The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutEIR 94-01; CARLSBAD RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT; FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE CARLSBAD SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT; 1995-11-01FINAL . PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT for the CARLSBAD RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT SCH# 95051001 EIR 94-01 NOVEMBER 1995 Prepared for: City of Carlsbad Planning Department 207 5 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, California 92009 Prepared by: · ·Cotton/Beland/ Associates, Inc. 747 :East Green Street, Suite 400 Pasadena, California 91101 • 6310 Greenwich, Suite 220 San Diego, California 92122 879.00 TABLE OF CONTENTS • Section Page 1.0 IN1RODUCTION 1-1 2.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2-1 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3-1 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 4-1 5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS 5-1 5.1 Agricultural Resources 5.1-1, 5.2 Air Quality 5.2-1 5.3 Archaeological and Paleontological Resources 5.3-1 5.4 Biological Resources . 5.4-1 5.5 Traffic/ Circulation . 5.5-1 5.6 Hazardous Waste/Pesticide Residue 5.6-1 5.7 Land Use Compatibility 5.7-1 ' 5.8 Noise 5.8-1 5.9 Public Services and Utilities 5.9-1 • 5.10 Solid Waste 5.10-1 5.11 Visual Aesthetics/Grading 5.11-1 5.12 Water Quality 5.12-1 6.0 ALTERNATIVES 6-1 6.1 No Project/No Development Alternative 6-30 6.2 Development Under Existing Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Designations 6-30 6.3 Alternative Location 6-35 \ 7.0 ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS 7-1 7.1 Cumulative Impacts 7-:-1 7.2 Growth Inducing Impacts 7-8 7.3 Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes 7-10 7.4 Unavoidable Significant Environmental Impacts 7-10 · 7.5 Areas of No Significant Impact 7-10 8.0 REFERENCES 8-1 9.0 RESPONSES TO COMMENTS ON DRAFT EIR 9-1 cl. Carlsbad Ranch SRecific Plan Amendment Final Program El i • CJ% of Carlsbad ovember 1995 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) Section lQ;O APPENDICES (bound under separate cover) Appendix A: Notice of Preparation, Environmental Checklist, and Responses to the Notice of Preparation Appendix B: Water Use Study Appendix C: Transportation Analysis Appendix D: Noise Analysis , Appendix E: Air Quality Analysis Appendix F: Biological Resources Analysis Appendix G: Cultural Resources Analysis Appendix H: Water Quality Analysis Appendix I: Hazardous Waste/Pesticide Residue Assessment Appendix J: Solid Waste Assessment Appendix K: Caltrans Visual Study Mitigation Monitoring Program (bound under separate cover) Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR ii City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • • LIST OF TABLES Table Page 2-1 Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures 2-3 2-2 Summary of Impacts, Mitigation, and Monitoring Report Program for the Proposed Project and Each Alternative 2-13 3-1 Project Characteristics 3-8 3-2 Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Phasing 3-13 5-1 Current Agricultural Use of the Project Site 5.1-5 5-2 County Summary and Change·by Land Use Category 5.1-9 5-3 Land Committed to Nonagricultural Use 5.1-9 5-4 Land Use Conversion from 1990 to 1992 5.1-10 5-5 California and Federal Ambient Air Quality Standards 5.2-3 5-6 Projected Air Pollutant Emissions Year 2000 (Pounds Per Day) · 5-7 Projected Air Pollutant Emissions at _Buildout, Year 2010 (Pounds Per Day) 5-8 Impacts to Vegetation Communities (and Developed Area) on Carlsbad Ranch 5-9 Intersection Levels of Service Analysis Existing Conditions 5.2-6 5.2-6 5-10 Street Segment Levels of Service Analysis/Existing Conditions 5-11 LFMP -Zone 13 Trip Generation Year 2000 5.4-10 5.5-5 5.5-7 5.5-12 5.5-13 5.5-21 5-12 LFMP -Zone 13 Trip Generation Buildout 5-13 Intersection Levels of Service Analysis Year 2000 and Buildout Conditions Without Mitigations 5-14 Street Segment Levels of Service Analysis Year 2000 and Buildout Conditions 5-15 Armada Drive/LEGO Drive Intersection Levels of Service Analysis Buildout Conditions Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR iii 5.5-22 5.5-24 City of Carlsbad · November 1995 LIST OF TABLES (Continued) Table Page 5-16 Intersection Levels of Service Analysis Year 2000 and 5.5-30 Buildout Conditions With Mitigations 5-17 Relationship of Proposed Project to General Plan Goals 5.7-12 and Policies 5-18 Vehicular Noise from Project and Cumulative Traffic Buildout, 5.8-5 Year 2010 5-19 Estimated Sewage Flow 5-20 Estimated Water Demand for Carlsbad Ranch 6-1 Summary of Impacts, Mitigation, and Monitoring/Report Program for the Proposed Project and Each Alternative 6-2 Matrix Summary of Site Analysis for the Project in the San Diego Region 7-1 Citywide Cumulative Build-out Assumptions 7-2 Cumulative Build-out Subregional Area Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR iv 5.9-6 5.9-18 6-5 6-38 7-2 7-4 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 3-1 Regional Location and Local Vicinity Map 3-2 3-2 Planning Areas 3-5 3-3 Development Summary 3-9 3-4 Existing General Plan Land Uses 3-15 3-5 Proposed General Plan .Land Uses 3-16 3-6 Existing Zoning Designa.tions 3-17 3-7 Proposed Zoning Designations 3-18 5-1 Important Farmland Surrounding the Project Site 5.1-2 5-2 Agriculture Leaseholds of Project Site 5.1-4 5-3 Unique Farmlands· Inventory 5.1-7 • 5-4 Williamson Act Lands 5.1-13 5-5 Air Basin Bou·ndaries 5.2-2 5-6 Vegetation and Sensitive Resources 5.4-2 5-7 Project Site in Relation to Preserve Planning Areas 5.4-7 5-8 Impacts to Biological Resources 5.4-9 5-9 Project Study Area 5.5-3 5-10 Year 2000 LFMP Zone 13 Trip Distribution 5.5-14 5-11 Year 2000 Without Cannon Road Extension LFMP 5.5-15 Zone 13 Trip Distribution 5-12 Build-out Conditions LFMP Zone 13 Trip Distribution 5.5-16 5-13 Year 2000 LFMP Zone 13 Only Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 5.5-17 5-14 Year 2000 Without Cannon Road Extension LFMP Zone 13 5.5-18 • Only Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Carlsbad Ranch SR_ecijic Plan Amendmelll Final Program El .. V 9Z of Carlsbad ovember 1995 LIST OF FIGURES (Continued) Figure 5-15 Build-out Conditions LFMP Zone 13 Only Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 5-16 Locations of Surface Stains and Soil Samples 5-17 Zone 13 Location Map 5-18 Local Coastal Program Map 5-19 McClellan-Palomar CLUP Map 5-20 School District Boundaries 5-21 Existing and Proposed Water and Reclaimed Water Facilities 5-22 Grading Concept 5-23 Earthwork Phasing Concept 5-24 View Location Map 5-25 View 1 5-26 View 2 5-27 View 3 6-1 Existing Specific Plan Alternative 6-2 Alternative Locations Considered 7-1 SANDAG Series 7 Subregional Areas Map Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR vi Page 5.5-19 5.6-3 5.7-4 5.7-5 5.8-2 5.9-8 5.9-16 5.11-3 5.11-4 5.11-8 5.11-9 5.11-10 5.11-11 6-32 6-41 7-3 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • r -• [ f l le ! l- r I ' 1.0 Introduction • • • 1.0 INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION This Final Program Environmental Impact Report (Final Program EIR) evaluates the environmental effects of the development and operation of: The Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan; improvements to the 1-5/Cannon Road Interchange; and the development of a 24.2 acre parcel immediately adjacent to the northern boundary of the specific plan site. The Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan is a planning document which will guide the development of a 44 7.40 acre area through the provision of a comprehensive set of' guidelines, regulations, and implementation programs. The proposed land uses for the Specific Plan include office, research and development, related light manufacturing, commercial, hotel, destination resort, golf course, agriculture, a vocational school campus, and LEGOLAND Carlsbad. The 24.2 acre parcel adjacent to the northern boundary is proposed as a continuation of the Specific Plan golf course. Legal Requirements This Program Environmental Impact Report was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970 (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.); the Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act ( CEQA Guidelines) published by the Resources Agency of the State of California (California Administrative Code Sections 15000 et. seq.); and the environmental review guidelines of the City of Carlsbad. This report was prepared by professional environmental consultants under contract with the City of Carlsbad. The City of Carlsbad is the lead agency for the preparation of this EIR as defined by CEQA (Public Resources Code Section 21067 as amended), and the content of the document reflects the independent judgement of the City. EIR As An Information Document This EIR is intended to provide information to the public agencies, the general public, and the decision makers, regarding the potential environmental° impacts from the construction and operation of the proposed project. Under the provisions of CEQA, "the purpose of the Environmental Impact Report is to identify the significant effects .of a project on the environment, to identify alternatives to the project, and to indicate the manner in which significant effects can be mitigated or avoided." (Public Resources Code 21002. l(a)). The EIR serves as an information document for use by the public agencies, the general public and decision makers. This EIR is not a City of Carlsbad policy document; it does, however, discuss the potential impacts of development pursuant to the proposed specific plan and related components and analyzes project alternatives. The EIR will be used by the Planning Commission and City Council in assessing impacts of the proposed project. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendmellt Final Program EIR 1-1 City of Carlsbad November 1995 Background In order to define the scope of the investigation of the EIR, the City of Carlsbad distributed a Notice of Preparation to city, county, and state agencies, other public agencies, and any interested private organizations and individuals. The purpose of the NOP was to identify agency and public concerns regarding potential impacts of the proposed project. Written comments received during the 30-day public review period for the Notice of Preparation are included in Appendix A of this EIR. Technical documents prepared for the project are included as additional appendices. These documents were utilized as reference· material in the analyses of environmental impacts. Four Public Scoping Meetings were held at various locations in Carlsbad on the following dates: · • May 8, 1995 • May 10, 1995 • May 11, 1995 • May 15, 1995 The purpose of these meetings was to solicit input from the public and public agencies regarding the environmental issues associated with the proposed project. Availability of Reports This Program Environmental Impact Report is available for public inspection at the City of Carlsbad Planning Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Copies are available to the public on payment of a reasonable charge for reproduction. Circulating copies are available at the Carlsbad City Library, the La Costa Branch Library, and the Community Development Department. Documents may be reviewed during regular business hours or checked out. Comments Requested Comments of all agencies and individuals are invited regarding the information contained in the Final Program EIR. Where possible, those responding should endeavor to provide the information they feel is lacking in the Final Program EIR, or indicate where the information may be found. All comments on the Final Program EIR should be sent to the following City of Carlsbad contact: Mr. Don Neu Senior Planner City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, California 92009 Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 1-2 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • • Following a 45-day period of circulation and review of the Final Program EIR, all comments and the City responses to the comments will be incorporated in a Final Program EIR prior to certification of the document by the City of Carlsbad. Structure Of This EIR This EIR is organized into ten sections. Section 1.0 is the Introduction. Section 2.0, · the Executive Summary, provides a brief project description and summarizes project impacts and mitigation measures. Section 3.0 provides a detailed project description of the proposed project. Section 4.0 describes the general environmental setting. , Section 5.0 analyzes project impacts and identifies mitigation measures designed to reduce significant impacts. Section 6.0 provides an analysis of alternatives to the proposed project. Section 7.0 discusses the cumulative impacts, growth-inducing impacts and environmental impacts. References and persons responsible for preparation of the EIR are included in Section 8.0. References are .shown in the EIR text in parenthesis, e.g., (C-3). The letter and number in the parentheses reflect the location of the reference information in Section 8.0. Section 9.0 includes . responses to comments on the Draft EIR. A separately bound Section 10.0 consists of the Initial Study, Notice of Preparation, Responses to the Notice of Preparation and technical documents included as appendices to the EIR. In compliance with Public Resources Section 21081.6, a mitigation monitoring program has been prepared as a separately bound document. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 1-3 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • r / -• 2.0 Executive Surnmary • r- • • • 2.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY THE PROJECT The proposed project is the development and operation of the amended Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan as proposed by the Carltas Company and related discretionary actions. Related discretionary actions include a General Plan and Local Coastal Plan Amendment; zone change; Local Facilities Management Plan Amendment (Zone 13); cancellation of a Land Conservation Contract (Williamson Act contract) on portions of the property and an amendment to the preserve boundaries; Master Tentative Map; Non-Residential Planned Unit Development permit; Hillside Development permit; Development Agreement; Street Vacations; and SDG&E Encina Specific Plan Amendment. Approval of the project will allow the development of office, research and development, related light manufacturing, commercial, hotel, destination resort, golf course, agriculture, a vocational school campus, and LEGOLAND Carlsbad, on a total of 447.40 acres. Additionally, the proposed project will involve the development of a portion of the proposed golf course on a 24.2 acre parcel under SDG&E ownership, and improvements to the 1- 5/Cannon Road interchange. PROJECT LOCATION The project site encompasses a total of 471.6 acres located in northwestern San Diego County in the City of Carlsbad. The project site is located within the northwest quadrant of the City of Carlsbad. A majority of the site lies within the boundary of Local Facilities Management Zone 13, with a small portion on the eastern boundary of the site within LFMZ 5. Regional access to the project site is provided by Interstate 5. Local access is provided via Palomar Airport Road to the south and Cannon Road to the north. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The City of Carlsbad determined that an EIR is required pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines. The environmental issue areas identified in the environmental Initial Study are Agricultural Resources; Air Quality; Archaeological and Paleontological Resources; Biological Resources; Traffic/Circulation; Hazardous Waste/ Pesticide Residue; Land Use Compatibility; Noise; Public Services and Utilities; Solid Waste; Visual Aesthetics/Grading; and Water Quality. A summary of the environmental impacts and mitigation measures is provided in Table 2-1. A summary comparison of impacts between the proposed project and alternatives is provided in Table 2-2. POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS Based on the data and conclusions of this EIR, the City of Carlsbad finds that the project will result in significant cumulative impacts to air quality, agriculture, and Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 2-1 City of Carlsbad November 1995 traffic which cannot be fully mitigated. These cumulative impacts are regional in nature and occur in areas outside the jurisdiction of the City. Cumulative • unavoidable traffic impacts occur on SR-78 and the 1-5 corridor. If the City of Carlsbad chooses to approve the project, it must issue a "Statement of Overriding Considerations" pursuant to Sections 15093 and 15126(b) of the CEQA Guidelines. POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONTROVERSY The CEQA Guidelines require potential areas of controversy to be identified in the Executive Summary. The following may generate controversy regarding the project: • Agricultural Resources • Air Quality • Traffic/Circulation • Public Services and Utilities • Solid Waste ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT The alternatives evaluated during the analysis of the proposed project include: • • • No Project/No Development Existing Specific Plan Alternative Location These alternatives are discussed in detail in Section 6.0 of this document. The No Project/No Development alternative was found to be infeasible as there is an existing approved specific plan for the site and does not meet the project objectives. The existing Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan does not meet the project objectives. The alternative location was found to be not technically feasible and does not meet the project objectives. · Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 2-2 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • TABLE 2-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Cumulative Air Quality Implementation of the proposed. project will result in a significant impact to air quality. Project-specific impacts can be mitigated to a level less than significant through implementation of Mitigation Measure 1 discussed below. The cumulative impact remains significant and unavoidable. Cumulative Traffic/Circulation Implementation of the proposed project will result in a significant impact to traffic/circulation. Project-specific impacts can be mitigated to a level less than significant through the implementation of Mitigation Measures 1 through 3 described below. ,The cumulative impact to 1-5 and SR-78 is anticipated to remain significant and unavoidable. ·. · ' Cumulative Agricultural Resources Implementation of the proposed project will result in an,impact to agricultural re~ources, but impacts are less than significant as the project will be required to pay applicable sta.tutory conversion fees, will preserve 53 acres of agriculture on-site, and implement agriculture policies contained within the specific plan that address agricultural land use compatibility. The cumulative impact related to tlie conversion of existine. ae.ricultural land to urban uses will remain sie.nificant. Potential Environmental Impact ... . -.. ' . . Air pollution emissions will increase as a result of increased traffic, construction activity,, and gas and electric use (which requires the combustion of fossil fuels). · Mitigation Measures 1. Individual development projects within the specific plan area shall be required to implement the following mitigation measures, as determined feasible on a project-by-project basis by the City. These measures include: • • • • • • • • • Provide preferential parking spaces for carpools and vanpools and provide T2" minimum vertical clearance in parking facilities for van access unless surface parking is provided for vans. Implement on-site circulation plan in parking lots to reduce vehicle queuing (stacking up) . Provide shade trees to reduce building heating/cooling needs . Use energy efficient and automated controls for air conditioning . Use energy-efficient low-sodium parking lot lights . Provide adequate ventilation systems for enclosed parking facilities . Use light colored roof materials to reflect lieat .. Synchronize traffic lights on streets impacted by development. Schedule truck deliveries and pickups for off-peak hours . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 2-3 ·.:, City of Carlsbad , November 1995 • • TABLE 2-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES (Continued) Require on-site truck loading zones . Require employers to provide commuter information areas . • Implement compressed work week schedules where weekly work hours are compressed into fewer than five days: -9/80 -4/40 -3/'36 • • Develop a trip reduction plan to achieve 1.5 A YR for businesses with less than 100 employees or multi-tenant worksites . Construct on-site or off-site bus turnouts, passenger benches, or shelters as deemed necessary by the North County Transit District. • Construct off-site pedestrian facility improvements such as overpasses and wider sidewalks . • . Provide shuttles to major rail transit centers, multi-modal stations, and other local destinations for all uses within the specific plan. • • Contribute to regional transit systems (e.g., right-of-way, capital improvements, etc.) . Site Development Plan applications should contain the following: ·Bicycle parking facilities, such as bicycle lockers. Showers for bicycling employees' use. Impact After Mitigation No significant impacts as a result of construction activity are anticipated. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 1 will lessen long-term operation air quality impacts to a level less than significant. Potential Environmental Impact Implementation of the proposed project will result in impacts to archaeology sites CA-SDl-6132/W-119, and CA-SDl-8797, which have been identified as significant. The proposed project will result in grading in an area identified as having a high potential for . yielding significant paleontological resources. The I-5/Cannon Road interchange improvement portion of the project is located in an area that potentially contains paleontological resources. Mitigation Measures 1. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for the area north of Cannon _Road, a data recovery program shall be completed for CA-SDl- 6132 for the portion impacted north of Cannon Road. The data recovery program shall be completed in compliance with the City of Carlsbad's "Cultural Resource Guidelines•. 2. A portion of site CA-SDI-8797 within the Carlsbad Ranch was identified .as significant/important under City of Carlsbad and CEQA criteria and·was recommended to be mitigated of impacts through avoidance (Gallegos and Kyle 1992). This site shall be placed within an open space easement and capped. Capping shall include placement of 1-2" of sand followed by 12 to 24 inches of sterile fill. soil. Vegetation allowed within the fill soil should include grasses and other shallow rooted plants that will not penetrate the .underlying prehistoric site. This area could also be used for a parking area, upon completion of capping. Placement of utility lines or other underground lines shall be placed outside this sensitive area. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment F.inal Program EIR 2-4 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • • 3. 4. TABLE 2-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES (Continued) Mitigation of impacts for that portion of CA-SDl-8797 within the additional suivey area shall be achieved through avoidance or the completion of a City of Carlsbad approved data recovery program. If a data recovery program is conducted for this site, the program shall be completed in compliance with the City of Carlsbad's "Cultural Resource Guidelines". Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall provide written evidence that a certified archaeologist has been retained, shall be present at the pregrading conference, shall establish procedures for archaeological resource suiveillance, and shall establish, in cooperation with the project proponent, procedures for temporarily halting or redirecting work to permit the sampling, identification, and evaluation of artifacts as appropriate, If additional or unexpected archaeological features are discovered, the archaeologist shall report such findings to the applicant and to the City. If the archaeological resources are found to be significant, the archaeological obseiver shall determine appropriate actions, in cooperation with the applicant for exploration and/or salvage. These actions, as well as final mitigation and disposition of the resources, shall be subject to the review of the City. 5. • Prior to issuance of a mass-grading permit the developer shall present ·a letter to the City of Carlsbad indicating that a qualified paleontologist has been retained to carry out an appropriate mitigation program. (A qualified paleontologist is defined as an individual with a MS or Ph.D. in paleontology or geology who is familiar with paleontological procedures and techniques.) • A qualified paleontologist shall be present at the pre-construction meeting to consult with the grading and excavation con tractors. • A paleontological monitor shall be on-site at all times during the original cutting of previously undisturbed sediments of the Santiago Formation to inspect cuts for contained fossils. Periodic inspections of cuts involving the Lindavista Formation is also recommended. In the event that fossils are discovered in the Lindavista Formation it may be necessary to increase the per/day in field monitoring time. Conversely, if fossils are not being found then the monitoring should be reduced. (A paleontological monitor is defined as an individual who has experience in the collection and salvage of fossil materials. The paleontological monitor shall work under the direction of a qualified paleontologist.) • When fossils are discovered, the paleontologist (or paleontological monitor) shall recover them. In most cases this fossil salvage can be completed in a short period of time. However, some fossil specimens (such as a complete large mammal skeleton) may require an extended salvage period. In these instances the paleontologist (or paleontological monitor) shall be allowed to temporarily direct, divert, or halt grading to allow recovery of fossil remains in a timely manner. Because of the potential for the recovering of small fossil remains, such as isolated mammal teeth, it may be necessary in certain instances, to set up a screen-washing operation on the site. • Fossil remains collected during the monitoring and salvage portion of the mitigation program shall be cleaned, repaired, sorted, and cataloged. • Prepared fossils, along with copies of all pertinent field notes, photos, and maps, shall be deposited (as a donation) in a scientific institution with permanent paleontological collections such as the San Diego Natural History Museum. Donation of the fossils shall be accompanied by financial support for initial specimen storage. • A final summary report shall be completed that outlines the results of the mitigation program. This report shall include discussions of the methods used, stratigraphic sections(s) exposed, fossils collected, and significance of recovered fossils. 6. A certified paleontologist shall monitor all grading activity associated with the improvements to the 1-5/Cannon Road interchange. If buried cultural materials are unearthed during construction, work shall be halted in the vicinity of the find until a qualified paleontologist can assess its significance. If the testing demonstrates that a resource is significant, then a data recovery program will be necessary. Compliance with this measure shall be verified by Caltrans. Impact After Mitigation No impacts to archaeological resources are anticipated as a result of construction of the proposed 1-5/Cannon Road interchange improvements. Implementation of Mitigation Measures 1 through 4 will reduce significant impacts to archaeological resources within the Carlsbad Ranch project site to a level less than significant. Implementation of Miti2ation Measures 5 and 6 will reduce any potential impact to paleontological resources to a level of insignificance. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 2-5 City of Carlsbad November 1995 TABLE 2-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES (Continued) Potential Environmental Impact ' The proposed project will result in impacts to 1.1 acres of Diegan coastal scrub and potential indirect impacts to sensitive resources immediately adjacent to the project site. Mitigation Measures Direct Impacts 1. Diegan coastal sage scrub impacts should be mitigated by creation or restoration at ratios of 2:1 and 1:1, respectively, within Preserve Planning Area 3 or the purchase or preservation at a 1:1 ratio within the HCP area of Carlsbad. 2. To avoid direct impacts to the area proposed as natural open space and to the proposed open space deed restriction, the boundaries of these areas should be surveyed and fenced. The erection of fencing and its proper location should be verified by a biologist or planning department representative. After projection completion, permanent fencing may need to be established to prevent human intrusion into the areas. Indirect Impacts 3. It is anticipated that the gnatcatcher pair located immediately off-site to the east of the project will be taken during construction of the municipal golf course being proposed by the City of Carlsbad. As a result, no mitigation for construction noise impacts that may occur to this pair are proposed. If through final design of the City proposed golf course it is determined that this gnatcatcher pair is not taken, the following mitigation measure for noise impacts shall be implemented: During the gnatcatcher breeding season (February 15 through August 15), noise levels during grading shall not exceed 65 decibels, averaged over a one-hour period on an A-weighted decibel (dBA), measured at the edge of Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat that is occupied by the coastal California gnatcatcher. Grading could be initiated in areas adjacent to occupied gnatcatcher habitat prior to August 15 if the pair has successfully fledged young and the fledglings are at least three weeks out of the nest. Grading will be allowed adjacent to habitat occupied by unpaired individual birds after July 1. 4. Lighting should be selectively placed, shielded, and directed away from the areas listed above, in particular to avoid potential impacts to the coastal California gnatcatcher(s) east of the future LEGOIAND Carlsbad and any that may occur in the proposed open space. 5. During project construction and operation, measures should be implemented to control erosion, sedimentation, and pollution (fertilizers and pesticides from the proposed golf courses) that could impact the proposed natural open space or that could impact Agua Hedionda Lagoon. These'm!!35Ures could include berms, interceptor ditches, sandbags, filtered inlets, debris basins, and silt traps. ~ 6. Landscaping adjacent to the open space shall 'include non-invasive plant species. "'-> Impact After Mitigation Implementation of Mitigation Measures 1 through 6 will redu~ impacts to biological resources to a level less than significant. No impacts to biological resources will result from implementation of the 1-5/Cannon Road interchange improvements. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program. EIR 2-6 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • See Section 9 .0 Response G-1 • • • • • TABLE 2-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES (Continued) Potential Environmental Impact The proposed project will result in an increase in traffic and congestion in the area which will reduce intersection level of service at various locations and time periods on roadways surrounding the project site. Mitigation Measures 1. The following mitigation measures shall be implemented to reduce significant impacts on two intersections under the Year 2000 conditions and seven intersections under Buildout conditions to a level of less than significant. The recommended street improvements and their phasing, based on ultimate buildout conditions, are as follows: 1997 2000 2006 2008 2008 Buildout Buildout 1-5 Northbound Ramps & Palomar Airport Road (CMP Location) -Restripe the westbound Palomar Airport Road approach for the following: two through lanes, one shared through/right-turn lane, and one exclusive right tum lane. 1-5 Northbound Ramps & Cannon Road (CMP Location) -Restripe the westbound Cannon Road approach for the following: one through lane, one shared through/right-tum lane, and one exclusive right-turn lane. EI Camino Real & Cannon Road (CMP Location) -Restripe the southbound EI Camino Real approach for the following: one left-tum lane, two through lanes, one shared through/right-tum lane, and one exclusive right-tum lane. Avenida Encinas & Palomar Aimort Road (CMP Location) -Restripe the northbound Avenida Encinas approach to provide the configuration: one exclusive left-turn lane, one through lane, and one right-tum lane (already done) . EI Camino Real & Palomar Aimort Road (CMP Location) -Restripe the northbound EI Camino Real approach for the following: one left-tum lane: two through lanes, one shared through/right-tum lane, and one exclusive right-tum lane (already done). 1-5 Northbound Ramps & Cannon Road (CMP Location) -Restripe the westbound Cannon Road approach for the following: one through lane, one shared through/right-tum lane, and one exclusive right-tum lane. In addition, provide an additional eastbound Cannon Road left-tum lane. The resulting lane configuration on the eastbound approach would be two exclusive left-tum lanes and two through lanes. Paseo del Norte & Cannon Road (CMP Location) -The southbound approach (SDG&E driveway) should be constructed and striped as follows: one exclusive left-turn lane, one shared through/right-tum lane, and one exclusive right-tum lane. In addition, the eastbound Cannon Road approach would r~quire an additional left-tum lane. The resulting lane configuration in the eastbound direction would be two exclusive left-tum lanes, one through lane, and one through/right tum lane. Also, at a point east of the intersection, an_ additional westbound Cannon Road through lane would be required. At the intersection, this would result in the following lane configuration in the westbound direction: one exclusive left-tum lane, two through lanes, and a shared through/right-tum l_ane. . Pasco de! Norte & Palomar Aimort Road -Restripe the northbound and southbound Pasco del Norte approaches to provide the following: two exclusive left-tum lanes, one shared through/right-tum lane, and one exclusive right-tum lane. If Cannon Road is not extended to El Camino Real by the Year 2000 the following improvements would be necessary: 1997 1997 1-5 Northbound Ramps & Palomar Aimort Road (CMP Location) -Restripe the westbound Palomar Airport Road approach for the following: two through lanes, one shared through/right-turn lane, and one exclusive right tum lane. College Boulevard & Palomar Aimort Road (CMP Location) -Restripe the southbound College Boulevard approach for the following: one left-turn lane, one shared through/right-tum lane, and one exclusive right-tum lane. 2. In addition, the Congestion Management Plan (CMP) prepared for the project requires the development and implementation of a deficiency plan for freeway segments. The deficiency plan could include the following: Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 2-7 City of Carlsbad November 1995 TABLE 2-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES (Continued) • Assist in FWlding Other Improvements -This option would involve providing funds which would be utilized in the construction of other improvements. Several funding mechanisms already exist in the City of Carlsbad and are listed in the Zone 13 Local Facilities Management Plan Finance Plan for impacted facilities. These include: Traffic Impact Fees Transnet Funds Public Facilities Fees Community Facility District Moneys Private Developer Construction The Carlsbad Ranch development project is already conditioned on financial participation in four of the above five funding mechanisms. • Implement Transportation Demand Management (TOM) Measures -For applicable land uses within the development, implementation of a TOM program would be a way of reducing the peak hour trips and thus lessening the impacts on the affected facilities. These TOM measures could include but are not limited to: incentives for employees to carpoolfvanpool; telecommuting and flex-time; and providing a shuttle from the commuter rail station at Poinsettia Lane. Impact After Mitigation With the implementation of Mitigation Measures 1 and 2, all of the analyzed intersections and street segments are projected to operate at acceptable levels of service as sho~ i_n Table 5-16. The proposed street cross sections would be adequate to handle buildout traffic. At the impacted freeway segments, the above deficiency plan would reduce the projected impact the proposed project would have on these facilities. The use of TOM measures would mitigate the project's negative effect along the impacted segment of SR-78, if a reduction of approximately 35 project related trips during the morning peak hour along the impacted segment (for the Year 2000) were achieved. The 35 morning peak hour trips would represent approximately two percent of the project's total morning-peak hour trips. This level of reduction is well within the reductions that would be expected with an effective TOM program for the project. For buildout conditions, a reduction of approximately 125 peak hour trips would be needed to mitigate the projects impact. The 125 peak hour trips would represent between two percent (PM peak hour) and four percent (AM peak hour) of the project's total buildout peak hour trips. Again, this two to four percent reduction in project trips would be realistic with a project TOM program. The project's impact along the 1-5 segment could be reduced through the use of TOM. However, it would be unlikely that the project's total impact along the segment could be totally mitigated through the use of TOM measures alone. The impacts of the project on 1-5 could be mitigated through· a combination of a TOM program within the project and a diversion of project and background trips to parallel facilities. The project's financial participation in the development of these parallel facilities is expected to result in enough additional arterial street capacity being added to the system to offset the project's incremental impact on Interstate 5. It should be noted that both the growth of project traffic and background traffic are responsible for 1-5 exceeding the CMP criteria. Therefore, it should not be the sole responsibility of the Carlsbad Ranch development to improve conditions on the regional facilities to acceptable levels. Rather, Carlsbad Ranch's financial participation in the development of parallel arterial improvements will serve as the project's share of the mitigation oroe.ram. :)i:tfttitf}ttttttfttff:\t)\:/\ff=\:=??\;:;:-:·:\:j:(jf:t:tr=t==:=:!:t=t?::t{:(=:::==:::::::::r:tr===r::::::::::::::::::::::;:;::::r=:::::::. ·••.•:: . •'•: .: .. :•::·•:: ·: :;,,. ,· ·,·,. · ... ❖' :-: •• :-.-:'f•:,::·::::;:;:;::: ::·•:,. -:-·-· ,:: ::::;:;:;:;:;:;:;:::::::::;:::::::::::::::::;:::;:;:;:;:::::::::::;:;:::::;:;:;::;:::;:::::::· Potential Environmental Impact The project site has historically been utilized for agricultural production, and could potentially contain soil contamination due to historical pesticide use, and surface stainage from above ground fuel tanks. The potential for low level lead contamination exists within the 1-5 corridor. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 2-8 City of Carlsbad Noveinber 1995 • • • • • • TABLE.2-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES (Continued) Mitigation Measures 1. During grading, observations shall be made by a qualified hazardous materials specialist for areas of possible contamination such.as the presence of underground facilities, buried debris, stained soils, waste drums, and tanks or odorous soils. Should such materials be encountered, further investigation and analysis shall be required to identify the significance of the potentially contaminated area. Soil remediation measures to address any potentially contaminated areas shall be implemented based on the recommendations of the hazardous materials specialist. 2. Randomly selected surface samples shall be collected after each phase of grading and chemically tested for pesticides to verify that toxaphene and DDT plus its derivatives are below the established TTLC and S'TI.C action levels. · 3. During site development, soils contaminated with petroleum hydrocarbons shall be· mitigated. Mitigation techniques shall include: • Place the affected soil beneath a proposed road/parking area as a base material; • Recycle the affected soil; or • Bio remediate the affected soil on site. 4. A report documenting results of any future testing shall be prepared. This _report shall indicate the measures taken to mitigate contamination, as appropriate. The report shall be submitted to the City of Carlsbad Engineering Department. · Compliance with these measures shall be approved by the City of Carlsbad in conjunction with t~e review and approval by the San Diego County Department of Health Services and the Regional Water Quality Control Board as applicable. Impact After Mi~igation Implementation of Mitigation Measures 1 through 4 will reduce impacts from hazardous waste/pestic\de residue to a level less than significant. · Implementation of the I-5/Cannon Road improvements portion of the proposed project will not result in a significant impact associated with hazardous materials or soil contamination. Potential Environmental Impact The proposed project will result in the conversion of the project site to an intensive urban use which may result in land use compatibility impacts, and will require amendments to the general plan, local coastal plan, existing specific plan, and local facilities management plan. Mitigation Measures_ 1. Any future site development permit associated with the specific plan or 21.16 acre SDG&E parcel (golf course) shall be reviewed for consistency with the specific plan and related discretionary actions including the general plan and local coastal plan amendment, zone change, local facilities management plan amendment, and hillside development permit. The Planning Department shall make a . determination that the site development plan is consistent with these plans, prior to approval of the permit. Impact After Mitigation The conversion of the project site from a non-urban use to an intensive development is a potentially significant land use impact. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 1 will reduce this impact to a level of insignificance. No land use compatibility impacts between on-site and off-site land uses is anticipated. No impact to land use compatibility with the McClellan-Palomar Airport is anticipated . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR . '2-9 City of Carlsbad · November 1995 TABLE 2-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES (Continued) The amendment to the LFMP Zone 13 in and of itself will not result in a significant impact. Approval of a General Plan Amendment in and of itself would not result in an inconsistency with the General Plan. No impact is anticipated. No. impact as a result of the open space boundary adjustment is anticipated. No impact as a result of amendments to the Mello II and Agua Hedionda Segments of the LCP is anticipated. No land use impacts associated with the development agreement is anticipated. No impact as a result of amendine the Carlsbad Ranch Soecific Plan is anticioated. Potential Environmental Impact The specific plan's most sensitive uses, a community hotel and a part of the resort hotel site, are located within the 60 dB CNEL contour of the Mc□ellan-Palomar Airport. The airport's Noise/Land Use Compatibility Implementation Directives state that all transient lodging buildings, within the CNEL 60-70 contours must be subjected to an acoustical study to determine that interior levels do not exceed CNEL 45. Mitigation Measures 1. The interior noise level of the proposed community hotel building(s) (planning area 3), and resort hotel buildings (planning area 5) shall not exceed 45 dBA CNEL. As stated in the McClellan-Palomar Airport's Noise/Land Use Compatibility Implementation Directives, all transient lodging buildin°gs, within the airport's 60-70 CNEL contours must be subjected to an aco~stical study to determine that interior levels do not exceed CNEL 45. 2. An avigation easement for noise shall be required to be recorded with the County Recorder as a condition of approval of the project. A copy of the recorded easement is to be filed with the affected airport operator. For all property transactions, appropriate legal notice shall be given to all purchasers, lessees and renters of property in "conditionally compatible" or "interior only, conditionally compatible" areas which clearly describes the potential for impacts from airplane noise associated with airport operations. Notice also will be provided as required on the state Real Estate Disclosure form. Impact After Mitigation Implementation of Mitigation Measures 1 and 2 will reduce noise impacts to a level less than sienificant. Potential Environmental Impact The proposed project will result in an increased demand for police protection services and water supply/reclaimed water. Mitigation Measures Police Protedion Scrvia:s 1. Prior to Site Development Plan approval, developers shall submit security plans for review and approval by the Carlsbad Police Department. The plans shall be submitted prior to Site Development Plan approval, and shall include information about internal security proerams, security systems and devices and any other information reQuired by the Police Deoartment. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment · Final Program EIR . 2-10 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • ; TABLE·2-l ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES (Continued) Water SupplyfRedaimed Water 1. Reclaimed water shall be utilized for all agriculture, golf course, and landscaping on the project site to the extent feasible. The reclaimed water facilities shall be installed in accordance with the conceptual reclaimed water facility plan as proposed in the specific plan, and City of Carlsbad requirements. 2. Dual plumbing shall be required for all office, commercial, and industrial uses, and the LEGOLAND Carlsbad project as deemed feasible by the Carlsbad Municipal Water District. 1 • Impact After Mitigation Police Protection Services Implementation of Mitigation Measure 1 will reduce impacts to police service to a level less than significant. Water SupplyfRedaimed Water Supply The project impacts to water supply are potentially significant. Implementation of mitigation measures 1 and 2 will reduce impacis to a level of less than significant. Potential Environmental Impact The proposed project will result in the generation of solid waste associated with development of specific pla_n land uses. Mitigation Measures 1. As a condition of any future site development plans for the project, the applicant shall submit a solid waste management plan for review and approval by the City of Carlsbad. This plan shall provide the following: (1) The approximate location, type and number of containers to be used to collect refuse and recyclables. (2) Refuse and recyclable collection methods to be used in each planning area. (3) A description and site plan for any planned on-site processing facilities or equipment (balers, compactors). ,. (4) A description of the types of recycling services to be provided and contractual relationships with vendors to.provide these services. (5) The estimated quantity of waste generated and estimated quantities of recyclable materials in each planning area. This plan shall also evaluate the feasibility of the following diversion programs/measures: (1) (2) Source separated green waste collection for specific plan areas designated for agriculture, golf and developed areas with substantial landscaping (in particular the LEGOLAND Carlsbad planning area). Cardboard recycling in office, retail, and warehousing areas. (3) Office and retail programs which provide for the separation of wet (disposable) and dry (recoverable) materials. (4) Where feasible, providing compactors for non-recyclables to reduce the number of trips to disposal facilities. (5) Glass recycling in restaurants . ,. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment . Final Program EIR 2-11 City of Carlsbad ·· _Novembe~ 1995 See Section 9.0 • Resronsc F-2 TABLE 2-1 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES (Continued) (6) Providing on-site recycling containers accessible to the public to encourage the diversion of glass, and aluminum in LEGOIAND Carlsbad. (7) Where feasible, implement source reduction measures such as reducing excess packaging, paper and polystyrene cups. Impact After Mitig;ltion Implementation of Mitigation Measure 1 will reduce impacts associated with solid waste collection and disoosal to a level of insignificance. Potential Environmental Impact The ramp widening component of the 1-5/Cannon Road interchange improvements will result in the removal of mature trees and associated landscaping. Mitigation Measures 1. Trees shall be replaced 'at a 5:1 ratio. These trees shall be planted at Cannon Road and Palomar Airport Road, with supplemental water systems. Shrubs shall be replaced at a 1:1 ratio at Cannon Road only. Replacement trees shall be 15 gallon and replacement shrubs shall be 5 gallon. Species selection shall be determined by the Caltrans project landscape architect. 2. 3. 1-5/Cannon Road landscaping shall be installed concurrently with the interchange construction project in order to allow the planting to become established in time for the opening of the LEGOIAND Carlsbad in 1999. A plantable wall system (e.g. crib wall) shall be utilized to reduce the visibility and aid in graffiti deterrence of the proposed retaining walls. If cast-in-place type walls are used, a form-liner texture (e.g. "ripped rope") shall be incorporated into the design. Furthermore, the walls shall be aligned to allow the planting of vines and shrubs at the base of the walls for graffiti deterrence and to help blend the walls into the surrounding landscape. An agreement shall be reached with the property owner immediately adjacent to this area to plant and maintain on the owner's property. · Impact After Mitigation No significant impact to visual aesthetics/grading has been identified for the specific plan portion of the project. Implementation of Mitigation Measures 1, 2 and 3 will reduce aesthetic impacts associated with the 1-5/Cannon Road Interchange improvements to a level less than significant. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment . Final Program EIR . 2-12 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • • TABLE 2-2 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT Description The Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment proposes to develop 28.93 net acres (550,000 square feet of building) of GIA campus, 40.01 net acres (300,000 square feet of office and 500,000 square feet of research and development) of office/research and development, 10.48 net acres (280 room hotel, 20,000 square feet of retail) of community hotel and retail, 128.32 net acres for LEGOLAND (425,750 square feet of building area), 52.8 net acres of resort (700 suites), 26.65 net acres (300,000 square feet) of specialty retail, 53.42 acres for flower field preservation, 72.07 net acres for golf course, and 10 acres of natural open space. Additionally, the project involves development of 21.16 acres of the SDG&E parcel for golf course use, and improvements to the 1-5/Cannon Road Interchange. Agricultural Resources The proposed project will result in the conversion of existing agricultural lands to Significant impacts: urban uses, and the early removal of 181.2 acres of lands currently under Williamson Act Contracts. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR NO PROJECT/ NO DEVELOPMENT This alternative assumes that the site would not be developed with the proposed project, and the site would remain in its existing condition. No impacts as a result of the conversion of existing agricultural uses on-site to urban uses, or the early cancellation of Williamson Act contracts would result as the project site will remain in its existing condition. 2-13 EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN This alternative assumes that the project site would be developed under the existing approved Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan designations. The existing s~cific plan designates the project site as professional office/research and development, community commercial, travel service/community commercial, community commercial/office/research and development, open space, and non- residential reserve. This alternative assumes that no amendments to the existing plans (specific plan, general plan, local coastal plan) would be required fof development under this scenario. Buildout under the existing Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan designations would allow for the development of a maximum of 1,450,000 square feet of office, 220,000 square feet of retail, and a 280 room hotel. The specific plan also allows for a golf range, and the retention of approximately 306 acres of agriculture. The existing Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan encompasses a total of 423.5 acres. No impacts as a result of the conversion of existing agricultural uses on-site to urban uses, or the early cancellation of Williamson Act contracts would result as this alternative would retain a majority of the agriculture on-site and would not result in the early cancellation of Williamson Act land on-site. ALTERNATIVE LOCATION This alternative assumes the development of the proposed project at an alternative location. The alternative location is located in Oceanside, north of Oceanside Boulevard, east of El Camino Real, and south of Mesa Drive. No impacts as a result of the conversion of existing agricultural uses on-site to urban uses, or the early cancellation of Williamson Act contracts would result as the alternative location does not contain any agricultural resources or land under Williamson Act contract. City of Carlsbad November 1995 TABLE 2-2 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT Mitigation required to reduce impact The project's contribution to the statutory to a level less than significant: provision for the payment of fees, in combination with the pennanent preservation of 53 acres of agriculture on- site, and implementation of specific plan policies related to agriculture on-site will reduce the project's impact related to the direct conversion of agricultural land to a less than significant level. Monitoring: No monitoring would be required. Air Quality Air pollution emissions will increase as a result of increased traffic, construction Significant impacts: activity, and gas and electric use (which requires the combustion of fossil fuels). Mitigation required lo reduce impact I. Individual development projects within to a level less than significant: the specific plan area shall be required to implement the following mitigation measures, as detennined feasible on a project-by-project basis by the City. These measures include: • Provide preferential parking spaces for carpools and vanpools and provide 7'2" minimum vertical clearance in parking facilities for van access unless surface parking is provided for vans. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program Em • NO PROJECT/ NO DEVELOPMENT No mitigation measures are required. No monitoring would be required. No increase in short-term or long term air emissions would result as no additional development would occur on-site. No mitigation measures are required. 2-14 • EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN No mitigation measures are required. . No monitoring would be required. Potentially significant construction related impacts from dust emissions and construction-related traffic. Vehicular emissions from the proposed project would be significant both on a project level and cumulatively. Mitigation measures would be similar to those of the proposed project. ALTERNATIVE LOCATION No mitigation measures are required. No monitoring would be required. Air pollution emissions will increase as a result of increased traffic, construction activity, and gas and electric use (which requires the combustion of fossil fuels). Mitigation measures would be similar to those of the proposed project. City of Carlsbad November 1995 • Mitigation: - • • TABLE 2~2 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE ' • ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT NO· PROJECT/ EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN ALTERNATIVE LOCATION • Implement on.-site circulation plan in parking lots to reduce vehicle queuing (stacking up). • Provide shade trees to reduce building heating/c<>?ling needs. • Use energy· efficient and automated controls for air conditioning . .. • Use energy;efficient low- sodium parking lot lights. • Provide adequate ventilation systems for enclosed parking facilities. • Use light colored roof materials to reflect heat. • Synchronize traffic lights on streets impacted by development. • Schedule truck deliveries and pickups for off-peak hours. • Require on-site truck loading zones. • Require employers to provide commuter infomiation areas. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program ElR . . · NO DEVELOPMENT 2-15 .. City of Carlsbad November 1995 . Mitigation: .. TABLE 2-2 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM . FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE ISSUE PROPOSED PR'OJECT NO PROJECT/ EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN ALTERNATIVE LOCATION • Implement compressed work week schedules where weekly work hours are compressed into fewer than five days: -9/80 -4/40 -3/36 • Develop a trip reduction plan to achieve 1.5 AVR for businesses with less than 100 employees or multi-tenant worksites. • Construct on-site or off-site bus turnouts, passenger benches, or shelters as deemed necessary by the North County Transit District. • Construct off-site pedestrian facility improvements such as overpasses and wider sidewalks. • Provide shuttles to major rail transit centers, multi-modal stations, and other local destinations for all uses within the specific plan. • Contribute to regional transit systems (e.g., right-of-way, capital improvements, etc.). • Site development plan applications should contain the following: -Bicycle parking facilities, such as bicycle lockers . -Showers for bicycling employees' use. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR • NO DEVELOPMENT 2-16 • City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • TABLE 2-2 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT Monitoring: Monitoring would occur on a site-by-site basis within the specific plan area at time of site development plan approval. Archaeological and Paleontological Implementation of the proposed project Resources will result in impacts to archaeology sites CA-SDI-6132/W-l 19, and CA-SDl-8797, Significant impacts: which have been identified as significant. The proposed project will result in grading in an area identified as having a high potential for yielding significant paleontological resources. The 1-5/Cannon Road interchange improvement portion of the project is located in an area that potentially contains paleontological resources. Mitigalion required to reduce impact l. Prior to issuance of a grading permit to a level less than significant: for the area north of Cannon Road, a data recovery program shall be completed for CA-SDI-6132 for the portion impacted north of Cannon Road. The data recovery program shall be completed in compliance with the City of Carlsbad's "Cultural Resource Guidelines". Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR · NO PROJECT/ EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN NO DEVELOPMENT No monitoring would be required. Monitoring would be the same as under the proposed project. No significant impacts associated Potentially significant impacts to with development of the site. archaeological resources. However, sites could be subject to vandalism by "pot hunters" or inadvertent impacts by agricultural operations. No mitigation measures are required. Mitigation measures would be similar to those of the proposed project. 2-17 ALTERNATIVE LOCATION Monitoring would be the same as under the proposed project. Impacts to archaeological and paleontological resources are unknown. Because this site has been extensively graded associated with aggregate mining activities, the potential for impacts to archaeological resources is considered low. A site specific cultural resources study would identify any significant sites, and recommend appropriate mitigation measures. City of Carlsbad November 1995 Mitigation: TABLE 2-2 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND. EACH ALTERNATIVE ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT NO PROJECT/ EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN ALTERNATIVE LOCATION 2. A portion of site CA-SDI-8797 within the Carlsbad Ranch was identified as significant/important under City of Carlsbad and CEQA criteria and was recommended to be mitigated of impacts through avoidance (Gallegos and Kyle 1992). This site shall be placed within an open space easement and capped. Capping shall include placement of 1-2" of sand followed by I 2 to 24 inches of sterile fill soil. Vegetation allowed within the fill soil should include grasses and other shallow rooted plants that will not penetrate the underlying prehistoric site. This area could also be used for a parking area, upon completion of capping. Placement of utility lines or other underground lines shall be placed outside this sensitive area. 3. Mitigation of impacts for that portion of CA-SDI-8797 within the additional survey area shall be achieved through avoidance or the completion of a City of Carlsbad approved data recovery program. If a data recovery program is conducted for this site, the program shall be completed in compliance with the City of Carlsbad's "Cultural Resource Guidelines". Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR • NO DEVELOPMENT 2-18 • City of Carlsbad November 1995 • Mitigation: • • TABLE 2-2 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE • ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT NO PROJECT/ EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN ALTERNATIVE LOCATION 4. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall provide written evidence that a certified archaeologist has been retained, shall be present at the pre- grading conference, shall establish procedures for archaeological resource surveillance, and shall establish in cooperation with the project proponent, procedures for temporarily halting or redirecting work to permit the sampling, identification, and evaluation of artifacts as appropriate. If additional or unexpected archaeological features are discovered, the archaeolcigist shall report such findings to the applicant and to the City. If the archaeological resources are found to be significant, the archaeological observer shall determine appropriate actions, in cooperation with the applicant for exploration and/or salvage. These actions, as well as final mitigation and disposition of the resources, shall be subject to the review of the qty. 5 .• Prior to issuance of a mass-grading permit the developer shall present a letter to the City of Carlsbad indicating that a qualified paleontologist has been retained to carry out an appropriate mitigation program. (A qualified paleontologist is defined as an individual with a MS or Ph.D. in paleontology or geology who is familiar with paleontological procedures and tech'!_iques.) • A qualified paleontologist shall be present at the pre-construction meeting to consult with the grading and excavation contractors. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR NO DEVELOPMENT 2-19 City of Carlsbad November 1995 Mitigation: TABLE 2-2 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT NO PROJECT/ NO DEVELOPMENT EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN ALTERNATIVE LOCATION • A paleontological monitor shall be on-site at all times during the original culling of previously undisturbed sediments of the Santiago Fonnation to inspect cuts for contained fossils. Periodic inspections of cuts involving the Lindavista Fonnation is also recommended. In the event that fossils are discovered in the Lindavista Fomrntion it may be necessary to increase the per/day in field monitoring time. Conversely, if fossils are not being found then the monitoring should be reduced. (A paleontological monitor is defined as an individual who has experience in the collection and salvage of fossil materials. The paleontological monitor shall work under the direction of a qualified paleontologist.) • When fossils are discovered, the paleontologist (or paleontological monitor) shall recover them. In most cases this fossil salvage can be completed in a short period of time. However, some fossil specimens (such as a complete large mammal skeleton) may require an extended salvage period. In these instances the paleontologist (or paleontological monitor) shall be allowed to temporarily direct, divert, or halt grading to allow recovery of fossil remains in a timely manner. Because of the potential for the recovering of small fossil remains, such as isolated mammal teeth, it may be necessary in certain instances, to set up a screen-washing operation on the site. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR • 2-20 • City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • ISSUE Mitigation: •· • TABLE 2-2 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE • PROPOSED PROJECT NO PROJECT/ EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN ALTERNATIVE LOCATION NO DEVELOPMENT • Fossil remains collected during the monitoring and salvage portion of the mitigation program shall be cleaned, repaired, sorted, and cataloged. • Prepared fossils, along with copies of all pertinent field notes, photos, and maps, shall be deposited (as a donation) in a scientific institution with pem1anent paleontological collections such as the San Diego Natural History Museum. Donation of the fossils shall be accompanied by financial support for initial specimen storage. • A final summary report shall be completed that outlines the resulls of the mitigation program. This report shall include discussions of the methods used, stratigraphic sections(s) exposed, fossils collected, and significance of recovered fossils. 6. A certified paleontologist shall monitor all grading activity associated with the improvements to the 1-5/Cannon Road interchange. If buried cultural materials are unearthed during construction, work shall be halted in the vicinity of the find until a qualified paleontologist can assess its significance. If the testing demonstrates that a resource is significant, then a data recovery program will be necessary. Compliance with this measure shall be verified by Caltrans. Monitoring: Completion of archaeological mitigation No monitoring would be required. Monitoring would be the same as The site specific cultural resources study program would be required prior to issuance of the grading permit. Paleontological resources would be mitigated as ~etermined by the paleo monitor should any resources be uncovered during grading. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR under the proposed project. 2-21 would identify appropriate monitoring. City of Carlsbad November 1995 TABLE 2-2 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT Biological Resources The proposed project will result in impacts to I.I acres of Diegan coastal sage scrub, Significant impacts: and potential indirect impacts to sensitive resources immediately adjacent to the project site. Mitigation required to reduce impact Direct Impacts to a level less than significant: I. Diegan coastal sage scrub impacts should be mitigated by creation or restoration at ratios of 2: I and I: 1, respectively, within Preseive Planning Area 3 or the purchase or preservation at a 1:1 ratio within the HCP area of Carlsbad. Mitigation: 2. To avoid direct impacts to the area proposed as natural open space and to the proposed open space deed restriction, the boundaries of these areas should be surveyed and fenced. The erection of fencing and its proper location should be verified by a biologist or planning department representative. After projection completion, pem1anent fencing may need to be established to prevent human intrusion into the areas. Indirect Impacts 3. It is anticipated that the gnatcatcher pair located immediately off-site to the east of the project will be taken during construction of the municipal golf course being proposed by the City of Carlsbad. As a result, no mitigation for construction noise impacts that may occur to this pair are proposed. If through final design of the City proposed golf course it is determined that this gnatcatcher pair is not taken, then the following mitigation measure for noise impacts shall be implemented: Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR • NO PROJECT/ EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN NO DEVELOPMENT Implementation of this alternative Impacts to wetlands habitat are not would not impact biological considered significant because of the resources. limited value as related to size and disturbance and impacts associated with runoff. No mitigation measures would be To offset the loss of riparian vegetation required. the specific plan proposes to include a series of sedimentation basins to capture runoff to remove urban pollutants. In addition, the sedimentation basins will be landscaped with wetland associated species. 2-22 • ALTERNATIVE LOCATION Impacts to biological resources are unknown. Due to the extensive grading that has taken place on this site, biological resources are anticipated to be minimal, although there are areas at this location with native vegetation remaining. The site specific biological resources report would identify impacts and appropriate mitigation measures. Sensitive siting of the project on this alternative site would minimize any potential impacts to biological resources. City of Carlsbad November 1995 • Mitigation: .. • • TABLE 2-2 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE • ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT NO PROJECT/ EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN ALTERNATIVE LOCATION "' During the gnatcatcher breeding season (February 15 through August 15), noise levels during grading shall not exceed 65 decibels, averaged over a one-hour period on an A-weighted decibel (dBA), measured at the edge of Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat that is occupied by l_he coastal California gnatcatcher. Grading could be initiated in areas adjacent to occupied gnatcatcher habitat prior to . August l 5 if the pair has successfully fledged young and the fledglings are at least three weeks out of the nest. Grading will be allowed adjacent to habitat occupied by unpaired individual birds after July I. ~ ·- 4. Lighting should be selectively placed, shielded, and directed away from the areas listed above, in particular to avoid potential impacts to the coastal California gnatcatcher(s) east of the future LEGOLAND Carlsbad and any that may occur in the proposed open space. 5. During project construction and . operation, measures should be implemented to control erosion, sedimentation, and pollution (fertili1,ers and pesticides from the proposed golf courses) that could impact the proposed natural open space or that could impact Agua Hedionda Lagoon. These measures could include benns, interceptor ditches, sandbags, filtered inlets, debris basins, and silt traps. 6. Landscaping adjacent to the open space shall include non-invasive plant species. ' I . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program E/R NO DEVELOPMENT --- < . 2-23 . City of Carlsbad November 1995 .: TABLE 2-2 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT NO PROJECT/ EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN ALTERNATIVE LOCATION NO DEVELOPMENT Monitoring: Periodic monitoring would be required No monitoring would be required. Periodic monitoring by a qualified The site specific biological resources during construction and operation of the biologist would be required as a report would identify mitigation proposed project that will impact the condition of approval of the Specific measures and the appropriate sensitive biological resources to ensure Plan. monitoring. proper implementation of mitigation measures. Traffic/Circulation The proposed project will result in an Implementation of this alternative Thirteen of twenty-five intersections Traffic impacts for this alternative are increase in traffic and congestion in the would not increase the vehicular trips are expected to operate at unacceptable unknown. It can be anticipated that Significant impacts: area which will reduce intersection level of the surrounding roadway network. levels of service during the morning traffic impacts would be similar. of service al various locations and time peak hour period and fifteen of twenty- periods on roadways surrounding the five intersections are expected to project site. operate at unacceptable levels of · service during the afternoon peak hour. Mitigation required to reduce impact I. The following mitigation measures No mitigation measures would be The recommended mitigation measures Since site specific impacts are unknown, to a level less than significant: shall be implemented to reduce significant required. to reduce circulation impacts are a site specific traffic analysis would be impacts on two intersections under the phased as follows: required to determine the required Year 2000 conditions and seven mitigation measures. intersections under Buildout conditions to Year 19931 a level of less than significant. • Construct ultimate improvements The recommended street improvements at the 1-5/ Palomar Airport Road and their phasing, based on ultimate interchange, which are scheduled to buildout conditions, are as follows: begin construction in mid to late 1992. 1997 I-5 Northbound Rames & • Install traffic signal at the Palomar Aireort Road {CMP intersection of Road A/ Palomar Location) -Restripe the Airport Road. westbound Palomar Airport Road approach for the • Construct ultimate improvements following: two through lanes, at El Camino Real/Palomar Airport one shared through/right-tum Road intersection, three lane lane, and one exclusive right approaches, dual left tum lanes, and tum lane. right tum only lanes on all legs. It should be noted that the proposed project contributes less that two percent to the traffic at this location. 1 The circulation improvement years identified for the existing specific plan were established based on anticipated project phasing which has occurred later than originally projected. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR • 2-24 • City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • TABLE 2-2 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE • ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT NO PROJECT/ EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN ALTERNATIVE LOCATION 2000 1-5 Northbound Ratn(!S & Cannon Road {CMP Location} - Restripe the westbound Cannon Road approach for the following: one through lane, one shared through/right-tum lane, and one exclusive right- tum lane. 2006 El Camino Real & Cannon Road {CMP Location} - Restripe the southbound El Camino Real approach for the following: one left-tum lane, two through lanes, one shared through/right-tum lane, and one exclusive right-tum lane. 2007 Avenida Encinas & Palomar Ai!£ort Road {CMP Location} - Restripe the northbound Avenida Encinas approach to provide the configuration: one exclusive left-tum lane, one through lane, and one right-tum lane. 2008 El Camino Real & Palomar ,Ai!£ort Road {CMP Location} - Rcstripe the northbound El ' Camino Real approach for the following: one left-tum lane, ,two through lanes, one shared through/right-tum lane, and one exclusive right-tum lane . . , Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR . NO DEVELOPMENT ~- - ' 2-25 • Widen Palomar Airport Road to four lanes between El Camino Real and the eastern City limits. Again, it should be noted that the proposed project contributes less than two percent to the traffic at this location. .. " ·• . City of Carlsbad November 1995 ... ; Mitigation: TABLE 2-2 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT NO PROJECT/ EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN ALTERNATIVE LOCATION 2008 1-5 Northbound Rames & Cannon Road {CMP Location} - Restripe the westbound Cannon Road approach for the following: one through lane, one shared through/right-tum lane, and one exclusive right- tum lane. In addition, provide an additional eastbound Cannon Road left-tum lane. The resulting lane configuration on the eastbound approach would be two exclusive left-tum lanes and two through lanes. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program Em • NO DEVELOPMENT 2-26 • Year 1995 • Install traffic signals at Cannon Road/1-5 Northbound Off-Ramp, Cannon Road/1-5 Southbound Off- Ramp, Cannon Road/Paseo del Norte, . and Cannon Road/ Car Country Drive. • Widen westbound approach on Palomar Airport Road at Paseo del Norte for a right-tum only lane. Year 2000 • Widen Cannon Road to provide three westbound lanes between Paseo del Norte and the 1-5 Northbound On- Ramp. • Construct ultimate improvements al lhe El Camino Real/Cannon Road intersection. Year 2005 • Widen Cannon Road/ 1-5 Northbound and Southbound Off- Ramps to provide three lanes at the off-ramp junction. • Restripe Cannon Road at the 1-5 Southbound Off-Ramp to provide dual left-tum lanes for the westbound to southbound on-ramp movement. • Widen Cannon Road between the 1-5 Northbound Off-Ramp and Paseo del Norte for a right-tum only lane. City of Carlsbad November 1995 • Mitigation: . • • TABLE 2-2 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION,-AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND _EACH ALTERNATIVE . • ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT NO PROJECT/ EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN ALTERNATIVE LOCATION Buildout r Paseo de! Norte & Cannon Road {CMP Location) • The southbound approach (SDG&E driveway) should be constructed and striped as follows: one exclusive left• tum lane, one shared through/right-tum lane, and one exclusive right-tum lane. In addition, the eastbound Cannon Road approach would require an additional left- tum lane. The resulting lane configuration in the eastbound direction would be two exclusive left-tum lanes, one through lane, and one through/right tum lane. Also, at a point east of the intersection, an additional westbound Cannon Road through lane would be required. At the intersection, this would result in the following lane configuration in the westbound direction: one exclusive left-tum lane, two through lanes, and a.shared through/right-tum lane. Buildout Paseo del Norte & Palomar Airl!ort Road - Restripe the northbound and southbound Paseo del Norte approaches lo provide the following: two exclusive left-tum lanes, one shared through/right-tum lane, and one exclusive right-tum lane. If Cannon ·Road is not extended to El Camino Real by the Year 2000 the following improvements· would be necessary: Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR NO DEVELOPMENT 2-27 Street Classifications • The cumulative average daily traffic impacts projected at buildout of the Carlsbad Fully Constrained General Land Use Plan plus the development proposed for Zone 13 would be mitigated with the following street classifications: -Six-Lane Primary Arterial: Palomar Airport Road El Camino Real -Four-Lane Secondary Arterial: Cannon Road College Boulevard -Four-Lane Secondary Arterial: Paseo de! Norte Road A Kelly Drive Faraday Avenue (College Boulevard to east of El Camino Real) -Two-Lane Collector: Car Country Drive Road B Faraday A venue (Cannon Road to College·Boulevard) ' City of Carlsbad NfJVember 1995 Mitigation: TABLE 2-2 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM. FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT 1997 1-5 Northbound Rames & Palomar Air(!2rt Road {CMP Location) -Restripe the westbound Palomar Airport Road approach for the following: two through lanes, one shared through/right-tum lane, and one exclusive right tum lane. 1997 College Boulevard & Palomar Ai!I!ort Road {CMP Location) - Restripe the southbound College Boulevard approach for the following: · one left-tum lane, one shared through/right-tum lane, and one exclusive right- tum lane. 2. In addition, the Congestion Management Plan (CMP) prepared for the project requires the development and implementation of a deficiency plan for freeway segments. The deficiency plan could include the following: • Assist in Funding Other Improvements -This option would involve providing funds which would be utilired in the construction of other improvements. Several funding mechanisms already exist in the City of Carlsbad and are listed in the Zone 13 Local Facilities Management Plan Finance Plan for impacted facilities. These include: -Traffic Impact Fees -Transnei Funds -Public Facilities Fees -Community Facility District Moneys -Private Developer Construction Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR • NO PROJECT/ EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN NO DEVELOPMENT It is recommended that Cannon Road be ultimately constructed with six lanes between the 1-5 Northbound Ramps and Paseo del Norte, three westbound lanes and two east bound lanes plus a right-tum only lane at Paseo del Norte. Although the street segment perfom1ance standard is met with four lanes, the intersection performance standard compliance would require an additional eastbound right-tum only lane at Pasco de) Norte and an additional westbound right-tum only lane at the 1-5 Northbound Ramp intersection. This segment would, therefore, need to be widened ultimately to six lanes. Mitigation measures would be conditions of occupancy permits. 2-28 • ALTERNATIVE LOCATION . City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • TABLE 2-2 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT Mitigation: The Carlsbad Ranch development project is already conditioned on financial participation in four of the above five funding mechanisms. • Implement Transportation Demand Management (fDM) Measures -For applicable land uses within the development, implementation of a TDM program would be a way of reducing the peak hour trips and thus lessening lhe il)lpacts on the affected facilities. These TDM measures could include but are not limited to: incentives for employees to carpooVvanpool; telecommuting and flex- time; and providing a shuttle from the commuter rail station at Poinsettia L111e. Monitoring: Monitoring of required transportation improvements as conditions of occupancy pem1its. Ha1~1rdous Waste/Pesticide Residue The project site has historically been utilized for agricultural production, and Significant impacts: could potentially contain soil contamination due to historical pesticide use, and surface stainage from above ground fuel tanks. , - Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR NO PROJECT/ NO DEVELOPMENT No monitoring would be required. The potentially contaminated soils would remain in place and not be disturbed by the mass g~ading associated with the proposed project. 2-29 EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN . . -, Monitoring would be conditions of occupancy permits. The project site has historically been utili1.ed for agricultural production, and could potentially contain soil contamination due to historical pesticide use, and surface stainage M from above ground fuel tanks. ALTERNATIVE LOCATION Monitoring would be similar to the proposed project. Impacts are unknown and would require a hazardous waste assessment. City of Carlsbad November 1995 TABLE 2-2 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND .EACH ALTERNATIVE ISSUE Mitigation required to reduce impact to a level less than significant: PROPOSED PROJECT 1. During grading, obseIVations shall be made by a qualified hazardous materials specialist for areas of possible contamination such as the presence of underground facilities, buried debris, stained soils, waste drums, and tanks or odorous soils. Should such materials be encountered, further investigation and analysis shall be required to identify the significance of the potential! y contaminated area. Soil remediation measures to address any potentially contaminated areas shall be implemented based on the recommendations of the hazardous materials specialist. 2. Randomly selected surface samples shall be collected after each phase of grading and chemically tested for pesticides lo verify that toxaphene and DDT plus its derivatives are below the established TTLC and STLC action levels. 3. During site development, soils contaminated with petroleum hydroca!bons shall be mitigated. Mitigation techniques shall include: • Place the affected soil beneath a proposed road/parking area as a base material; • Recycle the affected soil; or • Bio remediate the affected soil on site. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR • NO PROJECT/ NO DEVELOPMENT No mitigation measures are required. 2-30 • EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN Potentially significant hazardous materials/waste impacts would be mitigated to below a level of significance through incorporation of the following measures: • During site development, soils contaminated with petroleum hydrocarbons could be mitigated by various techniques which include: -Place the affected soil beneath a propose(! road/parking area as a base material; -Recycle the affected soil; or -Bio remediate the affected soil on site. • During site development, obseIVations would be made for areas of possible contamination such as the presence of underground facilities, buried debris, stained soils, waste drums, and tanks on odorous soils. Should such materials be encountered, further investigation and analysis may be required. • Grade the project as planned, then collect up to 10 randomly selected surface samples and chemically test each individual sample for pesticides to verify that toxaphene and DDT plus its derivatives are below the established TTLC and STLC action levels. ALTERNATIVE LOCATION Since site specific impacts are unknown, a site specific hazardous materials assessment would be required to determine the required mitigation measures. City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • ISSUE Mitigation: Monitoring: Land Use Comeatibilil:z: Significant impacts: Mitigation required to reduce impact to a level less than significant: Monitoring: • • TABLE 2-2 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE PROPOSED PROJECT 4. A report documenting results of any future testing shall be prepared. This report shall indicate the measures taken to mitigate contamination, as appropriate. The report shall be submitted to the City of Carlsbad Engineering Department. No mitigation measures are required. Mitigation measures are the same as those of the proposed project. A site specific assessment would be required to identify the potential impacts and mitigation measures. Monitoring would occur during grading of areas with potential ha1..ardous materials. The proposed project will result in the conversion of the project site to an intensive urban use which may result in land use compatibility impacts, and will require amendments to the general plan, local coastal plan, existing specific plan, and local facilities management plan. I. Any future site development pemtit associated with the specific plan or 21.16 acre SDG&E parcel (golf course) shall be reviewed for consistency with the specific plan and related discretionary actions including the general plan and local coastal plan amendment, zone change, local facilities management plan amendment, and hillside development permit. The Planning Department shall make a determination that the site development plan is consistent with these plans, prior to approval of the permit. Monitoring of compliance would occur upon approval of site development permit. rr "'8 w ~ g- · NO PROJECT/ EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN ALTERNATIVE LOCATION NO DEVELOPMENT • Prepare a report documenting results of testing and indicate the measures taken to mitigate contamination, as appropriate. Submit report to City of Carlsbad Engineering Department. It should be noted that selected mitigation techniques would require the review and approval of the San Diego County Department of Health Services and the Regional Water Quality Control Board prior to implementation. No monitoring would be required. Monitoring would be the same as that The site specific hazardous assessment of the proposed project. would identify appropriate monitoring. No significant impacts are anticipated No significant land use compatibility Potential land use compatibility impacts with the continued agricultural use. impacts were identified with the could occur with surrounding land uses, The pressure to develop the land original Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. and impacts related to consistency with would continue as the surrounding land use designations on-site. area becomes more urbanized. No mitigation measures are required. No mitigation measures are required. Mitigation measures would be similar to those of the proposed project. - No monitoring would be required. No monitoring would be required. Monitoring would be similar to those of the proposed project. _--------------------' ~ -0------------------------------------------Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment City of Carlsbad Final Program EIR 2-31 November 1995 TABLE 2-2 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE ISSUE Significant impacts: Mitigation required to reduce impact to a level less than significant: PROPOSED PROJECT The specific plan's most sensitive uses, a community"hotel and a part of the resort hotel site, are located within the 60 dB CNEL contour of the McClellan-Palomar Airport. The airport's Noise/l.and Use Compatibility Implementation Directives state that all transient lodging buildings, within the CNEL 60-70 contours must be subjected to an acoustical study to determine that interior levels do. not exceed CNEL 45. l. The interior noise level of !he proposed community hotel building(s) (planning area 3), and resort hotel buildings (planning area 5) shall not exceed. 45 dB A CNEL. As stated in the McClellan- Palomar Airport's Noise/l.and Use Compatibility Implementation Directives, all transient lodging buildings, within the airport's 60-70 CNEL contours must be subjected to an acoustical study to determine that interior levels do not exceed CNEL 45. 2. An avigation easement for noise shall be required to be recorded wilh the County Recorder as a condition of approval of the project. A copy of the recorded easement is to be filed with the affected airport operator. For all property transactions, appropriate legal notice shall be given to all purchasers, lessees and renters of property in "conditionally compatible" or "interior only, conditionally compatible" areas which clearly describes the potential for impacts from airplane noise associated with airport operations. Notice also will be provided as required on the state Real Estate Disclosure form. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR · • NO PROJECT/ NO DEVELOPMENT No construction noise or increase in noise levels associated with the increase in vehicular traffic would occur. The existing agricultural operations are compatible with noise levels associated with the airport. No mitigation measures are required. 2-32 • EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN Construction noise impacts would not be significant as long as the developer adheres to the City's noise ordinance and building codes. The combination of traffic-related noise and noise related to the airport would result in potentially significant impacts for interior noise level for hotel uses. No significant construction noise impacts were identified; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. Precise grading and architectural plans for the hotel would be reviewed by an acoustical specialist set forth in the Comprehensive Land Use Plan for Palomar Airport. ALTERNATIVE LOCATION Construction noise impacts are not expected to be significant; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. A site specific noise analysis would be required to identify significant impacts and to recommend mitigation measures. Recommended mitigation measures are anticipated to be similar to the proposed project. Monitoring would be similar to the proposed project. City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • TABLE 2-2 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT Monitoring: Monitoring would occur at time of issuance of site development permits. Public Services and Utilities The proposed project will result in an increased demand for police protection Significant impacts: services and waler supply/reclaimed waler. Mitigation: Police Protection Services · I. Prior to Sile Development Plan approval, developers shall submit security plans for review and approval by the Carlsbad Police Department. The plans shall be submilled prior lo Sile Development Plan approval, and shall include infom1alion about internal security programs, security systems and devices and any other information required by lhe Police Department. Water Supply/Reclaimed Water I. Reclaimed waler shall be utilized for all agricullure, golf course, and landscaping on the project site to the · extent feasible. The reclaimed water facilities shall be installed in accordance with the conceptual reclaimed water facility plan as proposed in the specific plan, and City of Carlsbad requirements. 2. Dual plumbing shall be required for all office, commercial, and industrial uses, and the LEGOLAND project as deemed -feasible by the Carlsbad Municipal Water District. -. Monitoring: Monitoring would occur at approval of site development permit for each planning area. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR NO PROJECT/ NO DEVELOPMENT No monitoring would be required. No increase in demand on public services and ul iii ties would occur. No mitigation measures are required. . ... . No monitoring would be required. 2-33 EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN Certification by the acoustical specialist to ensure that interior noise levels of the hotel meet compatibility standards would be a condition of the building pem1it. Impacts would be similar to the proposed project. Mitigation measures would be similar lo the proposed project. Monitoring would be similar to the proposed project. ALTERNATIVE LOCATION Impacts would be greater than the proposed project. Miligalion measures would be similar to lhe proposed project. Monitoring would be similar to the proposed project. City of Carlsbad November 1995 TABLE 2-2 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT Solid Waste The proposed project will result in the generation of solid waste associated with Significant Impacts: development of specific plan land uses." Mitigation required to reduce impact I. As a condition of any future site to a level less than significant: development plans for the project, the applicant shall submit a solid waste management plan for review and approval by the City of Carlsbad. This plan shall provide the following: (1) The approximate location, type and number of containers to be used to collect refuse and recyclables. (2) Refuse and recyclable collection methods to be used in each planning area. (3) A description and site plan for any planned on-site processing facilities or equipment (balers, compactors). (4) A description of the types of recycling services to be provided and contractual relationships with vendors to provide these services. (5) The estimated quantity of waste generated and estimated quantities of ~cyclable_ materials in each planning area. This plan shall also evaluate the feasibility of the following diversion programs/measures: Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR • NO PROJECT/ NO DEVELOPMENT Implementation of this alternative would not result in the generation of additional solid waste beyond existing levels. No mitigation measures are required. 