The URL can be used to link to this page

Item 2 - EA/TTM 03-02 - Northpoint Development1 Dist �'. _ ad Februar, A GE AA REPORT SUMARY TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: James L. Bowersox, City Man INITIATED BY: Niall Fritz, Director of Development Services DATE: February 15, 2005 ��. SUBJECT: Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tract Map (TTM) 03 -02, Northpoint navelnnment. Annlicant ABSTRACT The applicant proposes a 5 -lot subdivision.of an approximate 85 -acre site that will consist of 4'. residential lots ranging in size from 4 to 6 acres and one open'space lot, in the Rural Residential A; (RR -A) /Open Space- Resource Management zone. No home construction is proposed' rat this time.: The applicant is proposing a "Lot Averaged" subdivision, pursuant to Section 17.08.170 of the Poway Municipal Code. Through lot averaging, proposed homesites can be clustered on smaller, 4- net -acre lots, provided that the overall maximum allowable density of the RR -A zone is not exceeded.. The intent of lot averaging is to cluster development in order to minimize grading and the extension of infrastructure improvements,'and to thereby promote the preservation of open space areas and natural features. The applicant has demonstrated that the theoretical, maximum permitted density of the approximate 85 -acre site is 4 dwelling units. The applicant is, therefore, proposing 4 lots, within the range of 4 to 6 net acres, clustered in the northeast.Dortion of the site, which is the portion of the site closest to existing roads. The ro'ect com lies'withall a `licable City standards. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW An Environmental Initial Study was completed on the project and it was determined that the project, will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment because all.anticipated project impacts' can be mitigated to a level of insignificance and a Mitigated Negative Declaration is recommended 'for approval. r FISCAL IMPACT None. ADDITIONAL PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND CORRESPONDENCE Public notices were published in the Poway News Chieftain and sent to 41 property owners within . 500 feet of the site. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Tentative Parcel Map 03 -02, subject to the conditions in the attached proposed Resolution. ACTION Approved staff recommendation, adopted R sol L. Dane Shea, City Clerk Mlp1anning \05report\ttm \03 -02 Northpoint Devellsum.doc 1 of 57 February 15, 2005 Item # iL CITY OF P O WAY AGENDA REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of4he City Council FROM: James L. Bowersox, City Mana INITIATED BY: Niall Fritz, Director of Develo ment Services /P� Patti Brindle, City Planner Jason Martin, Senior Planner DATE: February 15, 2005 SUBJECT: Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tract Map 03 -02, Northpoint Development, Applicant: A request for approval of a 5 -16t subdivision of an approximate 85 -acre site, consisting of 4 residential lots ranging in size from 4 to 6 acres and one open space lot at the southerly terminus of Tooth Rock Road, in the Rural Residential A/Open Space- Resource Management zone. BACKGROUND The subject property is located at the southerly terminus of Tooth Rock Road, which is located east of Espola Road on the south side of High Valley Road. The location and zoning map is included as Attachment B. Approximately 65 acres of the approximate 85- acre site is zoned Open -Space Resource Management (OS -RM), with the balance of the site zoned Rural Residential A (RR -A). The portion of the site that is zoned OS -RM, which is approximately 65 acres, is covered by a recorded Biological Conservation Easement (BCE) that was established as part of the mitigation requirements for the Heritage II project located in north Poway. The BCE was established on the site and the OS -RM zoning was put into place by the City, pursuant to the Poway Subarea Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) Implementation•Agreement. The applicant is not proposing to utilize, nor would they be permitted to utilize, any of the existing BCE for mitigation for this project. The purpose of OS -RM zone is permanent preservation of natural resources. The proposed project furthers the permanent preservation, by exhausting the development. potential of the site into a clustered 4 -lot subdivision on a smaller portion of the site adjacent to existing roadways. The RR -A portion of the site is proposed for development. The proposed development is shown on the Tentative Tract Map, which is included as Attachment C. 2 of 57 February 15, 2005 Item.# Agenda Report February 15, 2005 Page 2 The site is a hillside property and is undeveloped, with the exception of worn trails that traverse the site. The site was almost entirely burned in the 2004 Cedar Fire, and on -site habitat is recovering. The site is comprised of two peaks, which are at 1,1,10 -foot and 1,120 -foot elevations. These peaks are lower than, and just to the north of, the geographic landmark peak that contains Tooth Rock (near the easterly terminus of Twin Peaks Road). The west sides and tops of the peaks are within the OS /RM zoning. Development of the site is proposed east of and below the peaks in the RR -A zone. The portion of.the site proposed for development is not generally visible from the west (i.e., from Espola Road). It is visible from portions of the Poway Grade (i.e., near the vehicular turnout area on the south side of the road). Lots 1 and 4 fall within the Hillside - Ridgeline Overlay area, and will require special permitting and approval through Hillside - Ridgeline Minor Development Review Applications for home construction, that will be processed at a future date. A neighborhood meeting was conducted for the project and is discussed in more detail later in this report. FINDINGS The applicant is proposing a "Lot Averaged" subdivision pursuant to Section 17.08.170 of the Poway Municipal Code (PMC). Through lot averaging, proposed home sites can be clustered on smaller, 4- net -acre lots provided that the overall maximum allowable density of the RR -A zone is not exceeded. The intent of lot averaging is to cluster development in order to minimize grading and the extension of infrastructure improvements, and to thereby promote the preservation of open space areas and natural features. Density Calculation The applicant has demonstrated that the theoretical, maximum permitted density of the approximate 85 -gross acre site is 4 lots. A conventional subdivision design for the site, which has an overall Average Natural Slope (ANS) of 22.7 %, has been submitted. The PMC allows a maximum of 1 parcel per 8 net acres if the site has an ANS of 15 -25% and if the property is served by Citywater. The conventional subdivision design shows that 4lots ranging in size from 9 to 27 net acres would be allowed on the site. The. conventional subdivision design complies with the City's RR -A, maximum allowable density standards contained in the table in Section 17.08.170 of the PMC, demonstrated as follows: Parcel Average Natural Sloe Net Lot Size 1 24.1% 9.7 2 24.85% 13 3 20.1% 27.4 4 212% 27.6 In determining the maximum allowable density for the site, the applicant utilized the overall "net' lot area of the site as provided for in Section 17.08.170 of the PMC as defined below: 3 of 57 February 15, 2005 Item # • Agenda.Report February 15, 2005 Page 3 0 "Net area means all land, utility easements and trails within a given area or project including residential lots, and other open space which directly serves the resident of the net area, but exclusive of all public and private streets and other easement . such as floodway or flood control channel." Net lot area is further defined by the Poway Municipal Code (PMC) and the City's General Plan to exclude portions of the site with 45% and greater slopes. The area of the site that is designated OS -RM can therefore be used in the calculation of net lot area for the purpose of determining the theoretical, overall site, maximum permitted density. The smallest lot size allowed in the underlying RR -A zone is 4 net acres. Since this is a lot averaged subdivision, the allowable density of four lots can be clustered on the site and must have an area no less than the minimum size of 4 net acres. The applicant is proposing 4 residential lots within the range of 4 to 6 net acres, clustered in the northeast portion of the site, which is the portion of the site closest to existing roads, with the remainder of the site being left as open space. See Attachment C. The applicant is able to utilize the portions of the site that are within the existing BCE and OSRM zoning'that is on a portion of the site. Development Standards The following table shows that the project complies with the other .subdivision and development standards of the General Plan and the Poway Municipal Code. . 4 of 57 February 15, 2005 Item # z Standard Parcel Parcel Parcel Parcel Net Lot Size 4 4.7 5.9 4.6 4.7 (Acres) Lot Width 110' 430' 410' 400' 320' Lot Depth 150' 480' 540' 480' 600' Ratio Lot Depth/Width 3:1 Maximum 1.1:1 1.3:1 1.2:1 1.8:1 Based on Parcel has Parcel has Parcel has Parcel has Average an ANS of an ANS of an ANS of an ANS of Natural Slope 19.3 %. 24.5% 22.2 %. 22.5 %. Graded Area (ANS) of Parcel Maximum Maximum Maximum Maximum. to be created allowable allowable allowable allowable grading is grading is grading is grading is 2.35 acres. 1.18 acre. 0.92 acre. 0.94 acre. Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed grading is grading is 1 grading is grading is 1.1 acre. acre. 0.92 acre. 0.91 acre. 4 of 57 February 15, 2005 Item # z 011 . 0 Agenda Report February 15, 2005 Page 4 Improvements Subdivision of the property would also result in the following improvements: • Full on -site road improvements for Tooth Rock Road, and off -site Tooth Rock Road improvements from the project boundary to High Valley Road. Tooth Rock Road is a private street and improvements consist of paving curb and gutter. The off -site road easement width is 60 feet and the on -site road easement width is 40 feet. The paved width for the entire road is 24 feet. Street sections are included on Sheet 1 of Attachment C. A recreational trail will be provided. The trail will be along the shoulder of Tooth Rock Road from High Valley Road into the project site. It will then go off the road in between two of the lots at the terminus of Tooth Rock Road into the open space area, where it will fork in a southerly and westerly direction along existing worn trails. • Install a new fire hydrant(s) to the satisfaction of the Fire Marshal. • Extend City water to the new lots in a looped system. The water line will loop down Tooth Rock Road from the existing line in High Valley Road to the project and then loop up through properties north of the site to High Valley Road. The precise location of the water line has not been determined. The conceptual location is ,shown on Sheet 3 of the proposed TTM which is included as an Attachment. 4 The project will be served by a private septic system. - Neighborhood Meeting A Neighborhood Meeting was conducted on November 3, 2004, and approximately 24 interested individuals attended. A few neighbors expressed general concerns regarding increased traffic, drainage, and view blockage in the area. With regard to traffic, the increase that would result from 4 additional homes is not considered significant. Existing and proposed road improvements are designed to accommodate the increase. Drainage improvements, per City standards, will be installed. Engineering will ensure that drainage improvements are installed and function properly. In response to the view blockage issue, the developer offered a 28 -foot height restriction on Parcels 1 and 2 (the City height limit is 35 feet), and offered to lowerthe pad elevations on those parcels by 2 feet. A Condition of Approval is recommended accordingly. