,

Raffi Mangassarian
Associate Planner

EXHIBITS:

1. Resolution 2025- , recommending City Council approval of a Negative Declaration for the adoption of the Mar Vista Specific Plan
A. Negative Declaration

2. Resolution 2025- , recommending City Council approval of the Mar Vista Specific Plan with a General Plan Amendment amending Figure LUCI-2 and a Zone Change from A-1 to SPI for the Mar Vista Specific Plan Area
A. Draft City Council Resolution approving the General Plan Amendment (with Exhibit “A” – General Plan Figure LUCI-2 Amendment)
B. Draft City Council Ordinance approving the Mar Vista Specific Plan and Zone Change (with Exhibit “A” – Mar Vista Specific Plan and Exhibit “B” – Zone Change Map)

3. Mar Vista Specific Plan

4. Location Map

10/14/2025 PH1 105 of 158

REGULAR MEETING
March 18, 2025
The March 18, 2025, Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order by Chair Grimm at 6:01 p.m.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Commissioner Savage led the Pledge of Allegiance
COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT:

Chair Charles Grimm, Commissioners (“Cmnrs.”) Lisa De Jesus, Bill Martin, Clay McCarthy, John Savage
COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT:

Vice Chair Looney, Cmnr. Beth Hastings
STAFF PRESENT:

Director of Community Development Joe Vacca
Assistant Director of Community Development Patsy Chow
City Planner Michael Ressler
Associate Planner Raffi Mangassarian
Assistant City Attorney Amanda Guy
Senior Office Specialist Esmeralda Romero
Senior Office Specialist John Torres
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:

Cmnr. Martin moved to approve the minutes of February 18, 2025. Seconded by Cmnr.

De Jesus
MOTION TO APPROVE CARRIED: 4-0-1 (Vice Chair Looney and Cmnr. Hastings absent, Savage abstained)
AGENDA CHANGES:

None.

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS:

None.

COMMISSIONERS
Chair Charles Grimm, Vice Chair Don Looney,
Lisa De Jesus, Beth Hastings, Clay McCarthy, John
Savage, Bill Martin
10/14/2025 PH1 106 of 158

Planning Commission - Minutes
March 18, 2025

Page 2 of 5 ends

PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS:

PH1 P24-0354 – Mar Vista Specific Plan – City of Vista – A request for the adoption and implementation of the Mar Vista Specific Plan for properties located south of Mar Vista Drive, west of Miramar Drive, east of Buena Vista Drive and north of California Oak Drive. The project area is currently zoned Agriculture (A-1) and comprises of one hundred and eight (108) parcels, within a 143-acre project area, and would be rezoned to Mar Vista Specific Plan as part of this request. A Negative Declaration and Initial Study have been prepared for the proposed project for the requirement to prepare an environmental document pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to address the potential environmental impacts of the project. The Negative Declaration is out for a 20-day public review period from March 12, 2025 to April 1, 2025. Additionally, the project involves no intensification of existing land uses, no major improvements, and seeks to maintain current conditions, which constitutes no expansion of use beyond that of what is currently developed.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. Adopt resolution 2025-05, recommending City Council approval of a Negative Declaration for the Mar Vista Specific Plan

2. Adopt resolution 2025-06, recommending City Council approval of the Mar Vista Specific Plan with a General Plan Amendment amending Figure LUCI-2 and a Zone Change from A-1 (Agricultural) to SPI (Specific Plan Implementation) for the Mar Vista Specific Plan Area

Associate Planner Raffi Mangassarian provided the staff presentation.

Planning Commission questions:
• What prompted the original annexation of the Mar Vista area?

Chair Grimm opened the public hearing.

SPEAKERS:
• Ted Cole
• Bob Rall
• Jim Ellis
• Rebecca Maderas

Chair Grimm closed the public hearing.

Planning Commission discussion:
• Has there been another major annexation of County property done by the City in the last 10-15 years that can be referenced to see how it was processed? o The Stonemark annexation which created the Mar Vista area island. 10/14/2025 PH1 107 of 158

Planning Commission - Minutes
March 18, 2025

Page 3 of 5 ends

CMNR. DE JESUS MOTIONS TO ADOPT RESOLUTION, SECONDED BY CMNR.

MARTIN

ADOPTED RESOLUTION 2025-05, RECOMMENDING CITY

COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE
MAR VISTA SPECIFIC PLAN. AND ADOPTED RESOLUTION 2025-
06 RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THE MAR

VISTA SPECIFIC PLAN WITH A GENERAL PLAN AMENDEMENT
AMENDING FIGURE LUCI-2 AND A ZONE CHANGE FROM A-1
(AGRICUTLURAL) TO SPI (SPECIFIC PLAN IMPLEMENTATION)
FOR THE MAR VISTA SPECIFIC PLAN AREA.