2-34 • EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN The project-related impacts are not significant; however, cumulative impacts to landfills are significant. Mitigation measures would be similar to the proposed project. ALTERNATIVE LOCATION The generation of solid waste would be similar to the proposed project. Mitigation measures would be similar to the proposed project. City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • TABLE 2-2 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT Mitigation: (1) Source separated green waste collection for specific plan areas designated for agriculture, golf and developed areas with substantial landscaping (in particular the LEGOLAND planning area). (2) Cardboard recycling in office, retail, an~ warehousing areas. . (3) Office and retail programs which provide for the separation of wet . (disposable) and dry (recoverable) materials. (4) Where feasible, providing compactors for non-recyclables to reduce the number of trips to disposal facilities. (5) Glass recycling in restaurants. (6) Providing on-site recycling containers accessible to lhe public to encourage lhe diversion of_glass, and aluminum in the LEGOLAND family park area. (7) Where feasible, implement source reduction measures such as reducing excess packaging, paper and polystyrene cups. MonitoriJ1g: MoniloriJ1g would occur prior to approval . of any development permits within the specific plan area. Visual Aesthelics£Grading No visual aesthelics/grading impacts associated with the specific plan were Significant impacls: identified. . -The ramp widening component of the I- 5/Carmon Road interchange improvements will result in the removal of mature trees and associated landscaping. CCfrlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EI_R NO PROJECT/ EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN NO DEVELOPMENT ~ - - No moniloring would be required. Monitoringwould be similar to the proposed project. Implementation of lhis alternative As long as lhe building setbacks and would nol change the landscape or landscape buffers proposed in the views. Specific Plan are implemented, no significant visual impacts would result from implementation of lhe proposed project. .I 2-35 ! AL 1ERN A TIVE LOCATION - Monitoring would be similar to the proposed project. Impacts would be similar to lhe proposed project. Implementation of setbacks, landscaping and sensilive siting would reduce any potential visual impacts. .. City of Carlsbad November 1995 TABLE 2-2 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT Mitigation required to reduce impact 1. Trees shall be replaced at a 5: 1 ratio. to a level less than significant: These trees shall be planted at Cannon Road and Palomar Airport Road, with supplemental water systems. Shrubs shall be replaced at a 1:1 ratio at Cannon Road only. Replacement trees shall be 15 gallon and replacement shrubs shall be 5 gallon. Species selection shall be determined by the Caltrans project landscape architect. 2. 1-5/Cannon Road landscaping shall be installed concurrently with the interchange construction project in order to allow the planting to become established in time for the opening of the Lego themepark in 1999. 3. A plantable wall system (e.g. crib wall) shall be utilii.ed to reduce the visibility and aid in graffiti deterrence of the proposed retaining walls. If cast-in-place type walls are used, a form-liner texture (e.g. "ripped rope") shall be incorporated into the design. Furthermore, the walls shall be aligned to allow the planting of vines and shrubs at the base of the walls for graffiti deterrence and to help blend the walls into the surrounding landscape. An agreement shall be reached with the property owner immediately adjacent to this area to plant and maintain on the owner's property. Monitoring: Monitoring would be required by Caltrans after completion of improvements to the interchange. Water Quality No impacts to water quality were identified. Significant impacts: Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR • NO PROJECT/ NO DEVELOPMENT No mitigation measures are required. No monitoring would be required. No significant water quality impacts are expected to occur. 2-36 • EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN No mitigation measures are required. No monitoring is required. The proposed drain system would be adequate to handle project runoff and would direct runoff away from Agua Hedionda Lagoon; therefore no significant water quality impacts are expected to occur. ALTERNATIVE LOCATION No mitigation measures are required. No monitoring is required. Impacts lo water quality are unknown, but they are expected to be similar to those identified for the proposed project. City of Carlsbad November 1995 • Mitigation: Monitoring: • • • TABLE 2-2 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT NO PROJECT/ NO DEVELOPMENT No mitigation measures are required. No mitigation measures are required. No monitoring would be required. No monitoring would be required. Carlsbad Ranch Specific PlanAmendment Final Program EIR . . 2-37 EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN No mitigation measures are required. No monitoring would be required. ALTERNATIVE LOCATION No mitigation measures are required. No monitoring would be required. City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • 3.0. Projec~ Description • • • • 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION The Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment planning ~rea and SDG&E parcel ("project site") is located in northwestern San Diego County. Regional access to the project site is provided by Interstate 5 (1-5), located approximately 400 feet to the west of the westerly boundary of the project site, in the City of Carlsbad. The project site is shown in its regional perspective and local vicinity in Figure 3-1. The project site is located within the northwest quadrant of the City of Carlsbad. A majority of the project site is located within the boundary of Local Facilities Management Zone (LFMZ) 13 with a small portion along the eastern boundary located within LFMZ 5. The project site is generally located north of Palomar Airport Road, south of the future Cannon Road extension, ( except for an area totaling approximately 24.2 acres located on the north side of Cannon Road), east of Paseo Del Norte and west of the boundary of LFMZs 5 and 8. An existing water tank and the dirt road. located in the approximate location of future Hidden Valley Road generally mark the eastern boundary of the site. Local access to the specific plan area is provided via Palomar Airport Road to the south and Cannon Road to the north. · · • The project site is composed of gently rolling topography and contains three north- south trending ridges. · Almost all of the site has been disturbed by agricultural operations and is presently being cultivated. Environmentally constrained areas of the site consist of approximately 12 acres of steep slopes exceeding 25% in the northeast and southeast corners of the property. The steep slopes in the northeastern portion of the site adjacent to Macario Canyon contain coastal sage scrub and mixed chaparral. The elevations of the project site range from 260 feet above mean sea level at the eastern boundary of the site to 60 feet above mean sea level along Paseo Del Norte south of Car Country Drive. Existing land uses immediately surrounding the site consist of vacant land and the Agua Hedionda Lagoon to the north, retail and commercial (including Car Country and Pea Soup Andersons) to the west, retail and commercial to the south (Price Club, retail commercial), and vacant land to the east. The Palomar Airport and planned industrial uses are located approximately two miles east of the project along Palomar Airport Road . CQF/sbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR · 3-1 City of CQF/sbad November 1995 See Section 9.0 Response F-4 . .-0 :-::?· ·-n, . .. .... , ·--.-.... . C' t 2500' north Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment ProgramEIR Regional Location L&CWID --Northern San Diego County ······-- 3-2 ----.:.'°-q ~ 0 C ~ z 0 ;::i a, . _ ... Figure 3-1 Regional Location and Local Vicinity City of Carlsbad • • • • • BACKGROUND Carlsbad Ranch The Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan (SP 207) was originally approved by the City Council on March 16, 1993. A number of discretionary actions were approved concurrently with the Specific Plan including a General Plan Amendment, Local Coastal Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Tentative Map, Hillside Development Permit, Land Conservation Contract Amendment, and a Local Facilities Management Plan Amendment for Zone 13. A Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR 91-03) was prepared for the project and certified by the City Council on March 16, 1993. A Specific Plan Amendment request was subsequently initiated by the major property owner, Carlsbad Ranch Company. As described in the Notice of Preparation for this EIR, the project proposed an amendment to the existing plan which included the addition of 28.47 acres to the specific plan. An additional 23.22 acres north of Cannon Road was proposed for the golf course and 3.04 acres south of Cannon Road was proposed for access to the resort planning area, however these areas were not a part of the Specific Plan. Subsequent to the release of the Notice of Preparation, refinements were made to the overall project acreages. As currently proposed and analyzed in this EIR, the specific plan amendment increases the land area of the original specific plan from 423.51 acres to 447.40 acres for a total acreage increase of 23.89 acres. The increase included the transfer of 20.56 acres from Zone 5 to Zone 13 which is located along the southeast boundary of the project. The remainder of the increase is due to the inclusion of additional right-of- way from Cannon Road (3.33 acres) along the northern boundary of the project. SDG&E Parcel Although not within the boundaries of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment, a 24.2 acre parcel under SDG&E ownership immediately north of Cannon Road is also under development consideration at this time. This area is proposed to be developed with a golf course use which will provide a link to golf course planning areas 8a and 8b. This property is located within the boundaries of the SDG&E Encina Specific Plan which was originally adopted by the City Council on August 3, 1971. An amendment to the SDG&E Encina Specific Plan is proposed to remove this 24.2 acre area from that specific plan area. PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan The Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment area contains a total of 447.40 acres. The purpose of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment is to provide a comprehensive set of guidelines, regulations, and implementation programs for guiding and ensuring the orderly development of the Carlsbad Ranch in· accordance Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 3-3 City of Carlsbad November 1995 with-the City's General Plan. The specific plan defines the allowable type and intensity of land use, provides detailed development and design standards and • criteria, and describes the method by which the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment will be implemented. City Council adoption of the specific plan will establish the zoning and development standards for this property. The Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment will ensure that the subject property is developed in full accordance with the City of Carlsbad General Plan, Local Coastal Program -Mello II Segment, Zone 13 Local Facilities Management Plan, McClellan-Palomar Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan, and Land Conservation Contract 76-1. The proposed land uses for the Specific Plan reflect a mix of non-residential uses. Proposed uses include office, research and development, related light manufacturing, commercial, hotel, destination resort, golf course, agriculture, a vocational school campus and LEGO LAND Carlsbad. The Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment consists of nine planning areas which are described below. Figure 3-2 depicts these planning areas. Gemological Institute of America (Planning Area 1) The Gemological Institute of America (GIA) planning area consists of 28.93 net acres located in the northwest portion of the specific plan on the corner of LEGO Drive and Cannon Road. The GIA planning area is proposed for a vocational campus including classroom facilities, auditoriums, research and laboratory facilities, • libraries, administrative offices, manufacturing, warehousing, museum, bookstore, . dining and recreational facilities, and dormitories. A total of 550,000 square feet of building is proposed within this area. The GIA currently has an approved site development plan permit for this planning area. The Site Development Plan was approved pursuant to the existing Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan (SP207). Research & Development/Office (Planning Area 2) The Research & Development/Office planning area consists of 40.01 net acres located in the central portion of the specific plan, south of Planning Area 1 on the east side of Armada Drive. A combination of approximately 300,000 square feet of office and approximately 500,000 square feet of research and development uses are proposed within this area. Community Hotel & Retail (Planning Area 3) The Community Hotel & Retail planning area consists of 10.48 net acres located south of Planning Area 2 on the west side of Armada Drive overlooking the flower fields. A mixture of retail, lodging, timeshare, and office uses are proposed in this area which would consist of a 280 room hotel, and 20,000 square feet of retail. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 3-4 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • P.ICU'JC OC8.IH 1 2 3 4 5 ,ICU.I ES.J)JOH.DA . p · LICOOH ROJECT AREA BOUNDARY-- SOURCE: Carlsbad Ranch S .. pec,f,c Plan, 1995 . (C.txi\ I I I I I 0' 600' 1200· north Carlsbad Ranch S . . Program EIR ,pecific Plan Amendment 3-5 6 7 Sa Sb 9 SPECIFIC PLAN BOUNDARY SPECIALlY RETAIL FLOWER FIELDS GOLF COURSE GOLF COURSE NATURAL OPEN SPACE Figure 3~-2 Planning A recs City of Carlsbad See Section 9.0 Response I-2 LEGOLAND Carlsbad (Planning Area 4) The LEGOLAND Carlsbad planning area consists of 128.32 net acres proposed within the southeast quadrant of the specific plan. The LEGOLAND Carlsbad planning area is a themepark which features LEGO models and child oriented activities for children in the 2-13 age group and their families. This area will consist of parking, an inner park of active and passive clusters, an outer park and service and administration area. A total of 425,750 square feet of building area is proposed within this area. Resort (Planning Area 5) The Resort planning area consists of 52.8 net acres located north of Planning Area 4 at the eastern edge of the specific plan. A full-service destination resort which may include up to 700 suites, meeting space, restaurants, recreation and associated facilities is proposed within this planning area. The resort architecture will be compatible with the same Mediterranean architectural vocabulary prevalent throughout the specific plan except within the LEGOLAND Carlsbad inner park. Architectural features will include sloping tile roofs, terraces, arches, and elevated walkways connecting the various buildings. A golf course open to the public is proposed below the resort. Specia/,ty Retail (Planning Area 6) The Specialty Retail planning area consists of 26.65 net acres located on the east side of Paseo Del Norte. This western-most portion of the specific plan below the flower fields and adjacent to Paseo Del Norte will be developed as a specialty retail center. Buildings will be designed and oriented to allow for views of the flower fields to the east. A total of 300,000 square feet of specialty retail is proposed within this area. Flower Fields (Planning Area 7) The Flower Fields planning area consists of 53.42 acres located east of Planning Area 6, west of Planning Areas 2 and 3 and north of Palomar Airport Road. This area will continue its existing use as flower fields. Golf Course (Planning Area 8a, 8b) The golf course planning area consists of a total of 72.07 net acres located on the south side of Cannon Road in the northern portion of the specific plan. The golf course is planned as a nine-hole course open to the public. Access between the eastern and western parts of the golf course will be provided on the SDG&E property on the north side of Cannon Road. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 3-6 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • • Natural. Open Space (Planning Area 9) The Natural Open Space planning area consists of 10 net acres and is located east of Planning Area 5 in the northeast corner of the specific plan. This area consists of steep slopes covered with native vegetation. No grading or construction 1s proposed in this area. Planning Area 9 will remain in its existing condition. SDG&E Parcel Approximately 21.16 acres of area north of Cannon Road and outside of the specific plan boundary is proposed as a link between the two golf course areas. This parcel is proposed to be developed with approximately 2 golf course holes, in addition to providing golf cart and pedestrian access to the golf course planning areas 8a and 8b. Additionally, 3.04 acres south of Cannon Road adjacent to the northeastern corner of the Carlsbad Ranch are proposed to provide access to the Resort Planning Area. This area will be subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit when development plans for the golf course are available. Interstate 5/Cannoit Road Interchange Improvements A component of the proposed project will consist of improvements to the Interstate 5 /Cannon Road interchange whi~h will include widening the existing interchange ramps, metering the entrance ramps, signalizing an.ct channelizing the local street and ramp termini intersections, and cons_truction of merge lanes on Interstate 5 north and south of the Cannon Road Interchange. A Project Study Report (PSR) has been prepared for the proposed interchange improvements component of the · project by Caltrans. The PSR describes in detail the geometric improvements for the interchange. Cannon Road will be e~tended from its existing terminus at Car Country Drive to serve the project site. Table 3-1 provides a detailed breakdown of the proposed project characteristics. Figure 3-3 provides a map indicating the location of each development area. PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES Goals To promote the orderly development of the project site, the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan presents eight goals for the development and use of the project site, as follows: 1. Create an open space system that builds upon the visual prominence and agricultural traditions of the site. 2. Establish an attractive, mixed use development which preserves the open space character of the Carlsbad Ranch and enhances the scenic qualities and identity of the Carlsbad community . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 3-7 City of Carlsbad November 1995 TABLE 3-1 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS DEVEWPMENT LAND USE ACRES (NE'I) AREA NUMBER 1 Agriculture 53.42 2a,b Specialty Retail 26.65 3 Golf Course 45.61 4a,b,c G.IA. Vocational 28.93 School 5 Golf Course -26.46 6-12,14-15 Research & Dev't 40.01 13 Street "D" 1.97 (Private) 16 Open Space 10.00 17 Resort 52.80 18 LEGOLAND 128.32 Carlsbad 19 LEGO Drive 0.94 (Private) 20 Community Hotel 10.48 & Retail Public Roads 21.81 TOTAL 447.40 AC SPECIFIC PLAN SDG&E Parcel1 Golf Course 24.2 Source: Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan 1 The SDG&E parcel is located outside the Specific Plan boundaries. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 3-8 DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM Existing Flower Fields 300,000 SF 4 Holes 550,000 SF 3 Holes 800,000 SF Preserve in Natural State 700 Suites· 647,000 SF 425,750 SF 212,080 SF; 280 Rooms 2,934,830 SF 2 Holes City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • ·• • • \\ \\ \ .4CU.A BE.DIOND.4 LJ.COON \ r:-:-::::::::::::::::: ~ DEVELOPMENT AREAS NUMBER 2a,b 3 4 a,b,c 5 6-12, 14-15 13 16 17 18 19 20 LAND USE Agriculture Specialty Retail Golf G.I.A. Vocational School Golf Research and Dev't Street "D" (Private) Open Space Resort legoland Lego Drive (Private) Community Hotel and Retail Public Roads Total Specific Plan: SOURCE: Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan, 1995 _ 600' 1200· north Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment ProgramEIR AGRICULTURAL ~ GOLF COURSE 3-9 ACRES 53.42 26.65 45.61 28.93 26.46 40.01 1.97 10.00 52.80 128.32 0.94 10.48 21.81 447.40 ac DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM Existing Flower Fields 300,000 sf 4 Holes of Golf 550,000 sf 3 Holes of Golf 800,000 sf Preserve in Natural State 700 Suites; 647,000 sf 425,750 sf 212,080 sf; 280 rooms 2,934,830 sf Figure 3-3 Development Summary City of Carlsbad 3. Intensify development within designated development areas to create an appropriate level of pedestrian activity and vitality; to provide increased opportunities for mass transit; and to preserve larger areas of recreational open space on the site. 4. Create a business center and community destination at this significant location within the City of Carlsbad. 5. Provide for a circulation system that facilitates movement and access needs of automobiles, pedestrians and bicyclists, and provides structure and amenity to the Carlsbad Ranch development. 6. Encourage and facilitate the use of travel modes other than the private automobile for trips made to, from and within the Carlsbad Ranch. 7. Ensure that new development and new roadways meet City of Carlsbad growth management standards for traffic levels of service. 8. To establish a family oriented theme park and destination resort that will benefit both the citizens of and visitors to the City of Carlsbad. Objectives There are twelve objectives to guide the development of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan in reaching its goals, as follows: 1. Plan for a variety of compatible land uses separated and buffered by open space areas and landscape setbacks. 2. Establish a mixed-use development by combining complementary uses around LEGOLAND Carlsbad that will become a focus and activity center for the City of Carlsbad. 3. Establish recreational, agricultural and open space uses that maintain the open character and scenic quality of the Carlsbad Ranch property. 4. Minimize conflicts between agricultural and urban uses. 5. Develop LEGOLAND Carlsbad to focus on providing fun and creative educational experiences for children in the 2-13 age group and their families. 6. Grading and drainage approaches for the site should build on the topographic character of the Carlsbad Ranch. 7. Establish an attractive roadway system that provides access to the Carlsbad Ranch from the north and south. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendmellt Final Program EIR 3-10 . City of Carlsbad November 1995 •· • • • • • 8 . Provide a circulation system that allows for efficient transit service to the Carlsbad Ranch. 9. Cooperate with the regional planning and air quality agencies responsible for developing and maintaining the transportation control management plan and regional air quality plans. 10. Provide bicycle facilities that promote the use of the bicycle as an alternative mode of transportation. 11. Develop a strong pedestrian circulation network within the Carlsbad Ranch that connects with planned citywide trail systems. 12. Provide adequate parking facilities to serve the needs of the commercial and recreational uses on the Carlsbad Ranch. Additional objectives specific to the site selection for LEGOLAND, the Gemological Institute of America (GIA), a destination resort, a golf course, a regio~al retail center and other components of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan are as follows: 13. Develop LEGOLAND, a regional retail center and major destination resort in an area that can draw on a regional population base of 15 million people located within a three-hour drive. · 14. Locate LEGOLAND, a regional retail center and major destination resort at a site that is a 30 minute maximum drive from a major metropolis . 15. Develop LEGOLAND Carlsbad themepark on a minimum 128 net acre site. 16. Develop LEGOLAND, GIA, a major destination resort, a research and development area, and a regional retail center on a site that is an integral element of a well-planned mixed-use project with surrounding uses that are compatible. 17. Locate LEGOLAND Carlsbad themepark at a site with direct freeway access via a major arterial road and a maximum distance from the freeway interchange to the LEGOLAND Carlsbad site of 2 miles. 18. Locate LEGOLAND, GIA, a major destination resort, a research and development area, a regional retail center and a golf course at a site with no direct access through existing or planned residential neighborhoods. 19. Locate LEGOLAND, a major destination resort and a golf course at a site with close proximity to rail service. ' . 20. Develop LEGOLAND, GIA, a major destination resort, a research and development area, and a regional retail center at a site with major utilities available in close proximity to the site . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 3-11 City of Carlsbad November 1995 21. Commit the developer and the City to a suitable Master Plan for all surrounding properties to secure quality developments surrounding the LEGOLAND Carlsbad project and safeguard through comprehensive planning against neighboring and undesirable "spin-off' developments. 22. Require existing or proposed projects surrounding the themepark to include low density developments with high quality landscaping, compatible with the emphasis on landscaping and environmental sensitivity that is provided in the LEGOLAND Carlsbad project. . PROJECT PHASING Specific Plan The Specific Plan is a planning document, however it does not regulate the rate of development within Carlsbad Ranch. Other than general market conditions and contractual limitations set forth in the Land Conservation Contract and proposed development agreement, development within Carlsbad Ranch will be controlled by the availability of adequate public facilities. A phasing program was developed for public facility planning purposes. The phasing program, which is consistent with the Zone 13 LFMP analysis, is included in the Specific Plan and depicted on Table 3-2. This phasing program defines the level of infrastructure improvements required to meet estimated demand based on the buildout of proposed uses within the specific plan. For the purposes of the environmental analysis in this EIR, a buildout year of 2010 for the Specific Plan has been assumed. The 1-5/Cannon Road Interchange is scheduled for completion by Caltrans in 1999. INTENDED USES OF THE EIR Discretionary Actions -Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan· The following provides a list of the actions/approvals that will be under consideration by the City Council as part of the proposed project, and as analyzed in this EIR. 1. General Plan and Local Coastal Plan Amendment (Mello II Segment). The applicant is requesting an amendment to the General Plan and Local Coastal Plan (Mello II Segment). The amendment consists of a change to the General Plan and Local Coastal Plan Land Use Designations shown on Figure 34 to the proposed designations shown on Figure 3-5. Also proposed is an amendment to the circulation element to replace Hidden Valley Road with Armada Drive. An amendment to the text of the Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Plan is also proposed. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Fin'al Program EIR 3-12 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • • TABLE 3-2 CARLSBAD RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN PHASING Land Use 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 'Plannina Area) 1 ... '.:!U!...ANU Gansbad (41 -.... Resort (5).(8) Hotel Suites -700 Suites 576000 Retail 6000 Conference Facilities 16000 MeetinQ/Ballrooms 24000 Restaurant 19000 Golf Course -9 Holes Restaurant in Club House 6 000 Gemoloalcal Institute m Office/R&D/lab 46500 56600 Liqht ManufacturinQ 18300 Warehouse 38600 Vocational School/Ubrarv -40000 Cafeteria/Museum/Auditorium Soeclattv Retail (6) 100000 100.000 Travel Service (6A) Office (2) 30000 30000 30,000 30000 Research and Development (2) 50.000 50000 50000 50,000 HoteURetall (3) HoteVCommercial Livin<J Units -280 Rooms 96040 96040 Retail 20000 TOTAL** 283,400 80,000 276,040 1,365,390 --·-.... This schedule is for the purpose oC facility planning only. Actual dcvdopmcot may occur sooocr or later than shown, so long as adequate facilities arc provided coocurrcut with dcvdopmeot in aooordance with the Zone 13 Local Facilities Management Plan. • The oum~r in this column arc square footage rrol"AI.S unless otherwise noted The square footage for LEGO LAND Carlsbad may vary, but will oot have aoy impact oo the demand for public facilities since the plaooed attendance facilities rather than the square footage of the park will detennioe facility demands. The exact square footage for the 1999 opening of LEGOlAND Carlsbad will be detenniocd at the time of Site Development Plan approval. 2000 2001 2002 2003 311 500 38500 100 000 30 000 15.000 15.000 15000 50 000 25.000 25,000 25000 80,000 140,000 390,000 40,000 3-13 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 rror~Ls - 425,/bll 576000 6000 16000 24000 19.000 6.000 r 414.600 18.300 38.600 40.000 38,500 300,000 15000 15000 15000 15.000 15000 15000 15000 300.000 25000 25000 25 000 25.000 25000 25000 25000 500000 192 080 20000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 2,934,830 • • • See Section 9.0 Response B-1 2 . Zone Change. The proposed project will require a zone change to change the existing zoning designations of the project site to make the zoning consistent with the proposed General Plan and Local Coastal Plan designations. The existing zoning designations are shown in Figure 3-6 and the proposed designations are shown in Figure 3-7. 3. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment. The applicant is requesting an amendment to the adopted Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan which increases the land area of the original specific plan by 23.89 acres. This increase includes the transfer of 20.56 acres from Zone 5 to Zone 13 which is located along the southeast boundary of the project and the inclusion of 3.33 acres south of Cannon Road. The amendment also changes the proposed land uses for the Specific Plan. Although some of the uses will be similar in type to the original Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan, there will be a significantly reduced office/research & development component and the focus of the project will be recreational, retail, and visitor serving land uses. 4. Local Facilities Management Plan Amendment (Zone 13). The amendment is required to reflect proposed refinements in land use and adjustments to the Zone 13 boundary. The boundary adjustment incorporates an area which was formerly within Zone 5. 5. Cancellation of a Land Conservation Contract (Williamson Act) on portions of the property and an amendment to the Preserve Boundaries. The proposed project includes the request for cancellation of the Williamson Act Land Conservation Act Contract on approximately 182.49 acres. The boundaries of the agricultural preserve will be revised to cover only the acres remaining under contract. 6. Master Tentative Map. The applicant is requesting approval of a Master Tentative Map for the Specific Plan. A tentative map will be required for implementation of proposed development as analyzed in this document. The· · tentative map is required for all subdivisions creating five or more parcels pursuant to Government Code Section 66426. 7. Non-Residential Planned Unit Development Permit. A Non-residential Planned Unit Development Permit is proposed to allow for Street "D" within Planning Area 2 (Research and Development/Office) to be a private street with special design features. 8. Hillside Development Permit. Proposed grading of the project site must be in conformance with the City's Hillside Development Ordinance. The purpose of this permit is to review this conformance. 9. Development Agreement. The applicant is requesting approval of a Development Agreement. Approval of a Development Agreement would provide the City of Carlsbad and the applicant certain assurances that, during the specified term of the Development Agreement, the various elements of Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 3-14 City of Carlsbad November 1995 AGUA HED/ONDA LAGOON PACIFIC OCEAN ~ OPENSPACE [D REGIONAL COMMERCIAL J 0/PI I OFFICE/PLANNED INDUSTRIAL SOURCE: City of Carlsbad General Plan . '-oo'l l'---''--'l'--'____,I 1C! o· 600' 1200· north Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment ProgramEIR .J [![) TRAVEL RECREATION COMMERCIAL m COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL ~ UNPLANNED AREAS Figure 3-4 Existing General Plan Land Uses •• 3-15 City of Carlsbad • • • • AGUA HEDIONDA LAGOON PACIFIC ~ OPEN SPACE [D REGIONAL COMMERCIAL I 0/PI I OFFICE/PLANNED INDUSTRIAL SOURCE: Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan, 1995 ♦ O' 600' 1200' north Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment ProgramEIR .. -• · osi· TR. [![J TRAVEL RECREATION COMMERCIAL m COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL 3-16 · Figure .3-5 Proposed General Plan Land Uses City of Carlsbad AGUA HEDIONDA LAGOON PACIFIC OCEAN ~ IP-MI OFFICE PLANNED INDUSTRIAL IC-TI COMMERCIAL-TOURIST I P-U I PUBLIC UTILITIES SOURCE: City of Carlsbad Zoning Map I ♦ (c.150) O' 600' 1200' north Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment ProgramEIR I C-21 I 0-S I m IE-A I 3-17 P-U E-A I • • I • • J GENERAL COMMERCIAL OPEN SPACE QUALIFIED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY EXCLUSIVE AGRICULTURE Figure 3:-6 Existing Zoning Designations City of Carlsbad • •• • • • • • A~UA HEDIOJtlJA LAGOON PACIFIC OCEAN [QJ OFFICE P-U ~ PLANNED INDUSTRIAL I C-T I COMMERCIAL-TOURIST ~-PUBLIC UTILITIES SOURCE: Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan, 1995 0' 600' 1200' north Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment ProgramEIR C-T-Q I C-2 I GENERAL COMMERCIAL \ 0-S I OPEN SPACE [§J QUALIFIED DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY 3-18 Figure 3-7 Proposed Zoning Desigr:,ations City of Carlsbad the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan can be developed in accordance with the Specific Plan and other City rules, regulations and requirements in effect on • the effective date of the Development Agreement. 10. Street Vacation for a portion of Armada Drive associated with proposed alignment changes to this roadway. The proposed project will require a vacation of a portion of Armada Drive due to the plan's proposed realignment of this roadway. Discretionary Actions -SDG&E Parcel The following provides a list of the actions/approvals that will be under consideration by the City Council related to the SDG&E parcel component of the proposed project, and as analyzed in this EIR. 1. Zone Change. Currently, the site has a zoning designation of P-U (Public Utilities) with a general plan designation of OS (Open Space). Since the zoning designation is inconsistent with the general plan designation, a zone change is required to maintain general plan and zoning consistency. The proposed zone change will be from P-U to O-S for the 24.2 acre site and will allow for the development of the two holes of golf north of Cannon Road. 2. Local Coastal Plan Amendment (Agua Hedionda Segment). Minor changes to the Agua Hedionda Lagoon segment of the Local Coastal Plan are required to allow for the development of the two golf holes north of Cannon Road on the SDG&E property. In addition the Local Coastal Plan Amendment includes the Zone Change as the Zoning is the implementing ordinance for the Local Coastal Plan. 3. SDG&E Specific Plan Amendment. Amendment to the boundaries of the SDG&E Encina Specific Plan. The amendment to the SDG&E Encirta Specific Plan will be to remove 24.2 acres from the specific plan area. The existing Encina Specific Plan consists of an approving ordinance and a land use map. The revised land use map will supersede the current map and become a part of the existing Encina Specific Plan. Subsequent discretionary approvals that will be required prior to development in the specific plan will include one or more of the following: • Site Development Plan • Coastal Development Permit • Non-Residential Planned Development • Conditional Use Permit • Tentative Map Subsequent discretionary approvals that will be required prior to development in the area north of Cannon Road includes one or more of the following: Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR . 3-19 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • • • Conditional Use Permit Coastal Development Permit LEAD, RESPONSIBLE AND TRUSTEE AGENCIES Lead Agency In conformance with Section. 15050 and 15367 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Carlsbad has been designated the "lead agency" which is defined as the "public agency which has the principal responsibility for carrying out or disapproving a project." Possible· Responsible/Trustee Agencies Responsible Agencies are those agencies which have discretionary approval over one or more actions involved with development of the proposed project site. Trustee Agencies are state agencies having discretionary approval or jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by a project. These agencies include, but are not limited to the following: ' Responsible Agencies California D'epartment of Transportation U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service U ;S. Army Corps of Engineers San Diego Air Pollution Control District Regional Water Quality Control Board (NPDES) San Diego County Water Authority Trustee Agencies California Department of Fish and Game Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 3-20 City of Carlsbad November 1995 r ) • I I . 4.0 Environmental Setting • • • • 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Specific Plan Project Area The proposed project site is located within the northwestern quadrant of the City of Carlsbad. The City of Carlsbad is a coastal community located in the northwestern portion of San Diego County, approximately 35 miles north of downtown San Diego and approximately 90 miles south of downtown Los Angeles. The City of -Carlsbad encompasses 42.2 square miles and has a population of approximately 65,700. The project site is generally located north of Palomar Airport Road, south of the future Cannon Road extension, east of Paseo Del Norte and west of the boundary of Local Facilities Management Zones (LFMZs) 5 and 8. An existing water tank and a dirt road located in the approximate location of future Hidden Valley Road generally mark the eastern boundary of the site. Local access to the specific plan area is provided via Palomar Airport Road to the south and Cannon Road to the north. A majority of the project site is located within the boundaries of the LFMZ 13 with a small portion of the eastern boundary located within LFMZ 5. Additionally, a majority of the project site is located within the boundaries of the existing Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan previously approved by the City in 1993. The SDG&E parcel is located to the north of Cannon Road, adjacent to the northern boundary of the specific plan. The specific plan portion of the project encompasses approximately 447.40 acres, while the SDG&E parcel consists of approximately 24.2 acres. The project site is composed of gently rolling topography and contains three north- south trending ridges. Almost all of the site has been disturbed by agricultural operations and is presently being cultivated for vegetable/fruits and flowers. Approximately 10 acres in the northeastern portion of the project site is undist11rbed and contains native vegetation including chaparral, coastal sage scrub, and riparian scrub. The elevations of the project site range from 60 feet above mean sea level in the south western comer of the site to 260 feet above mean sea level at the eastern boundary of the site. The geological formations in the project site consist of the Linda Vista and Santiago formations. No earthquake fault exists on or near the project site. Faults in the vicinity of the project site include the Rose Canyon fault approximately 5-10 miles to the west, the Elsinore Fault approximately 30-40 miles to the east, and the San Jacinto fault approximately 60 miles to the east. Temperatures average about 62 degrees Fahrenheit (F) annually. Summer afternoons average in the low 80's F, while winter mornings drop down into the upper 30s F. Rainfall averages 10 to 15 inches per year, with most of the rain occurring from late November to early April. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendmelll Final Program EIR 4-1 City of Carlsbad November 1995 Existing land uses immediately surrounding the site consist of vacant land, agriculture and the Agua Hedionda Lagoon to the north, retail and commercial to • the west, retail and commercial to the south, and vacant land to the east. The Palomar Airport and planned industrial uses are located approximately two miles east of the project along Palomar Airport Road. 1-5/Cannon Road Improvements Project Area The I-5/Cannon Road interchange is located approximately 2,000 feet to the west of the specific plan area. The vegetation in this area consists of eucalyptus, acacia, pepper and pine trees. The ground cover consists of ice plant, fountain grass, and other non-native grasses. Land uses surrounding the I-5/Cannon Road Interchange include Car Country Carlsbad and agriculture to the east, and vacant, disturbed land to the west. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 4-2 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • ' c:- • 5.0 Environmental 1,mpact Analysis - ,- • • • s~o ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS As required by CEQA, this section addresses the environmental setting for each impact area, the threshold for determining significance of environmental impacts, identification of potential environmental impacts, mitigation measures for those environmental impacts which are deemed significant, and the environmental impact with implementation of mitigation measures. This Program EIR examines all of the environmental issue areas identified in the City of Carlsbad Initial Study. Each potential impact is discussed and analyzed in the sections that follow. Each environmental impact issue area is addressed according to the following format: · Environmental Setting: A discussion of the existing conditions, services, and physical environment of the project site. Threshold for Determining Significance: The amount or type of impact which constitutes a substantial or potentially substantial adverse change in the environment. Based on this criterion, project impacts can be classified as: unavoidable and significant; potentially significant, but can be mitigated, avoided, or substantially lessened; or less than significant. Environmental Impact: A discussion of the impacts of the proposed project in qualitative and/or quantitative terms, based on the uses of land identified in. the project description. Mitigation Measures: A discussion of the measures required by the City of Carlsbad to avoid, mitigate, or substantially lessen potential adverse impacts. Impact After Mitigation: A discussion of the level of potential impact of the project with implementation of required or recommended mitigation measures. AREAS OF POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11 . 12. Agricultural Resources Air Quality Archaeological and Paleontological Resources Biological Resources Traffic/Circulation Hazardous Waste/Pesticide Residue Land Use Compatibility Noise Public Services and Utilities Solid Waste Visual Aesthetics/Grading Water Quality Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5-1 City of Carlsbad November 1995 Detailed discussions of these impacts are found in the following section. References sources, indicating the document or person listed in Section 8.0 are shown in the • EIR's text in parenthesis [e.g. (C-3)]. A complete listing of references can be found - in Section 8.0, References. Other long-term environmental issues, including cumulativ~ environmental impacts · caused by the project, are discussed in Section 7.0 of this EIR. · Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5-2 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • See Section 9.0 Response H-3 5.1 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING City-wide Historical agricultural production in the City of Carlsbad has consisted of a variety of agricultural crops including tomatoes, flowers, strawberries, lettuce, avocados, citrus, barley, and miscellaneous truck crops. Agricultural production in the City has been steadily on the decline over the past two decades. This decline is attributable to several factors including availability and cost of water, urbanization, cost of land, labor costs and governmental regulations. According to the report, "A Guide to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program" (California Department of Conservation, 1994), there are five areas remaining within the City that contain land categorized by the State of California as "Prime Farmland". Prime farmland is located: (1) on the Carlsbad Ranch property; (2) northeast of the Rancho Carlsbad Mobile Home Park; (3) at the northeast corner of the intersection of El Camino Real and Palomar Airport Road; (4) at the southeast comer of the intersection of El Camino Real and Palomar Airport Road extending east to property just across from the industrial development on Loker Avenue; and (5) vacant property south of the prime farmland across from the industrial development on Loker Avenue. Figure 5-1 generally depicts the Important Farmland in the City. This figure is based on the most recent Department of Conservation mapping, however, it does not reflect 1995 land uses. Some of the areas depicted on the map as farmland have been developed subsequent to the publication of the map from the Department of Conservation. Farmland zoned Exclusive Agriculture (E-A) within the city consists of a portion of the Carlsbad Ranch property (flowers/nursery and truck crops); parcels on the southwest and southeast sides of the intersection of Palomar Airport Road and College Boulevard (vacant land and a packaging facility); and parcels on either side of El Camino Real between Camino Vida Roble and Carrillo Way (greenhouses). The Carlsbad Ranch property is the largest area zoned Exclusive Agriculture within the City. Project Site Various portions of the project site have been utilized for agricultural uses since the 1920's. Prior to the 1950's, irrigation water was not available on the project site; however the site was used for dry farming, primarily lima beans. In the early 1950s, water deliveries allowed the site to be utilized for poinsettia and cut flower production. In the early 1960s, the field growing of poinsettias was converted by the property owners (Ecke) to greenhouse growing in the Encinitas area . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.1-1 City of Carlsbad November 1995 Pacific 0 c e a n Oceanside V • s t a . ---, S a n a r c o s Pacific 0 c e a n ~ PROJECT· ·BOUNDARY ~ CITY OF CARLSBAD BOUNDARY [TI PRIME FARMLAND E n C s i n t a a n D i e g 0 I I I I 1-- 1 I I I IT] FARMLAND OF STATEWIDE C o u n t y IMPORTANCE _ .. -..... 0 UNIQUE FARMLAND ~ WATER IT] FARMLAND OF LOCAL IMPORTANCE 0 OTHER LAND IT] DEVELOPED LAND Encinitas SOURCE: State of California, Department of Conservation Figure 5-1 Important Farmland Surrounding the P~oiect Site O' 7000' north Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment ProgramEJR 5.1-2 City of Carlsbad • • • • • Subsequently, the property was gradually converted to flower field production and vegetable crops. During the late 1970's and the early 1980's, pole tomatoes were an important crop on the property, although tomato production on the property has declined along with the countywide trends. In recent years increasing water rates have forced many vegetable growers out of business on the project site. The flower production has remained more viable than vegetable production as the use of reclaimed water for flower production has been more successful than with the vegetable crops. The agricultural land on the project site is a remnant of what was once a much larger contiguous area of cropland. Fragmentation has occurred due to development and the construction of the Interstate 5 Freeway. The agricultural land was further fragmented as a result of the construction of Palomar Airport Road which forms a · barrier to farm: equipment accessing the crops and the processing areas to the south of the project. Existing Agricultural Uses On-sjte The entire project site consists of a total of 471.6 acres. A total of 447.40 acres are contained within the proposed specific plan area, and an additional 24.2 acres are contained within the SDG&E parcel north of Cannon Road. SDG&E Parcel ' The entire 24.2 acre SDG&E parcel is currently being utilized for agricultural production (strawberries). Thkparcel is leased by SDG&E to growers on a yearly basis. Specific Plan . Portions of the specific plan are leased to farm operators on an annual lease basis. The same tenants have used the property for .over ten years. In 1992, the property was leased by four principal leaseholds including Frazee Flowers, Tabata Brothers, Parkway Nursery and· Ukegawa Farms. However, a reduction in acreage of land in agricultural production and tenants on-site has occurred since 1992. Table 5-1 depicts the existing agricultural usage of the site. Figure 5-2 depicts the existing agricultural usage of the site. Frazee Flowers, Inc. The Frazee family has farmed a 236 acre parcel within the project site for over 17 years. The actual farming on this property is currently conducted by Mellano & Company. Approximately 182 acres were farmed in 1992, however this amount has decreased by approximately 112 acres in 1995 due to anticipated construction associated with the previously approved Gemological Institute of America site development plan. The property is best known for the ranunculus flowers which are seeded in late fall and bloom in March/ April. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR • · 5.1-3 City of Carlsbad November 1995 AGUA HED/ONDA LAGOON PACIFIC OCEAN ~-PARKWAY NURSERY . B SLEEPING INDIAN FARMS IZZJ TABATA BROTHERS SOURCE: The Carltas Company, July 1995 north Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment ProgramEIR Figure 5-2 Existing Agricultural Leaseholds o·f Proiect Site 5.1-4 City of Carlsbad • • • • • Because this crop is grown primarily for the bulbs it is allowed to flower, whereas with the gladiolus production the flower stalk is harvested as a tight bud and does not provide the dramatic floral display. The same site is used each year for the ranunculus flower, and the crop is not rotated. Previous attempts to farm the ranunculus in other areas of the project site besides the western slope have only been marginally successful. TABLE 5-1 CURRENT AGRICULTURAL USE OF THE PROJECT SITE TENANT CURRENT CROP YIELD ACRES .. FARMED Mellano & Company 70 • bulbs 200,000/AC cut flowers ranunculus 2,500 bunches/ AC: . gladiolus 5.500 bunches/AC Sleeping Indian Farms 20 raspberries 3,500 trays/ AC (12 half-pint boxes/tray Tabata Brothers 35 tomatoes 1,100 boxes/ AC (25 lbs/box) 31 strawberries 4,300 trays/ AC •• 20 squash. 900 boxes/AC (28 lbs/box) · · Parkway Nursery N/A palm trees NIA Ukegawa Farms 0 NIA NIA Source: Carltas, July 1995. • Cut flowers from only 55 of 70 acres.'. Currently, only 2 1/2 acres planted with gladiolus. •• Includes fresh market and freezer harvests; 12 one-pint boxes/fresh market tray and 16 lbs/freezer box. Tabata Brothers The Tabata brothers farmed an approximately 110 acre parcel on the project site in 1992. This has been reduced to approximately 86 acres in 1995. The Tabata brothers have a long history of farming tomatoes and strawberries. Since the mid- 1980's overall profitability of strawberry production has fallen. The San Diego area has lost some of the advantages it previously had as both an early and long season production area for strawberries . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.1-5 City of Carlsbad November 1995 Parkway Nursery Parkway Nursery historically utilized approximately 10 net farmable acres within the project site boundaries. The nursery is a specialized producer of containerized palm trees. The principal market for their production consists of urban developers and landscape contractors. The nursery is currently in the process of moving a portion of its operation to an off-site location on Avenida Encinas within the City of Carlsbad. Ukegawa Farms Ukegawa farms has historically leased approximately 10 acres on the project site where the tomato packaging facility is located. Ukegawa is one of the largest vegetable farmers in San Diego County and leases farm property throughout the County. Ukegawa farms is no longer a tenant on the project site. The tomato packing shed is currently being dismantled and is no longer in use. Soils/Important Farmlands Soils on the project site consist of Carlsbad gravelly loamy sand, 2 to 5 percent slope, and Marina loamy coarse sand, 2 to 9 percent slope (Ref. C-28). A majority of the project site is made up of the Marina loamy coarse sand. The Marina series consists of somewhat excessively drained, very deep loamy coarse sands. The Carlsbad gravelly loamy sand is gently sloping and is 36 to 39 inches deep over • hardpan. These soils are generally light, have low water holding capacity, and • require frequent irrigations. The Storie Index for these soils is low, 23 for Carlsbad gravelly loamy sand and 54 for Marina loamy coarse sand ( out of a perfect score of 100), but the moderate climate and gentle topography, and the utilization of drip or sprinkler irrigation, coupled with soil amendments can make these soils very productive for selected specialty crops (Ref. C-26). The United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service (SCS) has published a soil survey for the San Diego area which is used to determine the location and significance of Important Farmlands in the County. Prime Farmland and Farmland of Statewide Importance map categories are based on qualifying soil types as determined by the SCS as well as current land use (i.e. irrigated agriculture). Important Farmlands Inventory designations for the project site are depicted in Figure 5-3. This figure also shows the limits of grading currently underway associated with the previously approved CT 92-07. The project site contains land identified as prime farmland, farmland of statewide importance, unique farmland, urban and built-up land, and other land. The Important Farmland Map Categories on the project site are described below: Prime Farmland Land with the best combination of physical and chemical features able to sustain long-term production of agricultural crops. This land has the soil Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.1-6 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • PACIFIC OCEAN AGUA HEDIONDA LAGOON ~ \ \P 10a. PALOMAR AIRPORT R AD IT] [J[] rn PRIME FARMLAND rn OTHER LAND UNIQUE FARMLAND [ID URBAN AND BUILT-UP FARMLAND OF STATEWIDE IMPORTANCE SOURCE: State of California, Department of Conservation O' 600' 1200' north Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment ProgramEIR 5.1-7 ~ APPROVED GRADING FOR CT92-07 Figure 5-3 Unique Farmlands Inventory City of Carlsbad quality, growing season, and moisture supply needed to produce sustained high yields. The land must have been used for the production of irrigated • crops at some time during the two update cycles prior to the mapping date ' by the Soil Conservation Service. Farm/and of Statewide Importance Land similar to Prime Farmland but with minor shortcomings, such as greater slopes or with less ability to hold and store moisture. The land must have been used for the production of irrigated crops at some time during the two update cycles prior to the mapping date by the Soil Conservation Service. Unique Farmland Land of lesser quality soils used for the production of the state's leading agricultural crops. This land is usually irrigated, but may include non- irrigated orchards or vineyards as found in some climatic zones in California. The land must have been cropped at some time during the two update cycles prior to the mapping date by the Soil Conservation Service. Urban and Built-Up Land Land occupied by structures with a building density of at least one unit to one and one-half acres, or approximately six structures to a ten-acre parcel. Other Land Land which does not meet the criteria of any other category. According to the Important Farmlands Inventory mapping, the project site contains • approximately 300 acres of "Prime Land", 70 acres of "Unique Farmland", 25 acres of "Farmland of Statewide Importance", 69 acres of "Other Land", and 9 acres of "urban and built-up land." Tables 5-2 and 5-3 depict the conversion of agricultural land to non-agricultural uses within San Diego County from 1990 to 1992. As depicted in Table 5-2, 12,005 acres of prime, 14,468 of statewide, and 70,403 acres of unique farmland were inventoried in San Diego County in 1992. Table 5-4 depicts the agricultural land conversion in San Diego County from 1990 to 1992. Agricultural Preserves The Williamson Act (California Land Conservation Act, California Government Code, Section 51200 et. seq.) is a statewide mechanism for the preservation of agricultural and open space land. The Act provides a comprehensive method for local governments to protect farmland and open space by allowing lands in agricultural use to be placed under contract (agricultural preserve) between a local government and a land owner. The Williamson Act operates as a comprehensive program for land conservation through the interaction of four fundamental components which include agricultural preserves, restrictive use contracts, open space subvention payments, and administrative assistance. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR . 5.1-8 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • TABLE 5-2 COUN1Y SUMMARY AND CHANGE BY LAND USE CATEGORY 1990-92 ACREAGE CHANGES lAND USE TOTAL ACREAGE ACRES ACRES TOTAL NEr CATEGORY INVENTORIED WST GAINED ACREAGE ACRFAGE (-) (+) CHANGED OIANGED 1990 1992 Prime Farmland 12,120 12,005 602 487 1,089 -115 Farmland of Statewide Importance 15,546 14,468 1,369 291 1,660 -1,078 Unique Farmland 70,762 70,403 1,988 1,629 3,617 -359 Farmland of Local Importance 107,155 102,420 5,565 830 6,395 -4,735 IMPORTANT FARMLAND SUBTOTAL. 205,583 199,296 9,524 3,237 12,761 -6,287 Grazing Land 152,143 146,204 6,076 137 6,213 -5,939 AGRICULTURAL LAND SUBTOTAL 357,726 345,500 15,600 3,374 18,974 -12,226 Urban and Built-Up Land (1) 288,027 297,300 193 9,466 9;659 9,273 Other Land (1) 1,508,332 1,511,285 7,208 10,161 17,369 2,953 Water Area 13,810 13,810 0 0 0 0 TOTAL AREA INVENTORIED 2,167,895 2,167,895 23,001 23,001 46,002 0 Source: Farmland Conversion Report 1990 to 1992 (Department of Conservation). (1) 1990 acreages for Urban and Built-up Land and Other Land vary from those listed in the 1988-1990 Farmland Conversion Report due to improved computer processing methods. TABLE 5-3 LAND COMMITTED TO NONAGRICULTURAL USE LAND USE CATEGORY TOTAL ACREAGE 1992 Prime Farmland 8 Farmland of Statewide Importance 43 Unique Farmland 47 •. Farmland of Local Importance 3,089 IMPORTANT FARMLAND SUBTOTAL 3,187 Grazing Land 3,852 AGRICULTURAL LAND SUBTOTAL 7,039 Urban and Built-Up Land 0 Other Land 4,550 Water Area 0 TOTAL ACREAGE REPORTED 11,589 Source: Farmland Conversion Re~rt 19?0 to 1992 (Depaf!ment of Conservation) . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR · 5.1-9 City of Carlsbad November 1995 TABLE 5-4 • ' · . LAND USE CONVERSION FROM 1990 TO 1992 Total LAND USE Farmland Farmland Urban Converted CATEGORY of of Subtotal ' Total and To Prime Statewide Unique Local Important Grazing Agricultural Built-Up Other Water Another Farmland lmoortance Farmland Importance Farmland Land Land Land Land Area Use Prime Farmland to: 0 0 13 101 114 0 114 206 282 0 602 Farmland of Statewide Importance (2) (3) to: 200 0 46 336 582 0 582 94 693 0 1,369 Unique Farmland (3) to: 51 13 0 152 216 64 280 148 1,560 0 1,988 Farmland of Local Importance (3) to: 52 25 609 0 686 51 737 1,301 3,527 0 5,565 IMPORTANT FARMLAND SUBTOTAL 303 38 668 589 1,598 115 1,713 1,749 6,062 0 9,524 ) Grazing Land (3) to: 20 56 25 159 260 0 260 1,773 4,043 0 6,076 ,, AGRICULTURAL LAND SUBTOTAL 323 94 693 748 1,858 115 1,973 3,522 10,105 0 15,600 Urban and Built-Up Land (4) ll 0 0 132 3 135 2 137 0 56 0 193 to: :1· Other.Land to: 164 197 804 79 1,244 20 1,264 5,944 0 0 7,208 Water Area ·' to: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL ACREAGE CONVERTED to: 487 291 1,629 830 3,237 137 3,374 9,466 10,161 0 23,001 Source: Farmland Conversion Report 1990 to 1992 (California Department of Conservation). 1. 1990 acreages for Urban and Built-Up Land and Other Land vary from those listed in the 1988-1990 Farmland Conversion Report due to improved computer processing methods. 2. Conversion to Prime Farmland due to corrections made to soil unit identification. 3. Conversion to Other Land due to initiation of the San Dieguito Lagoon Open Space Preserve, an ecological preserve near Escondido, _leveling of land for development, and rural residential development. 4. Conversion to Unique Farmland primarily due to identification of nurseries surrounded on all sides by development, particularly in Carlsbad. Carlsbad Ranch S P'!_cific Plan Amendment Screencheck Draft Program EIR • 5.1-10 • City of Carlsbad June 1995 • • • See Section 9.0 Response B-1 Presently approximately 328.84 acres of the entire 471.6 acre project site are under a Williamson Act Land Conservation Contract. No other property in the City of Carlsbad is under a Williamson Act Land Conservation Contract. Existing Agricultural Uses in the Vicinity of the Project Site There are no agricultural, uses in the immediate vicinity of the project site of the same scale as the existing agricultural use on the project site. Agricultural operations of a comparable scale within the City of Carlsbad are concentrated in the eastern portion of the City, east of El Camino Real and south of Palomar Airport Road, and in the central portion of the city north of El Camino Real, north of the Rancho Carlsbad Mobile Home Park. Remaining agricultural operations in the City of Carlsbad are highly fragmented and are made up of small parcels. There are no agricultural lands contiguous to the project site with the exception of the land currently under production immediately north of the site. This land is currently leased by SDG&E on a yearly basis. THRESHOLD FOR DETERMINING SIGNIFICANCE For the purposes of this Environmental Impact Report, a significant impact would occur if implementation of the proposed project will convert prime agricultural land to non-agricultural uses or impair the agricultural productivity of prime agricultural land . Additionally, according to the Department of Conservation's Land Conservation Office (OLC), projects which propose to cancel Williamson Act contracts, use land enrolled under contract for purposes which are not compatible with agricultural use, or hold the potential to increase pressures for cancellation of contracts, are considered by OLC to have potentially significant environmental effects. Section 15206 (b(3)) of the CEQA Guidelines indicates that a proposed project shall be considered to be of statewide, regional, or area-wide significance if it will result in the cancellation of (a) Williamson Act contract(s) of 100 or more acres. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT Direct Conversion Implementation of the proposed project will result in the conversion of a portion of the project site to urban uses. The project will convert approximately 176 acres of existing agricultural uses to urban uses. The proposed project will result in the conversion of prime, unique, and farmland of statewide importance. The conversion of farmland will result in an incremental loss to the countywide agricultural land. This conversion would further preclude the potential production of coastal dependent crops on-site. Approximately 53 acres of the existing agricultural land on-site will be retained for the flower fields as part of the proposed specific plan . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Ame11dmenl Final Program EIR 5.1-11 · City of Carlsbad November 1995 See Section 9. 0 Response H-2 See Section 9.0 Response H-4 See Section 9.0 Response B-1 The Specific Plan provides for partial mitigation of the conversion of the existing agricultural land to urban uses through the preservation of these 53 acres. The land uses proposed in the specific plan will provide economic support to an area which will be permanently preserved in agriculture. The existing land use provisions of the site provide for temporary preservation of the fields (both through the Williamson Act Contracts and existing zoning designations). The specific plan will provide economic support for the infrastructure (including reclaimed water), and through product sales as a result of visitor and tourist use of the site. The Specific Plan locates the Flower Fields as the lead activity for the visitor oriented project,which is supported by the LEGOLAND Carlsbad, retail and lodging components. These support uses will increase access for direct sales from cut flowers. During the past three years, the long-term viability of agricultural operations on the site has come into question as the principal grower (Frazee) liquidated in a private insolvency proceeding, and two other growers have not paid rent on the property, or have requested a subsidization. The primary problems associated with these agricultural operations on-site is the basic inability to realize an adequate economic return from the sale of the field grown products. As stated previously, in recent years increasing water rates have forced many vegetable growers out of business on the project site. Urban encroachment has also contributed to the decline of agriculture production on the site as a result of fragmentation, and costs associated with theft, vandalism, and protection from personal injury liability. For the flower production, economic support is needed for both cut flowers and bulbs. The coastal program adopted for Carlsbad includes a statutory provision for mitigation by payment of a fee for agriculture permanently converted to non- agriculture uses. Section 30171.5 of the Coastal Act states that the amount of the mitigation fee for development" ... shall be determined in the applicable segment of the local coastal program of the City of Carlsbad, but shall not be less than five thousand dollars ($5,000), nor more than ten thousand dollars ($10,000) per acre." These fees can be applied to restoration of natural resources and wildlife habitat in Batiquitos Lagoon, development of an interpretive center at Buena Vista Lagoon, provision of access to public beaches in the City of Carlsbad, or any other project or activity benefiting natural resources in the coastal zone which is consistent with CCR Section 15370. This conversion program, which is part of the statutory framework for agricultural land conversion in the City, in combination with the permanent preservation of 53 acres of agriculture on-site, and the policies contained within the Specific Plan that maximize the agricultural utilization of the project site through conversion will reduce the project's impact related to the direct conversion of agricultural land to non-agricultural uses to a level less than significant. Williamson Act Cancellation The proposed project includes a request for an early cancellation of 182.49 of the 328.84 acres of land on the project site currently under Williamson Act contract. Approximately 40 acres of the land for which cancellation is requested is located in the southeast portion of the project site, and has not been in agricultural production for the last 10 years due to inability of the soil to support field agriculture. Figure 5-4 depicts the Williamson Act lands requested for early cancellation. This figure Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.1-12 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • \ \ ; ·'., • • • \ \ \ \ . PACIFIC OCEAN NON-WILLIAMSON ACT LANDS 118.56 Acres WILLIAMSON ACT LANDS REMAINING UNDER CONTRACT 146.35 Acres See Section 9.0 Response 8-1 WILLIAMSON ACT LANDS TO BE REMOVED 182.49 Acres SOURCE: Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan, 1995 t O' 600' 1200' north Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Program EIR 5.1-13 Figure 5-4 Williamson Act Lands City of <:;arlsbad See Response 9. 0 Response B-1 also shows the areas of the project site where existing contracts will expire in 2001 and 2006, and the portions of the site that are not under contract. Approximately • 146.35 acres of agricultural land will remain under Williamson Act contract until the contracts on these lands expire in the years 2001 and 2006. A Notice of Non- Renewal of the Williamson Contract was filed, effective January 1, 1992. Pursuant to the provisions of the Williamson· Act Land Conservation Contract, the Contract will expire as to certain portions of the Agricultural Preserve on January 1, 2001 and January 1, 2006. The remaining 118.56 acres of the project site are not currently in a Williamson Act contract. Additionally, the project is proposing an amendment to the boundaries of the remaining agricultural preserve in order to cover only the acres remaining under contract. The early cancellation of the Williamson Act contracts on 182.49 acres is a potentially significant impact. However, the early termination will permit the initiation of the Specific Plan and the ability to create an economic basis that will permit the long term preservation of the remaining 53 acres of agriculture. The earlier that the plan can be initiated the more likely it is . that the existing agricultural operation can continue. In addition to the preservation of 53 acres of agriculture, the project will be required to pay statutory fees for the conversion. These factors will reduce impacts associated with early cancellation to a level less than significant. In order for the 182.49 acres of land proposed to be withdrawn from Williamson Act Contracts, the City Council must make specific findings pursuant to Government Code Section 51282. The City Council must make one of the following findings: 1. That the cancellation is consistent with the purposes of the Williamson Act; or, 2. That cancellation is in the public interest (Government Code Section 51282(a)). In order for the cancellation to be considered consistent with the purposes of the Williamson Act, the City Council must find that: 1. The cancellation is for land on which a notice of nonrenewal has been served. 2. That cancellation is not likely to result in the removal of adjacent lands from agricultural use. 3. That cancellation is for an alternative use which is consistent with the applicable provisions of the City general plan. 4. The cancellation will not result in discontinuous patterns of urban development. 5. That there is no proximate, noncontracted land which is both available and suitable for the proposed use, or, that development of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.1-14 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • contracted land would provide more contiguous patterns of urban development (Government Code Section 51282(b)). In order for the cancellation to be considered in the public interest, the City Council must make the following findings: 1. That other public concerns substantially outweigh the objectives of the Williamson Act; and, 2. That there is no proximate, noncontracted land which is both available and suitable for the proposed use, or, that development of the contracted land would provide more contiguous patterns of urban development (Government Code Section 51282 (c)). Additionally, Government Code Section 51284 requires the City to provide public notice, and hold a public hearing on the. Williamson Act ~ancellation prior to a decision being made on the cancellation. Indirect Conversion Implementation of the proposed project· would not result in indirect impacts to agricultural lands off-site, or in the early conversion of agricultural lands off-site. The project site is an isolated "island" of agriculture surrounded by existing urban uses. There are no major areas of agriculture within the near vicinity of the project site that would be indirectly impacted by the proposed project as a result of fragmentation or reduction in overall economic viability. There are no Williamson Act preserves or lands zoned for agriculture surrounding the project site. The cancellation of the Williamson Act contracts and the conversion of existing agricultural use on the project site will not lead to the termination of agricultural use on adjacent property. A majority of the surrounding property that. is currently in agricultural production (primarily the SDG&E property immediately north of the site) is already planned for a future urban use. A portion of the SDG&E property is designated for a commercial use as indicated in Figure 3-4 of the Project Description. Additionally, a majority of this property is planned for the future Hub Park, and/or contains power line easements that could potentially result in the discontinuation of agricultural activity if additional power lines or improvements are made within these easements. The circulation roadways as depicted in the City of Carlsbad General Plan Circulation Element would also contribute to the fragmentation of agriculture on the project site even if the proposed project was not implemented. These roadways would be required to handle regional traffic even without development of the project site. Please refer to Section 5.7 Land Use Compatibility, Section 6.0 Alternatives, and Section 7.0 Analysis of Long-term Effects for additional discussion related to agriculture impacts on-site and surrounding the project site . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.1-15 City of Carlsbad November 1995 Soil Erosion . A majority of the project site is currently graded and has exposed soils associated with agricultural production. The project will result in the covering of existing exposed soils with urban development, and golf course uses. Because the amount of exposed soils on-site will decrease wind generated soils erosion is not anticipated to be significant. The project proposes a drainage control plan that will control drainage to off-site areas to below predevelopment levels. No impacts related to soil erosion are anticipated. MITIGATION MEASURES No mitigation measures are proposed as impacts will be reduced to a level less than significant through the payment of fees consistent with the coastal program, the preservation of 53 acres on-site, and through implementation of policies contained in the specific plan. IMPACT AITER MITIGATION Impacts associated with the conversion of existing agricultural land and the early cancellation of Williamson Act land will be reduced to a less than significant level through the payment of conversion fees in compliance with the City's Coastal • program, the preservation of 53 acres of agricultural land on-site and through the • implementation of agricultural land use policies contained in the specific plan. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS Conversion of the existing agricultural lands on the project site and cumulative areas to urban uses will result in a significant incremental impact to agricultural resources. Please refer to Section 7.1 of this document for a detailed discussion of cumulative impacts. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.1-16 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • 5.2 AIR QUALI1Y The air quality calculations are provided in Appendix E of this BIR. The air quality calculations are based on vehicle trip generation information from the traffic report provided in Appendix C. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Regional and Local Conditions The Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment area is located in the San Diego Air Basin. The San Diego Air Basin is a non-attainment area for federal and state air quality standards for ozone and state standard for particulate matter less than ten microns in diameter (PM10). Air pollutants transported into the basin from the adjacent South Coast Air Basin substantially contribute to the non-attainment conditions in the San Diego Air Basin. Figure 5-5 depicts the Air Basin Boundaries within Southern California. Farming, motor vehicles, and aircraft from the McClellan-Palomar airport are the major generators of air pollutant emissions around the area of the project site. The San Diego Freeway (1-5) and the major arterials, Palomar Airport Road, El Camino Real, and Cannon Road carry substantial local and through traffic emitting exhaust pollutants. Currently, the project site is used for agricultural cultivation which generates seasonal PM10 pollutants (dust) from plowing the fields and other farming activities. Ambient Air Quality The San Diego Air Basin is administered by the San Diego Air Pollution Control District (SDAPCD) which maintains an air quality monitoring station in the City of Oceanside which adjoins Carlsbad to the north. In general, Carlsbad and the coastal area enjoy good air quality with the exception of ozone and PMl0. Air quality monitoring data obtained from the Oceanside monitoring station indicates that during the 1989-1993 period,·ozone levels exceeded the federal and state standards between 2 to 21 days per year, and PM10 exceeded state standards in three out of five years. Table 5-5 depicts the California and Federal ambient air quality standards. Sensitive Receptors High concentrations of air pollutants pose health hazards for the general population, but particularly for the young, the elderly, and the sick. Typical health problems Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.2-1 City of Carlsbad November 1995 CA AZ San Diego I Air Pollution Control Air Polluti Pacific ·'-Ocean· •• L no scale north Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment ProgramEIR ' District Di . San Diego County 5.2-2 .. • MEXICO Figure,5-5 Air Basin Boundaries City of Carlsbad • • • • TABLE 5-5 CALIFORNIA AND FEDERAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS -- Pollutant Averaging Tme California Standards(1) National Standards 2) Concentration Method Primary Secondary Method Ozone 1 Hour 0.09 ppm Ultraviolet 0.12 ppm Same as Primary Ethylene (180 ui:i/m3) Photometry (235 uQ/m3) -Standards Chemiluminescence Carbon 8 Hour 9.0 ppm Nondi1 ersive 9.0 ppm Same as Nondi1ersive Monoxide (10 mg/m3) lnfrare (10 mg/m3) Primary lnfrare Spectroscopy Standards Spectroscopy 1 hour 20 ppm 35 Pf: 3 (23 ma/m3l (45m m'l Nitrogen . Annual Ave~age --· Gas Phase 0.053 PP"'!i Same as Gas Phase Dioxide Chemiluminescence (100 ug/m) Primary Chemiluminescence 1 Hour 0.25 3 Standards (470 ug/m) - , Sulfur Annual Average Ultraviolet 0.03 PP.rl'!i -Pararosaniline Dioxide Fluorescence (80 ug/m) 24 Hour 0.05 ppm o .. 14 ppm -(131 ug/m3) 3 Hour --1 Hour ~'Th ' ,. ___ .05&fm (655 ug/ 3) (13 ug/m3) ' Suspended Annual PM Size Selective PM 1~3)3 Same a's Inertial Separation Particulate Geometric 30 J~/m3 High Volume 50 u m Primary and Gravimetric Matter Mean Sampler and Standards · Analysis Gravimetric . Analysis . 24 Hour PMW1/i 3 50 u m PM,B~ 3 150 m -25 ug/m3 Sulfates 24 Hour Turbidimetric ----Barium Sulfate Lead . 30 Day Average 1.5 ug/m3 Atomic ---Atomic Absorption Absorption Calendar Quarter ....... 15 ug/m3 Same as Primary Standards Hydrogen 1 Hour 0.03 PP"3 Cadmium ------Sulfide (42 ug/m ) Hydroxide Stractan Vinta 24 Hour 0.010 PPT Tedlar Bag· ---Choride (26 ug/m) Collection, Gas CChloroethenel Chromatoaraohv Visibility 1 Observation Insufficient amount to reduce the ---Reducing prevailing visibility to less than 10 Particles miles when the relative humidity is less than 70% ppm -parts per million ug/m3 -micrograms per cubic meter mg/m3 • milligrams per cubic meter (1) CO, S(?2 (1 Hour), NO2, 03, and PM 10 Standards are not to be exceeded. All other Standards are not to be equaled or exceeded. (2 3 ) Not to rre exceeded more man once a year, with the exception of the 0 3 standard and the-annual standards. ( ) Annual arithmetic mean. • attributed to smog include respiratory ailments, eye and throat irritations, headaches, • coughing, and chest discomfort. Currently, no sensitive receptors such as schools, parks, hospitals, convalescent homes or nursing homes are located within the project site, or are immediately adjacent to the project site. Regional Air Quality Strategy Plans In conformance with mandates of the Clean Air Act and the California Clean Air Act, the SDAPCD has adopted an air quality management plan designed to bring the San Diego Air Basin in compliance with both federal and state standards. To achieve this goal, the Regional Air Quality Strategy Plan calls for a Basin-wide five percent reduction in emissions each year. San Diego County has already implemented many reduction programs, making it difficult to achieve additional annual five percent reduction in emissions. Nonetheless, for the Plan to succeed, the development within the County needs to be consistent with the Plan's objectives, policies, and programs. THRESHOLD FOR DETERMINING SIGNIFICANCE A project normally is considered to have a significant air quality impact if it will violate any ambient air quality standard, contribute substantially to an existing or • projected air quality violation, or expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS Construction Impacts The amount of construction emissions is generally proportional to the size of the project under construction. The proposed· specific plan amendment anticipates development to occur over a 15-year period, with a buildout anticipated to be completed by about the year 2010. The LEGOLAND Carlsbad project and the vocational campus for the Gemological Institute of America are expected to be among the first developments within the plan's area. In order to assess construction impacts, information developed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District was .utilized. The SCAQMD has developed screening tables for determining potentially significant air quality impacts from construction, based on type of use and overall size. The following thresholds for determining significance have been .established for quarterly emissions: Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.2-4 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • Business Park: • Office: • Resort Hotel: • Restaurant: • Hotel: • School • Shopping/Retail 559,000 square feet 559,000 square (eet 745,000 square feet 975,000 square feet 745,000 square feet 660,000 square feet 975,000 square feet Over the next 15 years, development within the specific plan amendment area is projected to be at a maximum approximately 2.93 million total square feet, including a 700-suite resort and 280-room hotel, 0.55 million square feet of a vocational school campus, 0.8 million square feet of research and development, 0.32 million square feet of retail commercial, and a 0.43 million square feet of LEGOLAND Carlsbad park. This development averaged over the 15-year period would amount to approximately 195,000 square feet annually. This amount of average annual development is below the threshold of significance on any given average year. Also, each individual component or a planning area, other than research and development, will be below the screening threshold size. The research and development area of the plan is expected to develop to the buildout potential of 800,000 square feet over the 15-year period or at about 54,000 square feet per year on the average. This average will not exceed the screening threshold size in any given year. In addition, each individual development project within the plan's area will comply with the City of Carlsbad existing construction requirements, such as watering of construction sites, minimizing erosion, and proper functioning of equipment, which will reduce potential impacts. Therefore, the average construction impacts of the proposed specific plan,as well as the impacts of developing any individual planning area one at a time are considered less than significant. Operation Impacts In the long term, development anticipated to occur in the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment area will generate additional vehicular traffic (see Section 5.5 Traffic/Circulation). This additional traffic, amounting to about 37,000 trips in the year 2000 and 50,000 trips at buildout in 2010, will in tum generate new and additional mobile emissions throughout the region. Table 5-6 shows the projections of average daily mobile air pollutant emissions generated by the development within the specific plan area in the year 2000. Table 5-7 shows the projections of average daily pollutant emissions generated by developing the entire specific plan area. As shown, although overall emissions will be less than in the year 2000. The decrease in emissions for the year 2010 from year 2000 is attributable to advances in air emission reduction technology. and cleaner burning fuels . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.2-5 City of Carlsbad November 1995 TABLE 5-6 PROJECTED AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS YEAR 2000 (Pounds Per Day) Pollutant Mobile Stationary co 7,495 13 ROG 592 1 NOx 707 75 PMlO 108 2 See worksheets in Appendix E for detailed calculations. , Emission factors: SCAQMD CEQA Handbook, 1993. Total 7,508 593 782 110 Traffic factors: Kaku Associates, August, 1994 and May, 1995. The project's long-term operation impact on air quality is considered significant. Mitigation Measure 1 has been proposed to reduce this impact to a level less than significant. TABLE 5-7 PROJECTED AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS AT BUILDOUT, YEAR 2010 (Pounds Per Day) Mobile Stationary Pollutant Emissions Emissions co 6,075 21 ROG 294 2 NOx 675 122 PMl0 120 3 See worksheets in Appendix E for detailed calculations. Emission factors: SCAQMD CEQA Handbook, 1993. Total Emissions 6,096 296 1,060 123 Traffic factors: Kaku Associates, August, 1994 and May, 1995. Sensitive Receptors The development within the specific plan amendment area will include a vocational school campus with · dormitories, two hotels, arid recreation facilities such as LEGOLAND Carlsbad and golf courses, which are used by large numbers of people. These uses are compatible with other development anticipated under the proposed specific plan amendment, including open space, retail, and research and Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.2-6 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • • development. As a result, these. sensitive receptors are not expected to be exposed to concentrated localized air pollutant emissions, or "hot spots", ·from the surrounding development. 1-5/Cannon Road Interchange Improvements A microscale CO screening analysis was performed for the proposed 1-5/Cannon Road interchange. This analysis was conducted utilizing the Caltrans Air Quality Technical Analysis Notes (AQTAN) Section 6000, June 1988. The screening procedure is a technique to determine if the proposed project is likely to impact air • quality. If the predictions from the screening procedure exceed the standards, then a more detailed analysis is required. The results of this analysis indicated that the projected CO levels were below the California Air Resources Board (CARB) Ambient Air Quality Standards for 1 hour and 8 hour averaging times. No significant impacts are indicated as a result of the I-5/Cannon Road interchange improvements portion of the project. MITIGATION MEASURES 1. Individual development projects within the specific plan ·area shall be required to implement the following mitigation measures, as determined feasible on a project-by-project basis by the City. These measures include: • Provide preferential parking spaces for carpools and vanpools and provide 7'2" minimum vertical clearance in parking facilities for van access unless surface parking is provided for vans. · • Implement on-site circulation plan in parking lots to reduce vehicle queuing (stacking-up). • Provide shade trees to reduce building heating/ cooling needs . . • Use energy efficient and automated controls for air conditioning. • Use energy-efficient low-sodium parking lot lights. • Provide adequate ventilation systems for enclosed parking facilities. • . Use light colored roof materials to reflect beat. • Synchronize traffic lights on' streets impacted by developmeiit. • Schedule truck deliveries and pickups for off-peak hours. • Require on-site truck loading zones. • Require employers to provide commuter information areas . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment · Final Program EIR 5.2-7 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • Implement compressed work week schedules where weekly work hours are compressed into fewer than five days: • -9/80 -4/40 -3/36 • Develop a trip reduction plan to achieve 1.5 A VR for businesses with less than 100 employees or multi-tenant worksites. • Construct on-site or off-site bus turnouts, passenger benches, or shelters as deemed necessary by the North County Transit District • Construct off-site pedestrian facility improvements such as overpasses and wider sidewalks. • Provide shuttles to major rail transit centers, multi-modal stations, and other local destinations for all uses within the specific plan. • Contribute to regional transit systems (e.g., right-of-way, capital improvements, etc.). • Site Development Plan applications should contain the following: -Bicycle parking facilities, such as bicycle lockers. -Showers for bicycling employees' use. IMPACT AFTER MITIGATION No significant impacts as a result of construction activity are anticipated. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 1 will lessen long-term operation air quality impacts to a level less than significant. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The development anticipated under the proposed specific plan amendment together with the development of other related projects will have a significant and unavoidable cumulative impact on the region's air quality. A detailed discussion of cumulative impacts is presented in Section 7.1 of this EIR. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR . 5.2-8 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • See Section 9. 0 Response A-3 • • 5.3 ARCHAEOWGY AND PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES Information contained in this section is sumniarized from the Cultural Resources Update for the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Area (Gallegos and Associates, September 1995) and the Paleontological Resources Report (Demere and Associates, July 11, 1995). The cultural resources abstract and paleontological report are located in Appendix G of this EIR. The archaeological technical report is on file at the City of Carlsbad Planning Department. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Archaeological Resources Previously recorded sites within the 447.4 acre project site include CRL-1 (CA-SDI- 1014), CA-SDI-6132 (SDM-W-119), CA-SDI-6830 (SDM-W-1890), CA-SDI-8797 (SDM-W-116), CA-SDI-10670 (SDM-W-117), CA-SDI-10671 (SDM-W-118), CA- SDl-10672 (SDM-W-125), and CA-SDI-12814. Previous work conducted at sites within the Carlsbad Ranch include: Gross (1987), Wade and Hector (1988), Schroth et al. (1990), Gallegos and Kyle (1992) and Smith (in progress). All sites within the Carlsbad Ranch have been tested to determine site significance/importance under City of Carlsbad and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (Gallegos and Kyle 1992). Wade and Hector (1988) tested CA-SDI-6830, CA-SDI- 6132 and CA-SDI-10671 (SDM-W-118), as part of the proposed Cannon Road and Sewer Line Alignment. Sites CA-SDI-6132/W-119 and CA-SDI-10671/W-118 Mitigation of impacts through data recovery is presently being completed for sites CA-SDI-6132/W-119 and CA-SDI-10671/W-118 by Brian Smith and Associates (in progress). The data recovery report for these two sites will need to be reviewed and approved by the City of Carlsbad prior to development. Data recovery for CA-SDI- 6132 included Cannon Road impacts and that portion of CA-SDI-6132 south of Cannon Road. Mitigation of impacts through data recovery for CA-SDI-6132 did not include that portion of CA-SDl-6132 north of Cannon Road. If impacts are proposed for that portion of Cannon Road, then a data recovery program will need to be completed. Site CA-SDI-10672 (SDM-W-125) Site CA-SDI-10672 was tested and identified as important by Gross (1987). A data recovery program to mitigate development impacts for the majority of site CA-SDI- 10672 was completed· by Schroth et al. (1990). The portion of site CA-SDl-10672 located within the Carlsbad Ranch study area was tested and identified as not significant (Gallegos and Kyle 1992) . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.3-1 City of Carlsbad November.1995 Site CA-SDI-6830 Site CA-SDl-6830 was identified as not significant/important under City of Carlsbad and CEQA criteria (Wade and Hector 1988). No further work was recommended. Sites CA-SDI-8797, CA-SDI-I 0670, and CA-SDI-12814 Sites CA-SDI-8797, CA-SDI-10670, and CA-SDl-12814 were tested and identified as important under CEQA (Gallegos and Kyle 1992). Mitigation of impacts for sites CA-SDI-12814 and CA-SDl-10670 is presently being conducted through data recovery (Smith, in progress). The finalreport for mitigation of impacts for these site will need to be reviewed and approved by the City of Carlsbad prior to development. A portion of site CA-SDI-8797 within the Carlsbad Ranch was identified as significant/important under City of Carlsbad and CEQA criteria and was recommended to be mitigated of impacts through avoidance (Gallegos and Kyle 1992). This site will need to be placed within an open space easement and capped. Capping should include placement of 1-2" of sand followed by 12 to 24 inches of sterile fill soil. Vegetation allowed within the fill soil should include grasses and other shallow rooted plants that will not penetrate the underlying prehistoric site. This area could also be used for a parking area, upon completion of capping. Placement of utility lines or other underground lines will need to be placed outside this sensitive area. Site CA-SDI-8797 has been recently impacted by numerous • campfires and capping for site protection is necessary at this time to limit additional • impacts. Additional. survey areas Sites CA-SDI-6830 (SDM-W-1890), CA-SDI-6132 (SDM-W-119), CA-SDI-8797, and CRL-1 (SDI-1014) were relocated as part of the present study for the SDG&E parcel and the additional acreage added into the specific plan on the eastern . ·boundary. Sites CA-SDI-6830 and CA-SDI-6132 have been previously discussed. Site CRL-1 (CA-SDI-1014) and the newly recorded portion of CA-SDI-8797 were tested to determine site importance as per City of Carlsbad Guidelines. The site location for CRL-1 (CA-SDI-1014) was provided by the South Coastal Information Center, San Diego State University. Vegetation was dense and field survey produced one large flake and a small amount of shell. Subsurface testing at site CRL-1 (CA-SDI-1014) included shovel test pits, north-south and east-west across the site. This work produced no subsurface artifacts, therefore this site is identified as not significant/important under City of Carlsbad Guidelines and CEQA criteria. Site CA-SDI-8797 is a large site of which only approximately 25% is within the additional 24.2 acre survey area in the eastern portion of the specific plan. The surface survey identified a light shell and artifact scatter over the slope and a denser shell scatter near the · knoll top. Testing of this portion of the site included collection of surface artifacts, excavation of 21 shovel test pits (STPs) and two lXl Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.3-2 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • M units. The units were placed on the basis of field survey and positive STP results . Subsurface excavation identified a localized intact subsurface deposit to 70 cm. Given the intact nature of the deposit and the presence of milling tools, bone tools, a shell bead, bone and shell, this portion of CA-SDI-8797 is identified as significant/ important under City of Carlsbad and CEQA criteria. Mitigation of impacts for that portion of CA-SDI-8797 within the additional survey area can be achieved through avoidance or the completion of a City of Carlsbad approved data recovery program. Paleontological Resources General Geology The general geology of the project site consists of a "layer cake" series of Eocene and Pleistocene marine and terrestrial sedimentary rock formations. From oldest to youngest this geologic series consists of middle Eocene-aged ( approximately 40 to 45 million years old) sedimentary rocks of the Santiago Formation and late Pleistocene-aged (approximately 200 to 500 thousand years old) sedimentary rocks of the Lindavista Formation. The Santiago Formation consists of greenish-gray silty mudstones, brown siltstones, and_.white fine-grained sandstones in the northeast corner of the site; white coarse- grained cross-bedded sandstones and silty sandstones in the southeast corner of the site; and brown siltstones, reddish-tan q>bble sandstones, and white coarse-grained sandstones in roadcuts along Palomar, Airport Road. This diverse array of sedimentary rock types is thought to have been deposited within an Eocene river/estuary system (Eisenberg 1985). The Lindavista Formation consists of rust-red and gray sandstones, gray medium- grained cross-bedded sandstones, and cobble conglo~erates. This rock unit was deposited on a series of wave-cut platforms (sea floors) that formed during the later Pleistocene (between approximately 200,000 and 500,000 years ago). On the overall Carlsbad Ranch project site, these platforms occur as a stair-step sequence of erosion surfaces at approximately 225, 145, 120, and 65 feet above sea level. These different erosion surfaces correspond to the Bullrush, Magdalena, Palomar, and Nestor terraces, respectively, of Eisenberg (1985). Each terrace platform was initially eroded flat by ocean waves and then covered by river-borne alluvium when the sea level dropped. The Eocene Santiago Formation occurs below elevations of 225 feet on the eastern parcel of the site. The Pleistocene Lindavista Formation occurs over the entire area of the northern parcel. However, the Santiago Formation occurs in the subsurface of the northern parcel and will likely be encountered in any deep excavations that completely remove the overlying Lindavista Formation Sandstones . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final P.rogram EIR 5.3-3 City of Carlsbad November 1995 Paleontology Museum locality records do not document any known fossil localities within the boundaries of the northern or eastern parcels. However, EIR related field work for Macario Canyon back in 1981 recorded fragments of Eocene fossil mammal bones in sandstone outcrops (Santiago Formation) just off the northwest corner of the property. Many fossil sites presently on record in San Diego County have been discovered only during residential development activities or during highway and freeway construction projects. This close correlation between fossil sites and construction us due to the fact that surface weathering quickly destroys most fossil materials. It is not until fresh unweathered exposures are created by grading that well preserved fossils can be recovered. Also, because the amount of grading proposed for some sites, the odds are increased that grading will unearth rich fossil horizons. The Santiago Formation is · considered to be potentially fossiliferous almost everywhere it occurs. The Lindavista Formation has produced fossils from only a very few areas. The Santiago Formation occurs in the eastern portion of the project site (within Planning Area 4 and Planning Area 9). This formation has a high potential for yielding significant -paleontological resources. The Lindavista formation on the remaining portion of the project site has a low potential for producing significant paleontological resources. I-5/Cannon Road Interchange Project Area A cultural resources survey was conducted by Caltrans archaeologists on February 24, 1995 for the I-5/Cannon Road interchange improvements component of the proposed project. This survey included a records search and walkover survey of the project area. The technical report is provided in Appendix G of this EIR. The study area was surveyed on foot by means of parallel sweeps with crew spaced between 3 and 5 meters apart. The results· of the field survey and records search has indicated that no cultural resources are present within or immediately adjacent to the limits of grading that would be associated with the interchange ·component of the project. A previously recorded site (CA-SDI-6831 which is described as a shell midden), is located approximately 200 feet upslope from the proposed project area. THRESHOLD FOR DETERMINING SIGNIFICANCE According to Appendix G of CEQA, a project will normally have a significant effect on the environment if it will: Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.3-4 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • U) Disrupt or adversely affect a prehistoric or historic archaeological site or a property of historic or cultural significance to a community or ethnic social group; or a paleontological site except as a part of a scientific study. For purposes of this EIR, and in accordance with Appendix K of CEQA, an "important" archaeological resource is defined as one which: 1) Is associated with an event or person of: a) Recognized significance in California or American history, or b) recognized archaeological importance in prehistory; 2) Can provide information which is both of demonstratable public interest and useful in addressing scientifically consequential and reasonable or archaeological research questions; 3) Has a special or particular quality such as oldest, best example, largest, or last surviving example of its kind; 4) Is at least 100 years old and possess substantial stratigraphic integrity; or 5) Involves important research questions that historical research has shown can be answered only with archaeological methods. Under CEQA and the City of Carlsbad Guidelines, cultural resources need to be identified as important or not important cultural resources. Sites identified as important need to be addressed as to impacts and mitigation of impacts. Site identified as not important need not be addressed as to impacts or mitigation of impacts. Because paleontological resources are largely a buried resource, there is no way to accurately predict what fossils are present within a site or their individual significance to the scientific community before they are discovered. For the purposes of this EIR, all paleontological resources are considered to be significant. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT Archaeological Resources Implementation of the proposed project will result in impacts to significant archaeological sites CA-SDI-6132/W-119 and CA-SDI-8797. Implementation of mitigation measures 1 through 4 will reduce impacts to these sites to a level less than significant. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.3-5 City of Carlsbad November 1995 See Section 9.0 . Response A-2 Paleontological Resources Impacts to significant paleontological resources occur when earth work activities, such as mass excavation projects, cut into geologic deposits (formations) within which fossils are buried. These impacts are in the form of physical destruction of fossil remains. Since fossils are the remains of prehistoric animal and plant life they are considered to be non-renewable. Therefore such impacts are significant, and under CEQA guidelines, require mitigation. As discussed above, the eastern parcel is underlain by geological deposits with a high potential for producing significant paleontological resources. This is potential impact. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 5 will reduce this impact to a level less than significant. 1-5/Cannon Road Interchange Improvements As stated in the existing setting no cultural resources are present within or adjacent to the project's area of potential effect. No impacts to archaeological resources are anticipated from the interchange improvement portion of the proposed project. However, if buried cultural materials are unearthed during construction, Caltrans policy states that work must be halted in the vicinity of the find until a qualified archaeologist can assess its significance. As with the specific plan component of the project, the interchange improvement portion of the proposed project is located in an area with a high potential for producing significant paleontological resources. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 6 will reduce impacts to a level of insignificance. MITIGATION MEASURES 1. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for the area north of Cannon Road, a data recovery program shall be completed for CA-SDI-6132 for the portion impacted north of Cannon Road. The data recovery program shall be completed in compliance with the City of Carlsbad's "Cultural Resource Guidelines". 2. A portion of site CA-SDI-8797 within the Carlsbad Ranch was identified as significant/important under City of Carlsbad and CEQA criteria and was recommended to be mitigated of impacts through avoidance (Gallegos and Kyle 1992). This site shall be placed within an open space easement and capped. Capping shall include placement of 1-2" of sand followed by 12 to 24 inches of sterile fill soil. Vegetation allowed within the fill soil should include grasses and other shallow rooted plants that will not penetrate the underlying prehistoric site. This area could also be used for a parking area, upon completion of capping. Placement of utility lines or other underground lines shall be placed outside this sensitive area. 3. Mitigation of impacts for that portion of CA-SDI-8797 within the additional survey area shall be achieved through avoidance or the completion of a City Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.3-6 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • • 4. 5. of Carlsbad approved data recovery program. If a data recovery program is conducted for this site, the program shall be completed in compliance with the City of Carlsbad's "Cultural Resource Guidelines". Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall provide written evidence that a certified archaeologist has been retained, shall be present at the pregrading conference, shall establish procedures for archaeological resource surveillance, and shall establish, in cooperation with the project proponent, procedures for temporarily halting or redirecting work to permit the sampling, identification, and evaluation of artifacts as appropriate. If additional or unexpected archaeological features are discovered, the archaeologist shall report such findings to the applicant and to the City. If the archaeological resources are found to be significant, the archaeological observer shall determine appropriate actions, in cooperation with the applicant for exploration and/ or salvage. These actions, as well as final mitigation and disposition of the resources, shall be subject to the review of the City. • • Prior to issuance of a mass-grading permit the developer shall present a letter to the City of Carlsbad indicating that a qualified paleontologist has been retained to carry out an appropriate mitigation program. (A qualified paleontologist is defined as an individual with a MS or Ph.D. in paleontology or geology who is familiar with paleontological procedures and techniques.) A qualified paleontologist shall be present at the pre-construction meeting to consult with the grading and excavation contractors. • A paleontological monitor shall be on-site at all times during the original cutting of previously undisturbed sediments of the Santiago Formation to inspect cuts for contained fossils. Periodic inspections of cuts involving the Lindavista Formation is also recommended. In the event that fossils are discovered in the Lindavista Formation it may be necessary to increase the per/ day in field monitoring time. Conversely, if fossils are not being found then the monitoring should be reduced. (A paleontological monitor is defined as an individual who has experience in the collection and salvage of fossil materials. The paleontological monitor shall work under the direction of a qualified paleontologist.) • When fossils are discovered, the paleontologist ( or paleontological monitor) shall recover them. In most cases this fossil salvage can be completed in a short period of time. However, some fossil specimens (such as a complete large mammal skeleton) may require an extended salvage period. In these instances the paleontologist ( or paleontological monitor) shall be allowed to temporarily direct, divert, or halt grading to allow recovery of fossil remains in a timely manner. Because of the potential for the recovering of small fossil remains, Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR . 5.3-7 City of Carlsbad November 1995 such as -isolated mammal teeth, it may be necessary in certain instances, to set up a screen-washing operation on the site. • 6. • Fossil remains collected during the monitoring and salvage portion of the mitigation program shall be cleaned, repaired, sorted, and cataloged. • Prepared fossils, along with copies of all pertinent field notes, photos, and maps, shall be deposited (as a donation) in a scientific institution with permanent paleontological collections such as the San Diego Natural History Museum. Donation of the fossils shall be accompanied by financial support for initial specimen storage. • A final summary report shall be completed that outlines the results of the mitigation program. This report shall include discussions of the methods used, stratigraphic sections(s) exposed, fossils collected, and significance of recovered fossils. A certified paleontologist shall monitor all grading activity associated with the improvements to the 1-5/Cannon Road interchange. If buried cultural materials are unearthed during construction, work shall be halted in the vicinity of the find until a qualified paleontologist can assess its significance. If the testing demonstrates that a resource is significant, then a data recovery program will be necessary. Compliance with this measure shall be verified by Caltrans. IMPACTS AFTER MITIGATION No impacts to archaeological resources are anticipated as a result of construction of the proposed 1-5/Cannon Road interchange improvements. Implementation of Mitigation Measures 1 through 4 will reduce significant impacts to archaeological resources within the Carlsbad Ranch project site to a level less than significant. Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5 and 6 will reduce any potential impact to paleontological resources to a level of insignificance. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The proposed project in conjunction with cumulative projects will not result in a significant impact to archaeological and paleontological resources. Please ref er to Section 7.1 for a detailed discussion of cumulative impacts. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.3-8 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • 5.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Information contained in this section is summarized from the Biotechnical Report for Carlsbad Ranch (Sweetwater Environmental Biologists, Inc. (SEB) July 13, 1995). The biological assessment is located in Appendix F of this EIR. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Vegetation Communities The project site contains approximately 9 acres of developed land, approximately 452 acres of agriculturaljruderal vegetation, approximately 7.5 acres of Diegan coastal sage scrub, approximately 2 acres of southern mixed chaparral, approximately 1.1 acres of disturbed riparian scrub, and approximately 0.03 acre of disturbed freshwater marsh. Figure 5-6 depicts the vegetation and sensitive resources on-site. The following text describes the native vegetation communities on the project site. A list of all plant species observed in the portions of the site surveyed by SEB is provided in Appendix F of this EIR. Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub Diegan coastal sage scrub is dominated by subshrubs whose leaves abscise during summer drought. This adaptation allows these species to better withstand the prolonged dry period in the summer and fall. Approximately 6.4 acres of Diegan coastal sage scrub occur in the northeastern portion of the project site, and approximately 1.1 acres occur along the southern boundary of the site adjacent to Palomar Airport Road. Typical shrubs in this community are California sagebrush (Artemisia califomica), California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), and common encelia (Encelia califomica). All of the Diegan coastal sage scrub on the project site is high quality, although the quality of that along Palomar Airport Road is lessened due to the proximity to that road, its location on a manufactured slope and the lower species diversity . . Southern Mixed Chaparral Southern mixed chaparral is composed of broad-leaved, sclerophyllous shrubs that grow to about 6 to 10 feet tall and form dense, often nearly impenetrable stands. The plants of this community are typically deep rooted. This habitat occurs on dry, rocky, often steep north-facing slopes with little soil. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.4-1 City of Carlsbad November 1995 AGUA HEDIONDA LAGOON ---:::: 'Y._ AG/RUD/DIS _ -. -=::::::::::: -'----- PACIFIC OCEAN HOLA -----· ~\\P'0 a. PALOMARAIRPORTR AD AG/RUD/DIS Agricultural/ Ruderal/Disturbed Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub RS-D Riparian Scrub-Disturbed SMC Southern Mixed Chaparral DCSS DCSS-D DEV FWM-D Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub-Disturbed HOLA California Horned Lark (Eremophila alpestris actia) Developed Freshwater Marsh -Disturbed SOURCE: Sweetwater Environmental Biologists, Inc. I I I t (C.15ci') O' 600' 1200· north Carlsqad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment ProgramEIR 5.4-2 Figure 5-6 Vegetation and Sensitive Resources City of Carlsbad • • • • Approximately 2 acres of southern mixed chaparral occur in the northeastern portion of the project site. Typical shrubs in this community are chamise (Adenostoma. fasciculatum), black sage (Salvia mellifera), and lemonadeberry (Rhus integrifolia). All of the southern mixed chaparral on the project site is high quality. Disturbed Riparian Scrub Riparian scrub is dominated by woody vegetation less than 20 feet in height. Typical species in this community are considered true shrubs, young trees, and trees or shrubs that are small due to environmental conditions. Approximately 1.0 acres of disturbed riparian scrub occur in the northeastern portion of the project site on the side of a canyon, and the typical plant species in this location are willows (Salix sp.), giant reed (Arundo donax), and castor bean (Ricinus communis). This community likely occurs on the canyon side from agricultural runoff and/or a leaking pipe that outlines the canyon rim. Several farm worker shacks exist on this canyon side and activities associated with them have contributed to the community's disturbed condition. Disturbed riparian scrub also occurs in the southern portion of the site in two tiny patches ( totaling approximately 0.1 acre), and typical species include wipows and pampas grass (Cortaderia sp.). Disturbed Freshwater Marsh Freshwater marsh is dominated by perennial, emergent monocots which reach a height of 12 to 15 feet. This vegetation type occurs along the coast and in coastal valleys near river mouths and around the margins of lakes and springs. ,These areas are permanently flooded by fresh water yet lack a significant current (Holland 1986). Disturbed freshwater marsh occurs in the southern portion of the site (0.03 acre). Typical plant species for the freshwater marsh in the southern portion of the project site include cattails (Typha sp.) and dock (Rumex sp.). Animals Sixteen avian species and one mammalian species were observed during the site visit. No amphibian or reptilian species were observed. The small number of animals observed or detected is probably because approximately 96 percent of the site is agricultural, and almost all of the fields were plowed and unplanted at the time of the site visit. Some typical species in the agricultural field and ruderal vegetation areas were California horned lark (Eremophila alpestris actia), cliff swallow (Hirundo pyn-lzonota), European starling (Sturnus vulgaris), and California ground squirrel (Spermophilus beeclzeyi). Typical species in the coastal sage scrub and chaparral communities were rufous-sided towhee (Pipilo erythrophthalmus), northern mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos), and California towhee (Pipilo crissalis). Finally, typical species in the disturbed riparian scrub and freshwater marsh communities were song sparrow (Melospiza melodia) and common yellowthroat Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.4-3 City of Carlsbad November 1995 ( Geothlypis trichas ). · A list of all animal species obseived in the portions of the site suiveyed is provided in Appendix F of this EIR. .• Sensitive Biological Resources Vegetation Communities Sensitive vegetation communities are those which are considered rare within the region, are considered sensitive by the City of Carlsbad (1993), the County of San Diego (1991), the• California Department of Fish and Game (Holland 1986), or support sensitive plants or animals. The sensitive vegetation communities on Carlsbad Ranch are Diegan coastal sage scrub, southern mixed chaparral, riparian scrub, and freshwater marsh. All of these communities are considered threshold habitats by the City of Carlsbad (1994) which means that mitigation will be required for any impacts to them. Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub Coastal sage scrub is considered sensitive by the City of Carlsbad (1993), the County of San Diego (1991), and the California Department of Fish and Game (Holland 1986) _because it supports a number of state and federally listed endangered, threatened, and rare vascular plants as well as several avian and reptilian species that are federally listed or are candidate species for federal listing. Loss estimates for coastal sage scrub habitat in California range from 36 to 85 percent, but since these estimates were made in 1979 to 1981, additional losses have since accrued ., (O'Leary 1990). According to Oberbauer (1991), the historical reduction of coastal sage scrub in San Diego County is approximately 72 percent. The primary cause for the loss of this habitat has been grazing and, ·more recently, urbanization. Southern Mixed Chaparral Southern mixed chaparral is considered sensitive by the City of Carlsbad (1993) and the California Department of Fish and Game (Ogden Environmental and Energy Services Company, et al. 1993) because it is a declining habitat, and supports sensitive species. Riparian Scrub Riparian communities are considered sensitive and are protected by local, state, and federal agencies (City of Carlsbad 1993; County of San Diego 1991; California Department of Fish and Game and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers [Ogden Environmental and Energy Services Company, et al. 1993]). Riparian communities are situated along stream courses and adjacent stream banks. Riparian habitat alteration in southern California has been accomplished by filling, draining, clearing vegetation, diverting and impounding water, increasing or decreasing nutrient levels, grazing, channelizing, increasing sediment loads, lowering water tables, gravel mining, proliferation of exotic species, human recreational activities, and urban development (Bowler 1990). Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR · 5.4-4 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • Freshwater Marsh Freshwater marsh is considered sensitive and is protected by local, state, and federal agencies (City of Carlsbad 1993; County of San Diego 1991; California Department of Fish and Game and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers [Ogden Environmental and Energy Services Company, et al. 1993]). This wetland habitat is naturally limited and remaining acreage provides important habitat for migrant birds as well as performs many other functions such as floodwater conveyance and water quality control. Oberbauer (1991) reports a loss of 91 percent of freshwater marsh in San Diego County since the pre-European era. Sensitive Plant Species No sensitive or listed plant species were observed during the site visit, but focused surveys were not conducted for them. At least 11 sensitive or listed plant species are known from the project area and could potentially occur on site. Table 1 in Appendix F of this EIR depicts the sensitive or listed plant species potentially occurring on Carlsbad Ranch. One of these species, white coast ceanothus (Ceanothus verrucosus), was observed by RECON (1988) adjacent to the project site in chaparral to the north. Sensitive Animal Species One sensitive avian species was observed throughout the agricultural fields on Carlsbad Ranch during the SEB site visit in May 1995. This species is the California horned lark. The California horned lark is a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Category 2 candidate for listing as threatened or endangered and is a California Department of Fish and Game species of special concern. The species' range includes coastal slopes and lowlands from Sonoma County, California to northern Baja California, Mexico. Horned larks occur on sandy beaches, large fields, grasslands, and open areas, and build their nests on the ground .. Populations of horned larks have declined due to loss of suitable habitat caused by development. Twelve other sensitive or listed animal species that are known from the project vicinity have potential to occur on the project site. None of these were observed by P&D Technologies (1992) or by SEB (this study) on the project •site; however; two species were observed in the vicinity by RECON (1988) and/or SEB. Table 2 in Appendix F of this EIR depicts the sensitive or listed animal species potentially occurring on Carlsbad Ranch. Multiple Habitat Conservation Program and Draft Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan According to the Multiple Habitat Conservation Program (MHCP), Habitat Value Index Map (San Diego Association of Governments 1993), approximately one fifth of the eastern portion of the site contains habitat of very high and high value even though most of it is actually agricultural, ruderal, or disturbed land. This seeming Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.4-5 City of Carlsbad November 1995 contradiction is due to the very small scale mapping that was done for the MHCP . In addition, the northeastern corner of the project site is part of an MHCP biological core and linkage area (San Diego Association of Governments 1994). This northeastern corner of the project site is proposed to be retained as natural open space. According to the Draft Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan (HMP), part of the eastern portion of the site is within Preserve Planning Area 3. Figure 5-7 depicts the project site in relation to the preserve planning areas. The site is not considered a core area or connector for the preserve network (City of Carlsbad 1993). The remainder of the site is not within any preserve planning area. All of the native vegetation along the site's northeastern border is proposed to be retained as natural open space. The remainder of the eastern border contains agricultural, ruderal, and disturbed land that is proposed for development. Development of this land will not preclude connectivity between areas within Preserve Planning Area 3 because it occurs only on the edge of the preserve planning area. Natural Communities Conservation Planning The Natural Communities Conservation Plan (NCCP) provides guidelines for defining the long-term conservation of coastal sage scrub habitat and associated species (California Department of Fish and Game 1993). The Carlsbad Ranch project will impact approximately 1.1 acres of coastal sage scrub habitat. According • to the evaluation logic flow chart in the Southern California Coastal Sage Scrub • NCCP Process Guidelines (California Department of Fish and Game and California Resources Agency 1993), this coastal sage scrub ranks as having lower potential value for long-term conservation, and development can occur with adequate mitigation. 1-5/Cannon Road Interchange Project Area A biological resources survey was conducted by Caltrans biologists on April 3, 1995 for the I-5/Cannon Road interchange improvements component of the proposed project. The technical report is provided in Appendix F of this EIR. The results of the biological survey has indicated that the vegetation in the limits of the interchange improvements component of the project consists of typical freeway landscaping dominated by eucalyptus, acacia, pepper and pine trees. The ground cover in this area consists of ice plant, fountain grass, and other non-native grasses. Adjacent land use is commercial, vacant commercial lots, SDG&E maintenance yard, and agricultural uses. No sensitive animal species are anticipated to occupy these adjacent areas as this land is sparsely covered with non-native vegetation and are not connected to other areas of open space. Carlsbad Ra11ch Specific Pla11 Amendment Final Program EIR 5.4-6 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • Oceanside • Pacific O c e a n • Pacific O c e a n PROJECT BOUNDARY CITY OF CARLSBAD BOUNDARY Encin ta S a n D C o u e g o y V s t a S a n PRESERVE PLANNING AREAS Encin tas • SOURCE: Sweetwater Environmental Biologists, Inc. O' 7000' north Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment ProgramEIR 5.4-7 Figure 5-7 Proiect Site in Relation to Preserve Planning Areas City of Carlsbad THRESHOLD FOR DETERMINING SIGNIFICANCE According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a project will normally have a significant effect on the environment if it will: ( c) Substantially effect a rare or endangered species of animal or plant or the habitat of the species; ( d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any resident or migratory fish or wildlife species; and (t) Substantially diminish habitat for fish, wildlife or plants. For purposes of this EIR, a significant impact would occur if implementation of the proposed project would result in an unacceptable loss of rare or endangered plants or animals according to current resource agency regulations, or cause substantial interference with resident or migratory fish or wildlife species. Impacts to the flora and fauna observed or expected to occur on the site were determined to be significant or less than significant based upon sensitivity of the resource and the extent of the impact. Resources are generally considered significant if they are limited in distribution, and their ecological role is critical within regional or local context. DIRECT IMPACTS Vegetation Communities As proposed, the project will directly impact approximately 408.4 acres of the site. Figure 5-8 depicts the impacts to biological resources. The only areas to remain in their current condition are: (1) all of the native vegetation (Diegan coastal sage scrub [approximately 6.4 acres], southern mixed chaparral [approximately 2.0 acres], and disturbed riparian scrub [approximately 1.0 acre]) in the northeastern corner of the site and (2) approximately 53.4 acres of agriculture in the southwestern portion of the site and· (3) disturbed riparian scrub (approximately 0.1 acre), disturbed freshwater marsh ( approximately 0.03 acre), ruderal vegetation ( approximately 0.2 acre), and developed area ( approximately 0.03 acre) in the proposed open space deed restriction. Table 5-8 provides a statistical breakdown of impacts by vegetation community (and developed area). Approximately 1.1 acres of Diegan coastal sage scrub will be impacted and occurs on a manufactured slope adjacent to Palomar Airport Road. This community has little biological function and value. Generally, impacts to this community are considered significant because of its regional sensitivity, but the impacts can be mitigated to below a level of significance with the implementation of Mitigation Measures 1 and 2. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.4-8 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • ·• • • PACIFIC OCEAN AGUA HEDIONDA LAGOON -~\ \P '0 a. PALOMAR AIRPORT R AD AG/RUD/DIS Agricultural/ Ruderal/Disturbed Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub RS-D Riparian Scrub-Disturbed SMC Southern Mixed Chaparral DCSS DCSS-D DEV FWM-D Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub-Disturbed HOLA California Horned Lark (Eremophila alpestris adia) Developed · Freshwater Marsh -Disturbed SOURCE: Sweetwater Environmental Biologists, Inc . ♦ O' 600' 1200' north Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment ProgramEIR 5.4-9 ~ Impacted Are~ Figure 5-8 Impacts to Biological Resources City of Carlsbad TABLE 5-8 IMPACTS TO VEGETATION COMMUNITIES (AND .DEVELOPED AREA) ON CARLSBAD RANCH Vegetation Community Total Acreage Acreage Impacted (or develoned area) (annroximate) (annroximate) Agriculture /R uderal /Disturbed 452.0 398.40 Developed 9.0 8.97 Diegan coastal sage scrub 7.5 1.1 Freshwater marsh-disturbed 0.03 None Rioarian scrub-disturbed 1.1 None Southern mixed chaoarral 2.0 None Soun:e: Sweetwater Environmental Biologists, Inc. Agriculture is considered a habitat according to the City of Carlsbad (1994) and one that may be impacted subject to mitigation fees. Impacts to agriculture are discussed in detail in Section 5.1 of this EIR. Impacts to 8.97 acres of an already developed area are not considered biologically significant. Plant Species No sensitive or listed plant species were observed on the project site. No impact to plant species is anticipated. · Animal Species Direct impacts to the California horned larks on site will occur with the removal of approximately 88 percent of the agricultural fields. This impact is not considered significant due to the low sensitivity of this species and that ample agricultural land still exists in the area. If any of the potentially occurring sensitive or listed animal species are found, direct impacts are not likely to be considered significant because of the low sensitivity of most of the species and they would probably be found within the proposed open space. The case is the same for the coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila califomica califomica) which is federally listed as threatened. For those species that may'also forage over the agricultural fields (the northern harrier [Grus cyaneus] and white-tailed kite [Elanus leucurus]), impacts would not be considered significant because of the lower sensitivity of these species and because ample agricultural land still exists in the vicinity. No impact to animal species is anticipated. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.4-10 City of Carlsbad November 1995 •· •• • • • Sec Section 9.0 Response G-1 INDIRECT IMPACTS Indirect impacts are generally caused by noise, night lights, pollutants, erosion, and subsequent sedimentation. These indirect impacts may occur during project construction, or with activities associated with the developed project and could affect the proposed natural open space, the proposed open space deed restriction, Agua Hedionda Lagoon, preserve Planning Area 3, and any listed or sensitive species therein. Gnatcatcher presence or absence still needs to be determined in this area. Lighting also may need to be controlled to avoid potential impacts to species using Agua Hedionda Lagoon. Nighttime lighting has the potential to affect wildlife in the lagoon by increasing opportunities for night-time predation and by potentially altering physiological regimes. Although no conclu·sive evidence is available, it is thought that light pollution may affect wildlife physiologically. · Breeding and migratory functions are often regulated by light levels perceived in the environment, and nighttime lighting could disrupt the "biological clocks" of species adjacent to lighted development. These impacts could be considered significant depending on the degree of impact but can be mitigated to below a level less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measures 3 through 6. 1-5/Cannon Road Interchange Project Area No sensitive biological resources have been identified within the grading limits of the 1-5/Cannon Road interchange component of the proposed project. No impacts to biological resources are anticipated . An unlined drainage ditch is located to the east of the northbound 1-5 offramp. This drainage ditch will not be altered as a result of implementation of the proposed interchange improvements. Additionally, the proposed merge lanes on 1-5 north of Cannon Road will terminate south of the Agua Hedionda Lagoon, The proposed limits of grading for this improvement will not impact sensitive resources associated with the lagoon. MITIGATION MEASURES Direct Impacts 1. 2. Diegan coastal sage scrub impacts should be mitigated. by creation or restoration at ratios of 2:1 and 1:1, respectively, and within Preserve Planning Area 3 or the purchase or preservation at a 1:1 ratio within the HCP area of Carlsbad. To avoid direct impacts to the area proposed as natural open space and to the proposed open space deed restriction, the boundaries of these areas should be surveyed and fenced. The erection of fencing and its proper location should be verified by a biologist or planning department representative. After project completion, permanent fencing may need to be established to prevent human intrusion into the areas. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.4-11 City of Carlsbad November 1995 Indirect Impacts 3. It is anticipated that the gnatcatcher pair located immediately off-site to the east of the project will be taken during construction of the municipal golf course being proposed by the City of Carlsbad. As a result, no mitigation for construction noise impacts that may occur to this pair are proposed. If through final design of the City proposed golf course it is determined that this gnatcatcher pair is not taken, the following mitigation measure for noise impacts shall be implemented: During the gnatcatcher breeding season (February 15 through August 15), noise levels during grading shall not exceed 65 decibels, averaged over a one-hour period on an A-weighted decibel ( dBA), measured at the edge of Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat that is occupied by the coastal California gnatcatcher. Grading could be initiated in areas adjacent to occupied gnatcatcher habitat prior to August 15 if the pair has successfully fledged young and the fledglings are at least three weeks out of the nest. Grading will be allowed adjacent to habitat occupied by unpaired individual birds. 4. Lighting should be selectively placed, shielded, and directed away from the areas listed above, in particular to avoid potential impacts to the coastal California gnatcatcher(s) east of the future LEGOLAND Carlsbad arid any that may occur in the proposed open space. 5. During project construction and operation, measures should be implemented to control erosion, sedimentation, and pollution (fertilizers and pesticides from the proposed golf courses) that could impact the proposed natural open space or that could impact Agua Hedionda Lagoon. These measures could include berms, interceptor ditches, sandbags, filtered inlets, debris basins, and silt traps. 6. Landscaping adjacent to the open space shall include non-invasive plant species. IMPACT AFTER MITIGATION Implementation of Mitigation Measures 1 through 6 will reduce impacts to biological resources to a level less than significant. No impacts to biological resources will result from implementation of the I-5/ Cannon Road interchange improvements. · Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Ame11dme11t Final Program EIR 5.4-12 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The proposed project in conjunction with cumulative projects will not result in a significant contribution to cumulative biological impacts. Please refer to Section 7.1 of this document for a detailed discussion of cumulative impacts . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR . 5.4-13 City of Carlsbad November 1995 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The proposed project in conjunction with cumulative projects will not result in a significant contribution to cumulative biological impacts. Please refer to Section 7.1 of this document for a detailed discussion of cumulative impacts. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.4-13 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • • 5.5 TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION This section summarizes the findings of a traffic study conducted for the project in August, 1994, and a congestion management plan (CMP) prepared for the project in May 1995, by Kaku Associates, Inc. The studies evaluated the potential traffic impacts of projects included within the City of Carlsbad Local Facilities Manage- ment (L.F.M.) Zone 13, and the resulting necessary improvements. The Growth Management Plan facilities Zone 13 includes the land parcels of the Carlsbad Ranch and some additional parcels not affiliated with the ranch. The intent of the traffic analyses was to identify the scope and timing of any transportation infrastructure improvements that would be required to accommodate the traffic generated by Zone 13 development. The traffic analyses were conducted for the Year 2000 and "Buildout" (2010) conditions. If intersections or roadway segments were projected to not meet City of Carlsbad performance standards in 2000 or Buildout conditions, interim year development levels were tested in order to identify the year and the. amount of mitigation needed to bring the roadway or intersection up to City standards. The scope of the traffic study was developed in conjunction with the City. of Carlsbad Engineering Department. The base assumptions, technical methodologies, and geographic coverage of the study were all identified as part of the study ap- proach . The study analyzes potential traffic impacts along the existing and future street systems. As directed by the City of Carlsbad, the following traffic scenarios are analyzed: • Existing Conditions -The existing conditions analysis includes an assessment of land use, streets and highways, traffic volumes, and operating conditions. 1 • Year 2000 Conditions with Zone 13 (Cannon Road extended to Pointe Resort Drive) -The objective of this phase of the analysis is to project future traffic conditions which could be expected to result from regional growth and traffic expected to be generated by the L.F.M. Zone 13 under Year 2000 conditions with Cannon Road only extending to Pointe Resort Drive. This was conducted for the worst case scenario, the busiest day of the busiest month (Friday, August) peak hours and the weekend peak hour. • Year 2000 Conditions with Zone 13 (Cannon Road extended to El Camino Real) -This analysis is the same as the Year 2000 analysis, with the exception that Cannon Road would be extended to El Camino Real. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.5-1 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • Buildout Conditions with Zone 13 -The objective of this phase of the analysis is to project future traffic conditions which could be expected to result from regional growth and traffic expected to be generated by the L.F.M. Zone 13 under buildout conditions. Under these conditions, Cannon Road would extend to the City of Oceanside. This was conducted for the worst_ case scenario, the busiest weekday of the busiest month (Friday, August) peak hours. The following locations, which are illustrated in Figure 5-9, were identified for analysis in each of these scenarios: · Intersections '· J. Avenida Encinas & Cannon Road 2. Avenida Encinas & Palomar Airport Road 3. 1-5 Southbound Ramps & Cannon Road 4. 1-5 Northbound Ramps & Cannon Road 5. 1-5 Southbound Ramps & Palomar Airport Road 6. 1-5 Northbound Ramps & Palomar Airport Road 7. Paseo del Norte & Cannon Road 8. Paseo del Norte & Palomar Airport Road 9. Car Country Drive & Cannon Road 10. LEGO Drive & Cannon Road (future intersection) 11. Armada Drive/Price Club Driveway & Palomar Airport Road 12. Hidden Valley Road & Palomar Airport Road (future intersection) 13. College Boulevard & Palomar Airport Road 14. El Camino Real & Cannon Road (future intersection) 15. Camino Vida Roble & Palomar Airport Road l6. El Camino Real & Palomar Airport Road Street Segments A. Cannon Road between 1-5 and Paseo del Norte B. Cannon Road between Paseo del Norte and LEGO Drive (future location) C. Cannon Road west of El Camino Real (future location) D. Palomar Airport Road between 1-5 and Paseo del Norte E. ·Palomar Airport Road between Paseo del Norte and Armada Drive F. Palomar Airport Road between College Boulevard and Camino Vida Roble G. Palomar Airport Road between Camino Vida Roble and El Camino Real ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING A comprehensive data collection was undertaken to develop a detailed description of the existing conditions in and near Zone 13. The assessment of conditions includes an inventory of the streets and highways that serve the site, traffic volumes Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.5-2 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • AGUA HEDIONDA tAGOON / / / / / I / / I I I • ,,.,,.,,. ·~ c, ,,. 1 4 .. : :, ,,'&' / I .................... , / ...................... , / ·:::::s:: ......... :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::\ ,,/ _, [EEJJ LFMP ZONE 13 0 ZONE 13 BOUNDARY ♦ (C.'x\) north not to scale .·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.\ -~-................ · l(l · ............ ·ot1,RD ---- · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·~ ·1· ·-· ·oT · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · J N'S%\ / -~ • : : : : : : : ::: :-: : : :: : : • • 1· ·::: :: : : : : : : : : :: . ··-·-·~--.. --- 1//1 FUTURE ROADWAY r-57 ANALYZED STREET SEGMENT LA..J . ~ ANALYZED INTERSECTION SOURCE: Kaku Associates, 1995 Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment ProgramEIR C, Figure 5-9 Proiect Study Area City of Carlsbad on these facilities, and the operating conditions on the key roadways and at key • intersections. Streets and Highways Primary regional access to the study area is provided by Interstate Highway 5 (1-5) which runs in a north-south direction, west of the LFM Zone 13. The main access to and from the zone would be via Cannon Road and Palomar Airport Road. The principal streets serving the study area are: • Cannon Road -Within the study area, Cannon Road currently provides four travel lanes west of the 1-5 to its eastern terminus at Car Country Drive. For the Year 2000 scenarios, Cannon Road was assumed to be extended to Pointe Resort Drive in one scenario and to El Camino Real in the other. For the Buildout scenario, Cannon Road was assumed to be extended east of El Camino Real, providing access to the City of Oceanside. • Palomar Airport Road -West of Avenida Encinas, Palomar Airport Road provides two travel lanes. East of Avenida Encinas to Yarrow Drive, six travel lanes are provided along Palomar Airport Road. Within the study area, traffic signals are present at the Northbound and Southbound Ramps with the 1-5, Paseo del Norte, Armada_ Drive/Price Club Driveway, College Boulevard, and easterly at key intersections including the study intersections of Palomar Airport • Road with Camino Vida Roble and with El Camino Real. • Avenida Encinas -Avenida Encinas is a north-south street located west of 1-5 and the project site. Within the study area, Avenida Encinas provides four travel lanes from its northern terminus at Cannon Road to Palomar Airport Road. • Paseo del Norte -Within the study area, Paseo del Norte is a north- south street which_ provides four travel lanes. Paseo del Norte provides access to Car Country south of Cannon Road and serves commercial uses and a residential neighborhood south of Palomar Airport Road. Within the study area, there is one signalized intersection along Paseo del Norte. This occurs at Palomar Airport Road. • College Boulevard -Within the study area, College Boulevard provides four north-south travel lanes. The intersection with Palomar Airport Road is signalized. Existing Peak Hour Levels of Service Existing weekday morning and evening peak hour Volume to Capacity (V /C) ratio and corresponding level of service (LOS) at each of the existing analyzed Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.5-4 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • TABLE 5-9 INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE ANALYSIS EXISTING CONDITIONS SIGNALIZED AM PEAK HR INTERSECTION V/C LOS 2. Avenida Encinas & Palomar Airport Rd. 0.45 A 5. 1-5 southbound ramps & Palomar Airport Rd. 0.35 A .. 6. 1-5 northbound ramps & Palomar Airport Rd. . ·-0.37 A 8. Paseo del Norte & Palomar Airport Rd. 9. Car Coun\ry Dr. & Cannon Rd. 10. Lego Or. & Cannon Rd. .. 11. Armada Dr./Price Club Drwy. & Palomar Airport Rd. 12. Hidden Valley Rd. & Palomar Airport Rd. 13. College Bl. & Palomar Airport Rd. 14. El Camino Real & Cannon Rd. 15. Camino Vida Roble & Palomar Airport Rd. 16. El Camino Real & Palomar Airport Rd. STOP-CONTROLLED MOVE- INTERSECTION MENT 1. Avenida Encinas & Cannon Rd. NB LT NB RT WB LT 3. 1-5 southbound ramps & Cannon Rd. SB LT SB RT WB LT 4. 1-5 northbound ramps & Cannon.Rd: NB LT NB RT EB LT 7. Paseo del Norte & Cannon Rd. NB LT NB RT : WB LT Notes: [a] Ninety degree two legged intersection; LOS not applicable [b] Future intersection Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.5-5 0.59 A NA [a] NA NA lb] NA 0.36 A NA [bl NA 0.37 A NA lb] NA 0.39 A 0.61 B AM PEAK HR RESERVE CAPACITY LOS · +229 C +954 A +516 A +51 E +527 A +796 A +64 E' +662 A +823 A +424 A +794 A +507 A PM PEAK HR V/C LOS 0.59 A '0.32 A 0.70 8 0.55 A NA [a] NA NA [bl NA 0.58 A NA [bl NA 0.60 I A NA .