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW An Environmental Initial Study (EIS) was completed for the project. It was determined that, while the project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment, it could 5 of 57 February 15, 2005 Item # 2_ Agenda Report February 15, 2005 Page 5 result in potential impacts in the area of biology. All anticipated project impacts, however, can be mitigated to a level of insignificance. It is recommended that a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) be approved. The EIS and proposed MND are included.as Attachment D. The project is located within the Mitigation Area, the Biological Core and Linkage Area (BCLA), and the Proposed Resource Protection Area (PRPA) 11 /Rattlesnake Canyon Cornerstone of the Poway Subarea Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP). The site is not within the Quino Checkerspot Butterfly Survey area. A Biological Resources study was prepared for the project by REC Consultants (dated October 2004). The report indicates that the site is comprised of 77.81 acres of Coastal Sage Scrub (CSS), 7.55 acres of Chamise Chaparral, and 0.55 acres are developed (dirt roads and trails). Within the habitat areas in the northerly portion of the site is a small grove of eucalyptus trees. A blue line stream traverses the northeast portion of the site. No Federally or State listed sensitive plants were detected on -site. The single sensitive wildlife species identified on -site was the San Diego'Horned Lizard. Sensitive wildlife identified off -site, with a potential to occur on -site, include the California Gnatcatcher and the Orange- Throated Whiptail Lizard. Impacts to the blue line stream on -site, will required State and Federal Resource Agency review and potential permits /approvals. The project biology report, the EIS and the proposed MND were transmitted to State and Federal Resource agencies, and as of the writing of this report, no comments had been received. Ultimately, the project will result in the permanent removal of 7.9 acres of habitat. Of the overall total, 6.42 acres of on -site CSS will be removed, 1 acre of on -site Chamise Chaparral will be removed, and 0.57 acres of CSS off -site will be removed in conjunction with improvement to the off -site access road. The total amount of habitat removal complies with the HCP limit of 2 acres of habitat removal per lot, with the developer's proposal to revegetate septic fields that are outside of the required fire fuel management areas and with the developer's proposed reduction of the 0.28 acre of habitat removal on Lot 2. Per the HCP, habitat impact mitigation is required at the rate of 2:1 for CSS and 1:1 for Chamise Chaparral. Accordingly, 13.98 acres is required mitigation for CSS and 1 acre is required mitigation for Chamise Chaparral, for an overall total of 14.98 acres of mitigation. The applicant is proposing that 9.91 acres of habitat on the site, which is not in a BCE, be put into a BCE as partial mitigation. The balance of the mitigation requirement, or 5.07 acres, will be satisfied by either purchase of similar habitat within the Mitigation Area, or by payment of an In -Lieu Fee. 6 of 57 February 15, 2005 Item # 2 0 0 Agenda Report February 15, 2005 Page 6 The area on -site that will be placed in a BCE will be contiguous to the existing BCE on the site and will, therefore, enhance that open space and the PRPA 11 /Rattlesnake Canyon Cornerstone by increasing the overall size of the preservation. area. The project is consistent with and promotes the preservation goals of the HCP in that the project will have nearly 91 % of the on -site habitat within Biological Conservation Easements, which exceeds the minimum 80% preservation goal for this site. FISCAL IMPACT None. ADDITIONAL PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND CORRESPONDENCE Public notices were published in the Poway News Chieftain and sent to 41 property owners within 500 feet of the site. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Tentative Parcel Map 03 -02, subject to the conditions in the attached proposed Resolution. Attachments A. Proposed Resolution B. Land Use and Location Map C. Tentative Tract Map 03 -02 D. Mitigated Negative Declaration and Environmental Initial Study M: \p1anning \05report\ttm \03 -02 Northpoint Deve\agn.doc 7 of 57 February 15, 2005 Item # 2 0 0 RESOLUTION NO. P- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF POWAY, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP (TTM) 03 -02 ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS 321 - 100 -01 and 08 . WHEREAS, A request was submitted by Northpoint Development for a Tentative Tract Map (TTM 03 -02) for a 5 -lot subdivision of approximately 85 acres, consisting of 4 residential lots ranging in size from 4 to 6 acres and one open space lot, located at the southerly terminus of Tooth Rock Road in the Rural Residential A/Open Space-Resource, Management zone; and WHEREAS, on February 15, 2005, the City Council held a public hearing on the above - referenced item; and WHEREAS, the City Council has read and considered the agenda report for the proposed project and has considered other evidence presented at the public hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Poway as follows: Section 1: The City Council has considered the Environmental. Initial Study (EIS), Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), and associated Mitigation Monitoring Program, shown as Exhibit A of this Resolution, for Tentative Tract Map 03 -02. The subject EIS and MND documentation are fully incorporated herein by this reference. The City Council finds, on the basis of the whole record before it, that there is no substantial evidence the project will have a significant impact on the environment, that the mitigation measures contained in the EIS and Exhibit A hereof will mitigate potentially significant impacts to a less than significant level, and that the MND reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City. The City Council hereby approves the MND and the associated Mitigation Monitoring Program attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A. Section 2: Pursuant to the City of Poway Habitat Conservation Plan (Poway HCP), a biological report by REC Consultants (dated October 2004) was submitted for the property. Project development will permanently impact approximately 7.9 acres of habitat, consisting of Coastal Sage Scrub (CSS) and Chamise Chaparral, located on property inside of the Mitigation Area, the Biological Core and Linkages Area, and Proposed Resource Protection Area 11 /Rattlesnake Canyon Cornerstone of the Poway HCP. In accordance with the Poway HCP, the required findings for approval of the proposed mitigation for the removal of habitat for Tentative Parcel Map 03 -02 are as follows: - A. The proposed project is inside of the Mitigation Area of the Poway HCP. Per the HCP, habitat impact mitigation is required at the rate of 2:1 for CSS and 1:1 for Chamise Chaparral. Accordingly, 13.98 acres is required mitigation for CSS and 1 acre is required mitigation for Chamise Chaparral, for an overall total of 14.98 8 of 57 ATTACHMENT A February 15, 2005 Item # 0 Resolution No. P- Page 2 acres of mitigation. Approximately 9.91 acres of habitat on the site, which is not in a Biological Conservation Easement (BCE), shall be put into a BCE as partial mitigation. This habitat is contiguous to other habitat on the site that is already in a BCE. The balance of the mitigation requirement, or 5.07 acres, will be satisfied by either purchase of similar habitat within the Mitigation Area, or by payment of an In -Lieu Fee. Therefore, the mitigation is consistent with and furthers the implementing objectives of the Poway HCP. B. Preservation of such habitat within the Mitigation Area, and /or payment of In -Lieu Fees will contribute toward the building of the ultimate total Mitigation Area preserve system of the HCP. Therefore, such habitat preservation and /or payment of In -Lieu Fees will serve to enhance the long -term viability and function of the preserve system. C. The habitat preserved through off -site dedication or purchased by mitigation In -Lieu Fees will be to the long -term benefit of the Poway Subarea Habitat Conservation Plan. ( PSHCP) covered species and their habitats in that the recordation of a Biological Conservation Easement Deed over undisturbed and unencumbered habitat (see "A" above) and /or the payment of In -Lieu Fees will promote a meaningful addition to the assembly of a viable regional system of uninterrupted natural habitat resources, habitat linkages, buffers, and wildlife corridors. D. The preserved habitat will foster the incremental implementation of the PSHCP in an effective and efficient manner in that the preservation of off -site conservation areas) will be within an identified Mitigation Area within the City, and /or.the payment of In -Lieu Fees will contribute likewise towards assembling the total Mitigation Area preserve system. E. The preserved habitat will not result in a negative fiscal impact with regard to the successful implementation of the PSHCP as the subject mitigation lands will be dedicated to the City of Poway in fee title and /or placed within permanent public Biological Conservation Easement Deeds or In -Lieu Fees will be paid. Section 3: The findings, in accordance with the State Subdivision Map Act (Government Code Section 66410 et. seq.) for Tentative Tract Map 03 -02, are made as follows: A. The Tentative Tract Map is consistent with the General Plan in that it proposes to create 4 residential parcels, in a "lot averaged" subdivision, ranging in size from 4 to 6 net acres, on an approximate 85 -acre site, that comply with the density limits and minimum lot size standards contained in the General Plan and Poway Municipal Code. 9 of 57 February 15, 2005 Item # 2 Resolution No, P- Page 3 B. The design and improvements required of the Tentative Tract Map are consistent with the General Plan; in that road and water line improvements comply with City design standards. C. The site is physically suitable for the type of development and the density proposed in that the proposed subdivision complies with the density limitations and minimum lot size standards of the General Plan and Poway Municipal Code. D. The design of the Tentative Tract Map is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat in that the anticipated impacts to biological resources will be mitigated to a level of insignificance. E. The Tentative Tract Map is not likely to cause serious public health problems as City water service, in a looped system, will be provided to the site by the developer and the project's septic system will be designed to comply with City and /or County of San Diego Department of Environmental Health standards. F. The design of the Tentative Tract Map will not conflict with any easement by the public at large, now of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision since the vacation of an existing, land locked, public road easement, which is proposed by the developer, is required to occur prior to the approval of Final Map. Section 4: The findings in accordance with Government Code Section 66020 for the public improvements are made as follows: A. The design and improvements of the proposed development are consistent with all elements of the General Plan, as well as City ordinances, because all necessary services and facilities will be available to serve the project. The construction of public improvements is needed as a result of the proposed development to protect the public health, safety and welfare as identified below: 1. Roadway improvements on -site, and leading to the site from High Valley Road, will be constructed. 2. A looped water line from the existing line in High Valley Road will be constructed to serve the development. 3. On -site drainage improvements will be constructed to handle the surface water runoff. 4. A fire hydrant will be constructed to serve the development and provide fire protection. 10 of 57 February 15, 2005 Item # - • 0 Resolution No. P- Page 4 5. Water fees will be paid. On -site and off -site improvements will be made to provide water service to the development. 6. Access to the site will be provided in accordance with City standards and to ensure adequate emergency access. Section 5: The City Council hereby approves Tentative Tract Map 03 -02, a lot - averaged subdivision to allow a 5 -lot subdivision of an approximate 85 -acre site, . .consisting of 4 residential lots ranging in size from 4 to 6 acres; and one open space lot, located at the southerly terminus of Tooth Road in the Rural Residential A/Open Space-' Resource Management zone, as shown on the Tentative Tract Map dated October 6, 2004, subject to the following conditions: A. This approval is not inclusive of the design of the proposed single - family homes. Separate approval of the home design and footprints shall be applied for through the Development Review /Minor Development Review Application (and Hillside - Ridgeline Review, if applicable) process prior to issuance of Building Permits. B. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with any sections of the Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable City Ordinances in effect at the time of Building Permit issuance. C. This approval is based on the existing site conditions represented on the approved Tentative Tract Map.. If actual conditions vary from representations, the approved map must be changed to reflect the actual conditions. Any substantial. changes to the approved Tentative Tract Map, prior to Final Map approval, must be approved by the Director of Development Services and may require approval of the City Council. D. The developer is required to comply with the Poway Noise Ordinance requirements that govern construction activity and noise levels. E. Within thirty (30) days after City Council approval of the Tentative Tract Map, the applicant shall submit in writing to the City that all conditions of approval have been read and understood. F. Prior to Final Map approval, unless other timing is indicated, the following conditions shall be complied with. (Engineering) 1. Submittal of a Final Map to the City for review and approval. The Final Map shall conform to City standards and procedures, the City Subdivision Ordinance, the Subdivision Map Act, the Land Surveyors Act, and the Resolution of Approval as approved by the City Council, and shall be in substantial conformance with the approved Tentative Tract Map. 11 of 57 February 15, 2005 Item # 2 0 6 Resolution No. P- Page 5 Appropriate map review fees shall be paid at time of submittal. Prior to Final Map approval, the words "This is a Lot Averaged Subdivision" shall be put on the Final Map. 2. Record with the County Recorders Office a City- approved Conditions, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC &Rs) document, or.other instrument, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, to provide maintenance of private road and drainage facilities. 