HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-10-16; Planning Commission; Resolution 7524PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.7524
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A
SECOND ADDENDUM TO A FINAL SUPPLEMENTAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AS PREVIOUSLY ADDENDED
FOR: (1) AMENDMENTS TO THE GENERAL PLAN, ZONING
ORDINANCE, AND LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM FOR NEW AND
EXPANDED AIRPORT USES; AND (2) PROCEDURES FOR NOTICING,
STANDARDS FOR REVIEW, AND OTHER MATTERS WHERE THERE IS
COUNTY ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY BEYOND THE CURRENT
BOUNDARIES OF THE AIRPORT.
CASE NAME: CODE AMENDMENTS FOR NEW AND EXPANDED
AIRPORT LAND USES
WHEREAS, the City Planner has filed a verified application with the City of Carlsbad regarding: (1)
amendments to the General Plan Land Use and Community Design Element ("General Plan"), Title 21 of
the Carlsbad Municipal Code ("Zoning Ordinance"), and Local Coastal Program for new and expanded
airport airports; and (2) procedures for noticing, standards for review, and other matters where there is
acquisition of property beyond the current boundaries of the airport ("Procedures") hereinafter
collectively referred to as "Project;" and
WHEREAS, an Environmental Impact Report ("EIR"), State Clearinghouse No. 2011011004 (City
Planning Case No. EIR 13-02), was prepared and the City Council certified it as complete by City Council
Resolution No. 2015-242 on Sept. 22, 2015, for the General Plan Update; and
WHEREAS, the first addendum to the Final EIR 13-02 was prepared for the 2020 Climate Action
Plan Update and adopted on insert date; and
WHEREAS, the second addendum to the Final EIR 13-02 was prepared for the Housing Element
Update 2021-2029, and was adopted by City Council Resolution No. 2021-073 on April 6, 2021; and
WHEREAS, the third addendum to the Final EIR 13-02 was prepared for the Jefferson Mixed Use:
Townhome and Professional Office Project, and was adopted by City Council Resolution No. 2022-256 on
Nov. 8, 2022; and
CASE NO.: EIA2024-0004 (PUB2024-0008)
WHEREAS, in connection with an update to the General Plan Land Use and Community Design
Element, the General Plan Safety Element, the Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map, and the Local Coastal
Program for implementing a Housing Element rezone program, the City prepared a Final Supplemental
Environmental Impact Report tSEIR"), State Clearinghouse No. 2022090339 (City Planning Case No. EIR
2022-0007) to supplement EIR 13-02. On Jan. 30, 2024, the City Council certified the SEIR and adopted a
Statement of Findings of Fact, a Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program; and
WHEREAS, the Project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (11CEQA"), Public
Resources Code §§21000 et seq., and its implementing regulations, California Code of Regulations, Title
14, §§15000 et seq. (11CEQA Guidelines"); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA, the city is the Lead Agency for the Project, as the public agency with
the principal responsibility for approving the Project; and
WHEREAS, an Addendum / Initial Study (11IS") Checklist was prepared in accordance with CEQA
Guidelines §15063 and §15162 to evaluate the Project and to determine whether the environmental
effects of the later activity is within the scope of the previously prepared EIR; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA, when taking subsequent discretionary actions in furtherance of a
project for which an EIR has been certified, the Lead Agency is required to review any changed
circumstances to determine whether any of the circumstances under Public Resources Code §21166 and
CEQA Guidelines §15162 require additional environmental review; and
WHEREAS, City staff evaluated the environmental impact of the proposed modifications to the
Project in light of the standards for subsequent environmental review outlined in Public Resources Code
§21166 and CEQA Guidelines §15162; and
WHEREAS, based on this evaluation, staff concluded that the Final SEIR had fully analyzed and
mitigated, where feasible, in compliance with CEQA, all potentially significant environmental impacts, if
any, that would result from the Project modifications, that the impacts to the environment as a result of
the modifications are consistent with and would not create substantial new or increased impacts beyond
those that were evaluated in the Final SEIR, and that, therefore, no subsequent EIR or mitigated negative
declaration is now required; and
WHEREAS, as a result of the proposed modifications, and to document staffs evaluation of the
environmental impact of said modifications, staff prepared Addendum No. 2 to the Final SEIR pursuant to
CEQA Guidelines§ 15164; and
WHEREAS, the city duly noticed a public hearing of the Planning Commission on Oct. 16, 2024 to
consider recommending adoption of the Project. The public notice consisted of (1) that the project is
within the scope of the program approved earlier; and (2) the certified SEIR adequately describes the
proposed Project for the purposes of CEQA. Evidence was submitted to and considered by the Planning
Commission, including, without limitation:
1. Written information including all application materials and other written and graphical
information,
2. Oral testimony from city staff, interested parties, and the public,
3. The Oct. 16, 2024 Planning Commission staff report, which along with its attachments, is
incorporated herein by this reference as though fully set forth herein,
4. Additional information submitted during the public hearing; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if
any, of all persons desiring to be heard, examining Addendum No. 2 to the SEIR (Attachment A), on file in
the Planning Division and incorporated by this reference, and analyzing the information submitted by city
staff and considering any written and oral comments received, said Commission considered all factors
relating to EIR 13-02, EIR 2022-0007, and related addenda; and
WHEREAS, the Record of Proceedings upon which the Planning Commission bases its decision
includes, but is not limited to: (1) EIR 13-02, EIR 2022-0007, and related addenda, and any appendices and
technical reports cited in and/or relied upon in preparing the environmental documents; (2) the staff
reports, city files and records and other documents, prepared for and/or submitted to the city relating to
Addendum No. 2 to the SEIR and the Project itself; (3) the evidence, facts, findings and other
determinations set forth in herein; (4) the General Plan and the Carlsbad Municipal Code; (5) all designs,
plans, studies, data and correspondence submitted to the city in connection with Addendum No. 2 to the
SEIR and the Project itself; (6) all documentary and oral evidence received at public workshops, meetings,
or hearings or submitted to the city during the comment period relating to Addendum No. 2 to the SEIR
and/or elsewhere during the course of the review of the Project itself; (7) all other matters of common
knowledge to the to the city, including, but not limited to, city, state, and federal laws, policies, rules,
regulations, reports, records and projections related to development within the city and its surrounding
areas; and
WHEREAS, the city staff from the Planning Division and Office of the City Attorney have jointly
drafted this resolution based on the information provided in the administrative record, with the
understanding that this information is complete, true, and accurate.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
1. Record and Basis for Action. The Planning Commission has considered the full record before it,
which includes the Record of Proceedings. Furthermore, the recitals set forth above are found to
be complete, true, accurate, and material to this resolution; and are incorporated herein by
reference.
2. Compliance with CEQA. State CEQA Guidelines § 15164 requires lead agencies to prepare an
addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions to the project are necessary,
but none of the conditions requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR are present. The Planning
Commission has reviewed and considered EIR 13-02, EIR 2022-0007, and related addenda and
finds that those documents taken together contain a complete and accurate reporting of all of
the environmental impacts associated with the revised Project. The Planning Commission further
finds that the SEIR, Addendum No. 2 to the SEIR, and administrative record have been completed
in compliance with CEQA and CEQA Guidelines, and that the findings related to the SEIR and
Addendum No. 2 to the SEIR, taken together, reflect the Planning Commission's independent
judgment. Based upon the evidence submitted and as demonstrated by the analysis included in
the Addendum, which is attached hereto as Attachment A, none of the conditions described in
CEQA Guidelines§§ 15162 or 15163 calling for the preparation of a subsequent or supplemental
EIR or negative declaration have occurred; specifically:
A. The proposed modifications to the project do not create substantial changes that would
require major revisions to the SEIR due to the involvement of new significant
environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified
significant effects; and
B. The proposed modifications to the project do not create substantial changes with respect
to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken that will require major
revisions of the previous SEIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental
effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects;
and
C. There is no new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could
not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the SEIR was
certified as complete and adopted, that shows any of the following:
i. The modifications will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the
certified SEIR;
ii. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than
shown in the certified SEIR;
iii. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in
fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of
the project, but the Applicant declines to adopt the mitigation measure or
alternative;
iv. Mitigation measures or alternatives that are considerably different from those
analyzed in the certified SEIR would substantially reduce one or more significant
effects on the environment, but the Applicant declines to adopt the mitigation
measure or alterative; and
v. The evaluation of the proposed modifications to the project, certified SEIR, and
Addendum No. 2 to the SEIR reflect the Planning Commission's independent
judgment and analysis based on review of the entirety of the administrative
record, which record provides the information upon which this resolution is
based.
D. Pursuant to the above findings, the Planning Commission determines that the SEIR,
together with the Addendum, satisfy all the requirements of CEQA and is adequate to
serve as the required environmental documentation for the Project and, therefore
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of Addendum No. 2 to the SEIR for the Project (Attachment
A).
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City
of Carlsbad, California, held on Oct. 16, 2024, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Kamenjarin, Danna, Hubinger, Lafferty, Meenes, Stine
NAYES: Merz
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
ATTEST:
MIKE STRONG
Assistant Director, Community Development
City of Carlsbad
Addendum No. 2 to the Housing Element
Implementation and Public Safety Element
Update Supplemental Environmental Impact
Report for the Code Amendments for New and
Expanded Airports and Procedures to Implement
Public Utilities Code §21661.6
City of Carlsbad
1635 Faraday Avenue
Carlsbad, California 92008
Attaachment A
(i) .
.
Table of Contents
Table of Contents .............................................................................................................................................. i
Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................................... iii
1 Introduction and Project Summary ........................................................................................................... 1
Project Title .......................................................................................................................................................... 1
Lead Agency Name and Address ......................................................................................................................... 1
Contact Person and Phone Number ..................................................................................................................... 1
Project Location ................................................................................................................................................... 1
Project Sponsor’s Name and Address .................................................................................................................. 1
Background.......................................................................................................................................................... 3
Project Description .............................................................................................................................................. 4
2 Project Context ........................................................................................................................................ 6
3 Overview of the CEQA Guidelines ............................................................................................................ 8
4 Environmental Effects and Determinations ........................................................................................... 10
5 Addendum Methodology ....................................................................................................................... 11
6 Addendum Evaluation ........................................................................................................................... 16
7 References ............................................................................................................................................. 88
Figures
Figure 1 Regional Location and Project Vicinity ............................................................................... 2
This page intentionally left blank.
Executive Summary
The proposed Project consists of two parts. The Project includes proposed amendments to the General
Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and Local Coastal Program to specify and clarify the City of Carlsbad’s code
requirements and permit review procedures for new or expanded airport. The proposed Project also
consists of new procedures for noticing, standards for review, and other matters where there is
acquisition of property beyond the current boundaries of the McClellan-Palomar Airport. When used
in relation to the Addendum, the terms “Project” and “proposed Project” are interchangeable and
refer to both parts.
The proposed Project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), Public Resources
Code §§21000 et seq., and its implementing regulations, California Code of Regulations, Title 14,
§§15000 et seq. (“CEQA Guidelines”). Pursuant to CEQA, the city is the Lead Agency for the Project, as
the public agency with the principal responsibility for approving the Project.
CEQA Guidelines §15160 explains that there are several mechanisms, and variations in environmental
documents, that can be tailored to different situations and intended uses of environmental review.
Specifically, GEQ Guidelines §15160 states that the “… variations listed [including Subsequent EIRs,
Supplemental EIRs, and addendums] are not exclusive. Lead Agencies may use other variations
consistent with the Guidelines to meet the needs of other circumstances.” This provision allows Lead
Agencies to tailor the use of CEQA mechanisms (such as an addendum) to fit the circumstances
presented to the Lead Agency by a project.
In considering the potential environmental impacts of the proposed Project, the city has determined
that the EIR certified for the 2015 General Plan Update (General Plan & Climate Action Plan
Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse No. 2011011004, dated June 2015), SEIR certified
for the 2023 Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update (Housing Element
Implementation and Public Safety Element Update Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, State
Clearinghouse No. 2022090339, dated July 2023), and related addenda, are of continuing
informational value. Further, inasmuch as the proposed Project would reflect a change to the original
“project” that was analyzed in the Previous CEQA Documents, the analysis shows that these changes
would not result in a change to the approved EIR/SEIR. All of the impact issues previously examined in
the approved EIR/SEIR would remain unchanged with the proposed modifications. The changes
proposed are relatively minor and would not result in any new significant environmental impacts or
result in a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects which would
call for, as provided in §15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the preparation of a Subsequent EIR.
Therefore, this document’s analysis supports that an addendum to the approved EIR/SEIR is the
appropriate form of documentation to meet the statutory requirements of CEQA.
This page intentionally left blank.
1 Introduction and Project Summary
Project Title
Addendum No. 2 to the Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (“SEIR”) for: (1) amending the General Plan, Zoning
Ordinance, and Local Coastal Program; and (2) adopting procedures to implement Public Utilities Code
§21161.
The code amendments and procedures, together, are hereinafter collectively referred to as the
“Project” or “proposed Project.”
Lead Agency Name and Address
City of Carlsbad
1635 Faraday Avenue
Carlsbad, California 92008
Contact Person and Phone Number
Mike Strong, Assistant Director of Community Development, 442-339-2721.
Project Location
The City of Carlsbad encompasses approximately 39 square miles of land in northwest San Diego
County and is surrounded by Oceanside to the north, Vista, San Marcos, and unincorporated areas of
San Diego County to the east, Encinitas to the south, and the Pacific Ocean to the west. Along
Carlsbad’s northern edge, urban development abuts Highway 78, with the roadway and Buena Vista
Lagoon acting as a boundary between Carlsbad and Oceanside. Similarly, Batiquitos Lagoon, along the
city’s southern edge, acts as a boundary between Carlsbad and Encinitas. To the east, boundaries are
less distinct, as a mix of hillsides and urban development are adjacent to Vista, San Marcos, and
unincorporated County lands. Since the proposed Project involves specifying and clarifying the city’s
code requirements and permit review procedures for new or expanded airports, the Project’s planning
boundary is the Carlsbad city limits, which is depicted on Figure 1. The McClellan-Palomar Airport is
the only airport in the city’s limits. The airport is owned and operated by the County of San Diego and
located north of Palomar Airport Road between College Avenue and El Camino Real.
Project Sponsor’s Name and Address
City of Carlsbad
1635 Faraday Avenue
Carlsbad, California 92008
Figure 1 Regional Location and Project Vicinity
SAN DIEGO
COUNTY
• --, City of Carlsbad r.:_. . _:__ ___ l City Limits [ ___ _
0 1.5
7 in= 2.9ml
• n Base Esn Ocea8 GIS 001 2021013
3
Miles
San Marcos
c-'l..r.r
-<'
i-
_j
( • " I \. ·,
n.J i
Turner
Background
California has a diverse variety of airport types, ranging from large hub commercial airports to small,
privately owned airstrips. Additionally, California supports many facilities in a wide range of categories.
Although commercial service airports handle most of the public’s air travel needs, the most common
type of airport in California is the General Aviation Airport. General Aviation Airports offer a wide
variety of services, ranging from flight instruction, recreation, air cargo, emergency medical
transportation, law enforcement, and firefighting operations.
There are a lot of considerations that go into the storage, maintenance, and operation of aircraft –
from aviation demand forecasts, airfield requirements, gate and terminal space requirements, airline
support facilities, and surface transportation requirements. This includes but is not limited to runway
and taxiway design, passenger terminals, hangars, aprons, parking facilities, etc. To identify future
construction and capital infrastructure needs, airport proprietors will often prepare airport master
plans to identify existing airside (runway and taxiway system, etc.) and landside (terminal and hangars,
etc.) facilities, evaluate what facilities are needed in the future to what is currently available, and
recommend future construction and capital projects. An airport master plan is a comprehensive study
of the airport and typically describes short-, medium-, and long-term plans for airport development.
Performing regular airport master plan updates on a regular basis helps the airport proprietor meet
the changes emerging in the aviation industry and the future development requirements these
changes may create.
The analysis of various airside and landside functional areas are typically performed with the guidance
of several Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”) publications, including non-regulatory Advisory
Circulars (“AC”) 150/5060-5, Airport Capacity and Delay, 150/5300-13, Airport Design, and Order
5090.3C, Field Formulation of the National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (“NPIAS”). These
guidelines should be regarded as general planning tools with development tied to aviation activity
levels.
Palomar Airport Background
The Palomar Airport was opened in 1959 by the County after being relocated from Del Mar due to the
construction of Interstate 5 (“I-5”). When it was constructed, the area was mainly dominated by
agricultural uses, and as surrounding areas developed the Palomar Airport property became part of a
larger unincorporated island completely surrounded by the city. Palomar Airport was annexed to the
City of Carlsbad (“City”) by the San Diego Local Area Formation Commission (“LAFCO”) on Sept. 11,
1978. The City Council adopted Resolution No. 5637 and ordered the airport annexed on Dec. 19, 1978.
In order to comply with the requirements of the City of Carlsbad Zoning Code, the Local Area Formation
Commission (“LAFCO”) required an appropriate zoning designation be placed upon the airport
property and for the County to obtain a Conditional Use Permit from the city (LAFCO Annexation Case
No. CA77-50). Since then, the city’s General Plan Maps and Zoning Maps have continuously shown the
precise boundary of Palomar Airport. The Palomar Airport has a Public (P) General Plan land use
designation and is zoned Industrial (M) pursuant to the Carlsbad Municipal Code (“CMC”) Zoning
Ordinance (Title 21, Section 21.34).
Federal policies categorize airports by type of activities, including “Commercial Service Airports,”
“Cargo Service Airports,” “Reliever Airports,” and “General Aviation Airports.” A General Aviation
Airport is a public-use airport that does not have scheduled services or has scheduled service with less
than 2,500 passenger boardings (enplanements) each year (49 U.S.C. §47102(8)). At the time of the
Palomar Airport’s annexation into the city, the airport was classified as a “General Aviation Airport” by
the FAA. And when the Planning Commission approved CUP-172 (Resolution No. 1699) it was subject
to the condition that "[t]he existing designation of the airport as a General Aviation Basic Transport
Airport shall not change unless an amendment to this [Conditional Use Permit] is approved by the
Planning Commission.” The city’s land uses and zoning districts have been predicated upon the
continued operation of the airport as a General Aviation Airport as it was designated since the time of
annexation.
Project Initiation
On Dec. 17, 2019, a minute motion was made by the City Council that directed the City Manager and
the City Attorney to coordinate and bring back to the City Council specific procedures outlining a
process the city would apply and follow prior to the approval of the acquisition of property for any
airport purpose and where a vote of the people of Carlsbad would fit into that process.
On April 23, 2024, the city Council adopted a resolution of intent (Resolution No. 2024-086,) to
authorize the processing of code amendment applications to specify and clarify the city’s code
requirements and permit review procedures for new or expanded airport land uses.
Project Description
The Project includes two components: (1) amending the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and Local
Coastal Program; and (2) adopting procedures to implement Public Utilities Code §21661.6.
Amendments to the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and Local Coastal Program
Pursuant to the authority of Government Code §§65100 et seq., 65350 et seq., and 65850 et seq.;
Coastal Act §§30510 through 30514; and §§13551 through 13555 of the Commission’s regulations,
contained in Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, said verified application in its entirety
constitute amendments to the General Plan Land Use and Community Design Element (“General
Plan”), Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code (“Zoning Ordinance”), and Local Coastal Program (the
main land use document for coastal area development and natural resource protection).