[bl NA ' 0.62 B 0.72 C PM PEAK HR RESERVE CAPACITY +394 +766 +904 +187 +916 +717 +69 +889 +348 +134 +972, +857 LOS 8 -A A D A 'A E A 8 D A A City of Carlsbad November 1995 intersections are summarized in Table 5-9. (LOS is a qualitative description of • traffic conditions, with LOS A denoting "the best" and LOS F "the worst" conditions at an intersection.) As shown, all eight signalized intersections are currently operating at acceptable levels of service, (i.e., LOS Dor better) during the morning and afternoon peak hours. Two of the four stop controlled intersections operate at acceptable levels of service, while the remaining two have a constrained movement operating at LOS E during one or both peak hours. At the intersection of the 1-5 Southbound Ramps and Cannon Road the southbound left-tum movements operate at LOS E during the morning peak hour, while all other movements at this location are operating at excellent levels of service (LOS A). Similarly, at the intersection of the 1-5 Northbound Ramps and Cannon Road, the northbound left-tum movements operate at LOS E during both the morning and evening peak hours, while all other movements operate at good levels of service (LOS A or B). The intersection of Car Country Drive and Cannon Road is currently a two-legged intersection, with northbound left-turns and eastbound right-turns the only movements possible. However, for the Year 2000 and Buildout conditions, this location would operate as a "T' intersection due to the planned extension of Cannon Road. Therefore, due to the current configuration of this location, an existing level of service analysis was not conducted. Table 5-10 summarizes the weekday peak hour traffic volumes, V /C ratio and corresponding level of service for each of the five analyzed roadway segments. As shown, all five analyzed roadway segments are currently operating at acceptable levels of service (i.e., LOS D or better), based on a per lane capacity of 1,800 vehicles per hour. Parking There are currently no paved parking areas within the project site. The existing uses of the site do not generate a significant demand for parking facilities, with the exception of the flower fields. Parking to accommodate visitors to the flower fields is provided on unpaved lots immediately adjacent to the fields. Chapter 21.44 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code establishes parking standards for different development types. The City does not have a standard for an amusement park or equivalent use. THRESHOLDS FOR DETERMINING SIGNIFICANCE The City of Carlsbad's Growth Management Standards established a level of service (LOS) D as the minimum acceptable operating conditions during the weekday peak hours, and LOS C during the off-peak hours. A project whose traffic will result in operating conditions worse than LOS D during the weekday peak hour and/or LOS C during the off-peak hour will have a significant traffic and circulation impact. Additionally, a project that results in a significant demand for parking which cannot be met through the provision of.on-site parking facilities would result in a significant impact. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.5-6 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • TABLE 5-10 STREET SEGMENT LEVELS OF SERVICE ANALYSIS\ EXISTING CONDITIONS . SEGMENT DIRECTION A. Cannon Rd. WB between 1-5 and Paseo del Norte EB B. Cannon Rd. WB between Paseo del Norte and Lego Dr. EB C. Cannon Rd. WB west of El Camino Real EB D. Palomar Airport Rd. WB between 1-5 and Paseo del Norte EB E. Palomar Airport Rd. WB between Paseo del Norte and Price Club Drwy. EB F. Palomar Airport Rd. WB between College Bl. & Camino Vida Roble EB - G. Palomar Airport Rd. WB between Camino Vida Roble & El Camino Real EB Note: [" I Capacity based on 1 ,800 vehicles per lane per hour . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendmelll Final Program EIR AM PEAK HR CAPACITY{") VOL. VIC LOS 3,600 912 0.25 A 3,600 309 0.09 A 3,600 NA NA NA 3,600 NA NA NA 3,600 NA NA NA 3,600 NA NA NA 5,400 1,058 0.20 A 5,400 848 0.16 A 5,400 1,668 0.31 A 5,400 732 0.14 A 5,400 599 0.11 A 5,400 1,220 0.23 A 3,600 1,084 0.30 A 3,600 808 0.22 A 5.5-7 .PM PEAK HR VOL. VIC LOS 379 0.11 A 624 0.17 A NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 1,058 0.20 A 1,846 0.34 A 974 0.18 A 1,700 0.31 A 1,640 0.30 A 860 0.16 A 790 0.22 A 995 0.28 A City of Carlsbad November 1995 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT To evaluate transportation improvements needed to support the full buildout of Zone 13, estimates of future traffic conditions in the area with the proposed project traffic, and future cumulative background traffic were developed. First, future traffic volumes (without Zone 13 development) were developed based on data from the San Diego Association of Governments' (SANDAG) traffic model for the City of Carlsbad. Next, trip generation estimates for the Zone 13 land use components including LEGOLAND Carlsbad were developed. These project traffic estimates were then added to the SANDAG projections resulting in future traffic forecasts for conditions with the Zone 13 buildout. Future Street Network Future street network changes and improvements together with localized intersection improvements were assumed to be in place in both the Year 2000 and Buildout analysis. These improvements include: • Extensions with and without Cannon Road from Car County Drive to El Camino Real in the year 2000 scenario, and further extension east of El Camino Real to provide a link to the eastern portions of the City and the adjoining communities to the east at Buildout scenario; • Construction of LEGO Drive and Armada Drive as part of the future road network serving the proposed Ranch development; • Provision of no connection via Hidden Valley Road between Palomar Airport Road and Cannon Road; • Extension of College Blvd. south of El Camino Real at buildout. Also, the following localized intersection improvements needed to mitigate the existing unacceptable operating conditions are assumed to be in place in the traffic analysis. Since these improvements are needed to maintain acceptable LOS for existing conditions, they are not all the responsibility of the LFM Zone 13. Year 2000 Corulitions • Avenida Encinas & Cannon Road -Install a traffic signal. • 1-5 Southbound Ramps & Cannon Road -Install a traffic signal. Also, add southbound left-tum lane and restripe westbound through lane for an additional left-tum lane. • 1-5 Northbound Ramps & Cannon Road -Install a traffic signal. • Paseo del Norte & Cannon Road -Install a traffic signal. Also, provide an exclusive left-tum lane and a shared through/right-tum Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.5-8 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • • • • • • lane in the southbound direction. In the northbound direction, add a left-tum lane and restripe the exclusive right-tum lane for a shared through/right-tum lane. Also, add an eastbound left-tum lane and westbound shared through/right-tum lane. Paseo del Norte & Palomar Airport Road -Provide a westbound exclusive right-tum lane. Car Country Drive & Cannon Road -Install a traffic signal. Provide an exclusive left-tum lane and two through lanes in the westbound direction. In the northbound direction, add an exclusive right-tum lane. LEGO Drive & Cannon Road -Provide the following lane configuration at this intersection: two left-tum lanes and an exclusive right-tum lane in the northbound direction; two through lanes and an exclusive right-tum lane in the eastbound direction; and two left-tum lanes and two through lanes in the westbound direction. Armada-Drive/Price Club Driveway & Palomar Airport Road - Restripe the northbound approach for two left-tum lanes and a shared through/right-tum lane. In the southbound direction provide two left- turn lanes, one shared through/right-tum lane, and an exclusive right- turn lane. Also, add a eastbound left-turn lane and a westbound exclusive right-turn lane . College Boulevard & Palomar Airport Road -Provide two left-tum lanes, one through lane, and one shared through/right-turn lane in the northbound direction. Restripe the southbound approach for a left- turn lane, one through lane, and a shared through/right-turn lane. Buildout Conditions • Avenida Encinas & Palomar Airport Road -Provide an additional eastbound and westbound through lane. • 1-5 Northbound Ramps & Cannon Road -Add a northbound exclusive right-tum lane. • Paseo del Norte & Palomar Airport Road -Provide an eastbound exclusive right-tum lane. . · Project Trip Generation The future traffic expected from the Zone 13/Carlsbad Ranch development as a whole, was estimated by calculating the LEGOLAND Carlsbad trip generation and the estimated trip generation for the other components of the· Ranch. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.5-9 City of Carlsbad November 1995 Trip Generation by Land Use Component The weekday trip generation estimates for the land uses other than the LEGOLAND Carlsbad which make up the remaining components of Zone 13 were based on the projected development scheme and information provided by the City of Carlsbad and SANDAG. The trip generation estimates for the retail, office, hotel, and resort land uses were based on a combination of sources including published SANDAG trip generation rates and the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 5th Edition. Trip rates for the specialized Gemological Institute of America were taken from the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan after review with city staff. Trip generation estimates for the LEGOLAND Carlsbad were developed based on estimates of annual and daily attendance at the Park. The trip generation estimates for the Carlsbad Ranch (without the LEGOLAND Carlsbad) were included in the SANDAG model projections. Based on refined information (i.e., specific land use types, sizes of development, and increased trip generation rates) for the Ranch and the Zone as a whole, these trip generation estimates were actually increased for use in this analysis. LEGOLAND Carlsbad Trips The trip generation estimates for the LEGOLAND Carlsbad were developed for the busiest weekday (Friday) and weekend day (Sunday) during the busiest month of the year (August). It would be expected that for other days and months of the year, • attendance levels would not be as high as those being modeled for this analysis. • Thus the proposed trip generation estimate represents a worst case scenario. During the traffic analysis for the LEGOLAND Carlsbad, a peak weekend analysis was conducted in addition to the summertime weekday AM and PM peak hour analysis. However, this weekend analysis showed that the most heavily impacted time period was indeed the weekday commuter peak periods of the day. Therefore the infrastructure requirements for Zone 13 will be determined by weekday peak hour conditions and not weekend conditions. The LEGOLAND Carlsbad is expected to generate a total of approximately 6,630 daily trips (i.e. 3,315 daily inbound and 3,315 outbound trips) for the Year 1999 for August Friday conditions. The LEGOLAND Carlsbad peak morning hour would occur during the 11 AM to 12 Noon hour when a total of approximately 580 trips are expected (545 inbound and 35 outbound). The Park's evening peak hour would occur during the 5 PM to 6 PM hour, which would coincide with the evening peak hour of street traffic, when a total of 710 trips are anticipated (120 inbound and 590 outbound). During the morning peak hour of street traffic (8-9 AM), the Park would be expected to generate a total of approximately 125 trips. The LEGO LAND Carlsbad is expected to generate a total of approximately 8,180 daily trips (i.e., 4,090 inbound trips and 4,090 outbound trips) for Buildout conditions on an August Friday. The LEGOLAND Carlsbad peak morning hour would occur during the 11 AM to 12 Noon hour when a total of approximately 715 Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.5-10 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • trips are expected (675 inbound and 40 outbound). The park's evening peak hour would occur during the 5 PM to 6 PM hour, which would coincide with the evening peak hour of street traffic, when a total of 875 trips are anticipated (150 inbound and 725 outbound). During the morning peak hour of street traffic (8-9 AM), the Park would be expected to generate a total of approximately 150 trips. Future Zone 13 Total Trip Generation Table 5-11 shows the estimated week day trip generation for Zone 13 including the LEGOLAND Carlsbad for the year 2000. The total weekday trip generation for Zone 13 including the LEGOLAND Carlsbad for the Year 2000, is estimated to be apprmdmately 41,980 daily trips, of which about 2,100 trips are expected during the morning peak hour and about 4,085 trips during the evening peak hour. Table 5-12 summarizes the weekday trip generation for Zone 13 for buildout conditions. As shown on the table, Zone 13 (with LEGOLAND Carlsbad) which includes the travel services commercial property owned by SDG&E would be expected to generate approximately 69,380 daily trips of which about 3,650 trips would be anticipated for the morning peak hour and about 6,900 during the evening peak hour. Zone 13 Distribution Patterns The geographic distribution of traffic generated by the individual land use components of Zone 13 is dependent on factors such as: the geographic distribution of the population from which the potential visitors and employees are drawn, the location of the project site in relation to the surrounding street system, and physical characteristics of the street system. Based on these factors and information from other studies, three distribution patterns were developed for Zone 13 traffic. The trip distribution patterns for the Year 2000 with Cannon Road, Year 2000 without Cannon Road, and Buildout conditions are illustrated in Figures 5-10 through 5-12. The major difference in the Year 2000 distribution patterns involves the heavier usage of Palomar Airport east of Armada Drive for the scenario in which Cannon Road is not extended to El Camino Real. Both Year 2000 distribution patterns show approximately two-thirds of project traffic using Interstate 5. Distribution patterns in the Buildout condition indicate a similar two-thirds usage of the freeway with a higher dependence on the Cannon Road corridor from the east. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.5-11 City of Carlsbad . November 1995 · • DEVELOPMENT LAND USE GIA 200,000 SF Office/ Campus Specialty Retail 225,000 SF Office 150,000 SF R&D 250,000 SF Hotel 280 Rooms 20,000 SR Retail SDG&E 120,000 SF Trv Srvc Pointe Resort 700 Rooms 6,000 SF Commercial (2) 16,000 SF Commercial (2) 24,000 SF Meeting (2) 19,000 SF Restaurant 1 Golf Course incl. 6,000 SF Clubhouse LEGOLAND (3) Carlsbad Total Notes: TABLE 5-11 LFMP -ZONE 13 TRIP GENERATION YEAR 2000 GENERATION RA TE DAILY AM PEAK HOUR mlPS IN OUT 2 per staff plus stdnts (1) 2,600 304 34 50 per 1 ,000 SF 11,250 158 68 20 per 1 ,000 SF 3,000 378 42 8 per 1 ,000 SF 2,000 288 32 10 per room 2,800 101 67 40 per 1 ,000 SF 800 14 10 3,600 115 n 40 per 1 ,000 SF 4,800 86 58 8 per room 5,600 168 112 1 00 per 1 ,000 SF 1,900 11 8 600 per course 600 29 7 8,100 208 127 6,632 125 0 41,982 1,663 437 (1) Per "Carlsbad Specific Plan" (Urban Systems Associates, Inc., June 1992). (2) Supporting uses of hotel. (3) Trip generation per "Traffic Study for th·e LEGOLAND Carlsbad" (Kaku Associates, Inc., April 1994). • PM PEAK HOUR TOTAL IN OUT TOTAL 338 73 291 364 225 506 506 1,013 420 78 312 390 320 28 252 280 168 134 90 224 24 36 36 72 192 170 126 296 144 216 216 432 280 157 235 392 19 106 46 152 36 16 38 54 335 279 319 598 125 122 590 712 2,099 1,473 2,612 4,085 • • • TABLE 5-12 LFMP -ZONE 13 TRIP GENERATION BUILDOUT DEVELOPMENT LAND USE GENERATION RATE DAILY AM PEAK HOUR GIA 550,000 SF Office/ 2 per staff plus stdnts (1) Campus Specialty Retail 325,000 SF 50 per 1,000 SF Office 300,000 SF 20 oer 1,000 SF R&D 500,000 SF B oer 1 ,000 SF Hotel 280 Rooms 10 per room 20,000 SR Retail 40 per 1,000 SF SDG&E 463,600 SF Trv Srvc 40 oer 1 ,000 SF Pointe Resort 700 Rooms 8 per room . 6,000 SF Conmercial (2) 16,000 SF Corrmercial (2) 24,000 SF Meeting (2) 19,000 SF Restaurant 100 per 1 ,000 SF 1 Golf Course incl. 6,000 SF Clubhouse 600 per course LEGOLAND (3) Carlsbad Total Notes: (1) Per • Carlsbad Specific Plan• (Urban Systems Associates, Inc., June 1992). (2) Supporting uses of hotel. TRIPS IN 4,700 550 16,250 22.7 6,000 756 4,000 576 2,800 -101 BOO 14 3,600 115 18,544 334 5,600 168 1,900 11 600 29 8,100 208 8,182 152 69,376 2,919 (3) Trip generation per 'Traffic Study for the LEGOLAND Carlsbad' (Kaku Associates, Inc., April 1994). OUT 61 98 84 64 67 10 n 223 ' 112 8 7 127 0 733 • PM PEAK HOUR TOTAL IN OUT TOTAL 611 132 526 658 325 731 731 1,463 840 156 624 780 640 56 504 560 168 134 90 22.4 24 36 36 72 192 170 126 296 556 834 834 1,669 280 157 235 392 19 106 46 152 36 16 38 54 335 279 319 598 152 '150 726 876 3,651 2,509 4,390 6,899 AGUA HEDIONDA LAGOON 33 :::. =~ . .-:\ :::. . .................. , :::::. . ::::.·:::.·:::::::::::::\ . :-:-:.: . :-:-:-: .· .· .· .· .· .·:: .· .· .·: .· : ... · .. :. :-:-:->:. :-: -:-:-: -:-:-:. :-:-:-:-:-: -:·:. >: .. , ....................... ' .......................... , ............................ ' ................... . .. ,._._._. : . -:-::::::::: .:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:c~i:to '-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-.... ::: .' .' :::::: .' :-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-.. ·•·.·.···················· .. ····························•·•··••.•····················•:~ "--~~ ::::::::::~:~:/::~::::::::.. -:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............ . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . ............ . . ·:::.·::::::::::.. ·::::::::::::: . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.· ·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·, ..................... ' ................ . . :,;;.i:~~\-~·:-:<·:-:-:-:-:-::::.~ . .::.:.;,;.,;~;;. 36% ~ 0 0 :i: (EZ[] LFMP ZONE 13 0 ZONE 13 BOUNDARY ---XX% DIRECTION OF APPROACH ♦ (C.'xi) north not to scale SOURCE: Kaku Associates, 1995 Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment ProgramEIR • • 1% ,__ ____ __..;, __ '"RADAY ----- 1% Figure 5-10 Year 2000 LFMP Zone 13 Trip Distribution City of Carlsbad V, y, ..... V, • • AGUA HEOIONOA LA.GOON 3 ·:·:-: =~ .... :\ :/::>::-:·:-..::::::::::::::::.<:<:/}}://}}}:/:\ .·.:.~:.·.:•:·:·:·:·::::::::::::::::::::::>:::::::/::::::::::::::>:::::>:::\~:~~~\RO [[ITfilJ LFMP ZONE 13 ZONE 13 BOUNDARY : : : : : : : : :: : : : : : ............... : :: : : : : : : : : .'\ ~-.·.· .·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.· .·.· .·.· .·.·.·.· .·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.· .·.· .· .......................................... , ......................... ' ............. ·" ·:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ...... ·-:-::::::::::::::::::::::::::::), . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '' ............ ·' ·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·:.·.·:. .·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.J . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............. ~ .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .............. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . ............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........... '. . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . ............ . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . ............ . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . ............ . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . ............ . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . ............ . .·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.· ·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.• ........... ; ............................ . ".'.'.'.'PALOMAR.'.'.'.'.'.'.".'.'.'.'.'··· ::;...a..;••-·· 36% ---XX% . DIRECTION OF APPROACH Q 0 0 :i: ., 1% 1% Figure 5-11 Year 2000 Without Cannon Road Extension north not to scale . SOURCE: Kaku.Associates, 1995 LFMP Zone 13 Trip Distribution Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment ProgramEIR City of Carlsbad AGUA HEDIONDA LAGOON 3 ·--::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: =~ ... :\ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... ' .. ' ....... ·, ·-:::::::::::: .......................... :::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::::::\ ................................................. , ............. ' ................................ ·• .............................................. -,...__;.;.·: :·:-: ...... .' .. .-... :·:•:·:·:-:•:•:·:·:·:·:·:•:•:·:-:•:-:-:-:·:·:·:c~NO ,........ ....................... . . . . . . . . ............................. . °'" \ \ , ....... '........ . ............. . "";................ • •.•.•...•••.. p . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .............. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . ............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . ............ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............ . ............ '...... . ............ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '.. ' ............ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .................... . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • C .... .','.PALOMAR .......... . ····· ···· .. · .. ·~------ 33% l:EZ±J LFMP ZONE 13 ---XX% DIRECTION OF APPROACH ZONE 13 BOUNDARY north not to scale SOURCE: Kaku Associates, 1995 Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Program EIR • • ~ 0 0 :c 6% Figure 5-12 Buildout Conditions LFMP Zone 13 Trip Distribution City of Carlsbad . • • 50 (15)-.. SOURCE: Kaku Associates, 1995 ♦ (C.'xi) north not to scale Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment ProgramEIR L,5 (705) -120 (415) J4.5 (JJ0)-.. ~ L20 (170) +-115 (59') • ao !25o)J f 575 1so)-e ---------------/--~ F~4Y ~o' ~~ J • L30 <•> t., +-140 (170) o5 (5)J 45 (180)-.. ~---- ~ .J +-150 (160) • (IO)J 45 (110)- /JI (PM) Ptd< Ho11 Traffic v,1.,n,. M vOMnd rOUkkd to n10tul S yd'JtJu Hcglg~I• Vol.mo • Figure 5-13 Year 2000 LFMP Zone 13 Only Peak Hour Traffic Volumes City of Carlsbad !--, Y' ..... Oo SOURCE: Kaku Associates, 1995 ♦ (C.oo') north not to scale Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment ProgramEIR • Lgis (n5) -120 (♦15) L20 (170) _,,, (595) :rn .i I -,♦5 9♦0) 85 (l◄O)J j 1 ♦90 (♦JO)-~o' JO (2♦5)T .:::,!!!. '!!~ !~~ 85 (5)J 115 (585)- ~,,, ~ "' •1.. L20 (u5) ..i I -,oo (510> 60 (250)J .1~ 575 (150)-:! --- lliQ!Q; XX (XX) I "' ;; .J -,so (205) 55 (J7o)J 60 (270)- NI (PV) Pook Hoi, !mile Yolane, M yokmo.J roe.Mid to nco,u1. S YOhidtJ H,9i9iblo Volmo Figure 5-14 Year 2000 Without Cannon Road Extension LFMP Zone 13 Only Peak Hour Traffic Volumes City of Carlsbad • • • 8 C SOURCE: Kaku Associates, 1995 + {E.'5al north not to scale Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment ProgramEIR L21sc1.1as1 -110 (560) Luo (loo) -as (a75) 125 (Uo)-,.. ~ t! D /?! 105 (l20)J t ,.. 510 (11S)-'o 'w1 e- • ------:---------+--..JF~~y ~---- !! .J -260 (195). 5 {lO)J 4j 55 (295)-. ., S (lS)7 LEGEND: IX (IX) IJI (PM) Peat H...-Trvffic Vohnlu M volurne:s l'l)(.lldod lo n.cuect S ~hidn H,9'i91'bk ~lml• Figure 5-15 Buildout Conditions LFMP Zone 13 Only Peak Hour Traffic Volumes City of Carlsbad Zone 13 Traffic Assignments ,Utilizing the estimated trip generation and the distribution patterns, the traffic generated by the proposed Zone 13 land uses was assigned to the future street networks. Figures 5-13 through 5-15 show the Zone 13 generated peak hour traffic volumes at each of the analyzed intersections for both Year 2000 scenarios and for Buildout conditions. Year 2000 Traffic Conditions --With Cannon Road Extension As indicated in Table 5-13, two of the sixteen analyzed intersections are expected to exceed the Growth Management Standard under the Year 2000 --With Cannon Road Extension conditions (without mitigations). The intersections projected to operate at a LOS E or F during one of the weekday peak hours are: • 1-5 Northbound Ramps & Cannon Road (PM peak hour) • 1-5 Northbound Ramps & Palomar Airport Road (PM peak hour) Table 5-14 shows that all analyzed street segments would operate at acceptable levels of service under Year 2000 conditions. Year 2000 Traffic Conditions --Without Cannon Road Extension • The second column in Table 5-13 summarizes the results for the analyzed • intersections under the assumption that Cannon Road will not be extended to El Camino Real by the Year 2000. As shown, two of the sixteen analyzed intersections are expected to exceed the Growth Management Standard under this scenario. The intersections projected to operate at a LOS E or F during the one of the weekday peak hours are: • 1-5 Northbound Ramps & Palomar Airport Road (PM peak hour) • College Boulevard & Palomar Airport Road (PM peak hour) Table 5-14 shows that all of the analyzed street segments would operate at accept- able levels of service under Year 2000 conditions even without the extension of Cannon Road. Year 2010 Buildout Traffic Conditions As shown in the final column . of Table 5-13, seven of the sixteen analyzed intersections are expected to be impacted under Buildout conditions without mitigations. The intersections projected to operate at unacceptable levels of service, unless mitigated, are: • Avenida Encinas & Palomar Airport Road (AM & PM peak hours) Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.5-20 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 1 l. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. TABLE 5-13 INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE ANALYSIS YEAR 2000 AND BUILDOUT CONDITIONS WITHOUT MITIGATIONS PEAK INTERSECTION HOUR Avenida Encinas & WKAM Cannon Ad. WKPM Avenida Encinas & WKAM Palomar Airport Ad. WKPM· 1-5 southbound ramps & WKAM Cannon Ad. WKPM 1-5 northbound ramps & WKAM Cannon Rd. WKPM 1-5 southbound ramps & WKAM Palomar Airpon Ad. WKPM 1-5 northbound ramps & WKAM Palomar Airpon Ad. WKPM Paseo del None & WKAM Cannon Rd. WKPM Paseo del None & WKAM Palomar Airport Rd. WKPM Car Country Dr. & WKAM Cannon Rd. WKPM Lego Dr. & WKAM Cannon Rd. WKPM Armada Dr /Price Club Driveway & · WKAM Palomar Airport Rd. WKPM Hidden Valley Rd. & WKAM Palomar Airpon Rd. WKPM College Bl. & WKAM Palomar Airpon Rd. WKPM El Camino Real & WKAM Cannon Rd. WKPM Camino Vida Roble & WKAM Palomar Airpon Rd. WKPM El Camino Real & WKAM Palomar Airport Rd. WKPM YEAR 2000 W/ YEAR 2000 W/O CANNON RD. EXT. CANNON RD. EXT. V/C LOS V/C LOS 0.38 0.41 0.75 0.63 0.57 0.64 A A C 8 A 8 0.57 A fat:\19;gzc:n::gq;;;:;;c 0.42 0.38 0.49 A A A -0.38 A 0.42 A 0.76 C 0.74 C 0.54 A 0.50 A 0.55 A 0.86 D 0.42 A 0.39 A 0.52 A BUILDOUT VIC LOS 0.61 0.46 0.78 0.83 8 A C D 0.75 C @@W:=2:9,;;:r:nm:P'?/?· 0.56 0.52 0.65 A A 8 ?t:H@:tfo:1:rm:nBtrntrrn ses.to.er:rtm.E't'l#> ;rn+ttbte+::%15::=:ee 0.59 A 0.73 C 0.74 C 0.83 D 0.30 A 0.52 A 0.27 A 0.62 8 0.45 A 0.67 8 0.58 A 0.69 B 0.45 A 0.83 D 0.50. A 0.58 A 0.54 A 0.71 C 0.86 D 0.83 D 0.52 A 0.73 C 0.79 C 0.84 D 0.17 A 0.38 A 0.27 A 0.38 A 0.51 A 0.75 C 0.69 8 0.75 C 0.76 C NA NA NA NA 0.59 0.74 A C 0.86 D 0.87 D ~{~:1:;:~!~t:;:: 0.60 A 0.68 .8 0.69 8 0.86 D 0.56 A 0.81 D 0.68 8 0.75 C 0.76 C 0.86 D 0.86 D 0.67 0.90 B D MMtl -Unacceptable level of service • Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.5-21 City of Carlsbad November 1995 TABLE 5-14 STREET SEGMENT LEVELS OF SERVICE ANALYSIS YEAR 2000 AND BUILDOUT CONDITIONS YEAR 2000 WIO PEAK YEAR 2000 CANNON ROAD EXT. BUILOOVT SEGMEl'lT DIRECTION HOUR A. Cannon Rd. WB WKAM between 1-5 and Paseo del None EB WKAM WB WKPM EB WKPM 8. Cannon Rd. WB WKAM between Paseo del None and Lego Or. EB WKAM WB WKPM EB WKPM C. Cannon Rd. WB WKAM west ol El Camino Real EB WKAM WB WKPM EB WKPM 0. Palomar Airpon Rd. WB WKAM between 1-5 and Paseo del None EB WKAM WB WKPM EB WKPM E. Palomar Airpon Rd. WB WKAM belween Paseo del None and Armada Or. EB WKAM WB WKPM EB WKPM F. Palomar Alrpon Rd. we WK-AM between College Bl. & Camino Vida Roble EB WKAM we WKPM EB WKPM G. Palomar Alrpon Rd. we WKAM belween Camino Vida Roble & El Camino Real EB WKAM we WKPM EB WKPM Notes: I· I Capacity based on 1 .800 vehicles per lane per hour. I 1 I Under buildout conditions Palomar Airport Road will be a six lane facility. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final -Program EIR CAPACITY ('I VOL. VIC 3,600 687 0.19 3,600 1,215 0.34 3,600 1,663 0.46 3,600 1,518 0.42 3,600 663 0.18 3,600 574 0.16 3,600 1,121 0.31 3,600 1,293 0.36 3,600 680 0.19 3,600 453 0.13 3,600 740 0.21 3,600 1,122 0.31 5,400 1.284 0.24 5,400 1,719 0.32 5,400 3,096 0.57 5,400 1,335 0.25 5,400 1,181 0.22 5,400 2,248 0.42 5,400 2.858 0.53 5,400 1,313 0.24 5,400 1,015 0.19 5,400 1,286 0.24 5,400 1,968 0.36 5,400 1,053 0.20 3,600/5,400 (11 1,200 0.33 3,60015,400 849 0.24 3. 600/5. 400 1,501 0.42 3.600/5,400 1,091 0.30 5.5-22 LOS VOL. VIC A 461 0.13 A 1,192 0.33 A 1,683 0.47 A 816 0.23 A 219 0.06 A 496 0.14 A 1,017 0.28 A 429 0.12 A NA A NA A NA A NA A 1,436 0.27 A 1,763 0.33 A 3,069 0.57 A 1,798 0.33 A 1,587 0.29 A 2,377 0.44 A 3,011. 0.57 A 1,854 0.34 A 1,053 0.20 A 1,313 0.24 A 1,965 0.36 A 1,236 0.23 A 1,238 0.34 A 885 0.25 A 1,534 0.43 A 1,274 0.35 LOS VOL VIC A 1,169 0.32 A 2,367 0.66 A 2,662 0.74 A 2,100 0.58 A 1,068 0.30 A 1,587 0.44 A 1,809 0.50 A 1,640 0.(6 2,286 0.64 1,712 0.(8 1,378 0.38 936 0.26 A 1,752 0.32 A 2,548 0.47 A 3,544 0.66 A 1,800 0.33 A 1,611 0.30 A 3,173 0.59 A 3,309 0.61 A 1,800 0.33 A 1,201 0.22 A 1,961 0.36 A 2,036 0.38 A 1,336 0.25 A 1,435 0.27 A 1,097 0.20 A 1,385 0.25 A 1,337 0.25 City of Carlsbad November 1995 LOS A B C A A A A A B A A A A A B A A A B A A A A A A A A A • • • • • • • • • • • • 1-5 Northbound Ramps & Cannon Road (PM peak hour) 1-5 Northbound Ramps & Palomar Airport Road (PM peak hour) Paseo del Norte & Cannon Road (AM & PM peak hours) Paseo del Norte & Palomar Airport Road (AM & PM peak hours) El Camino Real & Cannon Road (AM peak hour) El Camino Real & Palomar Airport Road (AM & PM peak hours) l'able 5-14 shows that all analyzed street segments would operate at acceptable levels of service under Buildout conditions. Armada/Lego Intersection Analysis When the LEGOLAND Carlsbad proposed its roadway system, it proposed to place a traffic circle/roundabout at the intersection of Armada Drive and LEGO Drive. Because the City of Carlsbad was concerned with the operations and ultimate capacity of the roundabout, Kaku Associates was asked to review the design and potential performance of the roundabout under Buildout Conditions for Zone 13. In addition, three alternate configurations for a more traditional T-intersection were evaluated. Traditional Intersection Design ' Three different intersection configurations were investigated for the traditional approach of signalizing the intersection of Armada Drive/LEGO Drive . The first alternate involved keeping LEGO Drive as a continuous north-south street. Armada Drive would be rerouted to "T'' into LEGO Drive in an east-west direction (see sketch in Table 5-15 Alternate A). The heaviest movement in the morning peak hour involves southbound vehicles desiring to turn westbound into the employment area of Zone 13. In the morning peak hour, this movement must handle over 1,250 vehicles per hour. Because of this heavy turn movement, the intersection would perform at Level of Service D during the morning peak hours. All other hours of the day, including weekend conditions, would result in excellent operations at· this signalized intersection. H Armada Drive and the north section of LEGO Drive were kept continuous and the south section of LEGO Drive became the third leg of the T-intersection (Alternate B in Table 5-15), the intersection would operate satisfactorily during the morning and afternoon peak hours. The level of service would degrade on weekends and during the morning hours when inbound traffic to LEGOLAND Carlsbad was at its peak. Even under these conditions, however, the intersection would still meet the City's Level of Service D criteria. Alternate C in Table 5-15 shows the effects of grade-separating the inbound traffic headed toward the LEGOLAND Carlsbad. Under this scenario, southbound traffic destined for the LEGOLAND Carlsbad would travel through an underpass under the ~outhwest leg of Armada Drive. Under this configuration, excellent levels of service Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendmelll Final Program EIR 5.5-23 City of Carlsbad November 1995 ALTERNATIVE A B C D TABLE 5-15 ARMADA DRIVE/LEGO DRIVE INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS BUILDOUT CONDITIONS • CONFIGURATION INTERSECTION DESCRIPTION ~ Armada Dr. (EB) T-ing into Lego Dr. ill ~ ( Lego Dr. (WB) T-ing into Armada Dr. -< -1'' Lego inbound grade separated '\It JI ~ ( Lego inbound grade separated -< no left-turns. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.5-24 PEAK HOUR WK AM WK PM · WKEND LEGO PK WK AM WK PM WKEND LEGO PK WK AM WK PM WKEND LEGO PK WK AM WK PM WKEND LEGO PK SUILDOUT V/C LOS 0.81 D 0.55 A 0.56 A 0.60 A 0.45 A 0.65 8 0.80 C 0.87 D 0.81 D 0.45 A 0.56 A 0.39 A 0.45 A 0.5.3 A 0.60 A 0 . .39 A • Legend: XXX (XXX) AM{PII) Poo~ Hour Traffic Vo.\mes An Volumes Rounded to the Nearest S Vehiclu Ne-gfigiblc Vofumu City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • would be provided during the afternoon peak hours and during weekend and LEGOLAND Carlsbad peak inbound operations. The morning peak hour for this configuration would still operate at Level of Service D because the southbound to westbound right-turn still requires a significant amount of the signal cycle. Level of Service D operations, however, would result. A fourth alternate (Alternate D in Table 5-15 would involve a variation of Alternate B. If the westbound to southbound left-turn in this configuration were grade- separated (i.e., the southbound traffic on LEGO Drive headed toward the LEGOLAND. Carlsbad) and northbound left-tum was prohibited, the intersection would operate at Level of Service A during all time periods. Roundabout Analysis The firm of Penfield & Smith, experts in the design and operation of roundabouts, were asked to review the future traffic volumes and develop a design for the roundabout which would result in satisfactory operations under Buildout conditions. The roundabout analysis is contained within the traffic report prepared by Kaku Associates, Inc. and contained in Appendix C of this EIR. In the proposed design, a roundabout with a 138-foot outside radius would satisfactorily accorp.modate future traffic levels through this intersection. The design incorporates two "bypass" lanes. The first would allow northbound traffic leaving LEGOLAND Carlsbad and headed for Cannon Road to stay in the right lane and completely bypass going through the roundabout itself. Similarly, a bypass lane has been provided so that the southbound to westbound heavy right turn headed to the Zone 13 employment areas could go directly through the intersection without passing through the roundabout. The roundabout itself is projected to operate at Level of Service A during both weekday and weekend peak hours. Summary There are a number of different configurations that would allow the intersection of Armada Drive and LEGO Drive to operate within the City's level of service criteria even under Buildout Conditions. The intersection could be configured as a signalized T-intersection, or a roundabout could be designed. Since both an at- grade signalized T-intersection or an at-grade roundabout provide acceptable levels of service, grade-separating any movements at this location may be undesirable due to the associated costs. Beach Parking Demand The project is anticipated to· result in an increase in demand for parking in the beach areas as a result of the additional visitors to the City. This increase is not considered significant. Mitigation Measures proposed in the Air Quality section of Carlsbad Ranch· Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.5-25 City of Carlsbad November 1995 this EIR require the provision of a shuttle for all specific plan land uses which reduce the project's contribution to the overall demand on beach parking. • Parking The parking standards and parking ratios provided in the specific plan are consistent with the minimum parking standards of the City. Because the City does not have a parking standard for a themepark or equivalent use, the potential parking needs of the LEGOLAND Carlsbad were assessed by Kaku and Associates. Based on the proposed parking plan of 3,500 visitor parking spaces, it was determin~d that this supply would be sufficient to meet the projected parking demand for the Year 2000 conditions. Under buildout conditions an overflow parking lot is proposed which would provide an additional 1, 150 parking spaces. The proposed parking supply including the overflow lot will be sufficient to meet the demand projected for buildout conditions. These parking estimates are based on a conservative approach to determine the peak demand. That is, these projections are based on attendance levels on the busiest weekday and weekend day of the busiest month of the year. As these projections are evaluated over time, the actual parking patterns will determine the need for the overflow parking lot under the buildout conditions. No impact to parking is anticipated. MITIGATION MEASURES 1. The following mitigation measures shall be implemented to reduce significant impacts on two intersections under the Year 2000 conditions and seven intersections under Buildout conditions to a level of less than significant~ The recommended street improvements and their phasing, based on ultimate buildout conditions, are as follows: 1997 2000 2006 I-5 Northbound Ramps & Palomar Airport Road (CMP Location) - Restripe the westbound Palomar Airport Road approach for the following: two through lanes, one shared through/right-tum lane, and one exclusive right turn lane. 1-5 Northbound Ramps & Cannon Road (CMP Location) -Restripe the westbound Cannon Road approach for the following: one through lane, one shared through/right-tum lane, and one exclusive right-tum lane. El Camino Real & Cannon Road (CMP Location) -Restripe the southbound El Camino Real approach for the following: one left-tum lane, two through lanes, one shared through/right-turn lane, and one exclusive right-turn lane. ' Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.5-26 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • 2007 2008 2008 Avenida Encinas & Palomar Airport Road (CMP Location) -Restripe the northbound Avenida Encinas approach to provide the configuration: one exclusive left-tum lane, one through lane, and one right-tum lane (already done). El Camino Real & Palomar Airport Road (CMP Location)·-Restripe the northbound El Camino Real approach for the following: one left- tum lane, two through lanes, one shared through/right-tum lane, and one exclusive right-tum lane. 1-5 Northbound Ramps & Cannon Road (CMP Location) -Restripe the westbound Cannon Road approach for the following: one through lane, one shared through/right-tum lane, and one exclusive right-tum lane. In addition, provide an additional eastbound Cannon Road left- tum lane. The resulting lane configuration on the eastbound approach would be two exclusive left-tum lanes and two through lanes. Buildout Paseo del Norte & Cannon Road (CMP Location) -The southbound approach (SDG&E driveway) should be constructed and striped as follows: one exclusive left-tum lane, one shared through/right-tum lane, and one exclusive right-tum lane. In addition, the eastbound Cannon Road approach would require an additional left-tum lane. The resulting lane configuration in the eastbound direction would be two exclusive left-tum lanes, one through lane, and one through/right tum lane. Also, at a point· east of the intersection, an additional westbound Cannon Road through lane would be required. At the intersection, this would result in the following lane configuration in the westbound direction: one exclusive left-tum lane, two through lanes, and a shared through/right-tum lane. Buildout Paseo del Norte & Palomar Airport Road -Restripe the northbound and southbound Paseo del Norte approaches to provide the following: two exclusive left-tum lanes, one shared through/right-tum lane, and one exclusive right-turn lane. If Cannon Road is not extended to El Camino. Real by the Year 2000 the following improvements would be necessary: 1997 1-5 Northbound Ramps & Palomar Airport Road (CMP Location) - Restripe the westbound Palomar Airport Road approach for the following: two through lanes, one shared.through/right-tum lane, and one exclusive right tum lane. . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.5-27 City of Carlsbad November 1995 1997 College Boulevard & Palomar Airport Road (CMP Location) - Restripe the southbound College Boulevard approach for the following: one left-turn lane, one shared through/right-turn lane, and one exclusive right-turn lane. 2. In addition, the Congestion Management Plan (CMP) prepared for the project requires the development and implementation of a deficiency plan for freeway segments. The deficiency plan shall include the following: • Assist in Funding Other Improvements -This option would involve providing funds which would be utilized in the construction of other improvements. Several funding mechanisms already exist in the City of Carlsbad and are listed in the Zone. 13 Local Facilities Management Plan Finance Plan for impacted facilities. These include: Traffic Impact Fees Transnet Funds Public Facilities Fees Community Facility District Moneys Private Developer Construction The Carlsbad Ranch development project is already conditioned on financial participation in four of the above five funding mechanisms. • Implement Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Measures - For applicable land uses within the development, implementation of a TDM program would be a way of reducing the peak hour trips and thus lessening the impacts on the affected facilities. These TDM measures could include but are not limited to: incentives for employ~es to carpool/vanpool; telecommuting and flex-time; and providing a shuttle from the commuter rail station at Poinsettia Lane. IMPACT AFTER MITIGATION With the implementation of Mitigation Measures 1 and 2, all of the analyzed intersections and street segments are projected to operate at acceptable levels of service as shown in Table 5-16. The proposed street cross sections would be adequate to handle buildout traffic. At the impacted freeway segments, the above deficiency plan would reduce the projected impact the proposed project would have on these facilities. The use of TDM measures would mitigate the project's negative effect along the impacted segment of SR-78, if a reduction of approximately 35 project related trips during the morning peak hour along the impacted segment (for the Year 2000) were achieved. The 35 morning peak hour trips would represent approximately two percent of the project's total morning peak hour trips. This level of reduction is Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.5-28 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • • well within the reductions that would be expected with an effective TDM program for the project. For buildout conditions, a reduction of approximately 125 peak hour trips would be needed to mitigate the projects impact. The 125 peak hour trips would represent between two percent (PM peak hour) and four percent (AM peak hour) of the project's total buildout peak hour trips. Again, this two to four percent reduction in project trips would be realistic with a project TDM program. The project's impact along the 1-5 segment could be reduced through the use of TDM. However, it would be unlikely that the project's total impact along the segment could be totally mitigated through the use of TDM measures alone. The impacts of the project on 1-5 could be mitigated through a combination of a TDM program within the project ·and a diversion of project and background trips to parallel facilities. The project's financial participation in the development of these parallel facilities is expected to result in enough additional arterial street capacity being added to the system to offset the project's incremental impact on Interstate 5. It should be noted that both the growth of project traffic and background traffic are responsible for 1-5 exceeding the CMP criteria. Therefore, it should not be the sole responsibility of the Carlsbad Ranch development to improve conditions on the regional facilities to acceptable levels. Rather, Carlsbad Ranch's financial participation in the development of parallel arterial improvements will serve as the project's share of the mitigation program . CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The proposed project, in conjunction with other cumulative projects will result in a cumulative impact to traffic and circulation. The proposed project's contribution to any impact can be reduced to less than significant levels with the implementation of recommended mitigation measures. However, the overall cumulative impact remains significant and unavoidable. Please refer to Section 7.1 for a detailed discussion related to cumulative impacts . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.5-29 City of Carlsbad · November 1995 TABLE 5-16 INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE ANALYSIS YEAR 2000 AND BUILDOUT CONDITIONS WITH MITIGATIONS YEAR 2000 W/O CANNON RD. YEAR 2000 W/O YEAR 2000 WTrn EXT. W/O INTERSECTION 2. Avenlda Encinas & Palomar Airport Rd. 4. 1-5 northbound ramps & Cannon Rd. 6. 1-? northbound ramps & Palomar Alrpon Rd. 7. Paseo del None & Cannon Rd. 8. Paseo del None & Palomar Alrpon Rd. 13. College Bl. & Palomar Alrpon Rd. 14. El Camino Real & Cannon Rd. 16. El Camino Real & Palomar Alrpon Rd. Notes: PEAK HOUR WKAM WKPM MmGATIONS VIC LOS 0.75 C 0.63 8 WKAM 0.57 A WK PM .i}fi@;~l@tiL§itll! WKAM 0.49 A 'NK PM &Jffilp}af!@£J WKAM 0.59 A WKPM 0.73 C WKAM 0.74 C WKPM 0.83 0 WK.AM 0.45 A WKPM 0.83 0 WKAM 0.50 A WKPM 0.58 A WKAM 0.86 D WKPM 0.83 D !fil§ -Unacceptable level of service. MmGATIONS V/C LOS 0.75 C 0.63 8 0.57 A 0.75 C 0.49 A 0.73 C 0.59 A 0.73 C 0.74 C 0.83 D 0.45 A 0.83 D 0.50 A 0.58 A 0.86 D 0.83 D MmGATIONS V/C LOS 0.76 C 0.74 C 0.55 0.86 A D 0.52 A 0.73 C 0.79 C 0.84 D 0.76 C NA NA NA NA 0.86 D 0.87 D I 1 I -Levels of service based on traffic volumes which include citywide and regional buildout conditions. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program E/R 5.5-30 YEAR 2000 W/O CANNON RD. EXT. WITH MmGATIONS V/C LOS 0.76 C 0.74 C 0.55 A 0.86 D 0.52 A 0.80 C 0.52 A 0.73 C 0.79 C 0.84 D 0.60 A 0.90 D NA NA NA NA 0.86 D 0.87 D BUI LOO UT W/O MmGATIONS V/C LOS 0.75 C 0.65 B 0.76 0.86 0.86 C D D BUILDOUT WTrn MmGATIONS V/C LOS 0.86 D 0.89 D 0.68 8 0.87 D 0.63 8 0.87 O· o.es D 0.88 D 0.81 D O.e9 D 0.76 C 0.56 D o.aa D 0.78 C 0.83 D o.a, D City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • • 5.6 HAZARDOUS WASTE/PESTICIDE RESIDUE The following summarizes the results of the Phase I site assessments conducted by Leighton & Associates in 1989 associated with the original specific plan boundaries, and 1995 which covers the additional 23.89 acre parcel within the specific pl~ and the 24.2 acre SDG&E parcel located immediately north of the proposed Cannon Road extension. The technical reports are contained in Appendix I of this document. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Geologic and Hydrologic Setting The project site is located within the coastal plain of the Peninsular Range Province of California. The Carlsbad Ranch project site is underlain primarily by grey, dense, fine to medium-grained sands of the Eocene Santiago and/ or Del Mar formations. These units are not exposed at the site because they are overlain by deposits · consisting primarily of orangish redish brown, dense silty fine to medium sandstones. The three elongated ridges trending north-south on the site are remnant Pleistocene beach ridges. Fill materials have been derived from on-site formational materials . The project site is located within the Carlsbad Hydrographic Unit, a roughly triangular-shaped drainage area of approximately 210 square miles. Depth to ground water within the unit is generally 50 feet or less-(primarily in alluvial valleys and/or topographic lows) and produces water of marginal quality. Rating of ground water for domestic use in the coastal plains section ranges from suitable to inferior because of a high total dissolved solids content along with a high nitrate or high · sulfate content in the local area. Survey of the Project Site A preliminary historical review and site reconnaissance was conducted by Leighton & Associates in 1989 in association with the original specific plan boundaries and -preparation of the 1992 Draft Program EIR for the Carlsbad Ranch. A subsequent historical review and site reconnaissance was conducted by Leighton & Associates in 1995 for the SDG&E parcel and specific plan expansion area adjacent to the future Hidden Valley Road at the eastern portion of the specific plan. Subsequent testing of random soil samples was conducted after each site reconnaissance. The purpose of the 1989 and 1995 surveys was to assess the potential for the presence of hazardous materials or waste contamination on the project site which may have resulted from past or present use of the site, and to determine whether pesticide residue is present in the near-surface soils . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR City of Carlsbad November 1995 The history of the project site was determined through historical data gathered • during the assessments (personnel interviews with property owners and government agencies, aerial photograph review and records searches). Historical aerial photographs indicate that a majority of the site has been used for agricultural purposes over the past several decades. At least seventeen potential locations of hazardous waste within the original specific plan boundaries were examined, photographed and documented during the 1989 assessment. Figure 5-16 depicts the location of observed surface stains on the project site. At many of the locations depicted in Figure 5-16, the environmental risk and possibility of contamination is probably low ( e.g., the stockpiles of metal, wood, or scattered trash). Some of the mapped areas displayed evidence of soil contamination. These areas consist primarily of stained soils near the north end of the packaging facility and below the above-ground fuel storage tanks. Other areas did not display outward signs of contamination but are the areas where chemicals associated with agricultural production are stored. No stained surface soils, groundwater monitoring or production wells, pumps, or clarifiers were observed on the SDG&E parcel or specific plan expansion area during the 1995 survey. (Ref. C- 14) A review of public information indicates that several discharges of hazardous material or waste has occurred at locations within a 3-mile radius of the site. The potential for ground water contamination at the site from those documented hazardous waste sites which are located west of the site is low, because they are located hydraulically downgradient of the site. Soil samples were taken from 50 locations, exploratory boring samples from five sites, and stained soil sample from one site during the 1989 survey. The following summarizes the results of the soil testing from the 1989 survey: • Near surface soils (i.e. less than 3 feet below grade), in the area of the above-ground diesel tank, north of the packing facility have been impacted by diesel fuel at a level above the county guideline. • The surface soil immediately north of the packing facility has been impacted by petroleum hydrocarbons which was identified as diesel · fuel and/ or waste oil. This amount of petroleum hydrocarbon is above the County of San Diego Department of Health Services Guideline. Laboratory results also indicated that these surface soils contain 2,4- dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) and chloroform. The level of 2,4- D was well below the acceptable limit listed by the California Administrative Code Title 22, Article II. There is no limit listed for chloroform. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.6-2 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • ~♦• ~-, ·~,, ·:c; ... ~"' ... \ ' AGUA HEDIONDA LAGOON Staking/Equipment Storage Pile @) PACIFIC OCEAN Covered Agriculture Area [ID LOCATION OF SURFACE STAIN (Detected in 1989 assessment) APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF SOIL SAMPLE (Taken in 1995 assessment) SOURCE: Leighton & Associates, 1989, 1995 O' 600' 1200' north Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment ProgramEIR Figure 5-16 Location of Surface Stains and Soil Samples 5.6-3 City of Carlsbad • The field composite samples contained low levels of toxaphene and DDT and its derivatives (i.e. DOD and DDE) which indicated that there is no significant environmental impact to the site. • · The chemical results of the several samples from the borings drilled through the fill material, east of the packing facility, indicated non- detectable levels of herbicides, organophosphorus pesticides, or volatile organics except for Carene, which is a naturally occurring organic compound. It appears that neither the fill material nor the soil immediately below the fill have been impacted. • The soils collected adjacent to the conveyor system at the packing facility contained no organophosphorus pesticides nor trace levels of DDD, DOE, and 2,4,5-T. These trace levels are below the Total Threshold Level Concentrations (TTLC) and Soluable Threshold Limit Concentration (STLC) action levels. Based upon the information gathered to date during this historical review, site reconnaissance and chemical testing of near-surface soils during the 1995 survey presents the following summary of findings and conclusions: • The northern parcel (24.2 acre SDG&E parcel) has historically been used for agricultural purposes since 1929. • The southeast parcel (23.89 specific plan expansion area) appears as native slopes from 1929 to 1967 and between 1967 and 1983 the parcel became active agricultural fields. Currently, an experimental agricultural field is operating in the northern portion of the parcel. • Stained surface soils, ground water monitoring or production wells, pumps, clarifiers were not observed on either of the two parcels. • Composite near surface soil samples from each parcel were chemically analyzed and 4,4-DDT, 4,4-DDE and toxaphene were detected at concentrations well below which would be considered hazardous or a significant environmental health risk. 1-5/Cannon Road ·interchange Low-level lead contaminated soils may exist along the 1-5 corridor within the proposed interchange improvement area as a result of previous leaded fuel use. Caltrans has been granted a variance by the California Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) for the collection and reuse of soils containing low levels of lead. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • • . THRESHOLD FOR DETERMINING SIGNIFICANCE For purposes of this Environmental Impact Report, a significant impact would occur if implementation of the proposed project would result in contamination of the environment through the use of materials considered hazardous or the improper clean up of a currently contaminated environment which would have the potential to harm future users of the project site and the surrounding area. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT Implementation of the proposed project will result in an increased number of persons occupying the site associated with each of the proposed land uses. Evidence of surface staining and possible pesticide contamination was observed at several locations on the project site. Although no significant levels of soil contamination from pesticide or herbicides were detected during soil testing in 1989 and 1995, the potential for undetected contamination does exist due to the fact that the project site has been historically used for agricultural production. Additionally, surface soil contamination from petroleum hydrocarbons was detected immediately north of the existing packing facility. Exposure of persons to unremediated soils is a potential impact. Implementation of Mitigation Measures 1 through 4 will reduce this potential impact to a level less than significant. Mitigation Measures 1 through 4 require soil monitoring and remediation of any affected soils during site development. 1-5/Cannon Road Interchange Low-level lead contaminated soils may exist along the 1-5 corridor within the proposed interchange improvement are as a result of previous leaded . fuel use. Caltrans has been granted a variance by the California Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) for the collection and reuse of soils containing low levels of lead. Pursuant to this variance, Caltrans must follow the following procedures in dealing with soils potentially containing low-levels· of lead. ' • Caltrans must sample and test soils for lead content. • DTSC specified lead levels for which Caltrans must take certain steps (please refer to Caltrans table provided in Appendix I). • Caltrans will properly dispose of lead-containing soil for which it has no on-project-site use. • Caltrans must keep whatever lead-containing soil that it digs up in the area of contamination, and must keep it covered with thick plastic until it is reused . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.6-5 City of Carlsbad November .1995 • Caltrans may only reuse the soil in the area within the freeway corridor from which it came. • Caltrans will not reuse the lead-containing soil where it could come into contact with workers ( others are unlikely to be on or near freeways for any prolonged period of time), plants, and ground or surface water; and the soil must be put where it will be protected from erosion and runoff. • Caltrans will keep records and provide detailed reports to DTSC when it handles the soils containing lead. Caltrans will make copies of those records available to the public at its district offices, and at appropriate field engineer offices. The variance contains several other detailed technical requirements as well. Implementation of the 1-5/Cannon Road interchange improvements portion of the project will not result in a significant impact related to hazardous materials or soil contamination. MITIGATION MEASURES 1. During grading, observations shall be made by a qualified hazardous materials specialist for areas of possible contamination such as the presence of underground facilities, buried debris, stained soils, waste drums, and tanks or odorous soils. Should such materials be encount~red, further investigation and analysis shall be required to identify the significance of the potentially contaminated area. Soil remediation measures to address any potentially contaminated areas shall be implemented based on the recommendations of · the hazardous materials specialist. 2. Randomly selected surface samples shall be collected after each phase of grading and chemically tested for pesticides. to verify that toxaphene and DDT plus its derivatives are below the established TTLC and STLC action levels. 3. During site development, soils contaminated with petroleum hydrocarbons shall be mitigated. Mitigation techniques shall include: • Place the affected soil beneath a proposed road/parking area as a base material; • Recycle the affected soil; or • Bio remediate the affected soil on site. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.6-6. City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • • 4 . A report documenting results of any future testing shall be prepared. This report shall indicate the measures taken to mitigate contamination, as appropriate. The report shall be submitted to the City of Carlsbad Engineering Department,. Compliance with these measures shall be approved by the City of Carlsbad in conjunction with the review and approval by the San Diego County Department of ·Health Services and the Regional Water Quality Control Board as applicable. IMPACT AFTER MITIGATION Implementation of Mitigation Measures 1 through 4 will reduce impacts from hazardous waste/pesticide residue to a level less than significant. Implementation of the I-5/Cannon Road improvements portion of the proposed project will not result in a significant impact associated with hazardous materials or. soil contamination. , CUMULATIVE ll_\1PACTS The proposed project in conjunction with other cumulative projects will not result in a cumulative impact to hazardous materials/waste contamination. Please refer to Section 7.1 for a detailed analysis of cumulative impacts . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR City of Carlsbad. November 1995 • • • 5.7 LAND USE COMPATIBILI1Y ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING On-site Land Uses The project site is comprised of three gently sloping parallel ridges that traverse the · site in a north-south direction. The site ranges in elevation from 60 feet above mean sea level to 260 feet above mean sea level. The site has been historically used for agricultural activities. · The majority of the project site is currently being used for agricultural production. Section 5.1 Agricultural Resources of this EIR provides a detailed description of the existing agricultural activities on-site. There are several existing structur~s in the southern portion of the project site which are utilized for packaging and storage. These structures are currently in the process of being demolished. A site development permit has been approved by the City for the Gemological Institute of America vocational campus which will be located within the northern portion of the specific plan. Grading associated with the GIA campus started in the summer of 1995 . Ten acres within the north eastern portion of the site consist of undisturbed, natural vegetation. Off-site Land Uses Existing land uses immediately surrounding the project site consist of vacant land, agriculture, and the Agua Hedionda Lagoon to the north; retail and commercial (including Car Country and Pea Soup Andersons) to the west, retail and commercial to the south (Price Club, retail commercial), and vacant land to the east. The McClellan-Palomar Airport and planned industrial uses are located approximately two miles east of the project site along Palomar Airport Road. · Land uses surrounding the 1-5/Cannon Road interchange project area consist of Car Country Carlsbad, agriculture, and vacant land to the east, and vacant land to the west. Existing Land Use Plans The following describes the adopted . land use plans applicable to the proposed project site . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR . 5.7-1 City of Carlsbad November 1995 General Plan The City of Carlsbad General Plan is comprised of eight elements. These elements are: Land Use/Public Facilities; Circulation; Noise; Housing; Open Space & Conservation; Public Safety; Parks & Recreation; and Arts. Together, these elements satisfy the seven mandatory general plan elements as established in the California Government Code. Goals, objectives and implementing policies and action programs have been established for each of the elements. The existing general plan land use map designations for the Specific Plan portion of the project site are: Community Commercial; Office/Planned Industrial; Travel Recreation Commercial; Open Space; and Unplanned Areas. The SDG&E parcel is currently designated by the General Plan as Open Space. Figure 3-4 in Section 3.0 Project Description of this EIR depicts the existing general plan designations of the project site. Zoning The City of Carlsbad Zoning Ordinance provides the specific physical land use planning criteria for development within the City. The existing zoning designations of the Specific Plan portion of the project site consist of Office, Planned Industrial, Commercial-Tourist, General Commercial, Open Space, Exclusive Agricultural Zone and Qualified Development Overlay. The SDG&E parcel is currently zoned as Public-Utilities. Figure 3-6 in Section 3.0 Project Description of this EIR depicts the existing zoning designations of the project site. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan The Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan (SP 207) was originally adopted by the City Council on March 16, 1993. The purpose of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan is to provide a comprehensive set of guidelines, regulations and implementing programs for guiding and ensuring the orderly development of the Carlsbad Ranch. The originally adopted Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan consisted of a total of 423.51 acres. Land uses included office, research and development, related light manufacturing, commercial, hotel, driving range, agriculture and a vocational school campus. The land use designations of the Specific Plan are identical to those described above in the existing General Plan and Zoning designations for the original specific plan boundary area. Zone 13 Local Facilities Management Plan The City of Carlsbad prepares Local Facilities Management Plans (LFMP) in 25 different management zones within the City. The LFMP's implement the provisions of the City's Growth Management Program (GMP) by phasing all development and public facilities needs in accordance with the City adopted GMP performance standards. Individual projects must comply with the provisions of the LFMP in which boundaries it is located, as well as implement provisions of the Citywide plan. The proposed project is located within the boundaries of LFMP Zone 13 and a Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.7-2 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • • portion of LFMP Zone 5. Figure 5-17 depicts the project site in relation to the LFMZ's of the City. Performance standards for 11 different public facilities have been established by the GMP. These facilities are: city administration; library; wastewater treatment; parks; drainage; circulation; fire; open space; schools; sewer collection; and water distribution. The GMP requires these public fac_ilities to be available in conformance with the adopted performance standards in any area where new development occurs. Unless each of these eleven public facility standards have been complied with, no riew development can occur within the particular zone. The performance standard for City Administration Facilities, and Library Facilities are not applicable to the proposed project as no residential uses are proposed. The performance standard for Park facilities is: Park Facilities -Three acres of Community Park or Special Use Area per 1,000 population within the Park District must be scheduled for construction within a five year period. Zone 13 is located within the Park District 1. Zone 13 is composed exclusively of non-residential uses, and the Growth Management Program does not identify a parks performance standard for·non-residential uses. The performance standard for Open Space facilities is: Open Space Facilities -Fifteen percent of the total land area in the zone exclusive of environmentally constrained non-developable land must be set aside for permanent open space and must be available concurrent with development. Consistency with the remaining public facility thresholds as established by the GMP are addressed in Section 5.9 Public Services and Utilities of this document. Local. Coastal. Program (LCP) In 1972, California voters approved Proposition 20 which led to the enactment of the State law (California Coastal Act of 1976) which regulates any development within the California Coastal Zone. The Coastal Act requires that individual jurisdictions adopt Local Coastal Programs (LCPs) to implement state law at a local level. The City of Carlsbad's coastal zone has been divided into six segments (Mello I, Mello II, Agua Hedionda, Village Redevelopment, West Batiquitos and East Batiquitos) and each segment is regulated by a separate LCP. The Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan portion of the project is located within the Mello II Segment of the LCP. The SDG&E Parcel of the proposed project is located in the Agua Hedionda Segment of the LCP. Figure 5-18 depicts the project boundaries in relation to the LCP Map of the City of Carlsbad . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.7-3 City of Carlsbad November 1995 Oceanside I I '\ V s t a • .,.,,1' I Pacific 0 c e a n Pacific O c e a n PROJECT BOUNDARY CITY OF CARLSBAD BOUNDARY Encin tas ,_. San Diego County ~ ZONE 13 ZONE BOUNDARIES/ ZONE NUMBER SOURCE: LFMP Zone 13, Hofman and Associates, 1995 O' 7000' north Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment ProgramEIR 5.7-4 9 i IDI S a n I I I I 1-- 1 I I . I • .1--- E n c i n Figure 5-17 Zone 13 Location Map City of Carlsbad t a s • • • Oceanside Pacific 0 c e a n • Pacific O c e a n ~ PROJECT BOUNDARY ~ CITY OF CARLSBAD BOUNDARY MELLO I -MELLO II [ZZ] AGUA HEDIONDA E n c i n s a n C o D i e g 0 u n t y REDEVELOPMENT AREA V i s t a ---, S a n a r c o s I I I I .--1 I I I .J-..... g EAST BATIQUITOS LAGOON/HUNT I ___ I LOCAL COASTAL BOUNDARY [Il] E n c •i n. t a s • WEST BATIQUITOS LAGOON/SAMMIS · SOURCE: State of California, Department of Conservation + O' 7000' north Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment ProgramEIR 5.7-5 Figure 5-18· Local Coastal Program Map City of Carlsbad McClellan-Palomar Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan The Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) prepared by the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) for the McClellan-Palomar airport is a state-required long range master plan that addresses anticipated growth of the airport over at least the next 20 years. The intent of the CLUP is "to provide for the orderly growth of each public airport and ..• safeguard the general welfare of the inhabitants within the vicinity of the airport and the public in general" (Section 21675, Public Utility Code). The Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) reviews all proposed development within the boundaries of the airport influence area to determine whether the project complies with the provisions of the CLUP. The CLUP is updated every five years from the date of adoption or when the information upon which the plan is based has been changed sufficiently to warrant a review of noise contours, flight activity zones, or land use compatibility. The existing CLUP was adopted in April, 1994. The majority of the project site is located within the boundaries of the Airport Influence Area as identified by the CLUP. Development Agreement A Development Agreement is being requested as part of the proposed project. There is currently no development agreement in place for the proposed project. Please ref er to the impacts discussion in this section for. a discussion of the development agreement. THRESHOLD FOR DETERMINING SIGNIFICANCE For the purposes of this EIR, a significant impact would occur if implementation of the proposed project would result in inconsistencies with the adopted goals and policies of the City of Carlsbad General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, or other applicable plans and policies. Additionally, a significant impact would occur if implementation of the project.would create incompatibilities of land use on-site or with adjacent land uses off-site. · ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT Implementation of the proposed project will eliminate a majority of the existing on- site agricultural uses and convert existing undeveloped areas to a variety of urban uses. Figures 3-2 and 3-3 in Section 3.0 Project Description of this EIR provide the land use plan and development summary of the proposed project. Approval of the project will permit the development of specialty retail uses, a nine hole golf course, GIA vocational school campus, research and development uses, a resort hotel, LEGOLAND Carlsbad, community hotel and associated retail. Approval of the specific plan will also result in the preservation of approximately 53 acres of_ agriculture uses for the flower fields, and 10 acres of natural open space in the northeastern comer of the specific plan. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.7-6 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • The conversion of the existmg uses of the site to an intensive urban use is a significant impact. Land use related impacts as a result of the conversion of the site to an intensive development can be mitigated through the proper planning and development 'review of each planning area as development applications are processed over the 15 year buildout of the entire specific plan area. Potential land use impacts can be minimized if all site-specific development is reviewed for compliance with the specific plan. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 1 will reduce land use impacts associated with conversion of the existing uses of the site to a more intensive urban development by ensuring that all future site-specific development plans within the specific plan area are consistent with all applicable plans, permits and conditions analyzed within this EIR. The discretionary actions that will b·e required for implementation of the specific plan portion of the project include a General Plan and Local Coastal Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Specific Plan Amendment, and Local Facilities Management Plan Amendment (Zone 13). Each of these is discussed below. The Cancellation of a Land Conservation Contract and an amendment to the preserve boundaries is also being requested as part of the project. Please ref er to Section 5.1 Agricultural Resources of this EIR for a detailed discussion of impacts related to the Land Conservation Contract cancellation. Development of the SDG&E parcel of the project will require a zone change, Local Coastal Plan Amendment and an amendment to the SDG&E Specific Plan. Each of these is discussed below. • Compatibility Between On-Site Land Uses • The proposed specific plan will result in the development of a variety of land uses. In the eastern portion of the project site LEGOLAND Carlsbad will share a common boundary with the resort hotel and golf course to the north, research and development land use to the west, community hotel, and the flower fields also on the west. The specific plan provides development standards, policies, and land use design that minimize the potential land use compatibility impacts between each of these proposed land uses. Buffering techniques proposed in the specific plan include the use of walls, fences, landscaping, large setbacks, and roadway and grade separations. These techniques will reduce land use compatibility impacts associated with the planned land uses. There are no residential uses proposed within the specific plan, therefore land use compatibility impacts between residential land uses and other types of land uses will not occur. In the western portion of the project site the GIA vocational school campus, golf course, research and development land use, retail commercial, community hotel and retail, and flower field uses will all share common boundaries with each other. Land use compatibility impacts between the GIA campus, golf course, research and development, and community hotel will be reduced to less than significant levels through the implementation of the buffering techniques described above . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.7-7 City of Carlsbad November 1995 The proposed specific plan will retain approximately 53 acres for flower fields. The • flower fields will share common boundaries with specialty retail, golf course, research and development, and the community hotel and retail uses and LEGOLAND Carlsbad parking lot. Land use compatibility impacts between the flower fields and these adjacent land uses could occur if proper buffering techniques are not utilized. The types of impacts associated with land use compatibility with agricultural uses include the spreading of dust and pesticides to adjacent areas, the ability of farm vehicles and equipment to access adjoining agricultural areas and move within the agricultural area, and the transport of urban pollutants from the development area to the agricultural fields through storm and irrigation water runoff. The specific plan has provided for policies and standards to address potential land use compatibility impacts related to agricultural uses and share common boundaries adjoining land uses. Standards contained in the specific plan to address compatibility with the agricultural use include a 25 foot building setback for all development adjoining the flower field planning area, placement of a six feet high solid wall on the eastern boundary of the flower field planning area adjacent to the research and development and community hotel uses, and placement of a three feet high berm with an additional three feet high landscaping around the perimeter of the area adjacent to the specialty retail on the west, and golf course on the north. This planted berm will be approximately 15 to 20 feet in width. These features will provide a physical barrier between urban and agricultural uses and control access into agricultural areas. Construction of the perimeter wall and/or berms will occur concurrent with development. Installation of temporary barriers is required by specific plan policy • if the construction of Armada Drive precedes development on portions of the site. ~ Drainage facilities within the Carlsbad Ranch are designed to segregate urban runoff from agricultural areas. Additional specific plan policies include the use of landscaping for windbreaks and landscaping that is resistant to pests including aphids, thrips, whitefly and spider mites. Additionally, policies contained in the specific plan require notification of future tenants, users, or land owners that the area is subject to dust, pesticide and odors associated with the flower fields, and requires farm operators to regularly water dirt roads to minimize the drift of dust to adjoining areas. Incorporation of these measures will reduce any impacts associated with agricultural land use compatibility to a level less than significant. No impacts to land use compatibility on-site are anticipated. Compatibility With Off-Site Land Uses The Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan land uses will be compatible with existing and planned land uses surrounding the site. The types and intensity of land uses proposed are generally compatible with existing surrounding land uses. To the north of the SDG&E parcel, land is planned for open space and is currently vacant or being utilized for agricultural operations. This use is compatible with the golf course and open space uses that comprise the northern most portion of the specific plan. Additionally, Cannon Road will provide a physical separation between land uses proposed in the northern portion of the Specific Plan, and the open space immediately to the north. The SDG&E parcel that is proposed for golf course will Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.7-8 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • Sec Section 9.0 Response F-5 • provide a transition into the open space uses to the north. Buffering techniques including landscaping and setbacks that are proposed in the specific plan will reduce land use compatibility impacts to a level of less than significant. The land uses proposed in the southern portion of the specific plan consist of the flower fields, and the parking lot of LEGOLAND Carlsbad park. The parking area of LEGOLAND Carlsbad will be located in the southern portion of the LEGOLAND Carlsbad planning area adjacent to Palomar Airport Road. The specific plan standards for the LEGOLAND Carlsbad planning area call for a minimum 300 foot building setback from Palomar Airport Road, which includes a 140 foot landscape and parking setback and 30 foot grade separation above Palomar Airport Road. Land uses to the south of the specific plan are further buffered from LEGOLAND Carlsbad by Palomar Airport Road. Because the flower fields are an existing land use, no specific impact to existing land uses off-site is anticipated. Palomar Airport Road and Paseo Del Norte provide a physical separation between these land uses. The land uses proposed in the western portion of the specific plan include golf course, commercial retail, and the flower fields. These uses will share a common boundary with the existing Car Country and the Pea Soup Anderson's retail commercial areas. The proposed golf course will be separated from the Car Country retail area by Car Country Drive. The proposed commercial/retail area will be located next to existing commercial/retail uses, and will be separated from these uses by Paseo Del Norte. Additionally, a physical separation will be retained between the flower fields and the Pea Soup Anderson's as no modifications to Paseo Del Norte are proposed. Hidden Valley Road provides a physical separation between LEGOLAND Carlsbad and resort hotel and the future land uses to the east of the site. The General Plan land uses immediately to the east ·of the project site consist of open space, and planned industrial uses. A golf course could potentially be located in this area. Heavy landscaping in the eastern portion of the LEGO LAND Carlsbad parking area will screen the parking area from future land uses east of the future Hidden Valley Road. No impacts to land use compatibility with surrounding off-site land uses is anticipated. 1-5/Cannon Road Interchange Project Area Ne impacts to land uses adjacent to the 1-5/Cannon Road interchange project area are anticipated. The 1-5/Cannon Road improvements will primarily occur within existing Caltrans rights-of-way. Additional right-of-way will need to be acquired for right turn lane widening along Cannon Road and widening along the southbound on- ramp. Adjacent land uses include commercial, vacant land, open space, and agricultural uses. No land use impacts associated with this portion of the proposed project are anticipated . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.7-9 City of Carlsbad November 1995 General Plan Amendment Implementation of the proposed project will require an amendment to the General Plan. The General Plan Amendment proposes to modify the General Plan land use designations of the project site and amend the Circulation Element to replace Hidden Valley Road with Armada Drive. Figure 3-4 in Section 3.0, Project Description of this EIR, depicts the existing general plan designations, and Figure 3-5 depicts the proposed general plan land use designations of the project site. The proposed project will require modifications to the General Plan Land Use designations as follows: Existing General Plan Land Use Designations: • Office/Planned Industrial (0/PI) • Community Commercial/Office/Planned Industrial (C/0/PI) • Travel/Recreation Commercial/Community Commercial (T-R/C) • Community Commercial ( C) • Planned Industrial (PI) • Unplanned Area (UA) • Open Space (OS) Proposed General Plan Land Use· Designations: Office/Planned Industrial (0/PI) Regional Commercial (R) • • • • • Travel/Recreation Commercial/Community Commercial (T-R/C) Travel/Recreation Commercial (T-R) Open Space (OS) The land use amendments are generally consistent with the existing land use designations of the project site. The most significant land use designation change occurs in the eastern portion of the project site. The modification of the existing designation will allow the resort hotel and LEGOLAND Carlsbad to be located in this area. In this location, the project proposes to change the existing General Plan land uses of unplanned areas, office/planned industrial, community commercial/office/planned industrial, and open space to tourist recreational commercial and open space uses. The tourist recreational commercial designation will allow for the development of the resort hotel and golf course, and LEGO LAND Carlsbad. The impacts associated with the increase in development potential in this portion of the site are discussed in detail for each environmental topic addressed in this EIR. In order to modify the Open Space boundaries of the project site as currently shown on the City's "Official Open Space and Conservation Map" the following findings must be made: • The proposed open space area is equal to or greater than the area depicted on the Official Open Space and Conservation Map; and Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.7-10 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • • • The proposed open space area is of environmental quality equal to or greater than that depicted on the Official Open Space and Conservation Map; and • The proposed adjustment to open space, as depicted on the Official Open Space and Conservation Map, is contiguous or within close proximity to open space as shown on the Official Open Space Map. The open space boundary modification being requested as part of this project is consistent with the findings above. The proposed project will increase the total open space area of the site from the existing area. The specific plan includes the addition of 10 acres of open space containing sensitive biological resources. Additionally, the adjustments to the current open-space boundaries are contiguous or within close proximity to the open space area on the Official Open Space Map. No impacts as a result of the modification to the open space boundary is anticipated. The project proposes an amendment to the circulation element of the· General Plan to replace Hidden Valley Road as. depicted in the circulation element with the proposed Armada Drive. This amendment would not create any significant impacts. The transportation analysis prepared for the proposed project indicates that Armada Drive will open at an acceptable level of service as defined by the City. Please refer to Section 5.5 of this EIR for a detailed discussion of traffic impacts. Approval of a General Plan Amendment in and of itself would not result in an inconsistency with the General Plan. Table 5-17 provides an analysis of the project's consistency with applicable General Plan goals and policies. This analysis indicates that the proposed project will be consistent with applicable goals and policies of the General Plan. No impact is anticipated. Local Coastal Plan Amendment (Mello II and Agua Hedionda Segments) The City of Carlsbad General Plan land use designations are the same as the land use designations of the Local Coastal Plan. Amendments will be required to the Mello II and Agua Hedionda segments of the Local Coastal Plan. The land use designations will be amended as discussed above. Additionally, an amendment to the text of the Mello II and Agua Hedionda is proposed which would make the proposed land uses under the specific plan consistent with the land uses under these segments of the LCP and would allow the proposed land uses to occur on-site. The City's policies related to development of the LCP are integrated and consolidated in its General Plan. The proposed specific plan is anticipated to be consistent with the general plan. The project will be required to obtain permits through the California Coastal Commission. Consistency findings with the Coastal Act will need to be made in order for project approval through the Coastal Commission. No impact as a result of amendments to the Mello II and Agua Hedionda Segments of the LCP is anticipated . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.7-11 City of Carlsbad November 1995 TABLE 5-17 RELATIONSHIP OF PROPOSED PROJECT TO GENERAL PLAN GOALS AND POLICIES City Land Use Goals GoalA.1 A City which preserves and enhances the environment, character and image of itself as a desirable residential, beach and open space oriented community. Goal A.2 A City which provides for an orderly balance of both public and private land uses within convenient and compatible locations throughout the community and ensures that all such uses, type, amount, design and arrangement serve to protect and enhance the environment, character and image of the City. Goal A.3 A City which provides for land uses which through their arrangement, location and size, support and enhance the economic viability of the community. < City Land Use Objectives Objective B.1 To create a distinctive sense of place and identity for each community and neighborhood of the City through the development and arrangement of various land use components. Objective B.2 To create a visual form for the community, that is pleasing to the eye, rich in variety, highly identifiable, reflecting cultural and environmental values of the residents. City Land Use Policies -Policy C.3 Ensure that the review of future projects places a high priority on the ' compatibility of adjacent land uses along the interface of different density categories. Special attention should be given to buffering and transitional methods, especially, when reviewing properties where different residential densities or land uses are involved. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Ame11dme11l Final Program EIR Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan The project proposes natural open space, a public golf course, and the retention of the existing flower fields. The project will include uses open to the public such as LEGOLANDCarlsbad, golf course, and. flower fields. A pedestrian promenade and trail is proposed through the fields. Private uses include the GIA campus, the resort, LEGOLAND Carlsbad, and specialty retail shops. The project proposes a variety of land uses which have been carefully planned to maximize the best use of the site, and contribute to the economic viability of the city. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan The project will offer a distinctive yet compatible identity through the retention of the existing flower fields, and proposed landscaping and architectural themes within the project. The project proposes a variety of land uses that will complement each other, while maximizing the unique characteristics of the site by retaining the existing flower fields, and through the provision of significant landscaping and buffering techniques between uses. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Although no residential land uses are proposed within the project or immediately adjacent to the project site, buffering techniques including setbacks, landscaping, f e!lces, walkways and grade separations have been incorporated into the overall specific plan concept to ensure land use compatibility. 5.7-12 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • • TABLE 5-17 RELATIONSHIP OF PROPOSED PROJECT TO GENERAL PLAN GOALS AND POLICIES (Continued) City Growth Management and Public Facilities Goals Goal A.1 A City which ensures the timely provision of adequate public facilities and services to preserve the quality of life of residents. City Commercial Goals GoalA.1 A City that achieves a healthy and diverse economic base by creating a climate for economic growth and stability to attract quality commercial development to serve the employment, shopping, recreation, and service needs of Carlsbad residents. Goal A.3 A City which promotes economic development strategies, for commercial, industrial, office and tourist-oriented land uses. Goal A.4 A City which promotes recreational and tourist oriented land uses which serve visitors, employees of the industrial and business centers, as well as residents of the city. City Auiculture Goals, Objectives, and Policies Goal A.1 A City which prevents the premature elimination of agricultural land and preserves said lands wherever possible. Objective B.2 To conserve the largest possible amount of undeveloped land suitable for agricultural purposes, through the willing compliance of affected parties. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendmellt Final Program EIR Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan The specific plan includes provisions which ensure that all necessary public facilities will be available concurrent with demand. The specific plan has been developed to be consistent with and implement the Zone 13 LFMP. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan The specific plan proposes a themepark, resort, golf course, and retail commercial uses. The retail commercial uses are intended to help attract and accommodate local residents in addition to meeting the needs of the specific plan's tenants and guests. The specific plan proposes a variety of uses including commercial, industrial, office, and tourist-oriented uses which will meet this goal. The retail commercial uses are intended to help attract and accommodate local residents in addition to meeting the needs of the specific plan's tenants and guests. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan The specific plan will result in the termination of Williamson Act lands and the conversion of existing agricultural land to urban uses. However, the specific plan also provides for the preservation of approximately 53 acres of agricultural uses for the flower fields. Although the project will result in the conversion of agricultural land, it will also provide for the long-term preservation of agricultural land which would otherwise be unprotected from development in the future. The proposed development on the site will provide supplemental income to help sustain agricultural operations in Planning Area 7 (flower fields). The specific plan will increase the amount of acreage preserved as open space for agricultural purposes . 5.7-13 City of Carlsbad November 1995 TABLE 5-17 RELATIONSHIP OF PROPOSED PROJECT TO GENERAL PLAN GOALS AND POLICIES (Continued) Objective B.3 To develop measures to ensure the compatibility of agricultural production and adjacent land uses. Policy C.4 Attempt to preserve the flower fields or lands east of 1-5 to the first ridgeline between Cannon Road and Palomar Airport Road, through whatever method created and most advantageous to the City of Carlsbad. City Open Space and Conservation Goals and Objectives Goal A.1 An open space system of aesthetic value that maintains community identity, achieves a sense of natural spaciousness, and provides visual relief in the cityscape. Goal A-4 A city with an adequate amount and variety of open space for outdoor recreation, including, but not limited to: parks, beaches; areas for organized sports, connecting corridors containing trails; water recreation areas (beaches, lagoons, lakes); unique conservation areas for nature study, and semi-developed areas for camping. Goal B.1 To provide an adequate circulation infrastructure concurrent with or prior to the actual demand for such facilities. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR The specific plan incorporates specific measures including setbacks, landscaping, walls, and drainage control to buffer the agricultural areas from future urban uses. The specific plan proposes to retain the flower fields through project design, and through subsidizing operations from revenue generated from proposed urban development within the specific plan. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Open space will be provided on-site through the proposed golf course use, and flower fields which will provide aesthetic volume, maintain community identity and provide visual relief. A ten-acre parcel in the northeastern portion of the specific plan will be retained as natural open space. The specific plan provides for a public golf course, in addition to a comprehensive pedestrian trail network that will provide linkages throughout the project site. The specific plan will provide a comprehensive circulation system which will serve the present and future traffic needs of the City and the region. 5.7-14 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • • TABLE 5-17 RELATIONSHIP OF PROPOSED PROJECT TO GENERAL PLAN GOALS AND POLICIES (Continued) Policy C.20 Require that the following procedure be adhered to for adjusting the boundaries of any open space area shown on the map titled "Official Open Space and Conservation Map" dated June 1992. Findings required for the approval of a boundary adjustment to the map are as follows: (1) The proposed open space area is equal to or greater than the area depicted on the Official Open Space and Conservation Map; and (2) The proposed open space area is of environmental quality equal to or greater than that depicted on the Official Open Space and Conservation Map; and (3) The proposed adjustment to open space, as depicted on the Official Open Space and Conservation Map, is contiguous or within close proximity to open space as shown on the Official Open Space Map. Policy C. 11 Utilize proper design criteria for new development to maximize the preservation of agricultural lands. City Circulation Element Streets and Traffic Control Goals and Objectives Goal A3 A City with a comprehensive network of roads which provides appropriate access to all land uses. Objective B.1 To provide an adequate circulation infrastructure concurrent with or prior to the actual demand for such facilities. Policy C.1 Require new development to comply with the adopted (September 23, 1986) Growth Management performance standards for circulation facilities . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR The open space boundary modification being requested as part of this project is consistent with this policy. The proposed project will increase the total open space area of the site from the existing area. The specific plan includes the addition of 10 acres of open space containing sensitive biological resources. Additionally, the adjustments to the current open space boundaries are contiguous or within close proximity to the open space shown on the open space map. Setbacks, urban runoff controls, and other mechanisms have been incorporated into project design in order to insure preservation of the flower fields. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan -The specific plan provides for a system of roadways that will be constructed to city standards, and will provide access to all land uses. A phasing plan has been prepared for the project which identifies necessary improvements prior to each level of development. A transportation analysis has been prepared for the project which shows the project's compliance with Growth Management performance standards. 