MOTION TO APPROVE CARRIED: Vote 5-0 (Vice Chair Looney and Cmnr. Hastings absent)

PH2 P25-0043 – Vista Development Code Amendments – Vista Business Park Specific Plan and Specific Plan No. 14 – Signs on Private Property, Portable Signs – The City of Vista is proposing to amend Vista Development Code Chapter 18.52, Portable Sign Requirements, to allow portable signs on private property within the Vista Business Park Specific Plan and within Specific Plan No. 14, so that an establishment can obtain a permit to display a maximum of two portable signs, and a multi-tenant property can obtain a comprehensive sign program permit to allow for a maximum of one portable sign for each establishment. The proposed amendments are exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), the “Common Sense” exemption, because there is no possibility that proposed amendments may have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission’s review of these proposed amendments, additions, and standards is advisory to the City Council.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. Adopt resolution 2025-07, recommending City Council approval of an ordinance amending Vista Development Code Chapter 18.52, Signs on Private Property, Portable Sign Requirements

Director of Community Development Joe Vacca provided the staff presentation.

Planning Commission questions:
• Is there an idea of the budget for the wayfinding RFP? • Did Burtech Vineyards’ presentation to City Council kick-off the wayfinding sign concept?
• Does the ordinance mandate a specific material for the A-frame?

Chair Grimm opened the public hearing.

SPEAKERS:
• James Valles (Burtech)
10/14/2025 PH1 108 of 158

Planning Commission - Minutes
March 18, 2025

Page 4 of 5 ends

Chair Grimm closed the public hearing.

Planning Commission discussion:
• Does the wayfinding sign proposal need to be government funded or could it be put out to the private sector?
o A similar program was run by the Brewers Guild, but there is no current structure in Vista to manage a privately funded wayfinding sign program. • Signage is important to not only direct a consumer to what they are seeking but also to inform them of other potential businesses they may be interested in. • Signage cannot be in the public right-of-way and a multi-tenant center would have to do a sign program to prevent the proliferation of A-frame signs. Signs can only be out during business hours.

CMNR. DE JESUS MOTIONS TO ADOPT RESOLUTION, SECONDED BY CMNR.

SAVAGE

ADOPTED RESOLUTION 2025-07, RECOMMENDING CITY

COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING VISTA
DEVELOPMENT CODE CHAPTER 18.52, SIGNS ON PRIVATE

PROPERTY, PORTABLE SIGN REQUIREMENTS

CMNR DE JESUS ALSO INCLUDED A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL

TO SUPPORT THE WAYFINDING SIGN CONCEPT

MOTION TO APPROVE CARRIED: Vote 5-0 (Vice Chair Looney and Cmnr. Hastings absent)

REPORTS/COMMENTS FROM COMMISSION MEMBERS
• Chair Grimm stated he wanted to serve as chair for only one year. He asked that a selection of a new chair be added to the next Planning Commission agenda. • Chair Grimm thanked Cmnr. Savage and Vice Chair Looney for their tenure.

ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PATSY CHOW
• A reading of a goodbye/thank you letter from outgoing Vice Chair Looney to the Commission and Planning staff
• Recognition of outgoing Associate Planner Raffi Mangassarian (promoted to Senior Planner at City of Encinitas) and Senior Office Specialist Esmeralda Romero (joined the Housing Division at City of Vista)
• Staff expect there will be a Planning Commission meeting on April 15, 2025.

10/14/2025 PH1 109 of 158

Planning Commission - Minutes
March 18, 2025

Page 5 of 5 ends

ADJOURNMENT:

Chair Grimm adjourned the meeting at 7:13 p.m.

SECRETARY
10/14/2025 PH1 110 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 111 of 158
EXHIBIT 5

10/14/2025 PH1 112 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 113 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 114 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 115 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 116 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 117 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 118 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 119 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 120 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 121 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 122 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 123 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 124 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 125 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 126 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 127 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 128 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 129 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 130 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 131 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 132 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 133 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 134 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 135 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 136 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 137 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 138 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 139 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 140 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 141 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 142 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 143 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 144 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 145 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 146 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 147 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 148 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 149 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 150 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 151 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 152 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 153 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 154 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 155 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 156 of 158

10/14/2025 PH1 157 of 158

EXHIBIT 6: PROJECT LOCATION MAP

MAR VISTA SPECIFIC PLAN
Project Area:

Mar Vista Specific Plan
10/14/2025 PH1 158 of 158
EXHIBIT 6

CITY OF VISTA C A L I F O R N I A
Community Development
Interoffice Memorandum-
Date: October 13, 2025
To: Mayor John Franklin and City Council
From: Patsy Chow, Assistant Community Development Director� Subject: Mar Vista Specific Plan -Response to Comments Regarding Mar Vista Specific Plan Initial Study and Negative Declaration
CC: Joe Vacca, Community Development Director
The City prepared a Negative Declaration (ND) in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the Mar Vista Specific Plan document, with a public review period of March 12, 2025 to April 1, 2025. On March 31, 2025, one comment letter was received from Mr. Bob Rall, which included comments in response to the public review period for the ND document prepared by Planning staff.

Mr. Rall's comments are identified below, and related City's responses follow each comment.