Amendments to the General Plan propose the following:
1) Specify as a policy statement city opposition to any changes to the Palomar Airport that would
increase the impacts of the airport on neighboring communities.
2) Incorporate state law definitions for “airport” and “airport expansion.”
3) Require new or expanded “airport” land uses to obtain a new or amended Conditional Use
Permit.
4) Permit “airport” development only within the current boundary of Palomar Airport.
Amendments to the Zoning Ordinance amendments propose the following:
5) Incorporate state law definitions for “airport” and “airport expansion.”
6) Permit “airport” land uses only by issuance of a new or amended Conditional Use Permit.
7) Amend the zoning tables to remove “airport” as permissible land uses, such that only the
property within the current boundary of Palomar Airport as depicted in the city zoning map
would remain as permissible for “airport” land uses.
Procedures
Under California law (Public Utilities Code §21661.6) the acquisition of the property may not begin
until: (1) the County submits a plan detailing the proposed uses of the property to the city; and (2) the
city holds a public hearing on the plan and subsequently approves that plan. Because implementation
of the 2021 PAMPU could result in a proposal to acquire property beyond the current boundaries of
the Palomar Airport (and those properties are located within the limits of the city), the city has
determined that it is necessary to adopt procedures concerning noticing, standards for review, and
other matters relating the city’s role, review, and approval an airport expansion or enlargement plan
or where there is an acquisition of property beyond the current boundaries of the airport, including
necessary findings pursuant to Public Utilities Code §21661.6.
Discretionary Actions
The Project would require the following discretionary actions by the City Council:
• Approval of Addendum No. 2 to the Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety
Element Update Supplemental Environmental Impact Report;
• Adoption of the amendments to the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and Local Coastal
Program; and
• Adoption of procedures to implement Public Utilities Code §21661.6.
Location of Prior Environmental Document(s)
The location and custodian of the EIR certified for the 2015 General Plan Update (General Plan &
Climate Action Plan Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse No. 2011011004, dated June
2015), SEIR certified for the 2023 Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
(Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update Supplemental Environmental
Impact Report, State Clearinghouse No. 2022090339, dated July 2023), and related addenda are with
the City Clerk, City of Carlsbad, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, CA.
2 Project Context
The following provides a timeline of related environmental documentation that has been previously
prepared to support the environmental clearances for the Project.
On September 22, 2015, the City of Carlsbad certified a Final EIR for a comprehensive update to the
General Plan and a Climate Action Plan (General Plan & Climate Action Plan Environmental Impact
Report, State Clearinghouse Number 2011011004, City Planning Case No. EIR 13-02) (City of Carlsbad
2015). The certified EIR discussed the potential environmental impacts (both direct and indirect
impacts) associated with future development allowed under the General Plan Update and included a
thorough analysis of the estimated build out of the city through the horizon year 2035. The EIR found
that, with implementation of the policies and programs contained in the General Plan and
recommended mitigation measures, all impacts (direct and indirect) associated with future
development under the General Plan update would be less than significant, except impacts on Air
Quality and Transportation which would be significant and unavoidable.
On July 14, 2020, the City Council approved CAP Amendment No. 1 to revise the GHG inventory and
reduction targets and forecast, update reductions from existing measures and incorporate community
choice energy as a new reduction measure. Addendum No. 1 to the 2015 General Plan Update and CAP
EIR was prepared in May 2020 for EIR 13-02 to support updates to the certified CAP (“CAP Amendment
No. 1”) (City of Carlsbad 2020). The Addendum concluded that CAP Amendment No. 1 did not constitute
a substantial change in the project or circumstances involving significant environmental effects or a
substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. The mitigation measures previously
included and remaining in the CAP, and the CCE implementation measure remained feasible. Therefore,
CAP Amendment No. 1 did not necessitate a subsequent EIR because it did not create any of the
situations contained in State CEQA Guidelines §15162.
Addendum No. 2 to the Final EIR 13-02 was prepared for the Housing Element Update 2021-2029 and
was adopted by City Council Resolution No. 2021-073 on April 6, 2021 (City of Carlsbad 2021). The
Addendum. The Addendum found that, with implementation of mitigation measures, all impacts
(direct and indirect) associated with the Housing Element did not identify any changes in the Project
(2015 General Plan), changes in circumstance, and/or any new information of substantial importance
that would cause significant effects to environmental resources. Addendum No. 2 determined that the
2015 General Plan EIR was of continuing informational value, the changes in the 2021 Housing Element
Update were within the scope of that previously certified EIR, and none of the conditions requiring the
preparation of subsequent or supplemental environmental review under CEQA Guidelines §15162
existed.
Addendum No. 3 to the Final EIR 13-02 was prepared for the Jefferson Mixed Use: Townhome and
Professional Office Project was adopted by City Council Resolution No. 2022-256 on Nov. 8, 2022 (City
of Carlsbad 2022). The project consisted of amendments to the General Plan and Zoning Map to
support four residential air-space condominium units and a detached, approximately 897-square-foot
office building. The Addendum concluded that the land use development project did not constitute a
substantial change in the project or circumstances involving significant environmental effects or a
substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects. Therefore, Housing Element Update
2021-2029 did not necessitate a subsequent EIR because it did not create any of the situations contained
in State CEQA Guidelines §15162.
In connection with an update to the General Plan Land Use and Community Design Element, the
General Plan Safety Element, the Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map, and the Local Coastal Program
for implementing a Housing Element rezone program, the city prepared a Final SEIR, State
Clearinghouse No. 2022090339 (City Planning Case No. EIR 2022-0007) to supplement EIR 13-02. On
January 30, 2024, the City Council certified the SEIR and adopted a Statement of Findings of Fact, a
Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (City of
Carlsbad 2024). The certified SEIR discussed the potential environmental impacts (both direct and
indirect impacts) associated with the development of housing on 18 sites as part of the Housing Element
implementation. The SEIR identified updates to the Carlsbad General Plan, specifically the Land Use and
Community Design Element, to allow for this development. The Public Safety Element would also be
updated to ensure consistency with State regulations. Updates to the Land Use and Community Design
Element included the addition of two new residential land use designations (R-35 and R-40) for the
accommodation of higher density residential development, establishment of revised minimum
densities for some residential designations, miscellaneous, related changes to tables, text and policies,
and changes to land use designations on multiple sites to accommodate the city’s Regional Housing
Needs Allocation (RHNA) share. Updates to the Public Safety Element included the addition of the
requirements of new State legislation and the incorporation of new policies based on local and regional
data. The SEIR found that, with implementation of mitigation measures, all impacts (direct and indirect)
associated with the Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update would be less
than significant, except impacts on Air Quality, GHG, Noise, and Transportation which would be
significant and unavoidable.
Addendum No. 1 to the Final SEIR 2022-0007 was prepared for the 2024 Climate Action Plan Update
and was adopted by City Council Resolution No. [pending City Council decision - insert no.] on [insert
date] (City of Carlsbad 2024). The changes proposed with the project were relatively minor and would
not result in any new significant environmental impacts. Addendum No. 1 to Final SEIR 2022-0007
determined that none of the conditions requiring the preparation of subsequent or supplemental
environmental review under CEQA Guidelines §15162 existed.
This Second Addendum to the Final SEIR 2022-0007 (“Addendum No. 2 to the Final SEIR”) evaluates
two components: (1) amending the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and Local Coastal Program; and
(2) adopting procedures to implement Public Utilities Code §21161. These modifications to ordinances
and policies and procedures are described in more detail in Section 1. The Addendum No. 2 to the Final
SEIR will describe the effects of the change to the Project on the environmental setting, impacts, and
mitigation measures.
3 Overview of the CEQA Guidelines
Section 15160 of the CEQA Guidelines explains that there are several mechanisms, and variations in
environmental documents, that can be tailored to different situations and intended uses of
environmental review. Specifically, §15160 states that the “…variations listed [including Subsequent
EIRs, Supplemental EIRs, and addendums] are not exclusive. Lead agencies may use other variations
consistent with the Guidelines to meet the needs of other circumstances.” This provision allows Lead
agencies to tailor the use of CEQA mechanisms (such as this addendum) to fit the circumstances
presented to the lead agency by a project. Here, the city has opted to prepare an addendum to assess
the minor modifications of the Project that have transpired since preparation of the EIR.
Public Resources Code §21166 and California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) Guidelines §§15162
and 15164 set forth the criteria for determining the appropriate additional environmental
documentation, if any, to be completed when changes are proposed to a project that has a previously
certified EIR. When considering the need for additional environmental review, the fundamental
determination a lead agency must make is whether the previously certified EIR retains some
informational value or whether changes in the project or circumstances have rendered it wholly
irrelevant. If the previously certified EIR has continuing informational value, the lead agency then must
determine whether the proposed changes in the Project require additional environmental review
under Public Resources Code §21166 and CEQA Guidelines §15162.
CEQA Guidelines §15164 states that a lead agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified
EIR if some changes or additions are necessary, but none of the conditions described in §15162 calling
for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. CEQA Guidelines §15162(a) states that no
Subsequent or Supplemental EIR shall be prepared for a project with a certified EIR unless the lead
agency determines, based on substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, one or more of the
following:
1. Substantial changes are proposed in the project that will require major revisions of the previous
EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in
the severity of previously identified significant effects.
2. Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is
undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new
significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified
significant effects.
3. New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been
known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as
complete, shows any of the following:
A. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR.
B. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the
previous EIR.
C. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be
feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the
project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.
D. Mitigation measures or alternatives that are considerably different from those analyzed in
the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the
environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or
alternative.
The analysis pursuant to §15162 of the CEQA Guidelines demonstrates whether the lead agency can
approve the activity as being within the scope of the existing certified EIR, that an addendum to the
existing EIR would be appropriate, and no new environmental document, such as a new EIR, would be
required. The addendum need not be circulated for public review but can be included in or attached to
the final EIR/SEIR, and the decision-making body shall consider the addendum with the final EIR/EIR prior
to taking an action on the Project.
The city has prepared this Addendum, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §§15162 and 15164, to evaluate
whether the proposed Project’s environmental impacts are covered by and within the scope of the
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update Supplemental Environmental
Impact Report – State Clearinghouse Number 2022090339 (Final SEIR 2022-0007). The following
addendum details any changes in the original “project,” changes in circumstances under which the
original “project” is undertaken, and/or “new information of substantial importance” that may cause
one or more significant effects to environmental resources.
The responses herein substantiate and support the city’s determination that the potential
environmental impacts of the proposed Project are within the scope of the final EIR/SEIR, and do not
require subsequent or supplemental environmental review under Public Resources Code §21166 and
§15162 of the CEQA Guidelines and, in conjunction with the SEIR, preparation of an addendum
pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15164 is appropriate.
4 Environmental Effects and Determinations
The subject areas checked below were determined to be new significant environmental effects or to
be previously identified effects that have a substantial increase in severity either due to a change in
Project, change in circumstances, or new information of substantial importance, as indicated by the
checklist and discussion on the following pages.
■ NONE
□ Aesthetics □ Air Quality □ Biological Resources
□ Energy, Greenhouse Gas Emissions,
and Climate Change
□ Geology, Soils,
and Seismicity
□ Hazards and Hazardous
Materials, Airport Safety, and
Wildfires
□ Historical, Archaeological, and
Paleontological Resources (includes
Tribal Cultural Resources)
□ Hydrology and
Flooding
/Water Quality
□ Land Use Planning, Housing,
and Population
□ Noise □ Public Facilities
and Services
□ Utilities and Service Systems
□ Transportation □ Agriculture &
Forestry
Resources
□ Impacts Not Potentially
Significant: Mineral
Resources
Determination
Based on this analysis, the 2024 Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
SEIR has continuing informational value and:
□ Substantial changes are proposed in the original “project” or there are substantial changes in
the circumstances under which the project will be undertaken that will require major revisions
to the previous EIR due to the involvement of significant new environmental effects or a
substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. Or, there is “new
information of substantial importance,” as that term is used in CEQA Guidelines §15162(a)(3).
Therefore, a SUBSEQUENT or SUPPLEMENTAL EIR is required.
■ No substantial changes are proposed in the original “project” and there are no substantial
changes in the circumstances under which the “project” will be undertaken that will require
major revisions to the previous EIR due to the involvement of significant new environmental
effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. Also,
there is no “new information of substantial importance” as that term is used in CEQA
Guidelines §15162(a)(3). Therefore, the preparation of an Addendum to the previously
certified SEIR (City of Carlsbad, Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element
Update Supplemental Environmental Impact Report – State Clearinghouse Number
2022090339, dated July 2023) is adequate and appropriate.
Signature: _________________________________ Date: __________________________
Printed Name: ______________________________ Title: __________________________
5 Addendum Methodology
The city has previously prepared and certified an EIR for the 2015 General Plan, an Addendum for the
CAP Amendment (2020), an Addendum for the Housing Element (2021), an Addendum for the
Jefferson Mixed Use development project, a SEIR for the Housing Element Implementation and Public
Safety Element Update (2024), and an Addendum for the Climate Action Plan Update (2024).
Collectively, these CEQA reviews are known as the “Previous CEQA Documents.” No legal actions were
filed challenging the Previous CEQA Documents and thus are presumed valid.
When only some changes or additions to a previously certified EIR/SEIR are necessary and none of the
conditions described in Public Resources Code §21166 or §15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines calling
for the preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR are met, CEQA allows the lead agency to
prepare and adopt an addendum. (CEQA Guidelines §15164(a).)
In general, adoption or amendment to ordinances and policies and procedures do not directly affect
the environment, as ordinances and policies and procedures are intended or developed to guide a
local government’s physical, social, and economic growth in the future. However, the lead agency
must take account the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site impacts, cumulative
as well as project-level impacts, indirect as well as direct impacts, as well as construction and
operational impacts. The potential impacts of an adoption or amendment to ordinances and policies
and procedures are generally indirect, related to changes in future development patterns. Because of
the subject matter (new and expanded airports), impacts related to noise, safety, airspace protection,
and aircraft overflight must also be considered.
In conducting its environmental analysis of the proposed Project, and preparing Addendum No. 2 to
the Final SEIR, the city looked beyond what direct impacts could be attributable to the Project and also
considered how people might respond to the city’s code requirements and permit review procedures
for the orderly expansion of Palomar Airport. Noise and safety are the two primary airport impact
concerns that have the potential to affect the health, safety, and welfare of people and property in
the vicinity of an airport and to people on board the aircraft. Safety impacts from aircraft accidents
near airports are typically handled by specifying the types of land uses and thus limiting the number
of people who would be exposed to the risk of an accident. The other major safety concern is related
to land uses that can create hazards to flight. Airspace protection primarily involves limitations on the
height of objects on the ground near airports. Additional flight hazards to be considered are activities
that can cause electronic or visual impairment to navigation or attract large numbers of birds. Thus,
among other things, this addendum evaluates the proposed Project’s indirect and cumulative
relationship with the following: (1) the intensity of non-residential development measured in terms of
the number of people concentrated in areas most susceptible to aircraft accidents; (2) the density of
residential development measured in terms of dwelling units per acre; (3) development or expansion
of certain uses that represent special safety concerns regardless of the number of people present; and
(4) the extent to which development covers the ground and thus limits the options of where an aircraft
in distress can attempt an emergency landing. Therefore, as analyzed in more detail below, the
addendum evaluates whether the proposed Project would result in (1) substantial changes that
require major revisions to the EIR/SEIR; (2) substantial changes to circumstances, related to significant
effects, that require major revisions to the EIR/SEIR; (3) new information of substantial importance
regarding worsened significant effects, mitigation measures or alternatives now found to be feasible;
or new mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in
the EIR/SEIR.
It is important to note that from a CEQA perspective, the character of the development of the Palomar
Airport or the land or areas surrounding the airport would remain the same by which was previously
contemplated by the city in its certification of the EIR/EIS. The 2021 PAMPU’s desired, long-term
outcome or result to extend the runway is not new information or pertinent to this document’s
assessment of the conditions to prepare a subsequent or supplemental EIR.
• The runway extension was first introduced by the airport proprietors in the 1975 Airport
Master Plan. The 1975 Airport Master Plan anticipated “unrestricted” demand to be
approximately 500,000 annual operations by the year 1990, but the “constrained” operations
at Palomar Airport were anticipated to level-off at 290,000 annual operations by 1995.
(“Unconstrained” or “unrestricted” demand refers to the demand that an airport would expect
without taking into account any physical, operational, or legal impediments to an aircraft
operator’s use of the airport. The “constrained” forecast of demand takes those airport-
specific conditions into account.) The unrestricted forecast for the number of aircraft based at
Palomar Airport was determined to be 786, but due to Palomar Airport’s limited space, it was
estimated that only 600 based aircraft could be accommodated. The 1975 Airport Master Plan
identified a number of improvements that would be needed to meet this anticipated growth.
Of the improvements recommended in the 1975 Airport Master Plan, the most significant
were construction of a new parallel runway and extension of the existing runway. The 1975
Airport Master Plan proposed extending the existing runway, Runway 06-24, to a landing
length of 5,100 feet; it proposed constructing a parallel runway of 3,600 feet to the north. The
County performed most of the construction and capital projects that the 1975 Airport Master
Plan proposed, but not the extension of Runway 06-24 or the construction of the parallel
runway.
• The County first updated the 1975 Airport Master Plan in 1997, when it adopted the 1997
Airport Master Plan. While the County determined that the orientation and location of Runway
06-24 met FAA standards, the 1997 Airport Master Plan stated that it was desirable to
construct additional runway capacity to meet Palomar Airport’s “unconstrained” forecast
demand and growing operations. The 1997 Airport Master Plan projected that, by 2015,
Palomar Airport would have approximately 610 based aircraft and approximately 260,000
annual aircraft operations. As a result, the 1997 Airport Master Plan identified several
improvements that would be desirable to meet this anticipated growth, including extending
the existing Runway 06-24 by 300 feet to the east. The 1997 Airport Master Plan indicated that
the actual need and specific timing for new facilities would be established by levels of aircraft
activity. However, the 1997 Airport Master Plan’s forecasted aviation activity has not been
realized, and the runway extension was never pursued during the planning period.
• The 2021 PAMPU anticipates that the Palomar Airport will have up to 12,410 air carrier
operations, 12,727 air taxi/commuter operations, 168,958 general aviation operations, and
955 military operations by 2036. This results in approximately 195,050 total operations and
304,673 total enplanements. The exact timing for implementation of airside and landside
construction and capital projects are not defined in the 2021 PAMPU because project-specific
information had not been fully developed. The 2021 Airport Master Plan calls for a runway
extension of 200 feet (+/-10%) now and adding an additional 600 feet in the future, beyond
the 200-foot extension (total runway length of 5,697). This alternative would also shift the
centerline of Runway 06-24 the runway 104 feet to the north. Final decisions on these projects
have not been made.
All the foregoing (administrative record) predates the city’s certification of the Housing Element
Implementation and Public Safety Element Update (Housing Element Implementation and Public
Safety Element Update Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, State Clearinghouse No.
2022090339, dated July 2023). Thus, the adoption of the 2021 PAMPU EIR and 2021 PAMPU carries no
new information or value of significance that was not previously contemplated by the city in its
certification of the 2024 SEIR.