3. Post a cash deposit to the City, in an amount equivalent to $100.00 per sheet of the parcel map, for the photo mylar reproduction of the recorded Final Map. If applicant/developer provides the City with the photo mylar copy of the recorded Final Map within 3 months from recordation or prior to Building Permit issuance to Parcel 1, whichever comes first, said cash deposit shall thereafter be refunded to the depositor, otherwise it shall be used by the City to pay for the reproduction of a photo mylar copy. 4. Easements and /or right -of -way dedications to the City within the limits of the subdivision shall be made on the Final Map. Water mains and their appurtenances are to be installed at locations other than within public streets and shall have an easement, a minimum of 20 -feet wide for each line, dedicated to the City. 5. A monumentation bond in an amount acceptable to the City Engineer shall be posted. 6. Applicant shall submit to the City a "will serve letter" from San Diego Gas and Electric to provide gas and electric utilities for the project. 7. Vacation of the existing 60- foot -wide road and utility easement and the existing 15- foot -wide utility easement shall be completed before Final Map or Grading Permit approval, whichever occurs first. 8. Prior to the approval of Final Map or the issuance of a Grading Permit, whichever occurs first, it shall be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the City Engineer that the proposed septic systems comply with City standards and /or San Diego County Department of Environmental Health standards. Additionally septic areas shall be designed to not conflict with public trails that will be provided on -site. (Planning) 9. A public recreation trail shall be provided on and off -site as depicted on the Tentative Tract Map. Additionally, a public trail shall be provided in the general location of the existing worn trail, which is in the alignment of the road easement that the developer intends to vacate. The maximum trail 12 of 57 February 15, 2005 Item # 2 • i Resolution No. P- Page 6 easement width shall be 20 feet and the maximum improvement width shall be 10 feet. A lesser easement, and improvement, may be approved by the Director of Public Works. All public trails shall be shown on the Final Map, the grading plan and the street improvement plan, and shall be improved to the satisfaction of the Director of Development Services and the Director of Public Works. 10. The finished pad elevations on Lots 1 and 2 shall be lowered by 2 feet from the elevation shown on the approved Tentative Tract Map. The new pad elevations shall be shown on the Final Map and on the grading plan. The lowering of finished pad elevations shall not result in an expansion of the limits of grading as shown on the approved TTM, unless it has been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Director of Development Services, that any increase in the limits of grading complies with the project's maximum allowable grading pursuant to City standards. 11. Homes on Lots 1 and 2 shall be limited to 28 feet. in height from the finished pad elevation shown on the Final Map. Prior to Final Map approval, the applicant shall record a covenant on Lots 1 and 4 identifying the 28 -foot height limit. 12. Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit, or Final Map approval, whichever . occurs first, the applicant shall submit documentation and /or exhibits which demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the Director of Development Services, that the removal of Coastal Sage Scrub on proposed Lot 2 has been reduced by 0.28 acres to comply with City /HCP standards. 13. Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit, Administrative Clearing Permit or Final Map approval, whichever occurs first, the applicant shall mitigate for the on -site and off -site permanent removal of 6.99 acres of Coastal Sage Scrub at the rate of 2:1 and 1 acre of on -site Chamise Chaparral at the rate of 1:1, for an overall requirement of 14.98 acres. A Biological Conservation Easement (BCE) over 9.91 acres of on -site CSS and Chamise Chaparral shall be partial mitigation. The balance of required mitigation, 5.07 acres, shall be satisfied by either the establishment of a BCE over like habitat within the Poway Subarea Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) Mitigation Area or the payment of a In -Lieu Fee. The BCE shall be approved by the Director of Development Services, and shall be notarized and recorded with the County of San Diego at the cost of the applicant. In compliance with the HCP, the City shall re -zone the mitigation land to Open Space- Resource Management to insure its permanent preservation. 14. Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit, Administrative Clearing Permit, or approval of the Final Map, whichever occurs first, the applicant shall consult with the appropriate State and Federal permitting agencies regarding the 13 of 57 February 15, 2005 Item # 2+ Resolution No. P- Page 7 blue line stream located on the site. The applicant shall submit documentation of the project's compliance with the permitting agencies requirements to the City, and shall incorporate any permitting agency requirements into the project plans. 15. Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit, Administrative Clearing Permit or approval of the Final Map, whichever occurs first, the applicant shall submit to the City for review and approval a Habitat Restoration and Monitoring Plan (HRMP) and applicable review fees. The HRMP is for the septic field areas that the developer proposes to revegetate to comply with City HCP requirements. These areas shall be placed into an Open Space Easement, along with other portions of the lots that are outside the project development area and outside of any Biological Conservation Easement area. The Open Space Easement shall be approved by the Director of Development Services, and shall be .notarized and recorded with the County of San Diego at the cost of the applicant. Habitat restoration over the septic field areas, which are outside of the required fire fuel management areas, shall be conducted and maintained as habitat for the life of the project. G. Prior to Grading Permit issuance, unless other timing is indicated, the following conditions shall be complied with: (Engineering) 1. A grading plan is required for development of the lots, and shall be prepared on mylar at a scale of V =20', and submitted to the Development Services Department - Engineering Division for review and approval. As a minimum, the grading plan shall show the following: a. All new slopes with a maximum 2:1 (horizontal to vertical) slope. Tops and toes of graded slopes shall be shown with a minimum five - foot setback from open space areas and property lines. Buildings shall be located at least five feet from tops and toes of slopes, unless waived by the Planning Division and /or Engineering Division prior to issuance of a Grading Permit. b. Driveways, in compliance with the specifications provided in Section 17.08.170D of the Poway Municipal Code, and including minimum structural sections together with their elevations and grades. C. A separate erosion control plan for prevention of sediment runoff during construction. d. A certificate signed by a registered civil engineer that the grading plan has preserved a minimum of 100 square feet of solar access for 14 of 57 February 15, 2005 Item # 2+ 0 i Resolution No. P- Page 8 each dwelling unit and for each future building site within the subdivision. e. All utilities (proposed and existing), together with their appurtenances and. associated easements. Encroachments are not permitted upon any easement without an approved Encroachment Agreement/ Permit. f. Locations of all utility boxes, clearly identified in coordination with the respective utility companies, and approved by the City prior, to any installation work. Any utility improvements that are greater than 36 inches in height will be required to be screened by landscaping. 2. Grading of the project shall be in substantial conformance with the approved development plan and in accordance with the Uniform Building Code,. City Grading Ordinance, City Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance, and Drainage and Watercourses Ordinance. 3. Pad elevations shown on the grading plan shall not change by more than two feet in height from the elevations shown on the approved tentative map, unless otherwise approved by the City Council. 4. A soils /geological report shall be prepared by an engineer licensed by the State of California to perform such work, and shall be submitted with the grading plan. 5. A drainage study using the 100 -year storm frequency criteria shall be submitted with the grading plan. The drainage system shall be capable of handling and disposing all surface water within the subdivision and all surface water flowing onto the subdivision from adjacent lands. Said system shall include all easements required to properly handle the drainage. Concentrated flows across driveways are not permitted. The study shall also demonstrate that the project will not increase runoff to adjacent properties. 6. If grading of this project is to disturb one acre or more, the property owner shall file with the State Regional Water Quality Control Board a Notice of Intent (NOI) of coverage under the statewide General Permit that covers storm water discharges. Proof of filing of the NOI and an assigned Waste Discharge Identification Number shall be submitted to the Development Services Department - Engineering Division prior to issuance of a Grading or Building Permit. Applications may be obtained by contacting: 15 of 57 February 15, 2005 Item # 20_ Resolution No. P- Page 9. California Regional Water Quality Control Board. _ San Diego Region 9174 Sky Park Court, Suite 100 San Diego, CA 92123 (858)467 -2952 7. If grading of this project is to disturb one acre or more, the property owner shall prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that effectively addresses the elimination of non -storm runoff into the storm drain system. The SWPPP shall include, but not be limited to, an effective method of. hillside erosion and sediment control; a de- silting basin with a capacity of 3,600 cubic feet of storage per acre drained, or designed to remove fine silt for a 10 -year, 6 -hour storm event; a material storage site; measures to protect construction material from being exposed to storm water control; and other means of Best Management Practices to effectively eliminate. pollutants from entering the storm drain system. The engineer shall certify the SWPPP prior to issuance of the Grading Permit. 8. Erosion control, including, but not limited to, desiltation basins, shall be installed and maintained throughout construction of the project. An erosion control plan shall be prepared by the project civil engineer and shall be submitted as part of the grading plan. The applicant /developer shall make provisions to insure proper maintenance of all erosion control devices. 9. Grading securities in the form of a performance bond.and cash deposit, or a letter of credit shall be posted with the City. 10. A Right -of -Way Permit shall be obtained from the Engineering Division of the Development Services Department for any work to be done in public street rights -of -way or City -held easements. 11. The applicant/developer shall pay the following fees, and post or pay the grading securities: a. Grading Permit, plan checking, inspection, Right -of -Way Permit, and geotechnical review fees. The Grading Permit fee shall be paid at first submittal of grading plans. b. The driveway construction cost shall be included in the cost estimates for plan checking and determination of inspection fees. 12. Submittal of a request for, and then subsequently hold, a pre- construction meeting with a City Engineering Inspector. The applicant/developer shall be responsible that necessary individuals, such as, but not limited to, 16 of 57 February 15, 2005 Item # Z Resolution No. P- Page 10 contractors, subcontractors, project civil engineer and project soils engineer must attend the preconstruction meeting. 