A lead agency can approve a Negative Declaration only if it finds no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. While CEQA does not require a lead agency to prepare responses to comments on a Negative Declaration, this memorandum explains why the comments submitted do not contain substantial evidence supporting a fair argument that a significant environmental impact may result.

Staff has also grouped Mr. Rail's comments into three separate categories in order to better facilitate responses to comments raised. These categories are: 1) Grandfathering comments; 2) Lack of regulations; and 3) Setbacks.

Comment Category #1-Grandfathering comments

1.The City Planning Department's findings in the proposed Negative Declaration for the Mar Vista Specific Plan Initial Study ("the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment") does NOT adequately take into account the whole of the action involved -including cumulative and indirect project impacts resulting from the exclusion from the Specific Plan of existing environmental concerns.

2.At the LAFCO meeting of November 7, 2022, Commissioner Andy Vanderlaan clarified, in response to a specific inquiry by Land Use Planner and Commissioner Jo MacKenzie, that the City's intention to "grandfather" all existing uses (i.e., authorize the continued maintenance of, without defining mitigation options) would include unlawful current uses for which mitigation

ADD TO PACKET
PH1

has been deferred. These uses specifically include approved major encroachments upon wastewater disposal systems within the plan area in locations where city sewer is expected to remain inaccessible.

3. My comments here are in regards to the City's intent to "grandfather" specifically prohibited uses involving zoning violations with adverse environmental impacts, doing so without consideration of environmental mitigation measures.

4. Of significance is that the Mar Vista Initial Study makes no reference to the City's intent to "grandfather" these unlawful existing uses — and therefore does not take into consideration the project impacts associated in doing so.

5. It is not my intent to force the hand of the City in performing the otherwise required EIR, but rather to assure that required incorporation/substitution of alternative mitigation measures are agreed to and adopted prior to "grandfathering" of subdivision violations which involve adverse environmental effects — such that a negative declaration can be appropriately issued in the form of a mitigated negative declaration.

6. The City's LUCI Policy 2.3 emphasizes: "Specific plans shall not be used as a tool to modify or avoid zoning regulations that are consistent with surrounding development patterns, or standards." The decision to grandfather unlawful uses is being made in direct conflict with the goals of the General Plan, thereby creating a significant impact. The common idiom of a "grandfathered use" covers only uses which were lawful under the prior zoning - while excluding those which were not lawfully established (i.e.; "prohibited uses").

7. At the LAFCO meeting of November 7, 2022, County Supervisor and LAFCO Board Member Jim Desmond emphasized the importance of active involvement in the approval process for the Specific Plan as the appropriate place to address this issue.

8. Supervisor Desmond further stated "...if they don't like what's going on...with that specific plan they still have the grandfathered opportunities with their properties."

9. Supervisor Desmond's statement seems to suggest that the "grandfathered opportunities" with these properties (again, which have been acknowledged by LAFCO staff to include unlawful uses) take precedence over the terms of the Mar Vista Specific Plan. The fact that the proposed Specific Plan provides no definition or discussion of these "grandfathered opportunities" which are to take precedence over the terms of the Mar Vista Specific Plan deserves due attention.

10. It's not reasonable for the City to "grandfather" an unlawful use without first addressing any potential conflict with a lawful, approved use. The (County's) failure thus far to require the appropriate adoption/substitution of alternative mitigation measures for discretionary projects (which were piecemealed into numerous inappropriate "ministerial" approvals) has thus far created a cumulatively considerable and potentially continuing loss of once -feasible alternative mitigation measures.

11. Despite my immediate and proactive involvement prior to each milestone in this annexation process, City Planning has yet to address the fact that the grandfathering of unlawful uses as they are defined in Vista Development Code sections 18.02.697 and 18.02.700 (i.e., Unlawful purposes for which land or improvements are arranged, designed, or intended; or for which land or improvements may be occupied or maintained) creates conflict with 2 environmental enforcement measures which remain essential to the protection of public health — now and in the future.

12."[F]ormulation of mitigation measures shall not be deferred until some future time." (Guidelines, § 15126.4, subd. (a)(1)(B).)

13.The City's intent to exclude from this discretionary review existing environmental considerations which were not covered in prior environmental documents serves to undermine the legislative intent of CEQA to "Ensure that the long-term protection of the environment, consistent with the provision of a decent home and suitable living environment for every Californian, shall be the guiding criterion in public decisions."
• While the project area does include existing public infrastructure for wastewater disposal systems, a significant number of properties within the project area have no foreseeable access to this existing public infrastructure. The fact that such infrastructure exists "within the project area" offers no assurance to the appropriateness of project approval unless or until such infrastructure is considered accessible throughout the project area.

Ensuring that wastewater can be adequately managed is crucial for public health.

The approval process should prioritize the community's health and safety by addressing any potential issues related to inadequate wastewater disposal before attempting to authorize the continued maintenance of unlawful residential uses which could exacerbate existing issues.