The above-described targeted text amendments to city ordinances and policies and procedures
(Section 1) have been evaluated under CEQA to determine whether such changes in the original
“project,” circumstances, or information would trigger the need for any subsequent or supplemental
environmental documentation based on new or substantially more severe significant environmental
impacts. This is inclusive of secondary effects that may be reasonably foreseeable and caused by the
proposed Project. Based upon the environmental checklist prepared for the Project (Section 6), the
environmental effects associated with the implementation of the Project do not require additional
analysis beyond the analysis previously prepared and distributed in the Final EIR/EIS.
A. The proposed Project neither forbids nor authorizes a use or project/activity that could directly
alter the environment. The proposed Project does not directly authorize a use or
project/activity that could constitute hazards to people or property or aircraft in flight. The
proposed Project does not authorize a new building or structure and it does not increase the
number of people expected to occupy a non-residential or residential development in the
airport or in the lands or areas surrounding the airport. The proposed Project does not
construct, erect, or install tall structures, trees, and other objects near airports or on high
terrain. The proposed Project does not develop or construct a facility that represents special
safety concerns, attracts wildlife, causes visual impairment, or generates electronic
interference.
The legal provisions proposed in the Project are in the nature of a clarification of existing
ordinances; the Project’s intent is not to change the scope of city regulation. To the contrary,
the intent is to harmonize definitions in state law and city ordinances to ensure consistent
application of the law.
B. The proposed Project identified above is within the scope of the Previous CEQA Documents.
1. The EIR/EIS fully analyzed the environmental impacts that could occur from the city’s
cumulative build-out (site capacity, yield, sequence, and timing of public and private
land development projects/activities). There has been no change to the uniformity the
laws, policies, rules, and regulations that relate to future development patterns,
including but not limited how the city: (1) authorizes the review, design, and approval
of subdivisions; (2) requests dedications of public improvements; (3) collects related
permit or impact fees; or (4) how the city would otherwise require project-level
compliance with the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Local Coastal Program, and
ALUCP. The designated size, area, or degree of the airport, as designated on the city’s
General Plan Maps and Zoning Maps, does not change by any measurable or
quantifiable dimension. The Palomar Airport continues to have a Public (P) General
Plan land use designation and is zoned Industrial (M) pursuant to the CMC.
2. The proposed Project does not regulate the permissible physical uses of land within
Palomar Airport (existing boundaries). Rather than applying the scope of the definition
to lands or areas within the existing Palomar Airport boundary, the proposed Project
would only apply to land outside of, and not currently part of, Palomar Airport.
The proposed Project encourages the continued operation of the Palomar Airport as
a General Aviation Airport, while specifying and clarifying the city’s code requirements
and permit review procedures for the orderly expansion of Palomar Airport, without
interfering with any existing federal regulations. Nothing substantial, indirectly or
cumulatively, has changed with respect to the ’s land use safety compatibility planning
efforts and adopted ALUCP criteria to minimize the risks associated with impacts
related to noise, safety, airspace protection, and aircraft overflight. Nothing the city is
proposing would have an effect on aircraft operations, which could continue to rely
upon regulations enacted by the FAA and the State of California, as outlined in the
State Aeronautics Act. Furthermore, nothing has changed with respect to where the
EIR/SEIR assumed where the highest number of aircraft are arriving or departing,
where there would be proper safety and airspace protection, or where an off-airport
aircraft accident or emergency landing may occur.
3. Inasmuch as the revisions to the original “project” could be considered a change, for
the most part the proposed Project merely restates (rather than changing) existing law
and specifies and clarifies procedures, which must be followed prior to authorizing
new or expanded airport land uses/activities, and thus carries no potential for
resulting in a physical change in the environment. The only change is that the proposed
code amendments authorize airport-related uses only within the current boundary of
Palomar Airport and that the decision-making body to consider new or expanded
airport land uses shall be the City Council. The proposed Project does not significantly
change the intent of the use of the lands or areas surrounding the airport, as it was
originally contemplated in the EIR/SEIR. The addition of the targeted text amendments
and adoption of procedures to implement Public Utilities Code §21161 do not affect
the substance of the original “project” that was analyzed in the Previous CEQA
Documents, or the overall evaluation of city’s development potential for
projects/activities within the jurisdiction of the city.
C. In addition to changes in the original “project,” CEQA Guidelines §15162 states that no
subsequent EIR shall be required unless substantial changes occur with respect to the
circumstances under which the project is undertaken which would require major revisions of
the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant effects. In this instant, the
environmental setting has not significantly changed since the original “project” was approved.
At the time of the adoption of the original “project,” the city’s laws, policies, rules, and
regulations provided a benchmark to govern development within the Palomar Airport and the
land or areas surrounding the airport. Development since that time in the surrounding
community has largely occurred in the fashion dictated under the laws, policies, rules, and
regulations, with the exception being that it has happened in a less-intensive manner than
originally forecasted. However, the environmental circumstances and relevant land use
regulations remain mostly the same or are too insubstantial in their effect to require
subsequent environmental review.
The potential actions that could be taken by people in response to or to comply with (1) the
amendments to the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and Local Coastal Program; or (2) the
procedures to implement Public Utilities Code §21161, would be implemented in accordance
with local, state, and federal rules and regulations to protect surrounding communities from
adverse effects associated with airport operations, such as noise, safety hazards, and wildlife
interference. For the most part the proposed Project merely restates (rather than changing)
existing law, and thus carries no potential for resulting in a physical change in the
environment. There is no change to the uniformity to the various laws, policies, rules, and
regulations that relate to future development patterns, including but not limited how the city:
(1) authorizes the review, design, and approval of subdivisions; (2) requests dedications of
public improvements; (3) collects related permit or impact fees; or (4) how the city would
otherwise require project-level compliance with its General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Local
Coastal Program, and Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. .
D. Finally, there is no new information of substantial importance (which was not known or could
not have been known at the time of the EIR/SEIR adoption that shows any of the following:
1. The proposed Project would result in a significant effect not discussed in the EIR/SEIR
(CEQA Guidelines §15162(a)(3)(A);
2. The proposed Project would substantially increase in the severity of a previously
identified significant impact (CEQA Guidelines §15162(a)(3)(B);
3. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found infeasible that would now be
feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects identified, but
the city is declining to adopt such measures or alternatives (CEQA Guidelines
§15162(a)(3)(C); and
4. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those
analyzed in the EIR/SEIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on
the environment, but the city is declining to adopt such measures or alternatives
(CEQA Guidelines §15162(a)(3)(D).
6 Addendum Evaluation
Aesthetics
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162
Is a Subsequent SEIR Needed?
SEIR Evaluation Criteria
SEIR
Significance
Conclusion
SEIR
Mitigation
Measures
Do the Proposed
Changes Involve
a New or
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Are There New
Circumstances
Involving a New
or Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Is There New
Information
of Substantial
Importance
Requiring New Analysis
or
Verification?
Are Only Minor
Technical Changes
or Additions
Necessary or Did
None of the
Conditions Described in
§15162 Occur?
(§15164(a))
Project is within the
Scope of
the SEIR?
Would implementation of the CAP Update:
a. Have a substantial adverse effect
on a scenic vista?
Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
b. Substantially damage scenic
resources, including, but not
limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a State scenic
highway?
Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162
Is a Subsequent SEIR Needed?
SEIR Evaluation Criteria
SEIR Significance
Conclusion
SEIR Mitigation
Measures
Do the
Proposed
Changes Involve a New
or Substantial
Increase in
the Severity
of Previously Identified
Impacts?
Are There New
Circumstances Involving a
New or Substantial Increase in the Severity of Previously
Identified Impacts?
Is There New Information
of Substantial
Importance
Requiring
New Analysis or
Verification?
Are Only Minor
Technical
Changes or Additions
Necessary or
Did None of the
Conditions
Described in §15162 Occur?
(§15164(a))
Project is
within the Scope of the
SEIR?
c. In non-urbanized areas, substantially
degrade the exiting visual character or
quality of public views of the site and its
surroundings (Public views are those
that are experienced from publicly
accessible vantage point). If the project
is in an urbanized area, would the
project conflict with applicable zoning
and other regulations governing scenic
quality?
Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
d. Create a new source of substantial light or
glare that would adversely affect day- or
nighttime views in the area?
Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
Previous CEQA Analysis Aesthetics Findings
The 2024 SEIR identified less than significant impacts for scenic vistas (AES-1), scenic resources within
scenic highways (AES-2), visual quality (AES-3), and light and glare (AES-4) (Section 4.1, Aesthetics).
The certified EIR/SEIR, and related addenda, were completed in accordance with CEQA and CEQA
Guidelines. No legal actions were filed challenging the Previous CEQA Documents and thus are
presumed valid.
Addendum Analysis
The above-described targeted text amendments to city ordinances and policies and procedures have
been evaluated under CEQA to determine whether such changes in the original “project,”
circumstances, or information would trigger the need for any subsequent or supplemental
environmental documentation based on new or substantially more severe significant environmental
impacts. This is inclusive of secondary effects that may be reasonably foreseeable and caused by the
proposed Project. After a thorough factual evaluation, the city has determined that no further
environmental review is required, and as identified in the analysis below, all impacts associated with
the proposed Project would be equivalent to, or less than, the impacts previous analyzed in the
approved EIR/SEIR.
Please refer to Section 5 for a universal response on whether the proposed Project would result in (1)
substantial changes that require major revisions to the EIR/SEIR; (2) substantial changes to
circumstances; or (3) new information of substantial importance.
The 2024 SEIR identified less than significant impacts for scenic vistas (AES-1), scenic resources within
scenic highways (AES-2), visual quality (AES-3), and light and glare (AES-4) (Section 4.1, Aesthetics).
Implementation of the proposed Project would not change the types of projects/activities permitted
or where construction may occur. Construction activities associated with the 2024 SEIR, such as
equipment use and staging of materials, ground disturbances, removing existing pavement, repaving
roadway surfaces, painting or restriping pavement, modifying curbs, laying concrete, installing traffic
signals or lighting, installing landscaping, etc. all would be similar in impact (same time and place as
previously identified) and be short-term and temporary changes to aesthetic conditions in the city.
Long-term changes such as improvements at or near grade level of existing roadways and land
development projects would also be of the same time and place as previously identified. The proposed
Project would not result in new features of substantial height, bulk, or massing and implementation
of the proposed Project would not change the types of projects permitted or construction activities
that would have substantial adverse effects on existing scenic vistas, scenic resources, or visual quality.
Conclusion
The certified EIR/SEIR were completed in accordance with CEQA and CEQA Guidelines. Further, the
certified EIR/SEIR remains pertinent and continues to have strong informational value. Revisions to the
original “project” to specify and clarify the city’s code requirements and permit review procedures for
new or expanded airport land uses do not result in new significant impacts or increase the severity of
previously identified significant impacts in the approved EIR/SEIR. There are no changes in
circumstances or new information of substantial importance that would require major revisions to the
EIR/SEIR or result in new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously
identified effects. Since the adoption of the Previous CEQA Documents, there have been no substantial
changes in the city’s laws, policies, rules, regulations, that relate to actions contemplated by the
Project. Neither has there been new information, or a change of circumstances which would invalidate
the Previous CEQA Documents. It is not foreseeable that impacts from physical projects/activities
associated with the proposed Project would have greater or different impacts than those identified in
the approved EIR/SEIR. Therefore, the Project does not trigger any of the conditions that require the
preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR in Public Resources Code §21166 or §15162 of the
CEQA Guidelines, and therefore an Addendum is the appropriate document to address the Project. Applicable Mitigation Measures from the SEIR
There are no mitigation measures from the 2024 SEIR identified to reduce impacts related to
aesthetics.
Agriculture and Forestry Resources
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162
Is a Subsequent SEIR Needed?
SEIR Evaluation Criteria
SEIR
Significance
Conclusion
SEIR
Mitigation
Measures
Do the Proposed
Changes Involve
a New or
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Are There New
Circumstances
Involving a New
or Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Is There New
Information of
Substantial
Importance
Requiring New Analysis
or
Verification?
Are Only Minor
Technical Changes
or Additions
Necessary or Did
None of the
Conditions Described in
§15162 Occur?
(§15164(a))
Project is within the
Scope of
the SEIR?
Would implementation of the CAP Update:
a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique
Farmland, or Farmland of
statewide Importance, as shown
on maps prepared pursuant to
the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to
nonagricultural use?
No Impact None No No No Yes Yes
b. Conflict with existing zoning for
agricultural use, or a Williamson
Act contract?
No Impact None No No No Yes Yes
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162
Is a Subsequent SEIR Needed?
SEIR Evaluation Criteria
SEIR Significance
Conclusion
SEIR Mitigation
Measures
Do the
Proposed
Changes Involve a New
or Substantial
Increase in
the Severity
of Previously Identified
Impacts?
Are There New Circumstances
Involving a New or
Substantial Increase in the Severity of Previously
Identified Impacts?
Is There New
Information of
Substantial
Importance
Requiring New Analysis or
Verification?
Are Only Minor
Technical
Changes or Additions
Necessary or
Did None of
the Conditions
Described in §15162 Occur?
(§15164(a))
Project is
within the Scope of
the SEIR?
c. Conflict with existing zoning for, or
cause rezoning of, forest land, as
defined in Public Resources Code
Section 12220 (g)), timberland (as
defined by Public Resources Code
Section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined by
Government Code Section 51104(g))?
No Impact None No No No Yes Yes
d. Result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to non-forest
use?
No Impact None No No No Yes Yes
e. Involve other changes in the exiting
environment which, due to their
location or nature, could result in the
conversion of Farmland, to non-
agricultural use or conversion of forest
land to non-forest use?
No Impact None No No No Yes Yes
Previous CEQA Analysis Agriculture and Forestry Resources Findings
The 2024 SEIR identified no impacts for converting Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of
Statewide Importance (Farmland); for conflicting with existing zoning for agricultural use or a
Williamson Act contract or with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in
Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)); timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section
4526); or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section
51104(g)); and for resulting in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use; or
involving other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result
in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use
(Section 4.16.1, Agriculture and Forestry Resources).
The certified EIR/SEIR, and related addenda, were completed in accordance with CEQA and CEQA
Guidelines. No legal actions were filed challenging the Previous CEQA Documents and thus are
presumed valid.
Addendum Analysis
The above-described targeted text amendments to city ordinances and policies and procedures have
been evaluated under CEQA to determine whether such changes in the original “project,”
circumstances, or information would trigger the need for any subsequent or supplemental
environmental documentation based on new or substantially more severe significant environmental
impacts. This is inclusive of secondary effects that may be reasonably foreseeable and caused by the
proposed Project. After a thorough factual evaluation, the city has determined that no further
environmental review is required, and as identified in the analysis below, all impacts associated with
the proposed Project would be equivalent to, or less than, the impacts previous analyzed in the
approved EIR/SEIR.
Please refer to Section 5 for a universal response on whether the proposed Project would result in (1)
substantial changes that require major revisions to the EIR/SEIR; (2) substantial changes to
circumstances; or (3) new information of substantial importance.
The 2024 SEIR identified no impacts for converting Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of
Statewide Importance (Farmland); for conflicting with existing zoning for agricultural use or a
Williamson Act contract or with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in
Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)); timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section
4526); or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section
51104(g)); and for resulting in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use; or
involving other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result
in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use
(Section 4.16.1, Agriculture and Forestry Resources). Implementation of the proposed Project would
not result in the conversion of Important Farmland or forest land to urban or other uses. There are
currently no Williamson Act contracts in the city and the CAP Update does not propose land use
changes that would affect the status of any Williamson Act contracts. Additionally, there are no areas
in the city zoned as forest or timberland, therefore, implementation of the proposed project would
not conflict with existing zoning or cause rezoning any forest land, timberland, or timber land zoned
for timberland production. Therefore, the Project would not involve other changes in the exiting
environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in the conversion of Farmland, to non-
agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use.
Conclusion
The certified EIR/SEIR were completed in accordance with CEQA and CEQA Guidelines. Further, the
certified EIR/SEIR remains pertinent and continues to have strong informational value. Revisions to the
original “project” to specify and clarify the city’s code requirements and permit review procedures for
new or expanded airport land uses do not result in new significant impacts or increase the severity of
previously identified significant impacts in the approved EIR/SEIR. There are no changes in
circumstances or new information of substantial importance that would require major revisions to the
EIR/SEIR or result in new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously
identified effects. Since the adoption of the Previous CEQA Documents, there have been no substantial
changes in the city’s laws, policies, rules, regulations, that relate to actions contemplated by the
Project. Neither has there been new information, or a change of circumstances which would invalidate
the Previous CEQA Documents. It is not foreseeable that impacts from physical projects/activities
associated with the proposed Project would have greater or different impacts than those identified in
the approved EIR/SEIR. Therefore, the Project does not trigger any of the conditions that require the
preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR in Public Resources Code §21166 or §15162 of the
CEQA Guidelines, and therefore an Addendum is the appropriate document to address the Project. Applicable Mitigation Measures from the SEIR
There are no mitigation measures from the 2024 SEIR identified to reduce impacts related to
agriculture and forestry resources.
Air Quality
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162
Is a Subsequent SEIR Needed?
SEIR Evaluation Criteria
SEIR
Significance
Conclusion
SEIR
Mitigation
Measures
Do the Proposed
Changes Involve
a New or
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Are There New
Circumstances
Involving a New
or Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Is There New
Information
of Substantial
Importance
Requiring New Analysis
or
Verification?
Are Only Minor
Technical Changes
or Additions
Necessary or Did
None of the
Conditions Described in
§15162 Occur?
(§15164(a))
Project is within the
Scope of
the SEIR?
Would implementation of the CAP Update:
a. Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of the applicable
air quality plan?
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
MM AQ-1 No No No Yes Yes
b. Result in a cumulatively
considerable net increase of any
criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment
under an applicable federal or
State ambient air quality
standard?
Significant and
Unavoidable MM AQ-2 No No No Yes Yes
c. Expose sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant
concentrations?
Less than
Significant with Mitigation
MM AQ-3
MM AQ-4 No No No Yes Yes
d. Result in other emissions (such as
those leading to odors) adversely
affecting a substantial number of
people?
Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
Previous CEQA Analysis Air Quality Findings
The 2024 SEIR identified a less than significant impact related to a conflict with or obstruction of the
San Diego Regional Air Quality Strategy or State Implementation Plan (AQ-1) with implementation of
mitigation measure AQ-1. The 2024 SEIR identified that although mitigation measure AQ-2 would
reduce operational emissions from future development, it would be speculative to quantify such
emissions until details of the individual projects are known and concluded impacts to be significant
and unavoidable (AQ-2). The 2024 SEIR identified a less than significant impact related to exposing
offsite sensitive receptors to substantial pollution concentrations (AQ-3) with implementation of
mitigation measure AQ-3 and mitigation measure AQ-4. The 2024 SEIR also identified a less than
significant impact related to creating objectional odors (AQ-4) (Section 4.2, Air Quality).
The certified EIR/SEIR, and related addenda, were completed in accordance with CEQA and CEQA
Guidelines. No legal actions were filed challenging the Previous CEQA Documents and thus are
presumed valid.
Addendum Analysis
The above-described targeted text amendments to city ordinances and policies and procedures have
been evaluated under CEQA to determine whether such changes in the original “project,”
circumstances, or information would trigger the need for any subsequent or supplemental
environmental documentation based on new or substantially more severe significant environmental
impacts. This is inclusive of secondary effects that may be reasonably foreseeable and caused by the
proposed Project. After a thorough factual evaluation, the city has determined that no further
environmental review is required, and as identified in the analysis below, all impacts associated with
the proposed Project would be equivalent to, or less than, the impacts previous analyzed in the
approved EIR/SEIR.