13. Applicant construction staking is to be inspected by the Engineering' Inspector.prior to any clearing, grubbing, or grading. As a minimum, all protected areas, as shown on the project plans, are to be staked by a licensed surveyor and delineated with lathe and ribbon. A written certification from the engineer of work or a licensed surveyor shall be provided to the Engineering Inspector stating that all protected areas are . staked in accordance with the approved project plans. 14. Non - supervised or non - engineered fill is not allowed. Rock disposal areas shall be : graded in compliance with City-approved 'soils recommendations and the approved grading plans. 15. Prior to rock blasting, a pre -blast survey of the surrounding properties shall be conducted to the satisfaction of the Director of Development Services, and a Blasting Permit shall be obtained from the Engineering Division. Seismic recordings shall be taken for all blasting. Blasting shall occur only at locations and levels approved by the Director of Development Services. (Planning) 16. The limits of approved habitat removal shall be clearly shown on the grading plan and staked in the field prior to commencing grading. 17. Prior to the removal of any tree within the Eucalyptus Woodland on -site, during the recognized nesting season for raptors, .a qualified professional shall evaluate the subject tree(s) for a raptor nest and report the findings in writing to the City. Should a nest or nests be located, the tree removal shall be delayed until such time the nest or nests have been abandoned. 18. In accordance with Condition H of the PSHCP Incidental Take Permit, a take of active California Gnatcatcher nests, which includes harassment of the bird due to grading noise and vibrations from February 15 through July 1, is not permitted. Therefore, any grading or clearing during this timeframe will only be permitted subject to the following conditions having been met to the satisfaction of the Director of Development Services. The applicant is hereby advised that, during grading, if active nests are found within 500 feet of the grading, the grading activity shall be stopped until such time as mitigation measures to.the satisfaction of the City and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) are implemented. There is no guarantee that grading will be allowed to resume. 17 of 57 February 15, 2005 Item # 0 Resolution No. P- Page 11 a. Before issuance of a Clearing/ Grading Permit, if grading or clearing is to occur between February 15 and July 1, the applicant shall provide to the Planning Division a letter from a qualified biologist retained by the applicant, with a scope of work for the CSS habitat and Gnatcatcher Survey and a map showing all habitat areas, including all CSS habitat within 500 feet of the area to be graded. The biologist shall contact the USFWS to determine the appropriate survey methodology. The purpose of the survey is to determine if any active Gnatcatcher nests are located in the area to be cleared or graded, or if CSS habitat is within 500 feet of such area. To be considered qualified, the biologist must provide the City with a copy of a valid Gnatcatcher Recovery Permit from the.USFWS. The scope of work shall explain the survey methodology for the biological survey and the proposed Gnatcatcher nest monitoring activities during the clearing /grading operation. b. Should the survey show, to the satisfaction of the Director of Development Services, that active Gnatcatcher nests are not present within the area to be graded or cleared, or within 500 feet of said area, approval may be granted to commence grading /clearing within' the Gnatcatcher nesting season between February 15 and July 1 with appropriate monitoring during that time. C. If Gnatcatchers are present within the area to be graded /cleared,or within 500 feet of that area, no grading will be allowed unless appropriate mitigation is completed. 19. Install permanent signs and fencing as deemed necessary by the Director of Development Services, to delineate the limits of the Biological Conservation Easement(s) present on the site when grading of the project is complete to be verified by Planning staff before the issuance of a building permit or the release of grading securities whichever occurs first. 20. The finished pad elevations on Lots 1 and 2 shall be lowered by 2 feet from the elevation shown on the approved Tentative Tract Map. The new pad elevations shall be shown on the Final Map and on the grading plan. The lowering of finished pad elevations shall not result in an expansion of the limits of grading as shown on the approved TTM, unless it has been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Director of Development Services, that any increase in the limits of grading complies with the project's maximum allowable grading pursuant to City standards. K. Prior to Building Permit issuance the applicant shall comply with the following: 18 of 57 February 15, 2005 Item # z 0 0 Resolution No. P- Page 12 (Engineering) 1. Grading of lots shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, the City Grading Ordinance, the approved grading plan, the approved soils report, and grading practices acceptable to the City. 2. Rough grading of the lots is to be completed and meet the approval of the City inspector and shall include submittal of the following: a. A certification of line and grade for each lot, prepared by the engineer of work b. A final soil compaction report for each lot for review and approval by the City. 3. The applicant shall provide a new looped water system when the extension from the existing main to the project is greater than 1000 feet. This new system shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 4. The City may require an improvement plan to be prepared; for which plan checking and inspection fees shall be paid. 5. Payment of development fees to the City, unless other payee is indicated. The fees and the corresponding amounts are as follows and are subject to change without further notice. The amounts to be paid shall be those in effect at time of payment. The San Diego County Water Authority ( SDCWA) fee for a %" meter is $2004, and for a 1" meter is $3,206. It a 1" meter is required only as a result of fire sprinklers, the 3/4 " base capacity and . SDCWA fees will be applicable. Water base capacity fee (Resolution No. 91 -123) For V meter = $3,710.00 per meter For 1" meter = $6,678.00 per meter Other meter sizes = Contact Engineering Division Water meter fee (Resolution No. 91 -123) For 3/4" meter = $ 130.00 per meter For 1" meter = $ 140.00 per meter Other meter sizes = Contact Engineering Division Traffic mitigation fee = $3960.00* *(4 Lots X $990.00 /1-ot = $3960.00) Drainage fee = $7850.00 ** * *Drainage fee = $1,570.00 x 4 lots = $6280.00 19 of 57 February 15, 2005 Item #Z Resolution No. P- Page 13 Park fee = $ 10,880.00 * ** ** *Park fee = $2,720.00 x 4 lots = $ 10,880.00 (Fire) 6. Prior to delivery of combustible building materials, an on -site water system shall satisfactorily pass all required tests. 7. Installation of fire hydrant/s at location(s) determined by the City Fire Marshal. A water analysis may be required to analyze the'fire hydrant(s) adequacy to City's standards for fire flow and pressure. Any additional improvement recommendation made in the analysis shall be constructed. Payment for preparation of the analysis shall be paid to the City upon demand. (Planning) 8. The Final Map shall be approved and recorded. 9. The site shall be developed in accordance with the approved site plans on file in the Development Services Department and the conditions contained herein. 10. A Minor Development Review Application (MDRA) approval shall be obtained for home construction on a given lot before the issuance of a building permit on that lot. L. Compliance with the following conditions is required prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy: (Engineering) 1. Driveways, drainage facilities, slope landscaping and protection measures, and utilities shall be constructed, completed, and inspected by the Engineering Inspector. The driveway shall be constructed in accordance with Poway Municipal Code, Section 17.08.170D, and its- structural section shall be shown on the grading plan. 2. All existing and new utilities within the project shall be placed underground. The subdivider shall be responsible for the relocation and under grounding of existing public utilities less than 34.5 W, unless specifically waived by the Director of Development Services. 3. An adequate drainage system around each building pad capable of handling and disposing all surface water shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Engineering Inspector. 20 of 57 February 15, 2005 Item # 2 s � s Resolution No. P Page 14 4. Record drawings for grading plans, signed by the engineer of work, shall be submitted to Development Services prior to a request of occupancy, per Section 16.52.1306 of the grading ordinance.. Record drawings shall be submitted in a manner to allow the City adequate time for review` and approval prior to issuance of occupancy and release of grading securities. (Planning) 5. Habitat restoration over the septic field areas, which are outside of the required fire fuel management areas, shall be conducted and maintained as habitat for the life of the project. Section 6: The approval of Tentative Tract Map 03 -02 expires on February 15, 2007, at 5:00 p.m. The Final Map conforming to this conditionally approved Tentative Tract Map shall be filed with the City so that the City may approve the Parcel Map before this approval expires, unless at least 90 days prior to the expiration of the Tentative Tract Map a request for a time extension is submitted to the Development Services Department and a time extension is subsequently granted by the City Council. Section 7: Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020, the 90 -day approval period in which the applicant may protest the imposition of any fees, dedications, reservations, or exactions imposed pursuant to this approval shall begin on February 15, 2005. PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED by the City Council of the City of.Poway, State of California, at a regular meeting this 15th day of February 2005. Michael P. Cafagna, Mayor ATTEST: L. Diane Shea, City Clerk 21 of 57 February 15, 2605 Item #-;2- ,• i Resolution No. P- Page 15 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) SS. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) I, L. Diane Shea, City Clerk of the City of Poway, do hereby certify, under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing Resolution No. P- was duly adopted by the City Council at a meeting of said City Council held on the 15th day of February 2005 and that it was so adopted by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: DISQUALIFIED: L. Diane Shea, City Clerk City of Poway 22 of 57 February 15, 2005 Item # 2 Resolution No. P- Page 16 EXHIBIT A MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM FOR TTM 03 -02 Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code requires that public agencies "adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes which it has adopted or made a condition of project approval in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment. The reporting or monitoring program shall be designated to ensure compliance during project implementation." This mitigation monitoring program has been prepared in accordance with Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code. Non - compliance with any of these conditions, as identified by City staff or .a designated monitor, shall result in issuance of a cease and desist order for all construction activities. The order shall remain in effect until compliance is assured. Non - compliance situations, which may occur subsequent to project construction, will be addressed on a case -by- case basis and may be subject to penalties according to the City of Poway Municipal Code. When phasing of development has been established, it maybe necessary for this Monitoring Program to be amended, with City approval. Topic Mitigation Measure Timing Responsibility Biology Habitat restoration over the septic field Prior to Applicant areas, which are outside of the Certificate of required fire fuel management areas, Occupancy shall be conducted and maintained as (for habitat for the life of the project. restoration) Prior to the issuance of a Grading Prior to the Applicant Permit or an Administrative Clearing issuance of a Permit or approval of the Final Map Grading whichever' occurs 'first, the applicant Permit or the shall submit to the' City for review and approval of approval a Habitat Restoration and Final Map, Monitoring Plan, and applicable review whichever fees. These areas shall be placed into occurs first an Open Space Easement along with (for submittal other portions of the lots that are of plan) outside the project development area and outside of any Biological Conservation Easement area. The Open Space Easement shall be approved by the Director of Development Services, and shall be notarized and recorded with the County of San Diego at the cost of the applicant. 