County DEHQ has acknowledged that land within the plan area, without environmental mitigation, no longer has adequate sewage disposal for the intended occupancy of that land as a result of zoning violations involving prohibited depths of excavation on properties within the plan area.

While the existing septic tank and leach fields within the plan area are subject to the San Diego County On -site Wastewater Treatment Ordinance, its provisions are limited to ensuring the adequacy of septic system designs. The Ordinance does not address zoning or subdivision grading violations or their required mitigation measures where the capacity of a system is later reduced by conflicting subsequent approvals.

In a situation where there is limited adequacy of site soils to accommodate septic tanks and leach fields, the normal use of such systems could result in exceedances of system capacity, potentially affecting all downstream tributaries.

This is considered a significant impact.

A fair argument can be made that the recognized lack of adequate sewage disposal for approved occupancies within the plan area is a significant impact which should be mitigated to a level of insignificance as a condition of approval of a Specific Plan which includes the "grandfathering" of unlawful uses.

City's Response to Comment Category #1 - Grandfathering comments Commenter's opinions are noted. The comments do not raise concern under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and no further response is required of the City.
3 Although no response is required under CEQA, the City provides the following explanation in response to the comments in Comment Category #1: following annexation of the Mar Vista Island area to the City of Vista, the City assumed authority over any land development proposals in that area. As with other properties in its jurisdiction, the City reviews and considers approvals for that area according to the City's applicable rules and regulations, including the City's Land Development Code and the Mar Vista Specific Plan, once adopted.

Adoption of the Mar Vista Specific Plan does not authorize, legitimize, or "grandfather" prior illegal land development activities, such as illegal grading. The City's review of land development proposals in the Mar Vista Specific Plan area will consider any prior illegal land development activities on those properties where the City's tit Additionally, the of �.i�y s applicable rules and regulations permit i< to do so. „uu�uv��ally, County �� San Diego Department of Environmental Health & Quality, continues to exercise jurisdiction over septic approvals within the Mar Vista Specific Plan area; and, therefore, the County controls the review and approval of those projects according to their own rues and regulations.

Commenter argues that "the decision to grandfather unlawful uses is being made in direct conflict with the goals of the General Plan, thereby creating a significant impact." (Ralf 3.31.25 6, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21.) The Specific Plan would allow continuation of most land uses that were legally permitted by the County. Land uses which were legally permitted by the County but are not an expressly listed use under the Vista Development Code would be allowed by the Specific Plan as legal nonconforming uses, subject to Chapter 18.72. Legal nonconforming uses may meet the definition of an "unlawful use" under Vista Development Code Section

18.02.697. However, as explained above, prior illegal activities, which are distinct from land uses, are not legitimized or "grandfathered" by the Specific Plan.

Commenter's opposition to allowing for the grandfathering (continuation) of land uses that were legally permitted by the County without requiring a variance is noted.

CEQA analyzes the significant impacts of the project on the environment. These comments do not relate to the adequacy of the analysis or conclusions of the Negative Declaration.

Commenter states that mitigation measures cannot be deferred until a future time and that the City is intending to exclude consideration of existing environmental considerations not covered by prior environmental documents. (Rail 3.31.25 IN 12,13.) These comments are unclear; however, they appear to relate to concerns previously raised by Commenter alleging the County did not include mitigation measures in its review of a project on a neighboring parcel. Commenter's opinions are noted; however, CEQA encourages finality and does not allow the City of Vista to reconsider a prior environmental analysis by the County for a different project. If the City receives an application for a discretionary project subject to CEQA, the City will review the project in accordance with CEQA's requirements.

Commenter argues that the "lack of adequate sewage disposal for approved occupancies within the plan area is a significant impact which should be mitigated to a level of insignificance as a condition of approval of a Specific Plan which includes the "grandfathering" of unlawful uses." (Rail 3.31.25 14.) Commenter appears to argue that lack of adequate sewage disposal within the Specific Plan area is a significant environmental effect of the Specific Plan that should be mitigated. 4 Similarly, Commenter argues that "grandfathering unlawful zoning and regulatory violations so as to avoid the otherwise required zoning variances and their associated environmental mitigation measures may result in cumulatively considerable adverse environmental effects." (Ralf 3.31.25 II 20, 21.) This is incorrect. Lack of adequate sewage disposal, to the extent the situation exists anywhere within the plan area, would be an existing condition which the Specific Plan would not change or impact because the Specific Plan generally allows for the continuation of land uses which were allowed prior to annexation, subject to VDC Chapter 18.72. As explained above, the Specific Plan does not legalize prior illegal grading or building activities. The project does not propose or approve any specific development, will maintain existing development and land use standards in the Project area, and will not increase the generation of wastewater. (See Negative Declaration, Sections XV Public Services and XIX Utilities and Service Systems.) Commenter's opinion that a variance should be required is noted. However, these comments do not relate to the adequacy of the analysis or conclusions of the Negative Declaration. Additionally, Title 18 of the Vista Development Code, which contains the process for requesting and obtaining a variance, will continue to apply to the Specific Plan area.