Please refer to Section 5 for a universal response on whether the proposed Project would result in (1)
substantial changes that require major revisions to the EIR/SEIR; (2) substantial changes to
circumstances; or (3) new information of substantial importance.
The 2024 SEIR identified a less than significant impact related to a conflict with or obstruction of the
San Diego Regional Air Quality Strategy or State Implementation Plan (AQ-1) with implementation of
mitigation measure AQ-1. The 2024 SEIR identified that although mitigation measure AQ-2 would
reduce operational emissions from future development, it would be speculative to quantify such
emissions until details of the individual projects are known and concluded impacts to be significant
and unavoidable (AQ-2). The 2024 SEIR identified a less than significant impact related to exposing
offsite sensitive receptors to substantial pollution concentrations (AQ-3) with implementation of
mitigation measure AQ-3 and mitigation measure AQ-4. The 2024 SEIR also identified a less than
significant impact related to creating objectional odors (AQ-4) (Section 4.2, Air Quality).
Implementation of the proposed Project would not change the types of projects/activities permitted
or where construction may occur. Construction activities associated with the 2024 SEIR, such as
equipment use, construction of new facilities or retrofitting of existing facilities, would be similar in
impact (same time and place as previously identified) and be short-term and temporary changes to air
quality conditions in the city. Construction activities would be relatively small in scale, occur
intermittently in different locations throughout the city, last for only short periods of time, and would
not require substantial relocation of construction workers from areas outside of the city and the San
Diego region. Long-term changes would not result in the exceedance of SDAPCD thresholds and would
be considered consistent with the goals of the San Diego Regional Air Quality Strategy or State
Implementation Plan. The proposed Project would not result in new emissions (such as those leading
to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people.
Conclusion
The certified EIR/SEIR were completed in accordance with CEQA and CEQA Guidelines. Further, the
certified EIR/SEIR remains pertinent and continues to have strong informational value. Revisions to the
original “project” to specify and clarify the city’s code requirements and permit review procedures for
new or expanded airport land uses do not result in new significant impacts or increase the severity of
previously identified significant impacts in the approved EIR/SEIR. There are no changes in
circumstances or new information of substantial importance that would require major revisions to the
EIR/SEIR or result in new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously
identified effects. Since the adoption of the Previous CEQA Documents, there have been no substantial
changes in the city’s laws, policies, rules, regulations, that relate to actions contemplated by the
Project. Neither has there been new information, or a change of circumstances which would invalidate
the Previous CEQA Documents. It is not foreseeable that impacts from physical projects/activities
associated with the proposed Project would have greater or different impacts than those identified in
the approved EIR/SEIR. Therefore, the Project does not trigger any of the conditions that require the
preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR in Public Resources Code §21166 or §15162 of the
CEQA Guidelines, and therefore an Addendum is the appropriate document to address the Project.
Implementation of mitigation measures AQ-1 through AQ-4 from the SEIR are not applicable to the air
quality impacts of the proposed Project. The Project would not result in any new or substantially more
severe significant impacts related to air quality. Applicable Mitigation Measures from the SEIR
The SEIR identified mitigation measures AQ-1 through AQ-4 for air quality impacts. None of these
mitigation measures are applicable to the proposed Project.
Biological Resources
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162
Is a Subsequent SEIR Needed?
SEIR Evaluation Criteria
SEIR
Significance
Conclusion
SEIR
Mitigation
Measures
Do the Proposed
Changes Involve
a New or
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of
Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Are There New
Circumstances
Involving a New
or Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of
Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Is There New
Information
of Substantial
Importance
Requiring
New Analysis
or
Verification?
Are Only Minor
Technical Changes
or Additions
Necessary or Did
None of the
Conditions
Described in
§15162 Occur?
(§15164(a))
Project is
within the
Scope of
the SEIR?
Would implementation of the CAP Update:
a. Have a substantial adverse effect,
either directly or through habitat
modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status species
in local or regional plans, policies,
or regulations, or by the California
Department of Fish and Wildlife or
US Fish and Wildlife Service?
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
MM BIO-1
MM BIO-2 No No No Yes Yes
b. Have a substantial adverse effect
on any riparian habitat or other
sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional
plans, policies, or regulations, or
by the California Department of
Fish and Wildlife or US Fish and
Wildlife Service?
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
MM BIO-1
MM BIO-3
MM BIO-4
No No No Yes Yes
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 Is a Subsequent SEIR Needed?
SEIR Evaluation Criteria
SEIR Significance
Conclusion
SEIR Mitigation
Measures
Do the Proposed Changes Involve a New or Substantial
Increase in the Severity of Previously Identified
Impacts?
Are There New Circumstances Involving a New or Substantial
Increase in the Severity of Previously Identified
Impacts?
Is There New Information of Substantial
Importance Requiring New Analysis or
Verification?
Are Only Minor Technical Changes or Additions Necessary or Did
None of the Conditions Described in §15162 Occur?
(§15164(a))
Project is within the Scope of
the SEIR?
c. Have a substantial adverse effect on State or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
MM BIO-1
MM BIO-3
MM BIO-4
MM BIO-5
No No No Yes Yes
d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident
or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
Less than Significant with
Mitigation
MM BIO-1 MM BIO-3 MM BIO-4 No No No Yes Yes
e. Conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
Less than Significant with
Mitigation
MM BIO-6 No No No Yes Yes
f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan?
Less than
Significant
with Mitigation
MM BIO-1
MM BIO-2
MM BIO-3
MM BIO-4 MM BIO-7 MM BIO-8
No No No Yes Yes
Previous CEQA Analysis Biological Resources Findings
The 2024 SEIR identified a less than significant impact related to a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special
status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Wildlife or US Fish and Wildlife Service (BIO-1) with implementation of mitigation measures BIO-
1 and BIO-2. The 2024 SEIR identified a less than significant impact to any riparian habitat or other
sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife or US Fish and Wildlife Service (BIO-2) with implementation
of mitigation measures BIO-1, BIO-3, and BIO-4. The 2024 SEIR identified a less than significant impact
to State or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)
(BIO-3) with implementation of mitigation measures BIO-1, BIO-3, BIO-4, and BIO-5. The 2024 SEIR
identified a less than significant impact to interfering substantially with the movement of any native
resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors or impeding the use of native wildlife nursery sites (BIO-4) with implementation of mitigation
measures BIO-1, BIO-3, and BIO-4. The 2024 SEIR identified a less than significant impact related to
conflicts with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance (BIO-5) with implementation of mitigation measure BIO-6. The 2024
SEIR identified a less than significant impact related to conflicts with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional,
or State habitat conservation plan (BIO-6) with implementation of mitigation measures BIO-1, BIO-2,
BIO-3, BIO-4, BIO-7 and BIO-8 (Section 4.3, Biological Resources).
The certified EIR/SEIR, and related addenda, were completed in accordance with CEQA and CEQA
Guidelines. No legal actions were filed challenging the Previous CEQA Documents and thus are
presumed valid.
Addendum Analysis
The above-described targeted text amendments to city ordinances and policies and procedures have
been evaluated under CEQA to determine whether such changes in the original “project,”
circumstances, or information would trigger the need for any subsequent or supplemental
environmental documentation based on new or substantially more severe significant environmental
impacts. This is inclusive of secondary effects that may be reasonably foreseeable and caused by the
proposed Project. After a thorough factual evaluation, the city has determined that no further
environmental review is required, and as identified in the analysis below, all impacts associated with
the proposed Project would be equivalent to, or less than, the impacts previous analyzed in the
approved EIR/SEIR.
Please refer to Section 5 for a universal response on whether the proposed Project would result in (1)
substantial changes that require major revisions to the EIR/SEIR; (2) substantial changes to
circumstances; or (3) new information of substantial importance.
The 2024 SEIR identified a less than significant impact related to a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special
status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Wildlife or US Fish and Wildlife Service (BIO-1) with implementation of mitigation measures BIO-
1 and BIO-2. The 2024 SEIR identified a less than significant impact to any riparian habitat or other
sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife or US Fish and Wildlife Service (BIO-2) with implementation
of mitigation measures BIO-1, BIO-3, and BIO-4. The 2024 SEIR identified a less than significant impact
to State or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)
(BIO-3) with implementation of mitigation measures BIO-1, BIO-3, BIO-4, and BIO-5. The 2024 SEIR
identified a less than significant impact to interfering substantially with the movement of any native
resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors or impeding the use of native wildlife nursery sites (BIO-4) with implementation of mitigation
measures BIO-1, BIO-3, and BIO-4. The 2024 SEIR identified a less than significant impact related to
conflicts with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance (BIO-5) with implementation of mitigation measure BIO-6. The 2024
SEIR identified a less than significant impact related to conflicts with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional,
or State habitat conservation plan (BIO-6) with implementation of mitigation measures BIO-1, BIO-2,
BIO-3, BIO-4, BIO-7 and BIO-8 (Section 4.3, Biological Resources). Implementation of the proposed
Project would not change the types of projects/activities permitted or where construction may occur.
Construction activities associated with the 2024 SEIR, such as equipment use and staging of materials,
ground disturbances, removing existing pavement, repaving roadway surfaces, painting or restriping
pavement, modifying curbs, laying concrete, installing traffic signals or lighting, installing landscaping,
etc. and long-term changes such as improvements at or near grade level of existing roadways and land
development projects would be of the same time and place as previously identified. Implementation
of the proposed Project would not cause a substantial adverse direct or indirect effect to special-status
species. The proposed Project would not facilitate development in land or areas where riparian habitat
or other sensitive natural communities, protected wetlands, wildlife corridors, and protected
biological resources are present. The proposed Project would not result in physical improvements or
effects that would result in substantial long-term damage to biological resources.
Conclusion
The certified EIR/SEIR were completed in accordance with CEQA and CEQA Guidelines. Further, the
certified EIR/SEIR remains pertinent and continues to have strong informational value. Revisions to the
original “project” to specify and clarify the city’s code requirements and permit review procedures for
new or expanded airport land uses do not result in new significant impacts or increase the severity of
previously identified significant impacts in the approved EIR/SEIR. There are no changes in
circumstances or new information of substantial importance that would require major revisions to the
EIR/SEIR or result in new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously
identified effects. Since the adoption of the Previous CEQA Documents, there have been no substantial
changes in the city’s laws, policies, rules, regulations, that relate to actions contemplated by the
Project. Neither has there been new information, or a change of circumstances which would invalidate
the Previous CEQA Documents. It is not foreseeable that impacts from physical projects/activities
associated with the proposed Project would have greater or different impacts than those identified in
the approved EIR/SEIR. Therefore, the Project does not trigger any of the conditions that require the
preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR in Public Resources Code §21166 or §15162 of the
CEQA Guidelines, and therefore an Addendum is the appropriate document to address the Project. Applicable Mitigation Measures from the SEIR
The Project would not result in more significant impacts related to biological resources. None of these
mitigation measures are applicable to the Project.
Cultural Resources
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162
Is a Subsequent SEIR Needed?
SEIR Evaluation Criteria
SEIR
Significance
Conclusion
SEIR
Mitigation
Measures
Do the Proposed
Changes Involve
a New or
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of
Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Are There New
Circumstances
Involving a New
or Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of
Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Is There New
Information
of Substantial
Importance
Requiring
New Analysis
or
Verification?
Are Only Minor
Technical Changes
or Additions
Necessary or Did
None of the
Conditions
Described in
§15162 Occur?
(§15164(a))
Project is
within the
Scope of
the SEIR?
Would implementation of the CAP Update:
a. Cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of a
historical resource pursuant to
§15064.5?
Significant and
Unavoidable None No No No Yes Yes
b. Cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant
to §15064.5?
Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
c. Disturb any human remains,
including those interred outside
of formal cemeteries?
Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
Previous CEQA Analysis Cultural Resources Findings
The 2024 SEIR identified a significant and unavoidable impact related to a substantial adverse change in
the significance of a historical resource pursuant to §15064.5 and identified no feasible mitigation
measures (CUL-1). The 2024 SEIR identified a less than significant impact related to a substantial adverse
change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5 (CUL-2). The 2024 SEIR
also identified a less than significant impact for disturbing any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries (CUL-3) (Section 4.4, Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources).
The certified EIR/SEIR, and related addenda, were completed in accordance with CEQA and CEQA
Guidelines. No legal actions were filed challenging the Previous CEQA Documents and thus are
presumed valid.
Addendum Analysis
The above-described targeted text amendments to city ordinances and policies and procedures have
been evaluated under CEQA to determine whether such changes in the original “project,”
circumstances, or information would trigger the need for any subsequent or supplemental
environmental documentation based on new or substantially more severe significant environmental
impacts. This is inclusive of secondary effects that may be reasonably foreseeable and caused by the
proposed Project. After a thorough factual evaluation, the city has determined that no further
environmental review is required, and as identified in the analysis below, all impacts associated with
the proposed Project would be equivalent to, or less than, the impacts previous analyzed in the
approved EIR/SEIR.
Please refer to Section 5 for a universal response on whether the proposed Project would result in (1)
substantial changes that require major revisions to the EIR/SEIR; (2) substantial changes to
circumstances; or (3) new information of substantial importance.
The 2024 SEIR identified a significant and unavoidable impact related to a substantial adverse change in
the significance of a historical resource pursuant to §15064.5 and identified no feasible mitigation
measures (CUL-1). The 2024 SEIR identified a less than significant impact related to a substantial adverse
change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5 (CUL-2). The 2024 SEIR
also identified a less than significant impact for disturbing any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries (CUL-3) (Section 4.4, Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources).
Implementation of the proposed Project would not change the types of projects/activities permitted
or where construction may occur. Construction activities associated with the 2024 SEIR, such as
equipment use and staging of materials, ground disturbances, removing existing pavement, repaving
roadway surfaces, painting or restriping pavement, modifying curbs, laying concrete, installing traffic
signals or lighting, installing landscaping, etc. and long-term changes such as improvements at or near
grade level of existing roadways and land development projects would be of the same time and place
as previously identified. The Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidelines addresses treatment of cultural
resources to avoid substantial adverse effects should they be encountered during ground disturbance
activities. Therefore, with adherence to the Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidelines, there would not
cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resources pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines §15064.5.
The Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidelines Standard Treatment 11: Post-Review Discoveries section
addresses treatment of human remains should they be disturbed as a result of ground disturbing
activities. Moreover, human burials, in addition to being potential archaeological resources, have
specific provisions for treatment in Public Resources Code §5097. The California Health and Safety
Code (§§7050.5, 7051, and 7054) has specific provisions for the protection of human burial remains.
Existing regulations address the illegality of interfering with human burial remains, and protect them
from disturbance, vandalism, or destruction. They also include established procedures to be
implemented if Native American skeletal remains are discovered. Public Resources Code §5097.98 also
addresses the disposition of Native American burials, protects such remains, and provides for the
establishment of the NAHC to resolve any related disputes. All development projects are also subject
to State of California Health and Safety Code §7050.5 which states that, if human remains are
unearthed, no further disturbance can occur until the county coroner has made the necessary findings
as to the origin and disposition of the remains pursuant to the Public Resources Code §5097.98. If the
remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner has 24 hours to notify the
Native American Heritage Commission which will determine and notify a most likely descendant
(“MLD”). The MLD shall complete the inspection of the site and make recommendations to the
landowner within 48 hours of being granted access.
Conclusion
The certified EIR/SEIR were completed in accordance with CEQA and CEQA Guidelines. Further, the
certified EIR/SEIR remains pertinent and continues to have strong informational value. Revisions to the
original “project” to specify and clarify the city’s code requirements and permit review procedures for
new or expanded airport land uses do not result in new significant impacts or increase the severity of
previously identified significant impacts in the approved EIR/SEIR. There are no changes in
circumstances or new information of substantial importance that would require major revisions to the
EIR/SEIR or result in new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously
identified effects. Since the adoption of the Previous CEQA Documents, there have been no substantial
changes in the city’s laws, policies, rules, regulations, that relate to actions contemplated by the
Project. Neither has there been new information, or a change of circumstances which would invalidate
the Previous CEQA Documents. It is not foreseeable that impacts from physical projects/activities
associated with the proposed Project would have greater or different impacts than those identified in
the approved EIR/SEIR. Therefore, the Project does not trigger any of the conditions that require the
preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR in Public Resources Code §21166 or §15162 of the
CEQA Guidelines, and therefore an Addendum is the appropriate document to address the Project. Applicable Mitigation Measures from the SEIR
There are no feasible mitigation measures from the 2024 SEIR to reduce impacts related to cultural
resources.
Energy
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162
Is a Subsequent SEIR Needed?
SEIR Evaluation Criteria
SEIR
Significance
Conclusion
SEIR
Mitigation
Measures
Do the Proposed
Changes Involve
a New or
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Are There New
Circumstances
Involving a New
or Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Is There New
Information
of Substantial
Importance
Requiring New Analysis
or
Verification?
Are Only Minor
Technical Changes
or Additions
Necessary or Did
None of the
Conditions Described in
§15162 Occur?
(§15164(a))
Project is within the
Scope of
the SEIR?
Would implementation of the CAP Update:
a. Result in potentially significant
environmental impact due to
wasteful, inefficient, or
unnecessary consumption of
energy resources, during project
construction and operation?
No Impact None No No No Yes Yes
b. Conflict with or obstruct a State or
local plan for renewable energy or
energy efficiency?
No Impact None No No No Yes Yes
Previous CEQA Analysis Energy Findings
The 2024 SEIR identified no impact for the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy
resources, during project construction or operation or for conflicts with or obstruction of a State or
local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency (Section 4.16.2, Energy).
The certified EIR/SEIR, and related addenda, were completed in accordance with CEQA and CEQA
Guidelines. No legal actions were filed challenging the Previous CEQA Documents and thus are
presumed valid.
Addendum Analysis
The above-described targeted text amendments to city ordinances and policies and procedures have
been evaluated under CEQA to determine whether such changes in the original “project,”
circumstances, or information would trigger the need for any subsequent or supplemental
environmental documentation based on new or substantially more severe significant environmental
impacts. This is inclusive of secondary effects that may be reasonably foreseeable and caused by the
proposed Project. After a thorough factual evaluation, the city has determined that no further
environmental review is required, and as identified in the analysis below, all impacts associated with
the proposed Project would be equivalent to, or less than, the impacts previous analyzed in the
approved EIR/SEIR.
Please refer to Section 5 for a universal response on whether the proposed Project would result in (1)
substantial changes that require major revisions to the EIR/SEIR; (2) substantial changes to
circumstances; or (3) new information of substantial importance.