23 of 57 February 15, 2005 Item # Resolution No. P- Page 17 24 of 57 February 15; 2005 Item # z Install permanent signs and fencing as Prior to Applicant deemed necessary by the Director of starting Development Services, to delineate grading the limits of the Biological Conserv- ation Easement(s) present on the site. The limits of approved habitat removal shall be clearly shown on the grading plan' and staked in the field prior to commencing grading. Prior to the issuance of a Grading Prior to the Applicant Permit, or Final Map approval, issuance of a whichever occurs first, the applicant 'Grading shall submit documentation and /or Permit or the exhibits which demonstrate to the approval.of satisfaction of the Director of Final Map, Development Services, that the whichever removal of Coastal Sage Scrub on occurs first proposed Lot 2 has been reduced by 0.28 acres to comply with City /HCP standards. Prior to the issuance of a Grading Prior to the Applicant Permit or an Administrative Clearing issuance of a Permit or Final Map approval, Grading whichever occurs first, the applicant Permit or the shall mitigate the on -site and off -site, approval of permanent removal of 6.99 acres of Final Map, Coastal Sage Scrub (CSS) at the rate whichever of 2:1, and 1 acre of on -site Chamise occurs first Chaparral at the rate of 1:1 for an overall requirement of 14.98 acres. A Biological Conservation Easement (BCE) over 9.91 acres of on -site CSS and Chamise Chaparral shall be partial mitigation. The balance of required mitigation; or 5.07 acres, shall be satisfied by either the establishment of a BCE over like habitat within the Poway Subarea Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) Mitigation Area or the payment of an In -Lieu Fee. The BCE shall be 24 of 57 February 15; 2005 Item # z Resolution No. P- Page 18 25 of 57 February 15, 2005 Item # 2 approved by the Director of Development Services, and shall be notarized and recorded with the County of San Diego at a cost to be paid by the applicant. In compliance with the HCP, the City shall re -zone the mitigation land to Open Space - Resource Management to insure its permanent preservation. Prior to the issuance of a Grading Prior to the Applicant Permit or Administrative Clearing issuance of a Permit, or approval of the Final Map, Grading whichever occurs first, the applicant Permit or the shall consult with the appropriate approval of State and Federal permitting agencies Final Map, regarding the blue line stream located whichever on the site. occurs first The applicant shall submit documentation of the project's compliance with the permitting agencies requirements to the City, and shall incorporate any permitting agency requirements into the project plans. Prior to the removal of any tree within. Prior to the Applicant the Eucalyptus Woodland on -site, removal of during the recognized nesting season any tree for raptors, a qualified professional shall evaluate the subject tree(s) for a raptor nest and report the findings in writing to the City. Should a nest or nests be located in the tree, removal shall be delayed until such time the nest or nests have been abandoned. In accordance with Condition H of the Prior to and Applicant PSHCP Incidental Take Permit, a take during of active California Gnatcatcher nests, grading which includes harassment of the bird due to grading noise and vibrations from February 15 through July 1, is not permitted. Therefore, any grading or 25 of 57 February 15, 2005 Item # 2 Resolution No. P- Page 19 26 of 57 February 15, 2005 Item # 2 clearing during this timeframe will only be permitted subject to the following conditions having been met to the satisfaction of the Director. The applicant is hereby advised that, during grading, if active nests are found within 500 feet of the grading, the grading activity shall be stopped until such time as mitigation measures to the satisfaction of the City and the. United States fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) are implemented. There is no guarantee that grading will be allowed to resume. Before issuance of a Clearing/ Prior to Applicant Grading Permit, if grading or clearing Grading is to occur between February 15 and Permit July 1, the applicant shall provide to the Planning Division a letter from a qualified biologist retained by the applicant, with a scope of work for the CSS habitat and Gnatcatcher Survey and a map showing all habitat areas including all CSS habitat within 500 feet of the area to be graded. The biologist shall contact the USFWS to determine the appropriate survey methodology. The purpose of the survey is to determine if any active Gnatcatcher nests are located in the area to be cleared or graded, or if CSS habitat is within 500 feet of such area. To be considered qualified, the biologist must provide the City with a copy of a valid Gnatcatcher Recovery permit from the USFWS. The scope of work shall explain the survey methodology for the biological survey and the proposed Gnatcatcher nest monitoring activities during the clearing /grading operation. 26 of 57 February 15, 2005 Item # 2 • i • Resolution No. P- Page 20 M \p1anning \05report\ttm \03 -02 Northpoint Devel \reso.doc 27 of 57 February 15, 2005 Item # ,2 Should the survey show, to the satisfaction of the Director of Development Services, that active Gnatcatcher nests are not present within the area to be graded or cleared, or within 500 feet of said area, approval may be granted to commence grading /clearing within the Gnatcatcher. nesting season between February, 15 ' and" July 1 with appropriate monitoring during that time. If Gnatcatchers are present within the area to be graded /cleared, or within 500 feet of that area, no grading will be allowed unless appropriate mitigation is completed. M \p1anning \05report\ttm \03 -02 Northpoint Devel \reso.doc 27 of 57 February 15, 2005 Item # ,2 1 1, 1� I I 1'bOD' .�- ► Syr '�,v,��, r.•� lu �a q' 29 of 57 i 1w 1 ACWAK 4.710 PNM2 "M. PAWL 7 4A M PAROLL 4 4.7 k tW A 6 *ME 46.4 A0 E AB. " NIS I E �R �- �('Jt�i c. � AC.KOtTA6AA4 m ewc Ixmvc Auaw w6910 wu,uolusc IRR. a66m (0 DT, usn W - y IgUEt M. ®11 NIX or P/mc 2.x Ae, ' .8L W1lRf6nN K t6V >ttl[Hi TYP ORI IIY Nf5 MM EIOS f0R A BCCRFATORV. TRl4 {FR P9WAY IRNL SVIAYADS LOMM SOUTH Ixmvc Auaw w6910 wu,uolusc IRR. a66m (0 DT, usn W Mx NIX or P/mc 2.x Ae, 1.16 Ac K MM 20i a IYA6fl Us /G 1m A6 ,21 IC. LOCATION Me ' II.1i 2R w PAM W /L. 692 AF IM A 20M 20 OF KV= 6M A6 661 .e. 1.76 IA la ATTACHMENT C February 15, 2005 Item # tom- a RECEIVED I I • T40 0 6 2004 I � ooz. CO 1'' 1 Or POIN^; DEVt`.LC:i NI'L"N, SLI?'IIGIFS . Z � 8 AT"; III ', 1!'.'.trid // � �'�%� ' � ,��.iii i, .•! �yy 1`;,• NV \ V \� _ - `'� _.: , j : . � I � • FUG-/` _;\� __,._:_. -.: - -'rte. 1'.• • J`. `: ,�� 1 ,:� > ia. W a 1a� Z e� I 1 0 F � mom' / •i',i''I ii I! ' �' I` `�11 . \„ \ \ \,,r .I,• Z ; \`•\,,�. 'j: .p ii. 'III ':i: "•I 1'I ,a lil '�' .,�':,, `I ❑ �1 i!•SI'� F �. �F,.�`� -_ �i ��j'I; iN' �Ii' ' 'i ' ��8:; It 1 : '`,I I,:j ��I'II•,i �i��t'y �'l vl.\ ` \ \ \ \,�� \,\ � -'�_ �,' •I�1 .�: :I. lit' t �\ i�% � /�, .� i //� 'i .�:; '!•� •' i '.t .1 ;liliil x!1!1' \\ \` \�,\ .�.� _ '.'/ I j;' 11�' ��I�1 �, 11, 11�:�1,'•,1'111i'.11 \� \�'� <; \`- / -��•'/ 1 ''! 30 of 57 February 15, 2005 Item # W 0 til THIS IS A LOT AVERAGED SUBDIVISION TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 03 -02 VOGWPOI I ESTATES SwD .DEi (GROSS) S'=3WS lil III I Ijl -n y-- C _ -_ .! d_. -_. . -_.. "_ - __- .".�.'.. i0.• —_: -- g Q . Q CAI o;�. -PA- rzc.6L 2 suc --'3 k �C`A'fl .. IMP Q\ -� w P66K PIZ - 5 flr CITY Y ( F p�sai,lY DEV` i.o r, "'F:K 7 e'iilriCE^ MICKEY CAFAGNA, Mayor CITY OF POWA� BOB EMERY, Deputy Mayor MERRILEE BOYACK, Councilmember DON HIGGINSON, Councilmember BETTY RFXEORD, Councilmember CITY OF POWAY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 1. Name and Address of Applicant: Northpoint Development, Attention David Davis 402 West Broadway, Suite 2175, San Diego CA 92101 Project Name and Brief Description of Project: Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tract Map (TTM) 03 -02, Northpoint Development, Applicant: A proposal for a 5 -lot subdivision of approximately 85 acres, consisting of 4 residential lots ranging in size from 4 to 6 acres and one open space lot, located south of High Valley Road at the southerly terminus of Tooth Rock Road, in the Rural Residential (RR) A/Open Space Resource Management (OS -RM) zone. 2. In accordance with Resolution 83 -084 of the City of Poway, implementing the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, the City of Poway City,Council has found that the above project will not have a significant effect upon the environment and has approved a Mitigated Negative Declaration. An Environmental Impact Report will not be required. 3. This Mitigated Negative Declaration is comprised of this form along with the Environmental Initial Study that includes the Initial Study and Checklist and the approved Mitigation Monitoring Program containing the mitigation measures approved for this project. 4. The decision of the City Council of the City of Poway is final. Contact Person: Jason Martin Phone: (858) 668 -4658 Approved Niall Fritz, Director of Development Services Attachments: Environmental Initial Study Mitigation Monitoring Program Date: February 15, 2005 City Hall Located at 13325 Civic Center Drive FAX ,qg p jing Address: P.O. Box 789, 1 ATTACHMENT -- -''789 • 95.8 u6 8,414g�JAJ 6& 1 5 Reo'ded Paper CITY OF POWAY ENVIRONMENTAL INITIAL STUDY AND CHECKLIST A. INTRODUCTION This Environmental Initial Study and Checklist, along with information contained in the public record, comprise the environmental documentation for the proposed project as described below pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Based upon the information contained herein and in the public record; the City of Poway has prepared a Negative Declaration for the proposed project. B. PROJECT INFORMATION 1. Project Title: Tentative Tract Map (TTM) 03 -02 — Viewpoint Estates 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Poway 13325 Civic Center Drive Poway CA 92064 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Jason Martin, Senior Planner. (858) 6684658 4. Project Location: South of High Valley. Road, at the southerly terminus of Tooth Rock Road 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Northpoint Development, Attention: Dave Davis 402 West Broadway Suite 2175 San Diego CA 92101 6. General Plan Designation: Rural Residential A/Open Space Resource Management Zoning: Rural Residential A/Open Space Resource Management 7. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including, but not limited to, later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary). A proposal for a 5 -lot subdivision of approximately 85 acres, consisting of 4 residential lots and one open space lot, located south of High Valley Road at the southerly terminus of Tooth Rock Road, in the Rural Residential A (RR -A) /Open Space- Resource Management (OS -RM) zone. The 4 residential lots are between 4 — 6 acres in size and the open space lot is approximately 65 acres. Tooth Rock Road, south of High Valley Road, provides access to the site and will be improved from its current state to City standards. Road improvements, on and off -site, also include the provision of a public recreation trail that will connect with other trails on, and in the vicinity of, the site. The project will also involve the provision of a looped water line connection which will be in Tooth Rock Road and through the developed properties to the north of the site. 33 of 57 1 February 15, 2005 Item # _Z EIS and Checklist • • 8. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: North: Developed Single- Family Residential East/north: Developed Single- Family Residential .East/south: Undeveloped Single- Family Residential West/north: Developed Single - Family Residential West/south: Undeveloped Single- Family Residential South: Undeveloped Single - Family Residential 9. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g.: permits, financing approval, or participation agreement): A "blue line stream" as depicted on the USGS Quad Map traverses the site and will be disrupted by the development A Streambed Alteration Agreement and /or Section 404 Permit may be required from the applicable State /Federal Permitting agencies. Depending on the determination that would be made by outside Permitting agencies, approvals from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. California Department of Fish and Game and /or the San Die_ go County:. Regional Water Quality Board may be required As a mitigation measure the applicant is required to consult with the appropriate permitting agencies regarding the need for any Permit and any applicable requirements shall be incorporated into the project 10. References (all references are available at the Poway City Offices, Department of Development Services, at 13225 Civic Center Drive). Biological Report prepared by REC Consultants, October 2004. Environmental Factors Potentially Affected: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact -as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ❑ Land Use and Planning ❑ Population and Housing ❑ Geological Problems ❑ Hydrology and Water ❑ Air Quality ❑ Agricultural Resources ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance ❑ 'Transportation /Circulation ❑ Biological Resources ❑ Energy and Mineral Resources ❑ Hazards /Hazardous Materials ❑ Noise ❑ Public Services ❑ Utilities and Service 34 of 57 2 February 15, 2005 Item # Z Systems ❑ Aesthetics ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Recreation 34 of 57 2 February 15, 2005 Item # Z EIS and Checklist • • Determination (To be completed by the Lead Agency): On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment ❑ and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case as revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION'wil1 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 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. City of Poway KPns MIA Date 3 February 15, 2005 Item # 1 ■1 M EIS and Checklist C. Checklist • ISSUE POTENTIALLY POTENTIALLY LESS THAN NO SIGNIFICANT SIGNIFICANT SIGNIFICANT IMPACT IMPACT UNLESS IMPACT MITIGATION INCORPORATION I. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a. Affect a scenic vista or scenic X highway? b. Have a demonstrable negative X aesthetic effect? c. Create light or glare? X II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a. Convert prime farmland, unique X 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 X agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c. Involve other changes in the X existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use. III. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a. Conflict with or obstruct X implementation to the applicable air quality plan? 36 of 57 4 February 15, 2005 Item # Z EIS and Checklist • ISSUE POTENTIALLY POTENTIALLY LESS THAN NO SIGNIFICANT SIGNIFICANT SIGNIFICANT IMPACT IMPACT UNLESS IMPACT MITIGATION INCORPORATION b. Violate any air quality standard X or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c. Expose sensitive receptors to X substantial pollutant concentrations? d. Create objectionable odors X affecting a substantial number of people? IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a. Have a substantial adverse X 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 X effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c. Have a substantial adverse effect X 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, filing, hydrological interruption, or other means? d. Interfere substantially with the X movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? 37 of 57 February 15, 2005 Item # Z EIS and Checklist 0 0 38 of 57 6 February 15, 2005 Item # POTENTIALLY POTENTIALLY LESS THAN NO ISSUE SIGNIFICANT SIGNIFICANT SIGNIFICANT IMPACT IMPACT UNLESS IMPACT MITIGATION INCORPORATION e. Conflict with any local policies or X ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree reservation. policy or ordinance? f. Conflict with the provisions of an X adopted Habitat conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation Ian? V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the Project: a. Cause a substantial adverse X change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5 b. Directly or indirectly destroy a X unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? c. Disturb any human remains, X including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the ro'ect: a. Expose people or structures to X potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake X 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 a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shakin ? X III) Seismic - related ground failure, X including liquefaction? iv Landslides? X b. Result in substantial soil erosion X or the loss of topsoil? 38 of 57 6 February 15, 2005 Item # EIS and Checklist . 0 ISSUE POTENTIALLY POTENTIALLY LESS THAN NO SIGNIFICANT SIGNIFICANT SIGNIFICANT IMPACT IMPACT UNLESS IMPACT MITIGATION INCORPORATION c. Be located on a geologic unit or X 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 X defined in Table 18 -1 -B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risk to life or property? e. Have soils incapable of X adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: a. Create a significant hazard to the X public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b. Create a significant hazard to the X 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 X 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 X 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? 39 of 57 7 February 15, 2005 Item # EIS and Checklist 0 ISSUE POTENTIALLY POTENTIALLY LESS THAN NO SIGNIFICANT SIGNIFICANT SIGNIFICANT IMPACT IMPACT UNLESS IMPACT MITIGATION INCORPORATION e. For a project located within an X airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working within the project area? f. For a project in the vicinity of a X private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g. Impair implementation of, or X physically interfere with, an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation Ian? h. Expose people or structures to a X significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project a. Result in an increase in pollutant X discharge to receiving waters? Consider water quality parameters such as temperature, dissolved oxygen, turbidity and other typical storm water pollutants (e.g. heavy metals, pathogens, petroleum derivatives, synthetic organics, sediment, nutrients, oxygen - demanding substances, and trash). b. Result in significant alteration of X receiving water quality during or following construction? C. Result in increased impervious X surfaces and associated increased runoff? 40 of 57 8 February 15, 2005 Item # 'L EIS and Checklist • 0 ISSUE POTENTIALLY POTENTIALLY LESS THAN NO SIGNIFICANT SIGNIFICANT SIGNIFICANT IMPACT IMPACT UNLESS IMPACT MITIGATION INCORPORATION d. Create a significant adverse X environmental impact to drainage patterns due to changes in runoff flow rates or volumes? e. Substantially deplete X groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table lever (e.g. the production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level, which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted. f. Result in increased erosion X downstream? g. Project tributary to an already X impaired water body as listed on the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) list? If so, can it result in an increase in any pollutant for which the water body is already impaired? h. Is the project tributary to other X environmentally sensitive areas? Is so, can it exacerbate already sensitive conditions? i. Have a potentially significant X environmental impact on surface water quality, to either marine, fresh, or wetland waters? j. Have a potentially significant X adverse impact on ground water quality? k. Cause or contribute to an X exceedance of applicable surface or groundwater receiving water quality objectives or degradation of beneficial uses? 1. Impact aquatic, wetland, or riparian X habitat? 41 of 57 9 February 15, 2005 Item # z EIS and Checklist • m. Create or contribute runoff water X which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of pollute runoff? n. Place housing within a 100 -year X flood hazard area as mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? o. Place within a 100 -year flood X hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? p. Exposing people or structures to X a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? q. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or X mudflow? IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a. Physically divide an established X community? b. Conflict with applicable land use X plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c. Conflict with any applicable X habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation Ian. X. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a. Result in the loss of availability of X a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? b. Result in the loss of availability of X a locally- important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? 42 of 57 10 February 15, 2005 Item # EIS and Checklist •. ISSUE POTENTIALLY POTENTIALLY, LESS THAN NO SIGNIFICANT SIGNIFICANT SIGNIFICANT IMPACT IMPACT UNLESS IMPACT MITIGATION INCORPORATION XI. NOISE. Would the project result in: a. Exposure of persons to, or X generation of, noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b. Exposure of persons to, or X generation of excessive ground borne vibration or round borne noise levels? c. A substantial permanent increase X in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d. A substantial temporary or X periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e. For a project located within an X 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? f. For a project within the vicinity of X a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a. Induce substantial growth in an X area either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b. Displace substantial numbers of X existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? 43 of 57 11 February 15, 2005 Item # z EIS and Checklist • • ISSUE POTENTIALLY POTENTIALLY 7 LESS THAN NO SIGNIFICANT SIGNIFICANT SIGNIFICANT IMPACT IMPACT UNLESS IMPACT MITIGATION INCORPORATION C. Displace substantial numbers of X people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES. a. Would the project result in X 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 public services. i. Fire protection? X ii. Police protection? X iii. Schools? X iv. Parks? X V. Other public facilities? X XIV. RECREATION a. Would the project increase the X 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 X recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? XV. TRANSPORTATION /TRAFFIC/ Would the project: a. Cause an increase in traffic, which X is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? 44 of 57 12 February 15, 2005 Item # EIS and Checklist • ISSUE POTENTIALLY POTENTIALLY LESS THAN NO SIGNIFICANT SIGNIFICANT SIGNIFICANT IMPACT IMPACT UNLESS IMPACT MITIGATION INCORPORATION b. Exceed, either individually or X cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c. Result in a change in air traffic X patterns, including either an increase in traffic levefs or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d. Substantially increase hazards X due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e. Result in inadequate emergency X access? f. Result in inadequate parking X capacity? g. Conflict with adopted policies, X plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a. Exceed wastewater treatment X requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b. Require or result in the X construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c. Require or result in the X construction of new stormwater drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d. Have sufficient water supplies X available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? 45 of 57 13 February 15, 2005 Item # _09— EIS and Checklist . ISSUE POTENTIALLY POTENTIALLY LESS THAN NO SIGNIFICANT SIGNIFICANT SIGNIFICANT IMPACT IMPACT UNLESS IMPACT MITIGATION INCORPORATION e. Result in the determination by the X wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f. Be served by a landfill with X sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g. Comply with federal, site and X local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a. Does the project have the potential X to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self - sustaining levels. Threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminated important examples or the major periods of California history or prehistory? b. Does the project have impacts that X are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ( "Cumulative 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 effect of probably future projects)? c. Does the project have X environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. 46 of 57 14 February 15, 2005 Item # 2 EIS and Checklist D. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION Please refer to the Environmental Initial Study Checklist Form above when reading the following evaluation. AESTHETICS: The site is located in a relatively undeveloped hillside area in the eastern /central part of the City, and a portion of the site is located in the Hillside Ridgeline Overlay area. The Hillside Ridgeline Overlay area was established over certain properties in the City because of their location in prominent hillside areas. Properties in the Overlay area require special review of construction to minimize the potential for visual impacts to the community. A portion of two of the four proposed lots (Lots 2 and 3) are located in the Overlay area and are required to go through a special permitting process for construction of homes on those lots. Through the, Hillside Ridgeline Minor Development Review Application and permitting process any potential adverse visual impact will be minimized through appropriate placement of structures, use of special architectural design techniques, and /or the" use of special building materials and landscaping intended to blend the home construction with the surrounding hillsides. As a result, impacts in the area of aesthetics will be less than significant. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES: The project will have no impact on agricultural resources. The site has not been used for agricultural purposes in the past, and the site has not been classified by the State Department of Conservation as an important agricultural land. AIR QUALITY: Air quality in the surrounding area will be temporarily impacted during construction. All construction vehicles are required, under standard City regulations, to follow best management practices (BMP) to reduce the amount of emissions and dust. This includes the proper tuning of vehicles and the use of water trucks during grading. The project could ultimately result in the development of 4 residential lots. Automobile use and other miscellaneous air emissions associated with each residence will have an incremental potentially long -term impact on the ambient air quality in the area. A San Diego Regional Air Quality Strategies Plan — 1994 (jointly developed by the Air Pollution Control District and the San Diego Association. of Govern ments- SANDAG) exists for the San Diego area and provides strategies for pollution controls to improve air quality in the region. Land use plans and build out projections of the General Plans of jurisdictions within the San Diego area were considered in establishing the strategies of the Regional Air Quality Strategies Plan. The Poway General Plan includes strategies that are directed toward reducing air emissions through land use patterns, transportation planning, regional agency cooperation, energy conservation, and construction. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the Poway General Plan. Therefore, the proposed project is also consistent with the San Diego Regional Air Quality Strategies Plan through the land use and growth assumptions that were used in the document. Such consistency insures that the project will not have a significant adverse long -term impact on air quality in the area. 47 of,57 15 February 15, 2005 Item # EIS and Checklist • BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: The 85 -acre site is located in a relatively undeveloped hillside area adjacent to, and south of a developed rural residential area. The site itself is primarily undeveloped, except for the presence of existing worn ,,dirt roads and trails, which traverse the site. A 65.4 -acre portion of the site is currently in an. existing Biological Conservation Easement that was established in part for habitat impact mitigation for the Heritage II project located in north Poway off Old. Coach Road. Nearly the entire site was burned in the October 2003 Cedar Fire, and on -site habitat is in the process of recovering. The project is located within the Mitigation Area, the Biological Core and Linkage Area (BCLA), and Proposed Resource Protection Area (PRPA) 11 /Rattlesnake Canyon Cornerstone of the Poway Subarea Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP.). The site is not within the Quino Checkerspot Butterfly Survey area. A Biological Resources study was prepared for the project by REC Consultants (dated October 2004). The report indicates that the site is comprised of 77.81 acres of Coastal Sage Scrub, 7.55 acres of Chamise Chaparral, and 0.55 acres are developed (dirt roads and trails). Within the habitat areas in the northerly portion of the site is a small grove of eucalyptus trees. A blue line stream traverses the northeast portion of the site. No Federally or State listed sensitive plants were detected on -site. The single sensitive wildlife species identified on site was the San Diego horned lizard. Sensitive wildlife identified off -site, with a potential to occur on -site, include the California Gnatcatcher and the Orange- Throated Whiptail. Ultimately the project will result in the permanent removal of 7.9 acres of habitat. Of the overall total, 6.42 acres of on -site CSS will be removed, 1 acre of on -site Chamise Chaparral will be removed, and 0.57 of CSS off -site will be removed in conjunction with improvement to the off -site access road. The total amount of habitat removal complies with the HCP limit of 2 acres of habitat removal per lot, with the developer's proposal to revegetate septic fields that are outside of the required fire fuel management areas and with the developer's proposed reduction of the 0.28 acre of habitat removal on Lot 2. Per the HCP, habitat impact mitigation is required at the rate of 2:1 for CSS and 1:1 for Chamise Chaparral Accordingly, 13.98 acres is required mitigation for CSS and 1 acre is required mitigation for Chamise Chaparral, for an overall total of 14.98 acres of mitigation. The applicant is proposing that 9.91 acres of habitat on the site, which is not in a BCE, be put into a BCE as partial mitigation. The balance of the mitigation requirement, or 5.07 acres, will be satisfied by either purchase of similar habitat within the Mitigation Area, or by payment of an In -Lieu Fee. The area on -site that will be placed in a BCE will be contiguous to the existing BCE on the site, and will therefore enhance that open space, and PRPA 11 /Rattlesnake Canyon Cornerstone by increasing the overall size of the preservation area. The project is consistent with and promotes the preservation goals of the HCP in that the project will have nearly 91% of the on -site habitat within Biological Conservation Easements, which exceeds the minimum, 80% preservation goal for this site. 48 of 57 16 February 15, 2005 Item # Z EIS and Checklist • Mitigation Measures for the project are as follows: 1. Habitat restoration over the septic field areas, which are outside'of the required fire fuel management areas, shall be conducted and maintained as habitat for the life of the project. Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit or an Administrative Clearing Permit, the applicant shall submit to the City.for review and approval a Habitat Restoration and Monitoring Plan, and applicable review, fees. These areas shall be placed into an open space easement along with other portions of the lots that are outside the project development area and outside of any Biological Conservation Easement area. The. open space easement shall be approved by the Director of Development Services, and shall be notarized and recorded with the County of San Diego at the cost of the . applicant. 2. Install permanent signs and fencing as may. be deemed necessary by the Director of Development Services, to delineate the limits of the Biological . Conservation Easement(s) present on the site. 3. The limits of approved habitat removal shall be clearly shown on the grading plan and staked in the field prior to commencing grading. 4. Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit, or Final Map approval, which ever occurs first, the applicant shall submit documentation and /or exhibits which demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Director of Development Services, that the removal of Coastal Sage Scrub on proposed Lot 2 has been be reduced by 0.28 acres to comply with City /HCP standards. 5. Prior-to the issuance of a Grading Permit or an Administrative Clearing Permit or Final Map approval, whichever occurs first, the applicant shall mitigate, the on -site and off -site, permanent removal of 6.99 acres of Coastal Sage Scrub (CSS) at the rate of 21, and 1 acre of on -site Chamise Chaparral at the rate of 1:1 for an overall requirement of 14.98 acres. A Biological Conservation Easement (BCE) over 9:91 acres of on -site CSS and Chamise Chaparral shall be partial mitigation. The balance of required mitigation, or 5.07 acres, shall, be satisfied by either the establishment of a BCE over like habitat within the Poway Subarea Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) Mitigation Area or the payment of a In -Lieu Fee. The BCE shall be approved by the Director of Development Services, and shall be notarized and recorded with the County of San Diego at . the cost of the applicant. In compliance with the HCP, the City shall re -zone the mitigation land to Open Space- Resources Management to insure its permanent preservation. 6. Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit or Administrative Clearing Permit, or approval of the Final Map, whichever occurs first, the applicant shall consult with the appropriate State and Federal permitting agencies regarding the blue line stream located on the site. The applicant shall submit documentation of the project's compliance with the permitting agencies requirements to the City, and shall incorporate any permitting agency requirements into the project plans. 49 of 57 17 February 15, 2005' Item # EIS and Checklist • i 7. Prior to the removal of any tree within the Eucalyptus Woodland on -site, during the recognized nesting season for raptors, a qualified professional shall evaluate the subject tree(s) for a raptor nest and report the findings in writing to the City. Should a nest or nests be located in the tree, removal shall be delayed until such time the nest or nests have been abandoned. 8. In accordance with Condition H of the PSHCP Incidental Take Permit, a take of active California Gnatcatcher nests, which includes harassment of the bird due to grading noise and vibrations from February 15 .through July 1, is not permitted. Therefore, any grading or clearing during this timeframe will only. be permitted subject to the following conditions having been met to the satisfaction of the Director. The applicant is hereby advised that, during grading, if active nests are found within 500 feet of the grading, the grading activity shall be stopped until such time as mitigation measures to the satisfaction of the City and the United States fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) are implemented. There is no guarantee that grading will be allowed to resume. Before issuance of a Clearing /Grading Permit, if grading or clearing is to occur between February 15 and July 1, the applicant shall provide to the Planning Division a letter from a qualified biologist retained by the applicant, with a scope of work for the CSS habitat and Gnatcatcher Survey and a map showing all habitat areas including all CSS habitat within 500 feet of the area to. be graded. The biologist shall contact the USFWS to determine the appropriate survey methodology. The purpose of the survey is to determine if any active. Gnatcatcher nests are located in the area to be cleared or graded, or if CSS habitat is within 500 feet of such area. To be considered qualified, the biologist must provide the City with a copy of a valid Gnatcatcher Recovery permit from _. the USFWS. The scope of work shall explain the survey methodology for the biological survey and the proposed Gnatcatcher nest monitoring -activities during the clearing /grading operation. Should the survey show, to the satisfaction of the Director of Development Services, that active Gnatcatcher nests are not present within the area to be graded or cleared, or within 500 feet of said area, approval may be granted to commence grading /clearing within the Gnatcatcher nesting season between February 15 and July 1 with appropriate monitoring during that time. If Gnatcatchers are present within the area to be graded /cleared, or within 500 feet of that .area, no grading will be allowed unless appropriate mitigation is completed. CULTURAL RESOURCES: An archeological and cultural resources study was conducted for the project by Historical Resources, Inc. and the findings are included in a report dated November 18, 2003, on file with the Development Services Department. The report finds that the site contains no resources; therefore, there will be no impacts to cultural resources. GEOLOGY AND SOILS: The subject site is not located on or near any known earthquake fault or in an area prone to landslides. The preparation of the site for the 50 of 57 18 February 15, 2005 Item # Z F\ EIS and Checklist project will ensure proper compaction of earth before development. There will be no impacts in the areas of soils and geology. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS; The project.does not involve the use of hazardous materials or emissions. The property has not been identified by local agencies as having hazardous or contaminated soils. Adequate emergency vehicle access and fire fuel management has been designed into the project. As such, the project will not create a significant hazardous impact. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: Development of the .site, during and post construction, will comply will City regulations regarding drainage and. water quality. During construction, the project will implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that will include a number of construction BMPs which could include the use of desilting basins, erosion control mats, fiber rolls; etc. The development proposes the use of septic systems which will comply with City and /or.County Department of Environmental .Health regulations pertaining to septic systems. The project will not result in any impacts to hydrology and water quality. LAND USE AND PLANNING: The proposed project is consistent with all zoning requirements and the City General Plan therefore there will be no impacts to land use and planning. MINERAL RESOURCES: According to the City's Master Environmental Assessment, there are no known mineral resources in the project area. Therefore, the project will not have a significant adverse impact on any known mineral resource. NOISE: Development associated with the subdivision will result in a temporary increase in ambient noise levels in the area during the construction phases. The developer will be required to comply with the City's Noise Ordinance requirements that govern construction activity. POPULATION AND HOUSING: The project will result in an incremental increase in area population; however, it is not considered to be significant in that the project is consistent with the Poway General Plan and the build -out density set forth in the document. PUBLIC SERVICES: The proposed project would result in the establishment of 4 new single - family residences. Since existing public services are in place to accommodate the additional 4 homes and the project will be paying its shape of development impact fees, there will be no impacts to public services. RECREATION: The proposed project would result in the established of 4 new single - family residences. Since existing public recreational facilities are in -place to accommodate the additional 4 homes and the project will be providing a public recreation trail and improvements through the site, there will be no impacts to .recreation. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC: The project will result in an incremental increase in traffic in the area. According to the 1998 SANDAG Brief Guide of Traffic Generation Rates, a total of approximately 40 (10 average daily trips for each parcel) daily vehicle 51 of 57 19 February 15, 2005 Item # 1Z EIS and Checklist • • trips will be generated by the project at build -out. The City circulation system,. including roads in the immediate vicinity of the site, has been designed I to accommodate the increased traffic; therefore, there will be no impacts in the, area of transportation. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Existing utilities are either in place, or additional utilities (i.e., a water line) will be put in by the project; therefore, there will be no impacts to utilities and service systems. MANDATORY FINDING OF SIGNIFICANCE: The project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment that cannot be mitigated. MAp1anning \05report\ttm \03 -02 Northpoint Devel \eis.doc 0 52 of 57 20 February 15, 2005 Item # 2, 0 9 MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM FOR TTM 03 -02 Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code requires that public agencies "adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes which it has adopted or made a condition of project approval in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment. The reporting or monitoring program shall be designated to ensure compliance during project implementation ". This Mitigation Monitoring Program has been prepared in accordance with Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code. Non- compliance with any of these conditions, as identified by City staff or a designated monitor, shall result in issuance of a cease and desist order for all construction activities. The order shall remain in effect until compliance is assured. Non- compliance situations, which may occur subsequent to project construction, will be addressed on a case -by -case basis and may be subject to penalties according to the City of Poway Municipal Code. When phasing of development has been established, it may be necessary for this Monitoring Program to be amended, with City approval.' Topic Mitigation Measure Timing Responsibility Biology Habitat restoration over the septic field Prior to Applicant areas, which are outside of the Certificate of required fire fuel management areas, Occupancy shall be conducted and maintained as (for habitat for the life of the project. restoration) Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit or an Administrative Clearing Prior to the Applicant Permit, the applicant shall submit to issuance of a the City for review and approval a Grading Habitat Restoration and Monitoring Permit or the Plan, and applicable review fees. approval of These areas shall be placed into an Final Map, Open Space Easement along with whichever other portions of the lots that are occurs first outside the, project development area (for submittal and outside of any Biological of plan) Conservation Easement area. The Open Space Easement shall be approved by the Director of Development Services, and shall be notarized and recorded with the County of San Diego at the cost of the applicant. 53 of 57 February 15, 2005 Item # .Z 54 of 57 February 15, 2005 Item # �_'_ Install permanent signs and fencing as Prior to Applicant deemed necessary by the Director of starting Development Services, to delineate grading the limits of the Biological Conservation Easement(s) present on the site. The limits of approved habitat removal shall be clearly shown on the grading plan and staked in the field prior to commencing grading. Prior to the issuance of a Grading Prior to the Applicant Permit, or Final Map approval, issuance of a whichever occurs first, the applicant Grading shall submit documentation and /or Permit or the exhibits which demonstrate to the approval of satisfaction of the Director of Final Map, Development Services, that the whichever removal of Coastal Sage Scrub on occurs first proposed Lot 2 has been be reduced by 0.28 acres to comply with City /HCP standards. Prior to the issuance of a Grading Prior to the Applicant Permit or an Administrative Clearing issuance of a Permit or Final Map approval, Grading whichever occurs first, the applicant Permit or the shall mitigate the on -site and off -site, approval of permanent removal of 6.99 acres of Final Map, Coastal Sage Scrub (CSS) at the rate whichever of 2:1, and 1 acre of on -site Chamise occurs first Chaparral at the rate of 1:1 for an overall requirement of 14.98 acres. A Biological Conservation Easement (BCE) over 9.91 acres of on -site CSS and Chamise Chaparral shall be partial mitigation. The balance of required mitigation, or 5.07 acres, shall be satisfied by either the establishment of a BCE over like habitat within the Poway Subarea Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) Mitigation Area or the payment of an In -Lieu Fee. The BCE shall be approved by the Director of Development Services, and shall be notarized and recorded with the 54 of 57 February 15, 2005 Item # �_'_ 55 of 57 February 15, 2005 Item # County of San Diego at a cost to be paid by the applicant. In compliance with the HCP, the City shall re -zone the mitigation land to Open Space - Resource Management to insure its permanent preservation. Prior to the issuance of a Grading Prior to the Applicant Permit or Administrative Clearing issuance of a Permit, or approval of the Final Map, Grading whichever occurs first, the applicant Permit or the shall consult with the appropriate approval of State and Federal permitting agencies Final Map, regarding the blue line stream located whichever on the site. occurs first The applicant shall submit documentation of the project's compliance with the permitting agencies requirements to the City, and shall incorporate any permitting agency requirements into the project plans. Prior to the removal of any tree within Prior to the Applicant the Eucalyptus Woodland on -site, removal of during the recognized nesting season any tree for raptors, a qualified professional shall evaluate the subject tree(s) for a raptor nest and report the findings in writing to the City. Should a nest or nests be located in the tree, removal shall be delayed until such time the nest or nests have been abandoned. In accordance with Condition H of the Prior to and Applicant PSHCP Incidental Take Permit, a take during of active California Gnatcatcher nests, grading which includes harassment of the bird due to grading noise and vibrations from February 15 through July 1, is not permitted. Therefore, any grading or clearing during this timeframe will only be permitted subject to the following conditions having been met to the satisfaction of the Director. The applicant is hereby advised that, during grading, if active nests are 55 of 57 February 15, 2005 Item # • • 56 of 57 February 15, 2005 Item # found within 500 feet of the grading, the grading activity shall be stopped until such time as mitigation measures to the satisfaction of the City and the United States fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) are implemented. There is no guarantee that grading will be allowed to resume. Before issuance of a Clearing/ Prior to Applicant Grading Permit, if grading or clearing Grading is to occur between February 15 and Permit July 1, the applicant shall provide to the Planning Division a letter from a qualified biologist retained by the applicant, with a scope of work for the CSS habitat and Gnatcatcher Survey and a map showing all habitat areas including all CSS habitat within 500 feet of the area to be graded. The biologist shall contact the USFWS to determine the appropriate survey methodology. The purpose of the survey is to determine if any active Gnatcatcher nests are located in the area to be cleared or graded, or if CSS habitat is within 500 feet of such area. To be considered qualified, the biologist must provide ,the City with a copy of a valid Gnatcatcher Recovery permit from the USFWS. The scope of work shall explain the survey methodology for the biological survey and the proposed Gnatcatcher nest monitoring activities during the clearing /grading operation. Should the survey show, to the satisfaction of the Director of Develop- ment Services, that active Gnatcatcher nests are not present within the area to be graded or cleared, or within 500 feet of said area, approval may be granted to commence grading /clearing within the Gnatcatcher nesting season between February 15 and July 1 with appropriate monitoring during that time. 56 of 57 February 15, 2005 Item # 0 0 MAp1anning \05report\ttm \03 -02 Northpoint Devehmmp.doc 57 of 57 February 15, 2005 Item # 2 If Gnatcatchers are present within the area to be graded /cleared, or within 500 feet of that area, no grading will be allowed unless appropriate mitigation is completed. MAp1anning \05report\ttm \03 -02 Northpoint Devehmmp.doc 57 of 57 February 15, 2005 Item # 2 Cc ALI31 PfIP— I "F I Uerz -!- 2 (mlo5 A•�y . From: "Josephine BYRNE" <BYRNE1 @peoplepc.com> To: "Jim Bowersox" <jowersox @ci.poway.ca.us> Date: Tue, Feb 15, 2005 8:06:33 AM Subject: Tooth Rock Development I am strongly opposed to development in the Tooth Rock area. This is one of the most exquisite areas of Poway. It is part of the heritage of Poway and should be preserved for all our children, not just the wealthy ones. The views are breathtaking and more development could not help but damage the area. The zoning should not be changed. Additionally, according to the paper, the development company agreed to preserve the Tooth Rock area in order to develop another area (Heritage 11). What happened to that agreement? JoAnn Byrne Page 1 of 1 February 15, 2005 Item #2 2 /IS /OS tml From: "Josephine BYRNE" <BYRNEI @peoplepc.com> To: "Councilmember Emery" <bemery@ci.poway.ca.us> Date: Tue, Feb 15, 2005 8:14 AM Subject: Tooth Rock Development Don't let further development happen at Tooth Rock! Is the city council contemplating allowing the development company to renege on the deal to preserve the area? JoAnn Byrne Helen McGlothlan Page 1 of 1 February 15, 2005 Item #2 2 From: "Josephine BYRNE" <BYRNEI @peoplepc.com> To: "Mayor Cafagna" <mcafagna @ci.poway.ca.us> Date: Tue, Feb 15, 2005 8:10 AM Subject: Tooth Rock Development Please don't allow further development of the Tooth Rock Area. This beautiful area should be preserved for our posterity. Have you been up there since the fire? The views are gorgeous. Someone said, "The Sound of Music has nothing on us." According to the paper, you are considering changing the zoning to allow more development, and this negates an agreement made with the owning company regarding preserving the Tooth Rock area in exchange for permission to develop another area. JoAnn Byrne Page 1 of 1 February 15, 2005 Item #2