Commenter argues that CEQA is undermined because the Specific Plan "grandfathers" existing unlawful uses without due process by substituting alternative mitigation measures. (Ralf 3.31.25 9f 20, 21.) Although it is unclear what Commenter is referring to, the Specific Plan does not "substitute alternative mitigation measures", nor does the project propose or approve any specific development and will maintain existing development and land use standards in the Project area.

Comment Category #2 - Lack of Regulations
The safe disposal of wastewater for approved residential occupancies in the plan area necessarily requires either the use of a septic tank system or connection to the existing public infrastructure for wastewater disposal. The project area, however, does include locations where soils are incapable of adequately supporting the use of a septic tank system or alternative wastewater disposal systems and where there is no foreseeable access to the existing public sewer infrastructure.

A fair argument can be made that a City decision to not require the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems in locations where the existing public infrastructure for wastewater disposal is not intended to be made accessible may result in significant adverse environmental effects.

A fair argument can be made that "grandfathering" unlawful zoning uses involving spacing and density of land uses without requiring a variance is the equivalent to the creation of a prohibited zoning entitlement.

A fair argument can be made that "grandfathering" unlawful zoning uses without requiring a variance is inconsistent with the City's General Plan LUCI Policy 2.3 - as it appears that the Specific Plan involving the "grandfathering" of unlawful existing uses would serve to "avoid zoning regulations that are consistent with surrounding development patterns, or standards."
5 A fair argument can be made that "grandfathering" unlawful zoning uses without requiring a variance is in conflict with the City's General Plan Goal to "Preserve and protect existing residential neighborhoods from actions, activities, or land uses that may have an adverse impact upon the enjoyment of the residential living environment."
A fair argument can be made that the act of "grandfathering" unlawful zoning and regulatory violations so as to avoid the otherwise required zoning variances and their associated environmental mitigation measures may result in cumulatively considerable adverse environmental effects.

While requiring compliance with existing regulations would otherwise reduce impacts to less than significant levels, the City's decision. to "grandfather" existing unlawful uses conflicts with the City's ability to enforce compliance with existing regulations.

A fair argument can be made that impacts cannot be reduced to a less than significant level under conditions that the City has "lost its hammer" to enforcement of existing environmentally conflicting zoning violations.

The project impacts associated with the "grandfathering" of existing unlawful uses are cumulatively considerable - as the appropriate conditioning of anticipated future projects relies upon appropriate attention to required mitigation of adverse environmental effects of prior projects. "Grandfathering" of existing unlawful uses allows their continuance without otherwise required mitigation, paving the way for further loss of once -feasible mitigation measures to continued ministerial development approvals.

City's Response to Comment Category #2 - Lack of Regulations The Commenter's opinions are noted. As this comment does not relate to the adequacy of the analysis or conclusions of the Negative Declaration, no further response is required of the City under CEQA.

Although no response is required under CEQA, the City provides the following explanation in response to the comments in Comment Category # 2: Commenter states that the absence of a regulation within the Specific Plan requiring the use of septic tanks in locations where public wastewater infrastructure is not intended to be made accessible could result in significant adverse environmental effects. (RaII

3.31.25, 15.) Commenter also argues that grandfathering existing unlawful uses results in the city losing its hammer to enforce existing environmentally conflicting zoning violations. (RaII 3.31.25, 9¶ 22.)
As explained above, the Specific Plan does not legalize or "grandfather" prior illegal grading or building activities. CEQA analyzes the significant impacts of a project on the environment. The Specific Plan is not anticipated to impact population growth in the City of Vista since the Project itself does not propose or approve any development projects and does not significantly alter existing development patterns. (See Negative Declaration, Sections XV Public Services and XIX Utilities and Service Systems.) Further, as discussed in City Response #1, above, the County will continue to exercise jurisdiction over septic approvals within the Mar Vista Specific Plan area 6 and, therefore, the County controls the review and approval of septic projects according to their own rules and regulations.

Comment Category #3 - Setbacks comment from May 13, 2025 Letter from Mr. Bob Rall
At this point I am rightly concerned that the Planning Commission appears to be encouraging City Council approval of the Negative Declaration and Mar Vista Specific Plan Proposal without any (apparent) consideration of my expressed concerns regarding the City's proposed changes to development standards - this in addition to its decision to "grandfather" existing adverse environmental conditions without consideration of revised mitigation measures.
(1) PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2025-05, recommending City Council approval of the Proposed Negative Declaration — passed and approved 2 weeks prior to the close of the window for public comments; and
(2) PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2025-06, recommending City Council approval of the Mar Vista Specific Plan - also passed and approved 2 weeks prior to the close of the window for public comments; and
(3) Further currently proposed PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTIONS (2025-XX) - which are based upon the above resolutions together with the desired and anticipated findings projected as the outcome of a future meeting of the City Council of May 13, 2025.