The 2024 SEIR identified no impact for the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy
resources, during project construction or operation or for conflicts with or obstruction of a State or
local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency (Section 4.16.2, Energy). Implementation of the
proposed Project would not change the types of projects/activities permitted or where construction
may occur. Construction activities associated with the 2024 SEIR, such as equipment use and staging
of materials, ground disturbances, removing existing pavement, repaving roadway surfaces, painting
or restriping pavement, modifying curbs, laying concrete, installing traffic signals or lighting, installing
landscaping, etc. all would be similar in impact (same time and place as previously identified) and be
short-term and temporary changes to energy conditions in the city. Long-term changes such as
improvements at or near grade level of existing roadways and land development projects would also
be of the same time and place as previously identified. Where applicable, measures and actions
associated with the 2024 SEIR would be required to comply with CALGreen, the latest California
Building Code (“CBC”) requirements, including CBC Energy Efficiency Standards, as well as all local,
state, and federal rules and regulations pertaining to energy consumption and conservation. The
proposed Project doesn’t frustrate the San Diego Regional Energy Strategy renewable energy goals
and would not conflict with any applicable rule or regulation adopted regarding renewable energy or
energy efficiency.
Conclusion
The certified EIR/SEIR were completed in accordance with CEQA and CEQA Guidelines. Further, the
certified EIR/SEIR remains pertinent and continues to have strong informational value. Revisions to the
original “project” to specify and clarify the city’s code requirements and permit review procedures for
new or expanded airport land uses do not result in new significant impacts or increase the severity of
previously identified significant impacts in the approved EIR/SEIR. There are no changes in
circumstances or new information of substantial importance that would require major revisions to the
EIR/SEIR or result in new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously
identified effects. Since the adoption of the Previous CEQA Documents, there have been no substantial
changes in the city’s laws, policies, rules, regulations, that relate to actions contemplated by the
Project. Neither has there been new information, or a change of circumstances which would invalidate
the Previous CEQA Documents. It is not foreseeable that impacts from physical projects/activities
associated with the proposed Project would have greater or different impacts than those identified in
the approved EIR/SEIR. Therefore, the Project does not trigger any of the conditions that require the
preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR in Public Resources Code §21166 or §15162 of the
CEQA Guidelines, and therefore an Addendum is the appropriate document to address the Project. Applicable Mitigation Measures from the SEIR
There are no mitigation measures from the 2024 SEIR identified to reduce impacts related to energy.
Geology and Soils
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162
Is a Subsequent SEIR Needed?
SEIR Evaluation Criteria
SEIR
Significance
Conclusion
SEIR
Mitigation
Measures
Do the Proposed
Changes Involve
a New or
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of
Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Are There New
Circumstances
Involving a New
or Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of
Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Is There New
Information
of Substantial
Importance
Requiring
New Analysis
or
Verification?
Are Only Minor
Technical Changes
or Additions
Necessary or Did
None of the
Conditions
Described in
§15162 Occur?
(§15164(a))
Project is
within
the Scope
of the
SEIR?
Would implementation of the CAP Update:
a. Directly or indirectly cause
potential substantial adverse
effects, including the risk of loss,
injury, or death involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake
fault, as delineated on the most
recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake
Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or
based on other substantial
evidence of a known fault? Refer
to Division of Mines and Geology
Special Publication 42.
Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
iii. Seismic-related ground failure,
including liquefaction? Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
iv. Landslides? Less than Significant None No No No Yes Yes
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162
Is a Subsequent SEIR Needed?
SEIR Evaluation Criteria
SEIR
Significance Conclusion
SEIR
Mitigation Measures
Do the Proposed
Changes Involve
a New or Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of
Previously
Identified Impacts?
Are There New
Circumstances
Involving a New or Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of
Previously
Identified Impacts?
Is There New
Information of Substantial
Importance
Requiring
New Analysis
or Verification?
Are Only Minor
Technical Changes
or Additions Necessary or Did
None of the
Conditions
Described in
§15162 Occur? (§15164(a))
Project is
within the
Scope of the SEIR?
b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the
loss of topsoil? Less than Significant None No No No Yes Yes
c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil
that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and
potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property?
Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
e. Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal
systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of
wastewater?
Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
f. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Less than Significant None No No No Yes Yes
Previous CEQA Analysis Geology and Soils Findings
The 2024 SEIR identified less than significant impacts for the risk of loss, injury, or death involving
rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault
Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a
known fault (GEO-1); and for the risk of loss, injury, or death involving strong seismic ground shaking,
seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction or landslides (GEO-2). The 2024 SEIR also
identified less than significant impacts for substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil (GEO-3) and for
on or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse, and location on
expansive soils creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property (GEO-4). The 2024 SEIR
identified less than significant impacts for soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic
tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of
wastewater (GEO-5) and for the project to directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological
resource or site or unique geologic feature (GEO-6) (Section 4.5, Geology and Soils).
The certified EIR/SEIR, and related addenda, were completed in accordance with CEQA and CEQA
Guidelines. No legal actions were filed challenging the Previous CEQA Documents and thus are
presumed valid.
Addendum Analysis
The above-described targeted text amendments to city ordinances and policies and procedures have
been evaluated under CEQA to determine whether such changes in the original “project,”
circumstances, or information would trigger the need for any subsequent or supplemental
environmental documentation based on new or substantially more severe significant environmental
impacts. This is inclusive of secondary effects that may be reasonably foreseeable and caused by the
proposed Project. After a thorough factual evaluation, the city has determined that no further
environmental review is required, and as identified in the analysis below, all impacts associated with
the proposed Project would be equivalent to, or less than, the impacts previous analyzed in the
approved EIR/SEIR.
Please refer to Section 5 for a universal response on whether the proposed Project would result in (1)
substantial changes that require major revisions to the EIR/SEIR; (2) substantial changes to
circumstances; or (3) new information of substantial importance.
The 2024 SEIR identified less than significant impacts for the risk of loss, injury, or death involving
rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault
Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a
known fault (GEO-1); and for the risk of loss, injury, or death involving strong seismic ground shaking,
seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction or landslides (GEO-2). The 2024 SEIR also
identified less than significant impacts for substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil (GEO-3) and for
on or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse, and location on
expansive soils creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property (GEO-4). The 2024 SEIR
identified less than significant impacts for soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic
tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of
wastewater (GEO-5) and for the project to directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological
resource or site or unique geologic feature (GEO-6) (Section 4.5, Geology and Soils). Implementation
of the proposed Project would not change the types of projects/activities permitted or where
construction may occur. The measures identified in the proposed Project do not propose new housing
nor do they propose changes to policies or regulations related to land use or residential zoning. The
proposed Project would not result in the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known
earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued
by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault or result
in the risk of loss, injury, or death involving strong seismic ground shaking, seismic-related ground
failure, including liquefaction or landslides. The proposed Project would not result in substantial soil
erosion or the loss of topsoil or result in on or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse, and location on expansive soils creating substantial direct or indirect risks to
life or property.
Where applicable, short-term measures and actions associated with the 2024 SEIR, such as
construction, equipment use and staging of materials, ground disturbances, removing existing
pavement, repaving roadway surfaces, painting or restriping pavement, modifying curbs, laying
concrete, installing traffic signals or lighting, installing landscaping, etc. all would be similar in impact
(same time and place as previously identified) and be short-term and temporary changes to geologic
conditions in the city. Long-term changes such as improvements at or near grade level of existing
roadways and land development projects would also be of the same time and place as previously
identified. For measures and actions requiring ground disturbance in areas underlain by sensitive
geologic units, the Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidelines require a review of primary literature and
online databases, a paleontological assessment of the project area (plus a one-mile radius) by the San
Diego Museum of Natural History, and a field survey to determine if paleontological resources or
potentially fossiliferous sediments are present (if the sensitive sediments are exposed at the surface).
The results of these analyses are used to create a Paleontological Assessment Report which will
provide recommendations to mitigate impacts to paleontological resources, if necessary. The Carlsbad
Cultural Resource Guidelines set forth mitigation measures. Additionally, General Plan policies 7-P.7
through 7-P.11 of the Arts, History, Culture, and Education Element would reduce impacts to
paleontological resources by implementing the Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidelines; requiring
monitoring of ground-disturbing activities in areas known to contain paleontological resources; and
ensuring proper treatment and consultation of paleontological resources discovered during ground-
disturbing activities. With compliance with these guidelines and General Plan policies, implementation
of the proposed Project would not directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or
site or unique geologic feature.
Conclusion
The certified EIR/SEIR were completed in accordance with CEQA and CEQA Guidelines. Further, the
certified EIR/SEIR remains pertinent and continues to have strong informational value. Revisions to the
original “project” to specify and clarify the city’s code requirements and permit review procedures for
new or expanded airport land uses do not result in new significant impacts or increase the severity of
previously identified significant impacts in the approved EIR/SEIR. There are no changes in
circumstances or new information of substantial importance that would require major revisions to the
EIR/SEIR or result in new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously
identified effects. Since the adoption of the Previous CEQA Documents, there have been no substantial
changes in the city’s laws, policies, rules, regulations, that relate to actions contemplated by the
Project. Neither has there been new information, or a change of circumstances which would invalidate
the Previous CEQA Documents. It is not foreseeable that impacts from physical projects/activities
associated with the proposed Project would have greater or different impacts than those identified in
the approved EIR/SEIR. Therefore, the Project does not trigger any of the conditions that require the
preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR in Public Resources Code §21166 or §15162 of the
CEQA Guidelines, and therefore an Addendum is the appropriate document to address the Project.
Applicable Mitigation Measures from the SEIR
There are no mitigation measures from the 2024 SEIR identified to reduce impacts related to geology
and soils.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162
Is a Subsequent SEIR Needed?
SEIR Evaluation Criteria
SEIR
Significance
Conclusion
SEIR
Mitigation
Measures
Do the Proposed
Changes Involve
a New or
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Are There New
Circumstances
Involving a New
or Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Is There New
Information of
Substantial
Importance
Requiring New Analysis
or
Verification?
Are Only Minor
Technical Changes
or Additions
Necessary or Did
None of the
Conditions Described in
§15162 Occur?
(§15164(a))
Project is within the
Scope of
the SEIR?
Would implementation of the CAP Update:
a. Generate greenhouse gas
emissions, either directly or
indirectly, that may have a
significant impact on the
environment?
Significant
and
Unavoidable
GHG-1 No No No Yes Yes
b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for
the purpose of reducing the
emissions of greenhouse gases?
Significant
and
Unavoidable
GHG-1 No No No Yes Yes
Previous CEQA Analysis Greenhouse Gas Emissions Findings
The 2024 SEIR identified a significant and unavoidable impact for generating greenhouse gas
emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment and for
conflicting with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the
emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG-1). It identifies Mitigation Measure GHG-1, which requires the
preparation of this CAP Update to reduce the GHG emissions impacts identified in the 2024 SEIR
(Section 4.6, Greenhouse Gas Emissions).
The certified EIR/SEIR, and related addenda, were completed in accordance with CEQA and CEQA
Guidelines. No legal actions were filed challenging the Previous CEQA Documents and thus are
presumed valid.
Addendum Analysis
The above-described targeted text amendments to city ordinances and policies and procedures have
been evaluated under CEQA to determine whether such changes in the original “project,”
circumstances, or information would trigger the need for any subsequent or supplemental
environmental documentation based on new or substantially more severe significant environmental
impacts. This is inclusive of secondary effects that may be reasonably foreseeable and caused by the
proposed Project. After a thorough factual evaluation, the city has determined that no further
environmental review is required, and as identified in the analysis below, all impacts associated with
the proposed Project would be equivalent to, or less than, the impacts previous analyzed in the
approved EIR/SEIR.
Please refer to Section 5 for a universal response on whether the proposed Project would result in (1)
substantial changes that require major revisions to the EIR/SEIR; (2) substantial changes to
circumstances; or (3) new information of substantial importance.
The 2024 SEIR identified a significant and unavoidable impact for generating greenhouse gas
emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment and for
conflicting with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the
emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG-1). It identifies Mitigation Measure GHG-1, which requires the
preparation of this CAP Update to reduce the GHG emissions impacts identified in the 2024 SEIR
(Section 4.6, Greenhouse Gas Emissions). Implementation of the proposed Project would not change
the types of projects/activities permitted or where construction may occur. Construction activities
associated with the 2024 SEIR, such as equipment use and staging of materials, ground disturbances,
removing existing pavement, repaving roadway surfaces, painting or restriping pavement, modifying
curbs, laying concrete, installing traffic signals or lighting, installing landscaping, etc. all would be
similar in impact (same time and place as previously identified) and be short-term and temporary
changes to greenhouse gas conditions in the city. Long-term changes such as improvements at or near
grade level of existing roadways and land development projects would also be of the same time and
place as previously identified. The proposed Project would not generate greenhouse gas emissions,
either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment, nor would
implementation of the proposed Project conflict with an applicable plan adopted for the purpose of
reducing emissions.
Conclusion
The certified EIR/SEIR were completed in accordance with CEQA and CEQA Guidelines. Further, the
certified EIR/SEIR remains pertinent and continues to have strong informational value. Revisions to the
original “project” to specify and clarify the city’s code requirements and permit review procedures for
new or expanded airport land uses do not result in new significant impacts or increase the severity of
previously identified significant impacts in the approved EIR/SEIR. There are no changes in
circumstances or new information of substantial importance that would require major revisions to the
EIR/SEIR or result in new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously
identified effects. Since the adoption of the Previous CEQA Documents, there have been no substantial
changes in the city’s laws, policies, rules, regulations, that relate to actions contemplated by the
Project. Neither has there been new information, or a change of circumstances which would invalidate
the Previous CEQA Documents. It is not foreseeable that impacts from physical projects/activities
associated with the proposed Project would have greater or different impacts than those identified in
the approved EIR/SEIR. Therefore, the Project does not trigger any of the conditions that require the
preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR in Public Resources Code §21166 or §15162 of the
CEQA Guidelines, and therefore an Addendum is the appropriate document to address the Project. Applicable Mitigation Measures from the SEIR
The Project would not result in more significant impacts related to biological resources. None of
these mitigation measures are applicable to the Project.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162
Is a Subsequent SEIR Needed?
SEIR Evaluation Criteria
SEIR
Significance
Conclusion
SEIR
Mitigation
Measures
Do the Proposed
Changes Involve
a New or
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of
Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Are There New
Circumstances
Involving a New
or Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of
Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Is There New
Information
of Substantial
Importance
Requiring
New Analysis
or
Verification?
Are Only Minor
Technical Changes
or Additions
Necessary or Did
None of the
Conditions
Described in
§15162 Occur?
(§15164(a))
Project is
within the
Scope of
the SEIR?
Would implementation of the CAP Update:
a. Create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through
the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
b. Create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials
into the environment?
Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
c. Emit hazardous emissions or
handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances,
or waste within one-quarter mile
of an existing or proposed school?
Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162
Is a Subsequent SEIR Needed?
SEIR Evaluation Criteria
SEIR
Significance Conclusion
SEIR
Mitigation Measures
Do the Proposed
Changes Involve
a New or Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of
Previously
Identified Impacts?
Are There New
Circumstances
Involving a New or Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of
Previously
Identified Impacts?
Is There New
Information of Substantial
Importance
Requiring
New Analysis
or Verification?
Are Only Minor
Technical Changes
or Additions Necessary or Did
None of the
Conditions
Described in
§15162 Occur? (§15164(a))
Project is
within the
Scope of the SEIR?
d. Be located on a site which is
included on a list of hazardous material 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?
Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
e. For a project located within an airport land use plan area, or
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety
hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the
project area?
Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
f. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
Previous CEQA Analysis Hazards and Hazardous Materials Findings
The 2024 SEIR identified less than significant impacts for the routine transport, use, or disposal of
hazardous materials and reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release
of hazardous materials (HAZ-1); emitting or handling hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school (HAZ-2); being located
on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government
Code Section 65962.5 and creating a significant hazard to the public or the environment (HAZ-3); being
located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport or public use airport and
resulting in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area (HAZ-
4); and for impairing implementation of or physically interfering with an adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan (HAZ-5) (Section 4.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials).
The certified EIR/SEIR, and related addenda, were completed in accordance with CEQA and CEQA
Guidelines. No legal actions were filed challenging the Previous CEQA Documents and thus are
presumed valid.
Addendum Analysis
The above-described targeted text amendments to city ordinances and policies and procedures have
been evaluated under CEQA to determine whether such changes in the original “project,”
circumstances, or information would trigger the need for any subsequent or supplemental
environmental documentation based on new or substantially more severe significant environmental
impacts. This is inclusive of secondary effects that may be reasonably foreseeable and caused by the
proposed Project. After a thorough factual evaluation, the city has determined that no further
environmental review is required, and as identified in the analysis below, all impacts associated with
the proposed Project would be equivalent to, or less than, the impacts previous analyzed in the
approved EIR/SEIR.
Please refer to Section 5 for a universal response on whether the proposed Project would result in (1)
substantial changes that require major revisions to the EIR/SEIR; (2) substantial changes to
circumstances; or (3) new information of substantial importance.
The 2024 SEIR identified less than significant impacts for the routine transport, use, or disposal of
hazardous materials and reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release
of hazardous materials (HAZ-1); emitting or handling hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school (HAZ-2); being located
on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government
Code Section 65962.5 and creating a significant hazard to the public or the environment (HAZ-3); being
located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport or public use airport and
resulting in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area (HAZ-
4); and for impairing implementation of or physically interfering with an adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan (HAZ-5) (Section 4.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials).
Implementation of the proposed Project would not change the types of projects/activities permitted
or where construction may occur. Construction activities associated with the 2024 SEIR, such as
equipment use and staging of materials, ground disturbances, removing existing pavement, repaving
roadway surfaces, painting or restriping pavement, modifying curbs, laying concrete, installing traffic
signals or lighting, installing landscaping, etc. all would be similar in impact (same time and place as
previously identified) and be short-term and temporary changes to hazardous conditions in the city.
Long-term changes such as improvements at or near grade level of existing roadways and land
development projects would also be of the same time and place as previously identified. Where
applicable, measures and actions associated with the 2024 SEIR that result in ground disturbance,
would be remediated to allowable regulatory levels in accordance with applicable county and state
regulations before any ground-disturbing activities are permitted to occur. Implementation of the
proposed Project would not result in a significant hazard to the public or the environment due to being
located on a hazardous materials site. The proposed Project would not result in new or relocated
residential land uses, other types of noise-sensitive receptors, or new places of permanent
employment where residents or workers could be exposed to a safety hazard or excessive noise near
the airport. Implementation of the proposed Project would not expose residents or workers to a safety
hazard or excessive noise levels.
Conclusion
The certified EIR/SEIR were completed in accordance with CEQA and CEQA Guidelines. Further, the
certified EIR/SEIR remains pertinent and continues to have strong informational value. Revisions to the
original “project” to specify and clarify the city’s code requirements and permit review procedures for
new or expanded airport land uses do not result in new significant impacts or increase the severity of
previously identified significant impacts in the approved EIR/SEIR. There are no changes in
circumstances or new information of substantial importance that would require major revisions to the
EIR/SEIR or result in new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously
identified effects. Since the adoption of the Previous CEQA Documents, there have been no substantial
changes in the city’s laws, policies, rules, regulations, that relate to actions contemplated by the
Project. Neither has there been new information, or a change of circumstances which would invalidate
the Previous CEQA Documents. It is not foreseeable that impacts from physical projects/activities
associated with the proposed Project would have greater or different impacts than those identified in
the approved EIR/SEIR. Therefore, the Project does not trigger any of the conditions that require the
preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR in Public Resources Code §21166 or §15162 of the
CEQA Guidelines, and therefore an Addendum is the appropriate document to address the Project. Applicable Mitigation Measures from the SEIR
There are no mitigation measures from the 2024 SEIR identified to reduce impacts related to hazards
and hazardous materials.