The Draft Specific Plan specifically states "With adoption of this document, the Mar Vista Specific Plan, development standards, permitted land uses, and other standards previously governing this neighborhood under County of San Diego jurisdiction, will be memorialized within this document." As I've shared in previous communications, County standards existed prior to annexation which allowed for garages within the front yard setback under the provisions of County Zoning Ordinance §4837. A reasonable presumption can be made that the Board of Supervisors adopted these provisions only after due investigation and consideration as to their need. As I had shared previously, following due investigation with County DEH, the application of these provisions was specifically encouraged by County Counsel.

The Mar Vista Specific Plan Draft proposal, however, has no apparent provisions for garages within the front yard setback (a critical requirement on some hillside properties under conditions described in County Zoning Ordinance §4837).

The City's LUCI Policy 2.3 emphasizes:
"Specific plans shall not be used as a tool to modify or avoid zoning regulations that are consistent with surrounding development, patterns, or standards." The City's proposed changes to setback requirements, as currently stated, would be in direct conflict with this Policy. Please consider this request for the City, in keeping with its commitment to memorialize the "development standards, permitted land uses, and other standards previously governing this neighborhood under County of San Diego jurisdiction", to address these discrepancies.
7 City's Response to Comment Category #3 - Setbacks from Mr. Bob Rail's letter dated May 13, 2025
The Commenter's opinions are noted. As this comment does not relate to the adequacy of the analysis or conclusions of the Negative Declaration, no further response is required of the City under CEQA.

Although no response is required under CEQA, the City provides the following explanation in response to the comments in Comment Category #3: Commenter raised concerns about discrepancies between County standards that existed prior to annexation and the Specific Plan. (Rail 5.13.25, 1 1.) Although not a CEQA concern, these comments have been addressed by Community Development staff with amendments to the Specific Plan which were incorporated after presentation to the Planning Commission. Please see page 12 of the final draft Mar Vista Specific Plan. 8 PH1 - Mar Vista Specific Plan
P24-0354

City Council Public HearingOctober 14, 2025

PH1 – Mar Vista Specific Plan
Project Location / Existing Uses
Mar Vista Area:
143 acres and 108 parcels
ResidentialResidential
Residential
Residential
Residential

1.Generally located south of Mar Vista Drive,
east of Buena Vista Drive, north of Lupine
Hills Road, and west of State Route 78.

2.Streets include Mar Vista Drive, Miramar
Drive, Marine View Drive, Hillcrest Drive,
Hilo Way, Park Hill Road, Park Hill Place,
California Oak Drive, Auburn Woods Drive,
and Red Plum Lane.

3.The area is characterized by hillsides and
rolling hills with single-family residential
development throughout. The existing
residential character and land uses of the
surrounding area present important
influences upon the Specific Plan area
setting.

PH1 – Mar Vista Specific Plan
Background and Project Scope
•June 22, 2021 – Vista City Council adopted Resolution 2021-116 making an application to LAFCO for the annexation of Mar Vista island (143 acres). •November 7, 2022 – LAFCO adopted Resolution 2022-014 approving reorganization for the Mar Vista Annexation.
•April 11, 2023 – Mar Vista Island Reorganization, annexation to City of Vista, detachment from Buena Sanitation and Vista Fire Protection District was recorded (San Diego County Recorder’s Office) - effective date of jurisdictional change. •City of Vista to prepare and adopt a specific plan for the Mar Vista area as a condition from LAFCO’s approval.

PH1 – Mar Vista Specific Plan
Background and Project Scope
Adoption of the Mar Vista Specific Plan will address the following:
•Maintain existing single-family residential uses, existing agricultural uses and existing animal uses.
•Development standards that would remain consistent with the County of San Diego’s A70 (Agriculture) zone, prior to city annexation.
•Density would remain one dwelling unit per acre.
•Minimum lot size: 1-acre.
•General Plan Designation: Rural Residential (RR), will remain unchanged. •General Plan Figure LUCI-2 to be amended to reflect specific plan designation. •Zone Change from Agricultural (A-1) to Specific Plan Implementation (SPI).

PH1 – Mar Vista Specific Plan
Purpose of the Mar Vista Specific Plan
SUMMARY - Purpose for establishing the Mar Vista Specific Plan is to:

1.Maintain the rural setting experienced by property owners while under County of San Diego jurisdiction, prior to City of Vista annexation.

2.Adoption of similar development standards and permitted land uses compared to those previously governing this neighborhood under prior County jurisdiction.

3.Zoning and development standards in the Mar Vista Specific Plan substantially mirror the same prior standards from the County of San Diego.

4.The zoning designation (County of San Diego jurisdiction) for the Mar Vista area was Agricultural (A70) prior to annexation – this closely mirrors the City of Vista current zoning designation of Agricultural (A-1) and the proposed SPI under the Mar Vista Specific Plan.

PH1 – Mar Vista Specific Plan
Public Outreach Efforts
•A notice was sent to the affected property owners on November 26, 2024, to advise of the City’s proposal to establish a Specific Plan document for Mar Vista area. •Staff held an in-person community meeting on December 11, 2024 to gather input and respond to residents’ inquiries regarding this Specific Plan (18 persons in attendance).
•The Mar Vista Specific Plan webpage was created and posted to the city’s website:
–Q&A responses from the community meeting
–Staff presentation slides and Video of the meeting
–Minutes of the community meeting
–Draft Mar Vista Specific Plan
–Updates with hearing dates and outcomes

PH1 – Mar Vista Specific Plan
Planning Commission
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
•March 18, 2025 - Planning Commission unanimously
recommended approval of the Negative Declaration (CEQA
review) and the Mar Vista Specific Plan.

PH1 – Mar Vista Specific Plan
General Plan Designation
Rural Residential (RR) –
This will remain unchanged.

PH1 – Mar Vista Specific Plan
General Plan Figure LUCI-2
Figure LUCI-2
Existing Figure LUCI-2Proposed

PH1 – Mar Vista Specific Plan
Zoning

PH1 – Mar Vista Specific Plan
Roadways – Cannon Road

CANNON ROAD
•The City does not intend to extend
Cannon Road through to the Mar
Vista Specific Plan planning area.

STREETS
•All streets within the Mar Vista
Specific Plan will continue to be
maintained as semi-rural streets per
GP Circulation Element, with a
maximum of 2-lanes, and local /
private streets to remain as they are.

Correction: Hillcrest Drive was
inadvertently left out (page 16).

Specific Plan
Area

PH1 – Mar Vista Specific Plan
Sewer Requirements
SEWER
•Adoption of this Specific Plan
will not require property owners
to connect to sewer.

PH1 – Mar Vista Specific Plan
Permitted Uses
•A one-family dwelling on each lot.
•Accessory buildings and uses.
•Guesthouse
•Home occupations
•Fruit trees, nut trees, vines and nurseries for producing in –ground trees, and other horticultural stock.
•Agricultural crops
•Greenhouses
•Flower and vegetable gardening
•Animal raising

PH1 – Mar Vista Specific Plan
Permitted Uses via SUP and MUP, Landscaping
Permitted uses provided a Special Use Permit (SUP) is obtained in accordance with Title 18 of the VDC, this includes: Public stables, Residential Care Homes (more than 6 persons), Cemeteries and Churches.

Permitted uses via Minor Use Permit (MUP), examples include: Kennels, Aviaries, Parks, and Recreational Facilities.

Proposed Development Standards (next slide) will apply to all parcels within this Specific Plan area.

Landscaping shall comply with the City of Vista Landscape Manual.

PH1 – Mar Vista Specific Plan
Proposed Development Standards

PH1 – Mar Vista Specific PlanCommunity Meeting Topics Discussed - December 11, 2024 •Density – maintaining existing density = maintaining the rural setting. •Annexation – Mar Vista annexation recorded/completed April 11, 2023. •Sewer – Buena Sanitation District, now under Vista Sanitation. •Accessory Structures - attached or detached garages, carports, and other similar non-habitable uses. County requirements added to the Specific Plan (a result of comments received in the community meeting).
•Streets – all streets to remain semi-rural per our GP Circulation Element and local / private streets to remain as is.
•Code Enforcement – City will continue to investigate violations of local zoning/code requirements.
•Fire Hazard Zones – Mar Vista is outside the fire zones. •CEQA Review – Negative Declaration (public review from March 12, 2025 to April 1, 2025).

PH1 – Mar Vista Specific Plan
Basis for Approval
-The proposed Mar Vista Specific Plan will conform to applicable laws or regulations. -The proposed plan is consistent with the General Plan, Land Use and Community Identity Element.
-The Mar Vista Specific Plan does not propose any specific development projects or construction.
-It does not incentivize additional development.
-The proposed Specific Plan would maintain a transitional land use between more intense high-density residential uses (south) and less intense, lower density residential uses (north, west and east).

PH1 – Mar Vista Specific Plan
Environmental Review
-A Negative Declaration and Initial Study Checklist have been prepared per the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines. The document was available for a 20-day public review period - March 12, 2025, to April 1, 2025.
-On March 18, 2025, the Planning Commission recommended City Council approval of the Negative Declaration and the Mar Vista Specific Plan with a General Plan Amendment amending Figure LUCI-2 and a Zone Change from A -1 (Agricultural) to SPI (Specific Plan Implementation).
-One comment letter received on March 31, 2025, written responses were prepared (CEQA does not require lead agency to prepare responses to comments on a Neg Dec.) (Add to Packet Item - 10/13/25).

PH1 – Mar Vista Specific Plan
Recommendation
- Adopt City Council Resolution No. 2025- , approving a Negative Declaration for the Mar Vista Specific Plan area.
- Adopt City Council Resolution No. 2025- , approving a General Plan Amendment amending Figure LUCI-2 for the Mar Vista Specific Plan Area. - Introduce and adopt City Council Ordinance No. 2025- , adopting the Mar Vista Specific Plan and approving a Zone Change from A -1 (Agricultural) to SPI (Specific Plan Implementation) for the Mar Vista Specific Plan Area.