Hydrology and Water Quality
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162
Is a Subsequent SEIR Needed?
SEIR Evaluation Criteria
SEIR
Significance
Conclusion
SEIR
Mitigation
Measures
Do the Proposed
Changes Involve
a New or
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of
Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Are There New
Circumstances
Involving a New
or Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of
Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Is There New
Information
of Substantial
Importance
Requiring
New Analysis
or
Verification?
Are Only Minor
Technical Changes
or Additions
Necessary or Did
None of the
Conditions
Described in
§15162 Occur?
(§15164(a))
Project is
within the
Scope of
the SEIR?
Would implementation of the CAP Update:
a. Violate any water quality
standards or waste discharge
requirements or otherwise
substantially degrade surface or
ground water quality?
Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
b. Substantially decrease
groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater
recharge, such that the project
may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the
basin?
Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162
Is a Subsequent SEIR Needed?
SEIR Evaluation Criteria
SEIR Significance
Conclusion
SEIR Mitigation
Measures
Do the Proposed
Changes Involve a New or
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of
Previously Identified
Impacts?
Are There New
Circumstances
Involving a New or
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of
Previously Identified
Impacts?
Is There New Information
of Substantial
Importance
Requiring
New Analysis or
Verification?
Are Only Minor
Technical
Changes or Additions
Necessary or Did
None of the
Conditions
Described in §15162 Occur?
(§15164(a))
Project is
within the Scope of
the SEIR?
c. Substantially alter the existing
drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or
through the addition of impervious
surfaces in a manner which would:
i. result in substantial erosion or
siltation, on- or off-site;
ii. substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a
manner which would result in
flooding on- or offsite;
iii. create or contribute runoff water
which would exceed the capacity
of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or
provide substantial sources of
polluted runoff; or
iv. impede or redirect flood flows?
Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
d. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche
zones, risk release of pollutants due
to project inundation?
Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162
Is a Subsequent SEIR Needed?
SEIR Evaluation Criteria
SEIR
Significance
Conclusion
SEIR
Mitigation
Measures
Do the Proposed Changes Involve
a New or
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Are There
New
Circumstances Involving a
New or
Substantial
Increase in
the Severity of Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Is There New
Information of
Substantial
Importance Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Are Only Minor
Technical Changes or
Additions
Necessary or Did
None of the
Conditions Described in
§15162 Occur?
(§15164(a))
Project is within the
Scope of
the SEIR?
e. Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of a water quality
control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan?
Less than Significant None No No No Yes Yes
Previous CEQA Analysis Hydrology and Water Quality Findings
The 2024 SEIR identified less than significant impacts related to the violation of water quality
standards, waste discharge requirements (WDR’s), or otherwise degradation of surface or ground
water quality (HYD-1); decreasing groundwater supplies or interfering with groundwater recharge
(HYD-2); altering the existing drainage patterns through the alteration of the course of a stream or
river or through the addition of impervious surfaces resulting in substantial erosion or siltation on- or
off-site, increasing the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding
on- or off-site, or creating or contributing runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff
(HYD-3); impede or redirect flood flows or in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones risk release of
pollutants due to project inundation (HYD-4); conflicts with or obstruction of implementation of a
water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan (HYD-5) (Section 4.8,
Hydrology and Water Quality).
The certified EIR/SEIR, and related addenda, were completed in accordance with CEQA and CEQA
Guidelines. No legal actions were filed challenging the Previous CEQA Documents and thus are
presumed valid.
Addendum Analysis
The above-described targeted text amendments to city ordinances and policies and procedures have
been evaluated under CEQA to determine whether such changes in the original “project,”
circumstances, or information would trigger the need for any subsequent or supplemental
environmental documentation based on new or substantially more severe significant environmental
impacts. This is inclusive of secondary effects that may be reasonably foreseeable and caused by the
proposed Project. After a thorough factual evaluation, the city has determined that no further
environmental review is required, and as identified in the analysis below, all impacts associated with
the proposed Project would be equivalent to, or less than, the impacts previous analyzed in the
approved EIR/SEIR.
Please refer to Section 5 for a universal response on whether the proposed Project would result in (1)
substantial changes that require major revisions to the EIR/SEIR; (2) substantial changes to
circumstances; or (3) new information of substantial importance.
The 2024 SEIR identified less than significant impacts related to the violation of water quality
standards, waste discharge requirements (“WDRs”), or otherwise degradation of surface or ground
water quality (HYD-1); decreasing groundwater supplies or interfering with groundwater recharge
(HYD-2); altering the existing drainage patterns through the alteration of the course of a stream or
river or through the addition of impervious surfaces resulting in substantial erosion or siltation on- or
off-site, increasing the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding
on- or off-site, or creating or contributing runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff
(HYD-3); impede or redirect flood flows or in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones risk release of
pollutants due to project inundation (HYD-4); conflicts with or obstruction of implementation of a
water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan (HYD-5) (Section 4.8,
Hydrology and Water Quality). Implementation of the proposed Project would not change the types
of projects/activities permitted or where construction may occur. Construction activities associated
with the 2024 SEIR, such as equipment use and staging of materials, ground disturbances, removing
existing pavement, repaving roadway surfaces, painting or restriping pavement, modifying curbs,
laying concrete, installing traffic signals or lighting, installing landscaping, etc. all would be similar in
impact (same time and place as previously identified) and be short-term and temporary changes to
water conditions in the city. However, the ground disturbing activities would be temporary and
intermittent and would not involve the substantial use of groundwater or otherwise affect recharge
such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table
level. Furthermore, implementation of the proposed Project would not involve development of
residential land uses or other types of land development or induce population growth in an area that
would increase water demand. Long-term changes such as improvements at or near grade level of
existing roadways and land development projects would also be of the same time and place as
previously identified. Where applicable, measures and actions associated with the 2024 SEIR that
result in ground disturbance, would be addressed by existing local rules and regulations. The Carlsbad
Municipal Code requires BMPs to control the volume, rate, and potential pollutant load of stormwater
runoff from new development and redevelopment projects as a requirement of the Municipal
Stormwater Permit. Furthermore, the city’s Low Impact Development Ordinance in Chapter 15.12
aims to specifically reduce the amount of surface runoff and aid in groundwater recharge through
techniques such as infiltration, evapotranspiration, bioretention and/or rainfall harvest and additional
uses in accordance with the requirements set forth in the MS4 permit and the standards manual. The
proposed Project would not result in new or relocated residential land uses, alter the existing drainage
patterns or contribute runoff water in a manner which would result in substantial erosion, siltation, or
flooding, nor would it exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems.
Conclusion
The certified EIR/SEIR were completed in accordance with CEQA and CEQA Guidelines. Further, the
certified EIR/SEIR remains pertinent and continues to have strong informational value. Revisions to the
original “project” to specify and clarify the city’s code requirements and permit review procedures for
new or expanded airport land uses do not result in new significant impacts or increase the severity of
previously identified significant impacts in the approved EIR/SEIR. There are no changes in
circumstances or new information of substantial importance that would require major revisions to the
EIR/SEIR or result in new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously
identified effects. Since the adoption of the Previous CEQA Documents, there have been no substantial
changes in the city’s laws, policies, rules, regulations, that relate to actions contemplated by the
Project. Neither has there been new information, or a change of circumstances which would invalidate
the Previous CEQA Documents. It is not foreseeable that impacts from physical projects/activities
associated with the proposed Project would have greater or different impacts than those identified in
the approved EIR/SEIR. Therefore, the Project does not trigger any of the conditions that require the
preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR in Public Resources Code §21166 or §15162 of the
CEQA Guidelines, and therefore an Addendum is the appropriate document to address the Project. Applicable Mitigation Measures from the SEIR
There are no mitigation measures from the 2024 SEIR identified to reduce impacts related to hydrology
and water quality.
Land Use and Planning
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162
Is a Subsequent SEIR Needed?
SEIR Evaluation Criteria
SEIR
Significance
Conclusion
SEIR
Mitigation
Measures
Do the Proposed
Changes Involve
a New or
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Are There New
Circumstances
Involving a New
or Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Is There New
Information
of Substantial
Importance
Requiring New Analysis
or
Verification?
Are Only Minor
Technical Changes
or Additions
Necessary or Did
None of the
Conditions Described in
§15162 Occur?
(§15164(a))
Project is within the
Scope of
the SEIR?
Would implementation of the CAP Update:
a. Physically divide an established
community? No Impact None No No No Yes Yes
b. Cause a significant environmental
impact due to a conflict with any
land use plan, policy, or regulation
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
Less than Significant None No No No Yes Yes
Previous CEQA Analysis Land Use and Planning Findings
The 2024 SEIR identified no impact for physically dividing an established community (LU-1) and a less
than significant impact for conflicts with any land use plan, policy, or regulation (LU-2) (Section 4.9,
Land Use and Planning).
The certified EIR/SEIR, and related addenda, were completed in accordance with CEQA and CEQA
Guidelines. No legal actions were filed challenging the Previous CEQA Documents and thus are
presumed valid.
Addendum Analysis
The above-described targeted text amendments to city ordinances and policies and procedures have
been evaluated under CEQA to determine whether such changes in the original “project,”
circumstances, or information would trigger the need for any subsequent or supplemental
environmental documentation based on new or substantially more severe significant environmental
impacts. This is inclusive of secondary effects that may be reasonably foreseeable and caused by the
proposed Project. After a thorough factual evaluation, the city has determined that no further
environmental review is required, and as identified in the analysis below, all impacts associated with
the proposed Project would be equivalent to, or less than, the impacts previous analyzed in the
approved EIR/SEIR.
Please refer to Section 5 for a universal response on whether the proposed Project would result in (1)
substantial changes that require major revisions to the EIR/SEIR; (2) substantial changes to
circumstances; or (3) new information of substantial importance.
The 2024 SEIR identified no impact for physically dividing an established community (LU-1) and a less
than significant impact for conflicts with any land use plan, policy, or regulation (LU-2) (Section 4.9,
Land Use and Planning). Implementation of the proposed Project would not change the types of
projects/activities permitted or where construction may occur. Implementation of the proposed
Project would not result in physical improvements that could physically divide a community.
Implementation of the proposed Project would not change existing land uses that are reflected in all
applicable land use plans, policies, and regulations, including SANDAG’s 2021 Regional Plan,
Sustainable Communities Strategy, and the city’s 2015 General Plan (as amended city Council
Resolution No. 2021-073 on April 6, 2021). Implementation of the proposed Project would not cause
a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, rule or regulation
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.
Conclusion
The certified EIR/SEIR were completed in accordance with CEQA and CEQA Guidelines. Further, the
certified EIR/SEIR remains pertinent and continues to have strong informational value. Revisions to the
original “project” to specify and clarify the city’s code requirements and permit review procedures for
new or expanded airport uses do not result in new significant impacts or increase the severity of
previously identified significant impacts in the approved EIR/SEIR. There are no changes in
circumstances or new information of substantial importance that would require major revisions to the
EIR/SEIR or result in new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously
identified effects. Since the adoption of the Previous CEQA Documents, there have been no substantial
changes in the city’s laws, policies, rules, regulations, that relate to actions contemplated by the
Project. Neither has there been new information, or a change of circumstances which would invalidate
the Previous CEQA Documents. It is not foreseeable that impacts from physical projects/activities
associated with the proposed Project would have greater or different impacts than those identified in
the approved EIR/SEIR. Therefore, the Project does not trigger any of the conditions that require the
preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR in Public Resources Code §21166 or §15162 of the
CEQA Guidelines, and therefore an Addendum is the appropriate document to address the Project. Applicable Mitigation Measures from the SEIR
There are no mitigation measures from the 2024 SEIR identified to reduce impacts related to land
use and planning.
Mineral Resources
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162
Is a Subsequent SEIR Needed?
SEIR Evaluation Criteria
SEIR
Significance
Conclusion
SEIR
Mitigation
Measures
Do the Proposed
Changes Involve
a New or
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of
Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Are There New
Circumstances
Involving a New
or Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of
Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Is There New
Information
of Substantial
Importance
Requiring
New Analysis
or
Verification?
Are Only Minor
Technical Changes
or Additions
Necessary or Did
None of the
Conditions
Described in
§15162 Occur?
(§15164(a))
Project is
within the
Scope of
the SEIR?
Would implementation of the CAP Update:
a. Result in the loss of availability
of a known mineral resource
that would be of value to the
region and the residents of the
State?
No Impact None No No No Yes Yes
b. Result in the loss of availability
of a locally important mineral
resource recovery site
delineated on a local general
plan, specific plan, or other land
use plan?
No Impact None No No No Yes Yes
Previous CEQA Analysis Mineral Resources Findings
The 2024 SEIR identified no impacts to the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would
be of value to the region and the residents of the State, or the loss of availability of a locally important
mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan
(Section 4.16.3, Mineral Resources).
The certified EIR/SEIR, and related addenda, were completed in accordance with CEQA and CEQA
Guidelines. No legal actions were filed challenging the Previous CEQA Documents and thus are
presumed valid.
Addendum Analysis
The above-described targeted text amendments to city ordinances and policies and procedures have
been evaluated under CEQA to determine whether such changes in the original “project,”
circumstances, or information would trigger the need for any subsequent or supplemental
environmental documentation based on new or substantially more severe significant environmental
impacts. This is inclusive of secondary effects that may be reasonably foreseeable and caused by the
proposed Project. After a thorough factual evaluation, the city has determined that no further
environmental review is required, and as identified in the analysis below, all impacts associated with
the proposed Project would be equivalent to, or less than, the impacts previous analyzed in the
approved EIR/SEIR.
Please refer to Section 5 for a universal response on whether the proposed Project would result in (1)
substantial changes that require major revisions to the EIR/SEIR; (2) substantial changes to
circumstances; or (3) new information of substantial importance.
The 2024 SEIR identified no impacts to the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would
be of value to the region and the residents of the State, or the loss of availability of a locally important
mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan
(Section 4.16.3, Mineral Resources). The city does not have mineral resources of economic value or
active mining sites, therefore the 2024 SEIR identified no impacts to the loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state, or the loss of
availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan,
specific plan, or other land use plan. Similarly, implementation of the proposed Project would not
result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and
the residents of the state, or result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource
recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan.
Conclusion
The certified EIR/SEIR were completed in accordance with CEQA and CEQA Guidelines. Further, the
certified EIR/SEIR remains pertinent and continues to have strong informational value. Revisions to the
original “project” to specify and clarify the city’s code requirements and permit review procedures for
new or expanded airport land uses do not result in new significant impacts or increase the severity of
previously identified significant impacts in the approved EIR/SEIR. There are no changes in
circumstances or new information of substantial importance that would require major revisions to the
EIR/SEIR or result in new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously
identified effects. Since the adoption of the Previous CEQA Documents, there have been no substantial
changes in the city’s laws, policies, rules, regulations, that relate to actions contemplated by the
Project. Neither has there been new information, or a change of circumstances which would invalidate
the Previous CEQA Documents. It is not foreseeable that impacts from physical projects/activities
associated with the proposed Project would have greater or different impacts than those identified in
the approved EIR/SEIR. Therefore, the Project does not trigger any of the conditions that require the
preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR in Public Resources Code §21166 or §15162 of the
CEQA Guidelines, and therefore an Addendum is the appropriate document to address the Project. Applicable Mitigation Measures from the SEIR
There are no mitigation measures from the 2024 SEIR identified to reduce impacts related to mineral
resources.
Noise
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162
Is a Subsequent SEIR Needed?
SEIR Evaluation Criteria
SEIR
Significance
Conclusion
SEIR
Mitigation
Measures
Do the Proposed
Changes Involve a
New or Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of
Previously
Identified Impacts?
Are There New
Circumstances
Involving a
New or
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of
Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Is There New
Information of
Substantial
Importance
Requiring New
Analysis or
Verification?
Are Only Minor
Technical
Changes or
Additions
Necessary or Did
None of the
Conditions
Described in
§15162 Occur?
(§15164(a))
Project is
within the
Scope of
the SEIR?
Would implementation of the CAP
Update:
a. Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent
increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in
excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
Significant and
Unavoidable
(construction)
Less than
Significant
(operation)
MM NOI-1 No No No Yes Yes
b. Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels?
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
MM NOI-2 No No No Yes Yes
c. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
Previous CEQA Analysis Noise Findings
The 2024 SEIR identified that although mitigation measure NOI-1 would reduce construction noise
impacts for projects located within 500 feet of noise-sensitive land uses, it conservatively concluded
impacts to be significant and unavoidable related to construction activities generating a substantial
temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of
standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies (NOI-1). The 2024 SEIR identified a less than significant impact related to operational
activities generating a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the
vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance,
or applicable standards of other agencies (NOI-2). The 2024 SEIR identified a less than significant
impact related to the generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels (NOI-
3) with implementation of mitigation measure NOI-2. The 2024 SEIR also identified a less than
significant impact related to excessive noise levels within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport
land use plan or (NOI-4) (Section 4.10, Noise).
The certified EIR/SEIR, and related addenda, were completed in accordance with CEQA and CEQA
Guidelines. No legal actions were filed challenging the Previous CEQA Documents and thus are
presumed valid.
Addendum Analysis
The above-described targeted text amendments to city ordinances and policies and procedures have
been evaluated under CEQA to determine whether such changes in the original “project,”
circumstances, or information would trigger the need for any subsequent or supplemental
environmental documentation based on new or substantially more severe significant environmental
impacts. This is inclusive of secondary effects that may be reasonably foreseeable and caused by the
proposed Project. After a thorough factual evaluation, the city has determined that no further
environmental review is required, and as identified in the analysis below, all impacts associated with
the proposed Project would be equivalent to, or less than, the impacts previous analyzed in the
approved EIR/SEIR.
Please refer to Section 5 for a universal response on whether the proposed Project would result in (1)
substantial changes that require major revisions to the EIR/SEIR; (2) substantial changes to
circumstances; or (3) new information of substantial importance.
The 2024 SEIR identified that although mitigation measure NOI-1 would reduce construction noise
impacts for projects located within 500 feet of noise-sensitive land uses, it conservatively concluded
impacts to be significant and unavoidable related to construction activities generating a substantial
temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of
standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies (NOI-1). The 2024 SEIR identified a less than significant impact related to operational
activities generating a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the
vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance,
or applicable standards of other agencies (NOI-2). The 2024 SEIR identified a less than significant
impact related to the generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels (NOI-
3) with implementation of mitigation measure NOI-2. The 2024 SEIR also identified a less than
significant impact related to excessive noise levels within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport
land use plan or (NOI-4) (Section 4.10, Noise). Implementation of the proposed Project would not
change the types of projects/activities permitted or where construction may occur. Construction
activities associated with the 2024 SEIR, such as equipment use and staging of materials, ground
disturbances, removing existing pavement, repaving roadway surfaces, painting or restriping
pavement, modifying curbs, laying concrete, installing traffic signals or lighting, installing landscaping,
etc. all would be similar in impact (same time and place as previously identified) and be short-term
and temporary changes to noise conditions in the city. Where applicable, measures and actions
associated with the 2024 SEIR would be subject to existing city noise policies and regulations and
General Plan policies and programs, specifically those found in the Noise Element, and other local
polices and regulations pertaining to noise at any development site. Compliance with Occupational
Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”) standards for worker safety would minimize exposure of
workers to excessive noise levels. Long-term changes such as improvements at or near grade level of
existing roadways and land development projects would also be of the same time and place as
previously identified. Implementation of measures and actions included in the proposed Project would
not create a permanent increase in ambient noise levels or produce a new permanent source of noise,
and construction-related noise impacts would be reduced through enforcement of applicable city or
other noise policies. The proposed Project does not propose any new sensitive receptors (e.g.,
residences, schools) that could be adversely impacted from noise associated with aircraft flyovers.