Correction: Hillcrest Drive was inadvertently left out (page 16).

PH1 - Mar Vista Specific Plan
P24-0354

City Council Public HearingOctober 14, 2025

Uses Not Included from County A70 Zone

•Civic Use Types:
•Essential Services
•Fire Protection Services
•Law Enforcement Services
•Minor Impact Utilities
•Mobilehome Residential
•Recycling Collection Facility (small)
•Recycling Processing Facility, wood and green
materials
•Administrative Services / Ambulance Services
•Child Care Center
•Civic, Fraternal or Religious Assembly
•Clinic Services
•Community Recreation
•Cultural Exhibits and Library Services
• Major Impact Services and Utilities
• Parking Services
• Postal Services
•Veterinary (Large Animal)
•Veterinary (Small Animal)
•Explosives Storage
•Sports Recreation (outdoor)
•Transient Occupation (Campground and
Resort)
•Organic Material Processing (industrial)
•Winery
•Small Winery
•Boutique Winery
•Wholesale Limited Winery

Permitted Uses – Special Use Permit (SUP)
The following uses, are permitted provided a Special Use Permit is obtained in accordance with Title 18 of the VDC:
•Agriculture Sales
•Horticulture Sales
•Packing or processing plants for farm crops
•Public stables
•Horse Stable: More than 10 horses per acre of usable area, more than 10 acres of usable area or more than 100 horses
•Residential Care (more than 6 persons)
•Quarries / Borrow Pits
•Cemeteries
•Churches
•Rescue missions and temporary revival churches
•Shooting ranges, including pistol, rifle, trap and skeet ranges

Permitted Uses – Minor Use Permit (MUP)
The following uses, are permitted provided a minor use
permit is obtained in accordance with the provisions of Title 18 of the VDC:
•Kennels
•Specialty Animal Raising: Wild or Undomesticated
•Specialty Animal Raising (Excluding Birds or
Aquaponics)
•Horse Stable: Ten horses per acre of usable area,
of more than 5 acres and up to a maximum of 10
acres of useable area and between 50-100 horses
•Cottage industries
•Agriculture packing and processing (general,
support)
•Raising of chinchillas
•Clubs and lodges
•Aviaries
•Parks
•Public buildings and uses
•Radio and television transmitters
•Recreational Facilities
•Schools
•Skateboard ramps

Accessory Structures/Uses

DETACHED ACCESSORY STRUCTURES
Detached private garages and carports, storage buildings, workshops, offices, barns, agricultural buildings and other similar non-habitable uses (non-commercial).
•Limited to 25% of the living area of the principal residence, or in accordance with the lot size.

ATTACHED ACCESSORY STRUCTURES
Attached private garages, carports, storage buildings,
workshops, offices and other similar non-habitable uses. •Limited to 25% of the living area of principal residence, or in accordance with the lot size.

Animal Keeping/Raising

ANIMAL KEEPING
Animal Uses Allowed:
•Horse Stable (with limitations on use)
•Kennels
•Animal Raising (with limitations)
•Small Animal Raising (including poultry)
•Large Animal Raising (other than horses)
•Specialty Animal Raising (Wild/Undomesticated)
•Specialty Animal Raising (Bees)
•Animal keeping standards

ANIMAL ENCLOSURES
Setbacks:
•Front: 60-feet from street centerline
•Side (Interior): 10-feet from property line
•Side (Exterior): 35-feet from street centerline
•Rear: 10-feet from property line

Cargo Containers
A cargo container may be allowed in the Specific Plan
area if it meets the following restrictions:
•Setbacks
•Storage use only
•There is a legal primary use on site
•There are no violations on site.
•Exterior is painted a solid color

Commercial Agriculture
Specific Plan includes agricultural uses.
•Packing, processing (limited, general, support)
•Horticulture (including cultivation and storage)
•Tree crops
•Row and Field crops
•Agricultural Stand

Fences and Walls

SOLID FENCE/WALL (NON-VISIBLE)
Solid fences and walls are permitted at the following locations provided they conform to the height limitations shown below:
•Within Front or Exterior Side Yard main building
setbacks. Maximum height of 42 inches.
•Within Rear or Interior Side Yard setbacks. Permitted
up to a maximum height of 72 inches.

OPEN FENCE/WALL (VISIBLE)
Open fences and walls are permitted at the following locations provided they conform to the material specifications and height limitations shown below:
•Within Front or Exterior Side Yard. Permitted up to a maximum height of 42 inches.
•Within Rear or Interior Side Yards. Permitted up to a maximum height of 72 inches.

Landscaping
•Landscaping shall comply
with the City of Vista
Landscape Manual and its
provisions.

•This may include, but not
be limited to, erosion
control, slope stabilization,
bio basins, private yards,
retaining walls, or any other
landscape designs.

Fire Zones
Mar Vista SP

Vista City CouncilOctober 14, 2025

Vista City Council
October 14, 2025