Temporary construction workers would not be adversely affected by aircraft flyover as noise
generated from construction equipment would be the dominant noise exposure to them, which is
generally dealt with by wearing ear plugs to prevent hearing damage. Furthermore, long-term
maintenance workers would not sleep on-site; thus, they would not be exposed to potential sleep
disturbance from aircraft flyovers. Implementation of the proposed Project would not expose people
residing or working near an airport to excessive airport/aircraft noise.
Conclusion
The certified EIR/SEIR were completed in accordance with CEQA and CEQA Guidelines. Further, the
certified EIR/SEIR remains pertinent and continues to have strong informational value. Revisions to the
original “project” to specify and clarify the city’s code requirements and permit review procedures for
new or expanded airport land uses do not result in new significant impacts or increase the severity of
previously identified significant impacts in the approved EIR/SEIR. There are no changes in
circumstances or new information of substantial importance that would require major revisions to the
EIR/SEIR or result in new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously
identified effects. Since the adoption of the Previous CEQA Documents, there have been no substantial
changes in the city’s laws, policies, rules, regulations, that relate to actions contemplated by the
Project. Neither has there been new information, or a change of circumstances which would invalidate
the Previous CEQA Documents. It is not foreseeable that impacts from physical projects/activities
associated with the proposed Project would have greater or different impacts than those identified in
the approved EIR/SEIR. Therefore, the Project does not trigger any of the conditions that require the
preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR in Public Resources Code §21166 or §15162 of the
CEQA Guidelines, and therefore an Addendum is the appropriate document to address the Project. Applicable Mitigation Measures from the SEIR
The SEIR identified Mitigation Measures NOI-1 and NOI-2 for noise impacts. Neither of these
mitigation measures are applicable to the proposed Project.
Population and Housing
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162
Is a Subsequent SEIR Needed?
SEIR Evaluation Criteria
SEIR
Significance
Conclusion
SEIR
Mitigation
Measures
Do the Proposed
Changes Involve
a New or
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Are There New
Circumstances
Involving a New
or Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Is There New
Information
of Substantial
Importance
Requiring New Analysis
or
Verification?
Are Only Minor
Technical Changes
or Additions
Necessary or Did
None of the
Conditions Described in
§15162 Occur?
(§15164(a))
Project is within the
Scope of
the SEIR?
Would implementation of the CAP Update:
a. Induce substantial unplanned
population growth in an area,
either directly (for example, by
proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for
example, through extension of
roads and other infrastructure)?
Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
b. Displace substantial numbers of
existing housing or people,
necessitating the construction of
replacement housing
elsewhere?
Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
Previous CEQA Analysis Population and Housing Findings
The 2024 SEIR identified less than significant impacts for unplanned population growth (PH-1) and
substantial displacement of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere (PH-2) (Section 4.11, Population and Housing).
The certified EIR/SEIR, and related addenda, were completed in accordance with CEQA and CEQA
Guidelines. No legal actions were filed challenging the Previous CEQA Documents and thus are
presumed valid.
Addendum Analysis
The above-described targeted text amendments to city ordinances and policies and procedures have
been evaluated under CEQA to determine whether such changes in the original “project,”
circumstances, or information would trigger the need for any subsequent or supplemental
environmental documentation based on new or substantially more severe significant environmental
impacts. This is inclusive of secondary effects that may be reasonably foreseeable and caused by the
proposed Project. After a thorough factual evaluation, the city has determined that no further
environmental review is required, and as identified in the analysis below, all impacts associated with
the proposed Project would be equivalent to, or less than, the impacts previous analyzed in the
approved EIR/SEIR.
Please refer to Section 5 for a universal response on whether the proposed Project would result in (1)
substantial changes that require major revisions to the EIR/SEIR; (2) substantial changes to
circumstances; or (3) new information of substantial importance.
The 2024 SEIR identified less than significant impacts for unplanned population growth (PH-1) and
substantial displacement of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere (PH-2) (Section 4.11, Population and Housing). Implementation of the proposed
Project would not change the types of projects/activities permitted or where construction may occur.
Implementation of the proposed Project would not displace people or housing because the Project
would not require the removal of existing housing and would not propose changes to policies or
regulations related to land use or residential zoning or otherwise increase population growth in the
city or surrounding areas. Implementation of the Project would not displace substantial numbers of
existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere.
Conclusion
The certified EIR/SEIR were completed in accordance with CEQA and CEQA Guidelines. Further, the
certified EIR/SEIR remains pertinent and continues to have strong informational value. The 2024 SEIR
did not identify significant population and housing impacts and did not identify mitigation measures.
Revisions to the original “project” to specify and clarify the city’s code requirements and permit review
procedures for new or expanded airport land uses do not result in new significant impacts or increase
the severity of previously identified significant impacts in the approved EIR/SEIR. There are no changes
in circumstances or new information of substantial importance that would require major revisions to
the EIR/SEIR or result in new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously
identified effects. Since the adoption of the Previous CEQA Documents, there have been no substantial
changes in the city’s laws, policies, rules, regulations, that relate to actions contemplated by the
Project. Neither has there been new information, or a change of circumstances which would invalidate
the Previous CEQA Documents. It is not foreseeable that impacts from physical projects/activities
associated with the proposed Project would have greater or different impacts than those identified in
the approved EIR/SEIR. Therefore, the Project does not trigger any of the conditions that require the
preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR in Public Resources Code §21166 or §15162 of the
CEQA Guidelines, and therefore an Addendum is the appropriate document to address the Project. Applicable Mitigation Measures from the SEIR
There are no mitigation measures from the 2024 SEIR identified to reduce impacts related to
population and housing.
Public Services
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162
Is a Subsequent SEIR Needed?
SEIR Evaluation Criteria
SEIR
Significance
Conclusion
SEIR
Mitigation
Measures
Do the Proposed
Changes Involve
a New or
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of
Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Are There New
Circumstances
Involving a New
or Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of
Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Is There New
Information
of Substantial
Importance
Requiring
New Analysis
or
Verification?
Are Only Minor
Technical Changes
or Additions
Necessary or Did
None of the
Conditions
Described in
§15162 Occur?
(§15164(a))
Project is
within the
Scope of
the SEIR?
Would implementation of the CAP Update:
a. Result in substantial adverse
physical impacts associated with
the provision of new or physically
altered government 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:
• Fire?
• Police protection?
• Schools?
• Parks?
• Other public facilities?
Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
Previous CEQA Analysis Public Services Findings
The 2024 SEIR identified less than significant impacts associated with the provision of new or physically
altered government 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, including fire protection services (PS-1), police protection
services (PS-2), and schools (PS-3) (Section 4.12, Public Services and Recreation).
The certified EIR/SEIR, and related addenda, were completed in accordance with CEQA and CEQA
Guidelines. No legal actions were filed challenging the Previous CEQA Documents and thus are
presumed valid.
Addendum Analysis
The above-described targeted text amendments to city ordinances and policies and procedures have
been evaluated under CEQA to determine whether such changes in the original “project,”
circumstances, or information would trigger the need for any subsequent or supplemental
environmental documentation based on new or substantially more severe significant environmental
impacts. This is inclusive of secondary effects that may be reasonably foreseeable and caused by the
proposed Project. After a thorough factual evaluation, the city has determined that no further
environmental review is required, and as identified in the analysis below, all impacts associated with
the proposed Project would be equivalent to, or less than, the impacts previous analyzed in the
approved EIR/SEIR.
Please refer to Section 5 for a universal response on whether the proposed Project would result in (1)
substantial changes that require major revisions to the EIR/SEIR; (2) substantial changes to
circumstances; or (3) new information of substantial importance.
The 2024 SEIR identified less than significant impacts associated with the provision of new or physically
altered government 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, including fire protection services (PS-1), police protection
services (PS-2), and schools (PS-3) (Section 4.12, Public Services and Recreation). Implementation of
the proposed Project would not change the types of projects/activities permitted or where
construction may occur. The proposed Project would not generate new or increased demand for fire
protection services or interfere with or modify the ability of police and fire protection services to meet
performance objectives or response times outlined in the 2024 SEIR. The proposed Project does not
include development of new residences or the creation of substantial numbers of permanent jobs
requiring increased fire or police services. The proposed Project would not induce population growth
in the community that would require school services, new or expanded park facilities, other public
facilities. The proposed Project would not generate increased demand for public services such that
construction of new or expanded facilities would be required to maintain adequate service ratios.
Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities.
Conclusion
The certified EIR/SEIR were completed in accordance with CEQA and CEQA Guidelines. Further, the
certified EIR/SEIR remains pertinent and continues to have strong informational value. The 2024 SEIR
did not identify significant population and housing impacts and did not identify mitigation measures.
Revisions to the original “project” to specify and clarify the city’s code requirements and permit review
procedures for new or expanded airport land uses do not result in new significant impacts or increase
the severity of previously identified significant impacts in the approved EIR/SEIR. There are no changes
in circumstances or new information of substantial importance that would require major revisions to
the EIR/SEIR or result in new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously
identified effects. Since the adoption of the Previous CEQA Documents, there have been no substantial
changes in the city’s laws, policies, rules, regulations, that relate to actions contemplated by the
Project. Neither has there been new information, or a change of circumstances which would invalidate
the Previous CEQA Documents. It is not foreseeable that impacts from physical projects/activities
associated with the proposed Project would have greater or different impacts than those identified in
the approved EIR/SEIR. Therefore, the Project does not trigger any of the conditions that require the
preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR in Public Resources Code §21166 or §15162 of the
CEQA Guidelines, and therefore an Addendum is the appropriate document to address the Project. Applicable Mitigation Measures from the SEIR
There are no mitigation measures from the 2024 SEIR identified to reduce impacts related to public
services.
Recreation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162
Is a Subsequent SEIR Needed?
SEIR Evaluation Criteria
SEIR
Significance
Conclusion
SEIR
Mitigation
Measures
Do the Proposed
Changes Involve
a New or
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Are There New
Circumstances
Involving a New
or Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Is There New
Information of
Substantial
Importance
Requiring New Analysis
or
Verification?
Are Only Minor
Technical Changes
or Additions
Necessary or Did
None of the
Conditions Described in
§15162 Occur?
(§15164(a))
Project is within the
Scope of
the SEIR?
Would implementation of the CAP Update:
a. Would the project increase the
use of existing neighborhood and
regional parks, or other
recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration
of the facility would occur or be
accelerated?
Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
b. Does the project include
recreational facilities or require
the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might
have an adverse physical effect on
the environment?
Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
Previous CEQA Analysis Recreation Findings
The 2024 SEIR identified less than significant impacts associated with the provision of new or physically
altered parks, or the need for new or physically altered parks, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance
objectives (PS-4). The 2024 SEIR identified less than significant impacts related to the increase in use
of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial
physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated and for including recreational
facilities or requiring the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an
adverse physical effect on the environment (PS-4) (Section 4.12, Public Services and Recreation).
The certified EIR/SEIR, and related addenda, were completed in accordance with CEQA and CEQA
Guidelines. No legal actions were filed challenging the Previous CEQA Documents and thus are
presumed valid.
Addendum Analysis
The above-described targeted text amendments to city ordinances and policies and procedures have
been evaluated under CEQA to determine whether such changes in the original “project,”
circumstances, or information would trigger the need for any subsequent or supplemental
environmental documentation based on new or substantially more severe significant environmental
impacts. This is inclusive of secondary effects that may be reasonably foreseeable and caused by the
proposed Project. After a thorough factual evaluation, the city has determined that no further
environmental review is required, and as identified in the analysis below, all impacts associated with
the proposed Project would be equivalent to, or less than, the impacts previous analyzed in the
approved EIR/SEIR.
Please refer to Section 5 for a universal response on whether the proposed Project would result in (1)
substantial changes that require major revisions to the EIR/SEIR; (2) substantial changes to
circumstances; or (3) new information of substantial importance.
The 2024 SEIR identified less than significant impacts associated with the provision of new or physically
altered parks, or the need for new or physically altered parks, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance
objectives (PS-4). The 2024 SEIR identified less than significant impacts related to the increase in use
of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial
physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated and for including recreational
facilities or requiring the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an
adverse physical effect on the environment (PS-4) (Section 4.12, Public Services and Recreation).
Implementation of the proposed Project would not change the types of projects/activities permitted
or where construction may occur. The proposed Project would not generate new or increased demand
for parks and recreation facilities. Typically, this impact occurs when a project induces population
growth, such as new development or a business that would necessitate a large number of new
employees. The proposed Project does not include development of new residences or the creation of
substantial numbers of permanent jobs. Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in
substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered park
facilities nor increase the use of recreational facilities to the extent that substantial deterioration
would occur or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities.
Conclusion
The certified EIR/SEIR were completed in accordance with CEQA and CEQA Guidelines. Further, the
certified EIR/SEIR remains pertinent and continues to have strong informational value. The 2024 SEIR
did not identify significant population and housing impacts and did not identify mitigation measures.
Revisions to the original “project” to specify and clarify the city’s code requirements and permit review
procedures for new or expanded airport land uses do not result in new significant impacts or increase
the severity of previously identified significant impacts in the approved EIR/SEIR. There are no changes
in circumstances or new information of substantial importance that would require major revisions to
the EIR/SEIR or result in new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously
identified effects. Since the adoption of the Previous CEQA Documents, there have been no substantial
changes in the city’s laws, policies, rules, regulations, that relate to actions contemplated by the
Project. Neither has there been new information, or a change of circumstances which would invalidate
the Previous CEQA Documents. It is not foreseeable that impacts from physical projects/activities
associated with the proposed Project would have greater or different impacts than those identified in
the approved EIR/SEIR. Therefore, the Project does not trigger any of the conditions that require the
preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR in Public Resources Code §21166 or §15162 of the
CEQA Guidelines, and therefore an Addendum is the appropriate document to address the Project. Applicable Mitigation Measures from the SEIR
There are no mitigation measures from the 2024 SEIR identified to reduce impacts related to
recreation.
Transportation
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162
Is a Subsequent SEIR Needed?
SEIR Evaluation Criteria
SEIR
Significance
Conclusion
SEIR
Mitigation
Measures
Do the Proposed
Changes Involve
a New or
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of
Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Are There New
Circumstances
Involving a New
or Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of
Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Is There New
Information of
Substantial
Importance
Requiring
New Analysis
or
Verification?
Are Only Minor
Technical Changes
or Additions
Necessary or Did
None of the
Conditions
Described in
§15162 Occur?
(§15164(a))
Project is
within the
Scope of
the SEIR?
Would implementation of the CAP Update:
a. Conflict with a program, plan,
ordinance or policy addressing
the circulation system, including
transit, roadway, bicycle and
pedestrian facilities?
Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
b. Conflict or be inconsistent with
CEQA Guidelines § 15064.3,
subdivision (b)?
Significant
and
Unavoidable
MM T-1 No No No Yes Yes
c. Substantially increase hazards
due to a geometric design
feature ((e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)
Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
d. Result in inadequate emergency
access?
Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
Previous CEQA Analysis Transportation Findings
The 2024 SEIR identified a less than significant impact for conflicts with a program, plan, ordinance or
policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities
(T-1). The 2024 SEIR identified that although mitigation measure T-1 would aim to achieve VMT
reductions for development projects, it concluded impacts to be significant and unavoidable related
to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b) (T-2). The 2024 SEIR identified a less than
significant impact related to substantially increasing hazards due to a geometric design feature (T-3)
and for inadequate emergency access (T-4) (Section 4.13, Transportation).
The certified EIR/SEIR, and related addenda, were completed in accordance with CEQA and CEQA
Guidelines. No legal actions were filed challenging the Previous CEQA Documents and thus are
presumed valid.
Addendum Analysis
The above-described targeted text amendments to city ordinances and policies and procedures have
been evaluated under CEQA to determine whether such changes in the original “project,”
circumstances, or information would trigger the need for any subsequent or supplemental
environmental documentation based on new or substantially more severe significant environmental
impacts. This is inclusive of secondary effects that may be reasonably foreseeable and caused by the
proposed Project. After a thorough factual evaluation, the city has determined that no further
environmental review is required, and as identified in the analysis below, all impacts associated with
the proposed Project would be equivalent to, or less than, the impacts previous analyzed in the
approved EIR/SEIR.
Please refer to Section 5 for a universal response on whether the proposed Project would result in (1)
substantial changes that require major revisions to the EIR/SEIR; (2) substantial changes to
circumstances; or (3) new information of substantial importance.
The 2024 SEIR identified a less than significant impact for conflicts with a program, plan, ordinance or
policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities
(T-1). The 2024 SEIR identified that although mitigation measure T-1 would aim to achieve VMT
reductions for development projects, it concluded impacts to be significant and unavoidable related
to CEQA Guidelines §15064.3(b). The 2024 SEIR identified a less than significant impact related to
substantially increasing hazards due to a geometric design feature (T-3) and for inadequate emergency
access (T-4) (Section 4.13, Transportation). Implementation of the proposed Project would not change
the types of projects/activities permitted or where construction may occur. Implementation of the
proposed Project would not change the types of projects/activities permitted or where construction
may occur. Implementation of the proposed Project would not induce substantial population or
employment growth in the city that would in turn generate increased Vehicle Miles Traveled.
Implementation of the proposed Project would not conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines
§15064.3(b). Where applicable, measures and actions associated with the 2024 SEIR would be subject
to local rules and regulations. The city maintains improvement standards that guide the construction
of new transportation facilities to minimize design hazards for all users of the system. Furthermore,
General Plan policies 3-P.10, 3-P.12, 3-P.13, and 3-P.16 would reduce impacts related to safety.
Conclusion
The certified EIR/SEIR were completed in accordance with CEQA and CEQA Guidelines. Further, the
certified EIR/SEIR remains pertinent and continues to have strong informational value. The 2024 SEIR
did not identify significant population and housing impacts and did not identify mitigation measures.
Revisions to the original “project” to specify and clarify the city’s code requirements and permit review
procedures for new or expanded airport land uses do not result in new significant impacts or increase
the severity of previously identified significant impacts in the approved EIR/SEIR. There are no changes
in circumstances or new information of substantial importance that would require major revisions to
the EIR/SEIR or result in new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously
identified effects. Since the adoption of the Previous CEQA Documents, there have been no substantial
changes in the city’s laws, policies, rules, regulations, that relate to actions contemplated by the
Project. Neither has there been new information, or a change of circumstances which would invalidate
the Previous CEQA Documents. It is not foreseeable that impacts from physical projects/activities
associated with the proposed Project would have greater or different impacts than those identified in
the approved EIR/SEIR. Therefore, the Project does not trigger any of the conditions that require the
preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR in Public Resources Code §21166 or §15162 of the
CEQA Guidelines, and therefore an Addendum is the appropriate document to address the Project. Applicable Mitigation Measures from the SEIR
The 2024 SEIR identified Mitigation Measure T-1 for transportation impact T-2. This mitigation
measure is not applicable to the proposed Project.
Tribal Cultural Resources
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162
Is a Subsequent SEIR Needed?
SEIR Evaluation Criteria
SEIR
Significance
Conclusion
SEIR
Mitigation
Measures
Do the Proposed
Changes Involve
a New or
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Are There New
Circumstances
Involving a New
or Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Is There New
Information of
Substantial
Importance
Requiring New Analysis
or
Verification?
Are Only Minor
Technical Changes
or Additions
Necessary or Did
None of the
Conditions Described in
§15162 Occur?
(§15164(a))
Project is within the
Scope of
the SEIR?
Would implementation of the CAP Update:
a. Would the project cause a
substantial adverse change in the
significance of a tribal cultural
resource, defined in Public
Resources Code §21074 as either
a site, feature, place cultural
landscape that is geographically
defined in terms of the size and
scope of the landscape, sacred
place, or object with cultural
value to a California Native
American tribe, and that is:
i. Listed or eligible for listing in
the California Register of
Historical Resources, or in a
local register of historical
resources as defined in
Public Resources Code
section 5020.1(k), or
Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162
Is a Subsequent SEIR Needed?
SEIR Evaluation Criteria
SEIR
Significance Conclusion
SEIR
Mitigation Measures
Do the Proposed
Changes Involve
a New or Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of
Previously
Identified Impacts?
Are There New
Circumstances
Involving a New or Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of
Previously
Identified Impacts?
Is There New
Information of Substantial
Importance
Requiring
New Analysis
or Verification?
Are Only Minor
Technical Changes
or Additions Necessary or Did
None of the
Conditions
Described in
§15162 Occur? (§15164(a))
Project is
within the
Scope of the SEIR?
ii. A resource determined by
the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by
substantial evidence, to be
significant pursuant to
criteria set forth in
subdivision c of Public
Resources Code §5024.1, the
lead agency shall consider
the significance of the
resource to a California
Native American tribe.
Previous CEQA Analysis Tribal Cultural Resources Findings
The 2024 SEIR identified less than significant impacts related to causing a substantial adverse change
in the significance of a Tribal cultural resource as defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 that
is listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of
historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k) or pursuant to criteria set
forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1 (CUL-4) (Section 4.4, Cultural and Tribal
Cultural Resources).
The certified EIR/SEIR, and related addenda, were completed in accordance with CEQA and CEQA
Guidelines. No legal actions were filed challenging the Previous CEQA Documents and thus are
presumed valid.
Addendum Analysis
The above-described targeted text amendments to city ordinances and policies and procedures have
been evaluated under CEQA to determine whether such changes in the original “project,”
circumstances, or information would trigger the need for any subsequent or supplemental
environmental documentation based on new or substantially more severe significant environmental
impacts. This is inclusive of secondary effects that may be reasonably foreseeable and caused by the
proposed Project. After a thorough factual evaluation, the city has determined that no further
environmental review is required, and as identified in the analysis below, all impacts associated with
the proposed Project would be equivalent to, or less than, the impacts previous analyzed in the
approved EIR/SEIR.
Please refer to Section 5 for a universal response on whether the proposed Project would result in (1)
substantial changes that require major revisions to the EIR/SEIR; (2) substantial changes to
circumstances; or (3) new information of substantial importance.
The 2024 SEIR identified less than significant impacts related to causing a substantial adverse change
in the significance of a Tribal cultural resource as defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 that
is listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of
historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k) or pursuant to criteria set
forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1 (CUL-4) (Section 4.4, Cultural and Tribal
Cultural Resources). Implementation of the proposed Project would not change the types of
projects/activities permitted or where construction may occur. Construction activities associated with
the 2024 SEIR, such as equipment use and staging of materials, ground disturbances, removing existing
pavement, repaving roadway surfaces, painting or restriping pavement, modifying curbs, laying
concrete, installing traffic signals or lighting, installing landscaping, etc. and long-term changes such
as improvements at or near grade level of existing roadways and land development projects would be
of the same time and place as previously identified. The Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidelines
addresses identification and treatment of tribal cultural resources that may be impacted as a result of
measures and actions associated with the 2024 SEIR. Implementation of the proposed Project would
not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public
Resources Code §21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically
defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to
a California Native American tribe, and that is listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of
Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code §
5020.1(k). The proposed Project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
tribal cultural resource, pursuant to criteria set forth in Public Resources Code §5024.1(c).
Conclusion
The certified EIR/SEIR were completed in accordance with CEQA and CEQA Guidelines. Further, the
certified EIR/SEIR remains pertinent and continues to have strong informational value. The 2024 SEIR
did not identify significant population and housing impacts and did not identify mitigation measures.
Revisions to the original “project” to specify and clarify the city’s code requirements and permit review
procedures for new or expanded airport land uses do not result in new significant impacts or increase
the severity of previously identified significant impacts in the approved EIR/SEIR. There are no changes
in circumstances or new information of substantial importance that would require major revisions to
the EIR/SEIR or result in new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously
identified effects. Since the adoption of the Previous CEQA Documents, there have been no substantial
changes in the city’s laws, policies, rules, regulations, that relate to actions contemplated by the
Project. Neither has there been new information, or a change of circumstances which would invalidate
the Previous CEQA Documents. It is not foreseeable that impacts from physical projects/activities
associated with the proposed Project would have greater or different impacts than those identified in
the approved EIR/SEIR. Therefore, the Project does not trigger any of the conditions that require the
preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR in Public Resources Code §21166 or §15162 of the
CEQA Guidelines, and therefore an Addendum is the appropriate document to address the Project. Applicable Mitigation Measures from the SEIR
There are no mitigation measures from the 2024 SEIR identified to reduce impacts related to tribal
cultural resources.
Utilities and Service Systems
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162
Is a Subsequent SEIR Needed?
SEIR Evaluation Criteria
SEIR
Significance
Conclusion
SEIR
Mitigation
Measures
Do the Proposed
Changes Involve
a New or
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Are There New
Circumstances
Involving a New
or Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Is There New
Information
of Substantial
Importance
Requiring New Analysis
or
Verification?
Are Only Minor
Technical Changes
or Additions
Necessary or Did
None of the
Conditions Described in
§15162 Occur?
(§15164(a))
Project is within the
Scope of
the SEIR?
Would implementation of the CAP Update:
a. Require or result in the
relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater
treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural
gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or
relocation of which could cause significant environmental
effects?
Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
b. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years?
Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162
Is a Subsequent SEIR Needed?
SEIR Evaluation Criteria
SEIR
Significance Conclusion
SEIR
Mitigation Measures
Do the Proposed
Changes Involve
a New or Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of
Previously
Identified Impacts?
Are There New
Circumstances
Involving a New or Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of
Previously
Identified Impacts?
Is There New
Information of Substantial
Importance
Requiring
New Analysis
or Verification?
Are Only Minor
Technical Changes
or Additions Necessary or Did
None of the
Conditions
Described in
§15162 Occur? (§15164(a))
Project is
within the
Scope of the SEIR?
c. Result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing
commitments?
Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
d. Generate solid waste in excess
of State or local standards, or
in excess of the capacity of
local infrastructure, or
otherwise impair the
attainment of solid waste
reduction goals?
Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
e. Comply with federal, State,
and local management and
reduction statutes and
regulations related to solid
waste?
Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
Previous CEQA Analysis Utilities and Service Systems Findings
The 2024 SEIR identified less than significant impacts related to the relocation or construction of new
or expanded water, wastewater treatment or stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunication facilities (UTIL-1); sufficient water supplies during normal, dry and multiple dry
years (UTIL-2); adequate wastewater treatment capacity (UTIL-3); the generation of solid waste in
excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise
impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals and compliance with federal, State, and local
management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste (UTIL-4) (Section 4.14,
Utilities and Service Systems).
The certified EIR/SEIR, and related addenda, were completed in accordance with CEQA and CEQA
Guidelines. No legal actions were filed challenging the Previous CEQA Documents and thus are
presumed valid.
Addendum Analysis
The above-described targeted text amendments to city ordinances and policies and procedures have
been evaluated under CEQA to determine whether such changes in the original “project,”
circumstances, or information would trigger the need for any subsequent or supplemental
environmental documentation based on new or substantially more severe significant environmental
impacts. This is inclusive of secondary effects that may be reasonably foreseeable and caused by the
proposed Project. After a thorough factual evaluation, the city has determined that no further
environmental review is required, and as identified in the analysis below, all impacts associated with
the proposed Project would be equivalent to, or less than, the impacts previous analyzed in the
approved EIR/SEIR.
Please refer to Section 5 for a universal response on whether the proposed Project would result in (1)
substantial changes that require major revisions to the EIR/SEIR; (2) substantial changes to
circumstances; or (3) new information of substantial importance.
The 2024 SEIR identified less than significant impacts related to the relocation or construction of new
or expanded water, wastewater treatment or stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunication facilities (UTIL-1); sufficient water supplies during normal, dry and multiple dry
years (UTIL-2); adequate wastewater treatment capacity (UTIL-3); the generation of solid waste in
excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise
impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals and compliance with federal, State, and local
management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste (UTIL-4) (Section 4.14,
Utilities and Service Systems). Implementation of the proposed Project would not change the types of
projects/activities permitted or where construction may occur. Implementation of the proposed
Project would not increase development or induce population growth directly or indirectly, because
measures and actions do not propose new housing nor do they propose changes to policies or
regulations related to land use or residential or nonresidential zoning. The proposed Project would
not result in demand for new or expanded infrastructure, including water, wastewater treatment,
stormwater drainage, natural gas or telecommunication facilities would not increase to serve new
population or development. The implementation of the proposed Project would not involve
development of residential communities or other non-residential development or induce population
growth in an area that would increase demand for wastewater treatment. Further, it would not involve
the construction of restroom facilities. Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in
new habitable structures (e.g., housing, nonresidential development) that would generate
wastewater. Implementation of the proposed Project would not induce increased residential or non-
residential development, or population growth directly or indirectly, and there would be no increase
in solid waste production.
Conclusion
The certified EIR/SEIR were completed in accordance with CEQA and CEQA Guidelines. Further, the
certified EIR/SEIR remains pertinent and continues to have strong informational value. The 2024 SEIR
did not identify significant population and housing impacts and did not identify mitigation measures.
Revisions to the original “project” to specify and clarify the city’s code requirements and permit review
procedures for new or expanded airport land uses do not result in new significant impacts or increase
the severity of previously identified significant impacts in the approved EIR/SEIR. There are no changes
in circumstances or new information of substantial importance that would require major revisions to
the EIR/SEIR or result in new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously
identified effects. Since the adoption of the Previous CEQA Documents, there have been no substantial
changes in the city’s laws, policies, rules, regulations, that relate to actions contemplated by the
Project. Neither has there been new information, or a change of circumstances which would invalidate
the Previous CEQA Documents. It is not foreseeable that impacts from physical projects/activities
associated with the proposed Project would have greater or different impacts than those identified in
the approved EIR/SEIR. Therefore, the Project does not trigger any of the conditions that require the
preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR in Public Resources Code §21166 or §15162 of the
CEQA Guidelines, and therefore an Addendum is the appropriate document to address the Project. Applicable Mitigation Measures from the SEIR
There are no mitigation measures from the 2024 SEIR identified to reduce impacts related to utilities
and service systems.
Wildfire
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162
Is a Subsequent SEIR Needed?
SEIR Evaluation Criteria
SEIR
Significance
Conclusion
SEIR
Mitigation
Measures
Do the Proposed
Changes Involve
a New or
Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Are There New
Circumstances
Involving a New
or Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of Previously
Identified
Impacts?
Is There New
Information
of Substantial
Importance
Requiring New Analysis
or
Verification?
Are Only Minor
Technical Changes
or Additions
Necessary or Did
None of the
Conditions Described in
§15162 Occur?
(§15164(a))
Project is within the
Scope of
the SEIR?
Would implementation of the CAP Update:
a. Substantially impair an adopted
emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
b. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and
other factors, exacerbate wildfire
risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant
concentrations from a wildfire or the
uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
Less than Significant None No No No Yes Yes
c. Require the installation or
maintenance of associated
infrastructure (such as roads, fuel brakes, emergency water sources,
power lines or other utilities) that
may result in temporary or ongoing
impacts to the environment?
Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162
Is a Subsequent SEIR Needed?
SEIR Evaluation Criteria
SEIR Significance
Conclusion
SEIR Mitigation
Measures
Do the
Proposed
Changes Involve a New
or Substantial
Increase in the
Severity of
Previously Identified
Impacts?
Are There New
Circumstances Involving a
New or Substantial Increase in the Severity of Previously
Identified Impacts?
Is There New Information
of Substantial
Importance
Requiring
New Analysis or
Verification?
Are Only Minor
Technical
Changes or Additions
Necessary or
Did None of
the Conditions
Described in §15162 Occur?
(§15164(a))
Project
is within
the
Scope of the
SEIR?
d. Expose people or structures to significant risks,
including downslope or downstream flooding or
landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope
instability, or drainage changes?
Less than
Significant None No No No Yes Yes
Previous CEQA Analysis Wildfire Findings
The 2024 SEIR identified less than significant impacts for wildfire emergency response, access, and
evacuation (WF-1); and related to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors that could exacerbate
wildfire risks, installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment, exposing people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-
fire slope instability, or drainage changes; and exposing people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires (WF-2) (Section 4.15, Wildfire).
The certified EIR/SEIR, and related addenda, were completed in accordance with CEQA and CEQA
Guidelines. No legal actions were filed challenging the Previous CEQA Documents and thus are
presumed valid.
Addendum Analysis
The above-described targeted text amendments to city ordinances and policies and procedures have
been evaluated under CEQA to determine whether such changes in the original “project,”
circumstances, or information would trigger the need for any subsequent or supplemental
environmental documentation based on new or substantially more severe significant environmental
impacts. This is inclusive of secondary effects that may be reasonably foreseeable and caused by the
proposed Project. After a thorough factual evaluation, the city has determined that no further
environmental review is required, and as identified in the analysis below, all impacts associated with
the proposed Project would be equivalent to, or less than, the impacts previous analyzed in the
approved EIR/SEIR.
Please refer to Section 5 for a universal response on whether the proposed Project would result in (1)
substantial changes that require major revisions to the EIR/SEIR; (2) substantial changes to
circumstances; or (3) new information of substantial importance.
The 2024 SEIR identified less than significant impacts for wildfire emergency response, access, and
evacuation (WF-1); and related to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors that could exacerbate
wildfire risks, installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure that may exacerbate fire risk or
that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment, exposing people or structures to
significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-
fire slope instability, or drainage changes; and exposing people or structures, either directly or indirectly,
to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires (WF-2) (Section 4.15, Wildfire).
Implementation of the proposed Project would not change the types of projects/activities permitted
or where construction may occur. The implementation of the proposed Project would not involve
development of residential communities or other non-residential development or induce population
growth in an area that is subject to potential evacuations and the proposed Project would not result
in alterations of public roadways. Although the city is located within a Local Responsibly Area Very
High Fire Hazard Severity Zone and adjacent to a State Responsibility Area Very High Fire Hazard
Severity Zone, the proposed Project would not include the construction of new housing and do not
propose changes to policies or regulations related to land use or residential zoning. The proposed
Project would not introduce new occupants that could be exposed to pollutant concentrations from a
wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of as wildfire or require the installation or maintenance of
associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel brakes, emergency water sources, power lines or other
utilities). Where applicable, measures and actions associated with the 2024 SEIR would comply with
the San Diego County Emergency Operations Plan (“EOP”) and be subject to the California Fire Code
(“CFC”), which includes safety measures to minimize the threat of fire. Development would also be
required to meet California Building Code requirements, including CCR Title 24, Part 2, which includes
specific requirements related to exterior wildfire exposure, downslope or downstream flooding or
landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes. Compliance with
applicable policies, codes and regulations would reduce the risk of loss, injury, or death from wildfire.
Conclusion
The certified EIR/SEIR were completed in accordance with CEQA and CEQA Guidelines. Further, the
certified EIR/SEIR remains pertinent and continues to have strong informational value. The 2024 SEIR
did not identify significant population and housing impacts and did not identify mitigation measures.
Revisions to the original “project” to specify and clarify the city’s code requirements and permit review
procedures for new or expanded airport land uses do not result in new significant impacts or increase
the severity of previously identified significant impacts in the approved EIR/SEIR. There are no changes
in circumstances or new information of substantial importance that would require major revisions to
the EIR/SEIR or result in new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously
identified effects. Since the adoption of the Previous CEQA Documents, there have been no substantial
changes in the city’s laws, policies, rules, regulations, that relate to actions contemplated by the
Project. Neither has there been new information, or a change of circumstances which would invalidate
the Previous CEQA Documents. It is not foreseeable that impacts from physical projects/activities
associated with the proposed Project would have greater or different impacts than those identified in
the approved EIR/SEIR. Therefore, the Project does not trigger any of the conditions that require the
preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR in Public Resources Code §21166 or §15162 of the
CEQA Guidelines, and therefore an Addendum is the appropriate document to address the Project. Applicable Mitigation Measures from the SEIR
There are no mitigation measures from the 2024 SEIR identified to reduce impacts related to wildfire.
7 References
Where all or part of another document is incorporated by reference, the incorporated language shall
be considered to be set forth in full as part of the text of Addendum. All documents cited or referenced
are incorporated into the Addendum in accordance with CEQA Guidelines §§15148 and 15150,
including but not limited to the following: City of Carlsbad. 2015. City of Carlsbad General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report. Available : https://www.carlsbadca.gov/departments/community-development/planning/general-plan/related-documents/-folder-773. Accessed July 20, 2024. _________. 2020. An Addendum to the Previously Certified Program Environmental Impact Report for the 2015 General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan (PEIR 13-02). Available: https://records.carlsbadca.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=5154824&dbid=0&repo=CityofCarlsbad. Accessed July 20, 2024. _________. 2021. 2021 Housing Element Update Addendum. Available: https://records.carlsbadca.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=5312802&dbid=0&repo=CityofCarlsbad&cr=1. Accessed July 20, 2024.
_________. 2024. City of Carlsbad Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report. Available: https://files.ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/281700-3/attachment/_PFNFkSV8FCkmdU1hXlW25tF98n-BZ_pdzLkWZUQ3Kc2CA6Q1LZ_Xp9kUhHB0NSwdr7p4ccqp_dRZJ4S0. Accessed July 20, 2024. County of San Diego. 1997. 1997 Airport Master Plan Update. Available: https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/dam/sdc/dpw/AIRPORTS/palomar/documents/CRQ_MasterPlan1997.pdf. Accessed July 20, 2024. _________. 2021. Final Program Environmental Impact Report. Available: https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/dam/sdc/dpw/AIRPORTS/palomar/documents/Master-Plan-Update/2021/B-PEIR_Nov2021.pdf. Accessed July 20, 2024. _________. 2021. 2021 Airport Master Plan Update. Available: https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/dam/sdc/dpw/AIRPORTS/palomar/documents/Master-Plan-Update/2021/H-Master_Plan_Update_2021.pdf. Accessed July 20, 2024. In each instance where a document is incorporated by reference for purposes of this Addendum, the
Addendum shall briefly summarize the incorporated document, or briefly summarize the incorporated
data if the document cannot be summarized. In addition, the Addendum shall explain the relationship
between the incorporated part of the referenced document and the Addendum.