5.7-15 City of Carlsbad November 1995 TABLE 5-17 RELATIONSHIP OF PROPOSED PROJECT TO GENERAL PLAN GOALS AND POLICIES (Continued) City Circulation Element Alternative Modes of Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Transportation Goals and Objectives Objective B.i To provide infrastructure and The specific plan provides a system of facilities necessary to accommodate pedestrians, pedestrian, bicycle, and golf cart paths bicycles, and other non-automobile modes of throughout the plan area, which provide transportation. connections to land uses within and surrounding the project site. Policy C.4 Link public sidewalks to the network The specific plan provides a linkage for public of public and private trail systems. sidewalks surrounding the project to the plan's proposed trails. LFMP Zone 13 Amendment The proposed project will require an amendment to the LFMP Zone 13 boundary. The purpose of the amendment is to reflect proposed refinements in land use and • adjustments to the Zone 13 boundary. The boundary adjustment incorporates an • area which was formally within Zone 5 so that the entire project site is within the LFMP Zone 13. As a result of the more detailed land use information, the public facility requirements and timing for Zone 13 have been refined. These changes do not result in any significant changes in public facilities requirements. Section 5.9 provides a detailed analysis of the project's compliance with the public facilities performance standards with the exception of parks and open space. Zone 13 non- residential development will be required to pay a Park Fee at building permit issuance. Zone 13 has sufficient permanent performance standard open space to meet the adopted performance standard through buildout as of January 1, 1992. The amendment to the LFMP Zone 13 in and of itself will not result in a significant impact .. Specific Plan Amendment The proposed project is requesting an amendment to the adopted Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan which increases the land area of the original specific plan by 23.89 acres. This increase includes the transfer of 20.56 acres from LFMP Zone 5 to LFMP Zone 13 which is located along the southeast boundary of the project and the inclusion of 3.33 acres south of Cannon Road. The amendment also changes the existing approved land use designations of the specific plan. Although some of the uses will be similar in type to the original Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan, there will be a significantly reduced office/research & development component and the focus of the project will be recreational, retail, and visitor serving land uses. A major Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.7-16 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • (I See Section 9.0 Response L-1 • component of the amendment will allow for the construction of a resort hotel and LEGOLAND Carlsbad in the eastern portion of the Specific Plan. The amendment to the existing specific plan will not in and of itself create a significant land use impact. McClellan-Palomar Airport CLOP The project site is located within the McClellan-Palomar Airport Influence Area. A portion of the project site is within the projected 60 and 65 CNEL noise contours for the airport. Noise impacts related to airport operations are discussed in detail in Section 5.8 of this document. Figure 5-19 in Section 5.8, Noise, depicts the airport noise contours. Building height is a land use compatibility consideration. According to the flight line analysis provided in the Specific Plan, all proposed development lies well below the 100: 1 flight line. Figure 7 on page 22 of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan provides the airport flight line analysis. Although the project site is located within the Airport Influence Area, it is not located within the boundaries of a Runway Protection Zone (RPZ), or Flight Activity Zone (FAZ). These are the areas of highest accident ·potential. The RPZ's for McClellan-Palomar Airport are the land areas adjacent to the ends of the runway's primary surface, over which aircraft using the airport must pass for each operation, either arrival or departure. Additional air safety considerations are shown graphically in the CLUP as F AZ's. The areas most likely to experience a crash are those beneath the flight pattern, especially in the final approach to the runway. The project site is not located within any FAZ of the airport as identified in the CLUP. Please refer to Figure 5-19 in Section 5.8, Noise, which depicts the Flight Activity Zones of the airport. No impact to land use compatibility with the McClellan-Palomar Airport is anticipated. · Development Agreement The applicant is requesting approval of a Development Agreement. Approval of the Development Agreement would provide the City of Carlsbad and the applicant with the assurance that .the various elements of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan, including areas of public benefit as well as areas of development, will occur in a reasonable and orderly manner. The Development Agreement outlines the term, phasing, future subdivision, future entitlements, and future legislation. No land use impacts associated with the development agreement are anticipated. MITIGATION MEASURES 1. Any future site development permit associated with the specific plan or 21.16 acre SDG&E parcel (golf course) shall be reviewed for consistency with the specific plan and related discretionary actions including the general plan and local coastal plan amendment, zone change, local facilities management plan amendment, and hillside development permit. The Planning Department Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.7-17 City of Carlsbad November 1995 shall make a determination that the site development plan is consistent with these plans, prior to approval of the permit. • IMPACT AFfER MITIGATION The conversion of the project site from a non-urban use to an intensive development is a potentially significant land use impact. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 1 will reduce this impact to a level of insignificance. No land use compatibility impacts between on-site and off-site land uses is anticipated. No impact to land use compatibility with the McClellan-Palomar Airport is anticipated. The amendment to the LFMP Zone 13 in and of itself will not result in a significant impact. Approval of a General Plan Amendment in and of itself would not result in an inconsistency with the General Plan. No impact is anticipated. · No impact as a result of the open space boundary adjustment is anticipated. No impact as a result of amendments to the Mello II and Agua Hedionda Segments • of the LCP is anticipated. No land use impacts associated with the development agreement is anticipated. No impact as a result of amending the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan is anticipated. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The proposed project in conjunction with the cumulative projects will not result in a significant cumulative land use impact. Please ref er to Section 7 .1 of this document for a detailed discussion of cumulative impacts. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.7-18 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • 5.8 NOISE The noise calculations are provided in Appendix D of this EIR. The noise calculations are based on the vehicle trip generation information from the traffic report provided in Appendix C. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Major sources of noise affecting the specific plan area are vehicles traveling on the San Diego Freeway (1-5), Palomar Airport Road, and Cannon Road, and aircraft flights from the McClellan-Palomar airport, }ocated to the east of the site. Currently, the San Diego Freeway carries large volumes of traffic resulting in noise levels of approximately 73.5 dB CNEL at the Palomar Airport Road off-ramp. Palomar Airport Road is the most heavily travelled local roadway with traffic noise levels of about 73.1 dB CNEL at 75 feet from the centerline of the roadway (see Table 5.18). The McClellan-Palomar airfield is the only general aviation facility in the North County area. In 1995, the airport operations are estimated at about 290,000 aircraft operations2, with the majority occurring during daylight hours. However, approximately 220,570 operations occurred in 1994 (Ref. C-16). Only a small number of daily operations occur during the sensitive hours from 7 p.m. to 7 a.m. Most of the operations involve single engine aircraft. Nearly two-thirds of the Carisbad Ranch specific plan area lies within the airport's 60 dB CNEL contour. Only the southeastern portion of the plan's ·area, around the intersection of Hidden Valley Road and Palomar Airport Road intersection, lies within the airport's 65 dB CNEL contour. Figure 5-19 depicts the airport's noise contours. The Comprehensive Land Use Plan identifies non-residential uses, including recreation, retail, office, and others to be compatible uses within these contours. The area also lies within the Noise Impact Notification Area, which includes land within a three-mile radius from the McClellan-Palomar airport. This notification area is mostly impacted by aircraft operations. Much of the noise in this area occurs as sporadic and irregular single noise events of 50 to 60 second in duration and 10 to 20 second peak noise exceeding 85 dBA Leq3• REFERENCES AND NOTES 1. dB is one decibel, ·a measurement of sound pressure. CNEL (Community Noise Equivalent Level) or Ldn are the noise measurement scales representing the average noise level over the 24- hour period where noise occurring during evening and morning hours is penalized by adding 5 or 10 dB. 2. Each takeoff and each landing is considered a separate aircraft operation. 3. Leq. is the actual-averaged noise level calculated from field measurements based on noise events recorded on March 9, 1995 by the Airport's Environmental Monitoring Unit. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.8-1 City of Carlsbad November 1995 RUNWAY PROTECTION ZONE CZ] GYJ FLIGHT ACTIVITY ZONE SOURCE: San Diego Association of Governments 0' 3000· north Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Program EIR • PROJECT BOUNDARY Figure 5-19 McClellan-Palomar Airport 1995 Noise Contours, Runway Protection Zone and Flight Activity Zone City of Carlsbad • • • • • City of Carlsbad Noise Element The City of Carlsbad Noise Element identifies and defines existmg and future environmental noise levels from sources of noise within or adjacent to the City of Carlsbad; establishes goals, objectives and policies to mitigate these impacts, and provides policies and action programs to implement the goals and objectives. Goals, objectives and implementing policies and action programs applicable to the proposed project include: Land Use Goal A.2. A City with industrial and commercial. land uses which do not produce significantly adverse noise impacts. Objective B.1. To achieve noise compatibility between industrial/commercial and surrounding land uses and achieve an acceptable noise environment in industrial/ commercial areas. B.2. To achieve noise impact compatibility between land uses through the land use planning/ development review process. Implementing Policies and Action Programs C.1. Encourage the development of compatible land uses in areas which are subject to excessive noise levels. Airport Objective B.1. To minimize noise impacts on City residents, the City has planned for non-residential land uses within the 65 dBA Noise Contour of McClellan- Palomar Airport, as shown on Map 3: Airport Noise Contour Map. THRESHOLD FOR DETERMINING SIGNIFICANCE For the purpose of this EIR, the project is considered to have a significant impact if it will generate noise levels above the established City noise standards for the proposed uses; if the project's noise affects noise sensitive receptors; or if existing or future ambient noise levels will be incompatible with uses within the specific plan amendment area. State law requires that indoor noise levels in habitable rooms of multifamily dwelling units and hotel/motel rooms be limited to a 45 dB(A) CNEL. Since the average attenuation factor for structures is 15 to 25 dB (decibels), a 65 dB(A) CNEL exterior noise exposure level is typically considered to be a desirable maximum exterior noise level for noise sen_sitive land uses. Because commercial or Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.8-3 · City of Carlsbad November 1995 industrial uses are not occupied on a 24-hour basis, a less stringent noise/land use • compatibility criterion is generally specified for such land uses. Noise exposure standards within the City of Carlsbad General Plan Noise Element are based upon a set of standards developed by the California Department of Health Science, Office of Noise Control (1976). These standards define the noise criteria by which on-site suitability for a planned use is determined and establish significance criteria for any off-site transportation-related impacts resulting from development. For the proposed Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan, the 70 dB CNEL exposure goal is considered normally acceptable for all non-retail exterior site uses. Levels of up to 75 db CNEL are considered "conditionally acceptable" for the retail only component. Exterior noise in excess of up to 70 db CNEL is considered "conditionally acceptable" for hotel uses as long as adequate sound insulation is incorporated to meet the 45 dB CNEL interior standard necessary for sleep without noise disturbance. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT Construction Noise Construction of individual developments within the specific plan area will generate short-term noise from construction equipment and workers vehicles. This impact is considered less than significant because no substantial noise-sensitive uses such as residential neighborhoods, schools, day care facilities, hospitals, nursing homes, etc., • are located either within the specific plan area or adjacent to it. Existing City requirements regulating construction hours will further reduce this impact. Long-term Noise Traffic Noise Development under the proposed specific plan amendment will increase vehicular traffic, and consequently, will increase noise levels along major roadways. Buildout under the specific plan amendment is expected to generate over 50,000 trips per day. Most of these trips will be made using Interstate 5 for access to the project area. As shown in Table 5-18, traffic noise levels will be in a range between 74.3 to 76.1 dB CNEL at a distance of 75 feet from the road's centerline. Since most of the proposed facilities will be located at a greater distance of 200 feet or more from the centerline, they will be affected by noise levels below 70 dB CNEL. These levels of noise are considered acceptable for retail, hotel, entertainment, and research and development uses, and this impact is considered less than significant. Internal. Operation Noise Within the specific plan amendment area, each individual development will be required to conform to the existing City noise policies, standards, and requirements . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendmellt Final Program EIR 5.8-4 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • These existmg requirements will reduce noise from individual developments to acceptable levels, and this impact is considered less than significant. Aircraft Noise Noise from aircraft operations at the McClellan-Palomar Airport will affect the specific plan amendment area. However, no residences, hospitals, schools, or other noise sensitive uses are proposed for development under the specific plan amendment. The development with a mix of commercial, office, entertainment, and recreation uses is compatible with the Airport's 60 and 65 dB CNEL noise contours and its Comprehensive Land Use Plan, and with the City's noise compatibility policies. The specific plan's most sensitive uses, a community hotel and a part of the resort hotel site, are located within the 60 dB CNEL contour. The Airport's Noise/Land Use Compatibility Implementation Directives state that all transient lodging buildings, within the CNEL 60-70 contours must be subjected to an acoustical study to determine that interior levels do not exceed CNEL 45. Implementation of Mitigation Measures 1 and 2 will reduce this impact to a level less than significant. TABLE 5-18 VEHICULAR NOISE FROM PROJECT AND CUMULATIVE TRAFFIC BUILD-OUT, YEAR 2010 24-hour Traffic Voiume Noise Level (CNEL or LdnJ at Distance from RoadWay Center/ins Fururs Future Existina Future No Project Future Plus Praise, Change Change Without Pius 75 200 500 75 200 500 75 200 500 From due to RoadWay Ssornsnr £xisrinq Project Projscr fast feel fear fest feel fast fest fest f99f Existing Project Pa/oms.· elo Pssso Dal Norte 26.550 36.850 49,900 73.1 66.2 60.2 74.5 67.6 61.6 75.9 69.0 62.9 .. 2.1 +1.3 Cannon Rd 9/0 Leao 15,500 34,700 4.8 4.8 4.8 70.8 63.9 57.8 74.3 67.4 61.3 +56.6 .,3_5 wlo Leao 15.050 37,600 4.8 4.8 4.8 70.6 63.7 57.7 74.6 67.7 61.7 +56.9 +4.0 1-5/Paiomar 910. 1-S 28.900 36,100 53,200 73.5 66.6 60.5 74.4 67.5 61.5 76.1 69.2 63.2 +2.7 +1.7 \ssumpr,ons: Avg speed exist: 56.3 km/hr• 35.0 ·mph F/99fM1x 88¾ Autos rurure: 56.3 km/hr• 35.0 mph 4% Medium Trucks Simplified ro 2 ianes 6.1 meters• 20.0 /set from centerline 8% Heavy Trucks fulur9 6.1 meters• 20.0 leer from cenr11rtin11 Tims of Day: 70% Day Noise palh decay param11rer for soft site 15¾ Evening 15% Nigh/ Calculalions using m111hods ol Federal Highway Administration "Highway Traffic Noise Prlldiction Modal,· December, 1978 Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.8-5 City of Carlsbad November 1995 Single noise events from overflights will have the most effect on the future uses within the specific plan amendment area. The area's resort, golf courses, • LEGOLAND Carlsbad, and other recreational facilities will be the most affected because they involve outdoor recreational activity. Nonetheless, since this type of noise is generally considered a nuisance and not a health or safety issue, and it will not preclude or seriously impair the operations of businesses proposed under the specific plan amendment, this impact is considered less than significant. Consistency with City General Plan Noise Element The proposed project will be consistent with the applicable City of Carlsbad Noise Element goals, objectives and policies. The specific plan will not allow for commercial or industrial uses that will produce significant noise levels. The noise analysis conducted for the proposed project indicates that proposed land uses will be compatible with existing and future noise levels on-site, including the McClellan- Palomar Airport. No impact to consistency with the City General Plan Noise Element is anticipated. 1-5/Cannon Road Interchange The proposed project will involve improvements to the existing 1-5/Cannon Road Interchange. These improvements consist of widening the on-and off-ramps to accommodate projected future traffic volumes and the construction of merge lanes on 1-5 north and south of the Cannon Road Interchange. A field review was • conducted by Caltrans in and around the 1-5/Cannon Road Interchange for possible receptors that could be impacted by traffic noise from the interchange improvements. All development surrounding the interchange is commercial, agriculture and SDG&E maintenance yard. No noise impacts to surrounding land .uses are anticipated as a result of the improvements to the 1-5/Cannon Road Interchange. MITIGATION MEASURES 1. The interior noise level of the proposed community hotel building(s) (planning area 3), and resort hotel buildings (planning area 5) shall not exceed 45 dBA CNEL. As stated in the McClellan-Palomar Airport's Noise/Land Use Compatibility Implementation Directives, all transient lodging buildings, within the airport's 60-70 CNEL contours must be subjected to an acoustical study to determine that interior levels do not exceed CNEL 45. 2. An avigation easement for noise shall be required to be recorded with the County Recorder as a condition of approval of the project. A copy of the recorded easement is to be filed with the affected airport operator. For all property transactions, appropriate legal notice shall be given to all purchasers, lessees and renters of property in "conditionally compatible" or "interior only, conditionally compatible" areas which clearly describes the potential for impacts Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.8-6 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • •• • from airplane· noise associated with airport operations. Notice also will be provided as required on the state Real Estate Disclosure form. IMPACT AFTER MITIGATION .. Implementation of Mitigation Measures 1 and 2 will reduce noise impacts to a level less than significant. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The development under the proposed specific plan amendment together with the development of other related projects will increase ambient noise levels, particularly vehicular noise levels along local roadways. This cumulative impact is considered less than significant since· existing regulations and requirements of the City of Carlsbad, other public agencies, and the State designed to redu·ce noise impacts, will be applied to development on a project-by-project basis as appropriate . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR . 5.8-7 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • 5.9 PUBLIC SERVICES . The Carlsbad Ranch site is located within the City of Carlsbad's Local Facilities Management Zones (LFMZ) 5 and 13. Because the project will be located entirely within LFMZ 13, the following analysis is based on information provided in the Zone·13 LFMP, technical studies prepared for the project, and information obtained through telephone interviews with service providers. For the purpose of this BIR, the proposed specific plan amendment's impacts on each public service are considered significant if a service provider anticipates great difficulty in providing adequate service for the project and/ or the proposed project's demand will exceed the threshold standards identified for the public service facilities in the Zone 13 LFMP. In the following discussion, these thresholds are further specified for each public service and utility analyzed. FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING At the present time, Fire Station No. 4 serves LFMZ 13. Fire Station No. 4 is located at 6885 Batiquitos Road and has three full-tirrie fire fighters and one fire engine. LFMZ 13 is focated within the five-minute (or:2.5-mile) response area of Station No. 4. THRESHOLD FOR DETERMINING SIGNIFICANCE Impacts on fire services are considered significant if the proposed project will result in an increased demand for services beyond the capabilities of the Carlsbad Fire Department. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT At build out, the project site will be developed with over 2.9 million square feet of non-residential uses, including over 300,000 square feet of retail uses, 800,000 square feet of office/research and development uses, a vocational school campus, a 280- room hotel, a 700-suite resort, a golf course, and LEGOLAND Carlsbad. This intensification in land use, as compared to the existing agricultural uses, will place an increased demand on the City's fire protection and emergency response services . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.9-1 City of Carlsbad November 1995 The national standards recommend a new fire station and/ or engine company for each ne;' 2,00f0 dwelli~dg ~alts,bor_ 1 ad~ew dTheveloLpFmMZent with approdximately ~,750,000 ,. square 1eet o non-res1 ent1 UI mgs. e recommen s a maximum 2.5 mile, or five-minute response distance from a fire station to developed suburban areas. The proposed project is consistent with the five-minute response distance standard, as the project area is located within a five-minute response area of Station · No.4. · The project's total square footage of development is less than the 3.75 million and is, therefore, below the national threshold for a new fire station. The LFMP states that the existing six fire stations are adequate to serve the City's needs, and no new stations are needed at this time. The Carlsbad Fire Department has indicated that the project will not significantly affect the Department's ability to provide fire protection services to the area. While the project will create demand for additional fire fighters and engine companies to serve the project ·area, no additional fire station will be required. The project area will continue to be served by Station No.4. Existing City requirements, including construction in compliance with Title 24 of the Uniform Building Code and payment of Public Facilities Fees of 3.5 percent of buildings' valuation at issuance of the building permit, will result in the provision of adequate fire protection services. Therefore, this impact is considered less than significant. MITIGATION MEASURES Existing City requirements will adequately reduce impacts. No additional mitigation measures are necessary. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The development of the proposed project together with the development of related projects will result in a significant increase in demand on/for fire protection services. However, since each individual development project will be required to comply with the City's requirements, including payment of Public Facilities Fees, this cumulative impact will be mitigated to a level below significance on a project-by-project basis (see Section 7.1 of the EIR for detailed discussion related to cumulative impacts). POLICE PROTECTION SERVICES The Carlsbad Police Department currently operates one police station located at 2560 Orion Way, and it employs a total of 80 full-time officers and 30 civilians. The Department maintains a six-minute response time for Priority I calls. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.9-2 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • THRESHOLD FOR DETERMINING SIGNIFICANCE Impacts on police services are considered significant if the proposed project will result in an increased demand for. services beyond the capabilities of the Carlsbad Police Department. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT Implementation of the proposed project will result in the conversion of an agricultural area to an urban area developed with hotels, entertainment facilities such as LEGOLAND Carlsbad and golf courses, which will attract large numbers of visitors. As such, the plan's area will require additional law enforcement and crime prevention services. The potential increase in demand on police services is a significant impact. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 1 will reduce the impact to a level less than significant. This demand for police protection will be reduced through implementation of Mitigation Measure 1 by requiring security measures to be incorporated into the proposed hotel, resort, and associated recreational areas, as well as LEGOLAND Carlsbad. All these developments will be required to provide their own internal security with on-site security officers. According to the Carlsbad Police Department, development under the specific plan . amendment is not anticipated to significantly affect the Department's ability to provide adequate services. While additional police officers will be needed to serve the project, the actual number· of additional officers will be determined based on response time, calls for assistance, and other factors pertinent to the Department's goal of maintaining its current response time for Priority I calls at under six minutes. The provision of internal security measures by individual developments within the specific plan amendment area together with the existing City requirement for payment of a Public Facilities fee of 3.5 percent of buildings' valuation, will result in adequate police protection services. Therefore, this impact is considered less than significant. MITIGATION MEASURES In addition to complying with· the existing City requirements, · individual projects . within the specific plan amendment area shall implement the following mitigation measure: 1. Prior to Site Development Plan approval, developers shall submit security plans for review and approval by the Carlsbad Police Department. The plans shall be submitted prior to Site Development Plan approval, and shall include information about internal security programs, security systems and . devices and any other information required by the Police Department. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR · 5.9-3 City of Carlsbad November 1995 IMPACT AFfER MITIGATION Implementation of Mitigation Measure 1 will reduce impacts to police service to a level less than significant. · CUMULATIVE IMPACT The development of the specific plan amendment area together with the development of related projects will result in a significant increase in demand for police protection services. However, since each individual development project will be required to comply with the City's requirements, including payment of Public Facilities Fees, this cumulative impact will be mitigated to a level below significance on a project-by-project basis (see Section 7.1 of the EIR for detailed discussion related to cumulative impacts). SEWER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Sewer F adlities . • Sewer service in LFMZ 13 is provided by the Carlsbad Municipal Water District • (CMWD). LFMZ 13 is located within two major sewer drainage basins -the South Agua Hedionda and the Buena/Vallecitos sewer drainage basins. The South Agua Hedionda basin feeds to the 10-inch collector sewer in Cannon Road, and the Buena/Vallecitos basin feeds to the Buena/Vallecitos Interceptors. · Currently, Zone 13 is agricultural land with no sewer facilities. Wastewater Treatment Wastewater treatment in LFMZ 13 is provided by the Carlsbad Municipal Water District (CMWD). The District has the capacity for treating additional sewer flows at its two wastewater treatment plant facilities. Primary treatment capacity is provided through Encina Water Pollution Control Facility (WPCF), which is a regional facility owned by six member agencies. .The facility has the capacity to treat 36.0 million gallons per day (mgd). The City of Carlsbad retains ownership of 25.7 percent or 9.24 mgd of that capacity. The Carlsbad Municipal Water District also holds title ·to the Calavera Hills Wastewater Treatment Plant which has the capacity of 1.2 mgd. The Calavera Hills Facility is, however, not currently operational. According to the Zone 13 LFMP, the existing sewer demand for the entire Carlsbad Sewer Service District is 5.63 mgd. Carlsbad Ranch ~pecific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR . ·5,9-4 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • THRESHOLD FOR DETERMINING SIGNIFICANCE The City of Carlsbad has adopted the following performance standards for wastewater treatment and sewer facilities: • Trunk-line capacity to meet demand as determined by the appropriate sewer district, must be provided concurrent with development. • Sewer treatment plant capacity is adequate for. at least a five-year period: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT Sewer Facilities According to the Zone 13 LFMP, future development in LFMZ 13 wiJl _sewer into the District's existing 10-inch collector pipeline located in Cannon Road. Ultimately, the proposed South Agua Hedionda Interceptor (SAHi) sewer ·system, to be constructed as development to the east of Zone -13 occurs, will intercept the existing .10-inch collector. To adequately serve new development, the 10-inch sewer main .in Cannon Road will be extended. · 'Sewage flows tributary to Armada Drive will be intercepted by the District's existing :8-inch diameter sewer located at the intersection of the Price Club entrance and Palomar Airport Road. This sewer will convey the flow to the Vallecitos Interceptor Sewer, which has already been constructed to its ultimate configuration. Development under the specific plan amendment will require improvements to the Vista/Carlsbad Interceptor, since portions of this Interceptors serve Zone 13. These improvements have been planned for in the City's Master Plan o_f Sewerage. Since the City's existing requirements of imposing appropriate conditions on individual development projects requiring the developers in the South Agua Hedionda and the Buena/Vallecitos Sewer Basins to construct the necessary facilities concurrent with development, together with the existing requirement for payment of . sewer connection fees, will . result in adequate sewer facilities. Therefore, this impact is considered less than stgnificant. Wastewater TreatmenJ Based on sewage generation factors provided in the Zone 13 LFMP, developmeni under the proposed specific plan amendment will generate approximately 295,064 gallons ( or 0.3 mgd) of sewage per day (refer to Table 5-19). The Zone 13 LFMP projected a flow of 7.37 mgd of sewage at buildout of the entire Carlsbad Service Area in 2010, resulting in excess capacity of J.87 mgd. This remaining capacity is adequate to accommodate the projected flows from the specific plan area, and this impact is considered less than significant. 1 Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.9-5 City of Carlsbad November 1995 .. Land Use Agriculture Specialty Retail Golf Course G .IA. Vocational Sch. G.IA./Alt. Research & Development Street "D" Open Space Resort LEGOLANDCarlsbad 3 LEGO Drive . Hotel and Retail Public Roads Total Carlsbad Ranch SP SDG&E Golf Course TOTAL Notes: TABLE 5-19 ESTIMATED SEWAGE FLOW Equivalent Net Dwelling Unit (EDU) Acres Per Net Acre 53.42 ---- 26.65 7.0 72.07 0.1 18.06 6.0 10.87 7.0 · 40.01 7.0 1.97 ---- 10.00 ---- 52.80 5.0 128.32 5.0 0.94 ---- 10.48 5.0 .-21.81 ---- . 447.40 ---- 24.20 0.1 471.60 ---- Estimated Sewage Estimated Flow EDU (Gallons per Day) ------ 186.6 41,052 7.2 1,584 108.4 23,848 76.1 16,742 280.1 61,622 ------ ------ 264.0 58,080 364.0 80,080 --- 52.4 11,528 ' ------. 1,338.8 294,536 2.4 528 1,341.2 295,064 (1) Conversion factors for Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDU) per acre of land use obtained from the 2.one 13 Local Facilities Management Plan, City of Carlsbad, February 1995. (2) Average unit flow of 220 gallons per day per EDU obtained from the Z.One 13 Local Facilities Management Plan, City of Carlsbad, February 1995. (3) Acreage used to estimate the sewage flow for LEGOIAND Carlsbad excludes 55.52 acres of parking for the themepark. MITIGATION MEASURES Existing City requirements will adequately reduce impacts. No additional mitigation measures are required. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.9-6 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • CUMULATIVE IMPACT The development of the specific plan amendment area together with the development of related projects will result in a significant increase in demand on/for sewer and wastewater treatment facilities. However, since each individual development project will be required to comply with the City's requirements, including payment of connection fees and construction of necessary sewer facilities, this cumulative impact will be mitigated to a level below significance on a project- by-,project basis (see Section 7.1 of the BIR for detailed discussion related to cumulative impacts). SCHOOLS ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING City of Carlsbad The City of Carlsbad is served by four school districts. These school districts are: Carlsbad Unified School District; Encinitas Union Elementary School District; San Dieguito Union High School District; and San Marcos Unified School District. Figure 5-20 depicts the school district boundaries within the City of Carlsbad. The Encinitas Union Elementary District operates nine elementary schools in its district. Most of the District's schools are operating at capacity. (Ref. B-6). The Encinitas Union Elementary School District has two existing elementary schools in the southeast quadrant of the City in addition to sites for two future schools. The San Dieguito Union High School District operates three high schools and three junior high schools. These schools are currently operating over capacity (Ref. B-7). The San Dieguito Union High School District has a site for a future Junior High School and a site for a future High School in the southeast quadrant of the City. The San Marcos Unified School District operates seven elementary schools, one junior high school, and one high school. Most of these schools are operating at capacity, with elementary and junior high schools operating on multi-track and year- round schedules. (B-5). The San Marcos Unified School District has one existing elementary school in the City and a site for one additional elementary school. CUSD operates seven elementary schools, one junior high school (Valley Junior High School), and one high school (Carlsbad High School). With the exception of Valley Junior High School, which has a remaining capacity of 150 spaces, all schools in the CUSD are operating at capacity (B-2) . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.9-7 City of Carlsbad · November 1995 Pacific O c e a n Oceans de ........ ....-: , ........ .--• I 1•• V sta . \ .. _ .. ..: : o-: I . ·-··1 . . I • S a n a r o s Paci.fie 0 c e a n PROJECT BOUNDARY CITY OF CARLSBAD BOUNDARY CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT SAN MARCOS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT E n C s ENCINITAS UNION ELEMENTARY/ i n i t a a n D i C 0 u n . . sl . . I . ..... .... e g 0 t y 3 . • I . . ---··' I • • I . . I .... . .. ..., ··-· Encin tas SAN DIEGUITO HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICTS SOURCE: Hofman Planning Associates O' 7000' north Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment ProgramEIR Figure 5-20 School District Boundaries 5.9-8 City of Carlsbad • • • • General Plan and Growth Management Plan Policy/Standards . In order to accommodate the projected demand on schools as a result of future growth within the City, the City has adopted specific Growth Management Plan standards for development within each of the City's 25 growth management zones. The adopted City of Carlsbad General Plan Policies and Growth Management Plan standards have been structured to accommodate future impacts on schools as a result of buildout of the City under the General Plan land uses. The General Plan identifies special planning considerations for schools and the locations of existing schools and confirmed school sites within the City. The General Plan also identifies approximate locations for future school sites in order to meet projected growth. These sites .. would be confirmed by the respective school district at the time of development within the District's boundaries. As stated in the General Plan, at the time of subdivision review for an area in which a "floating" school site is shown, the following procedures are necessary to determine the ultimate location of the school: • The City must inform the appropriate school district that a development application has ,been filed within the district. • The district must notify the City whether or not it wants to initiate action to proceed with acquisition of a school site in the proposed subdivision . • The district must notify the City whether or not it will be abl~ to provide schools either through existing or proposed facilities (commonly called a "will-serve" letter). Development Impact Financing Mechanisms Each of the school districts located within the City of Carlsbad have identified general locations for future school sites based oh General Plan buildout. . Each District has identified its own student generation factors which are applied to the various types of residential development to project the number of students that will be added to the District. The future school sites are based on projections from each District. Several of the School Districts including the Carlsbad Unified School District are working on the formation of Mello-Roos Community Facilities Financing Districts . to fund the construction of new facilities. The City's Growth Management Plan provides specific thresholds and standards to address impacts to schools based on the projected development within each one of the 25 Local Facility Management Zones. Local Facility Management Zones The proposed project is currently within the boundaries of the LFMZ 13 and a portion of LFMZ 5. Upon approval, the proposed project site will be located Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.9-9 . City of Carlsbad November 1995 entirely within the City of Carlsbad's LFMZ ·13 which is in the boundaries of the • CUSD. There are no existing or planned school facilities on the project site, or . within LFMZ 13. According to the LFMZ 13 plan a school performance standard for non-residential uses is not identified. A school performance standard was adopted for the non- residential uses in Zone 5 which assumed that non-residential zones would be required to pay a school fee based on the square footage of development. The fee is based on legislation which determined that employees can educate their children in the same school district in which their place of employment is located. The fee is intended to offset the cost of the construction of school facilities required to accommodate children of parents working within the school district. School Districts Surrounding the City of Carlsbad The City of Carlsbad is immediately surrounded by the Encinitas Union Elementary School District, San Dieguito Union High School District, and the San Marcos Unified School District (which are located within and outside of the City's jurisdictional boundaries and have been described above) in addition to the Oceanside Unified School District, and the Vista Unified School District which are located entirely outside the City's jurisdictional boundaries. The Oceanside Unified School District operates 16 elementary schools, three middle schools, two senior high schools, and one continuation school. All schools are operating either at capacity or above capacity. The District states that it has no • funding for expanding existing schools, and has been using temporary trailers for classrooms. (Ref. B-3). The Vista Unified School District has 13 elementary schools, four middle schools, two comprehensive high schools, one Trainable Mentally Retarded (TMR) school, and one adult education school. Of the 13 elementary schools, one is a technical school, one a performing arts school, and one a charter school. All schools are operating at capacity. Some schools have been using temporary trailers to provide . _classroom space. (Ref. B-4). THRESHOLD FOR DETERMINING SIGNIFICANCE The California legislature has provided school districts the ability to assess school impact fees for any new residential, commercial, or industrial development to help mitigate school impacts. For the purposes of this EIR, project impacts are considered significant if the proposed project would increase student enrollment beyond the district's current capacities at a rate that could not be accommodated by capital improvements funded by school impact fees or other sources available to the districts. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.9-10 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • Sec Section 9.0 Response N-1 • • ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT Direct Impact Direct impacts to schools would normally occur as a result of an increase in enrollment generated by a project that would require the District affected to construct a new school to accommodate the new students locating within their district. The proposed project will not directly generate increased enrollment within the school district that it is located (Carlsbad Unified School District). No residential land uses are proposed as part of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment. The proposed project will not result in a direct impact to schools as no direct population increase is anticipated. Indirect Impact The employment generating uses proposed within Carlsbad Ranch could increase the demand for housing within and outside of the City of Carlsbad. The Specific Plan will generate approximately 3,000-4,000 service jobs upon buildout of the proposed resort hotel, community hotel, restaurants, retail/ commercial uses, and LEGOLAND Carlsbad. The research and development and the vocational school uses could generate an additional 1,000-2,000 jobs upon full buildout. The jobs generated from the resort hotel, community hotel, restaurants, retail/commercial uses and LEGOLAND Carlsbad will generally pay low and moderate wages. Many of the new jobs are expected to be filled by the currently unemployed, underemployed, or other employment-seeking residents of Carlsbad and surrounding communities. These new employees are expected to continue living at their current residences and commute to work in the specific plan amendment area as low and moderate wage jobs typically do not result in relocations of places of residence. Children of the households that may fill low and moderate wage jobs within the Specific Plan are also expected to continue attending local schools and not move into other districts. However, state law does allow children to attend schools in the same district that their parent's place of employment is located. As stated previously, the project site is located within the Carlsbad Unified School District and therefore the CUSD would experience any increase in enrollment if this option is exercised by future employees of the businesses within the specific plan area. The CUSD has the discretion to accept students from parents working within the specific plan area based on the available capacity of the District's schools. Development of the specific plan will also result in the generation of higher wage jobs which are more likely to result in the relocation of families not currently living in the north county area. A portion of these jobs will be filled by existing residences in the surrounding area who will not be required to relocate. It is however, anticipated that some of the future employees presently reside outside the area and will relocate within the City of Carlsbad and surrounding areas . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.9-11 City of Carlsbad November 1995 Impact on School Districts within the City of Carlsbad New households that locate within the City of Carlsbad will be served by the Carlsbad Unified School District, Encinitas Union Elementary School District, San Dieguito Union High School District, and San Marcos Unified School District. These households will either move into existing residences (which will replace the current household), or they will locate within new residential development. Families locating within existing housing units will replace the existing family currently residing within the existing housing unit, which is anticipated to result in a zero net effect on the demand for schools. Families moving into new residential units will result in additional students locating within the respective school districts. These school districts have financing mechanisms available to them to mitigate the increase in students from new residential development. Since the proposed specific plan amendment area is located within the CUSD boundaries, the District has the authority to collect applicable construction school fees from project developers. The neighboring school districts which could also be impacted by the proposed project, will have no authority to collect such fees. However, these districts will collect construction fees from new residential development within their jurisdictions that could occur as a result of project- generated employees. These fees, together with state funds for facilities, state funds per pupil, successful bond enactment by individual districts, and funds from Mello- • Roos districts formed by school districts for new residential development are the • funding mechanisms available to those school districts to reduce impacts of new development. The proposed project will require a General Plan Amendment and an Amendment to the LFMP Zones 5 and 13. The LFMZ 13 plan has been prepared in order to provide a plan for supplying the public facilities that will be needed to accommodate development within the Zone 13 area of the City. The amended plan reflects the proposed refinements in land use and adjustments to the Zone 13 boundary that are proposed as part of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment. The plan has been prepared in accordance with the City's Growth Management Program, as outlined in Chapter 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code and the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan of 1986. Zone 13 is within the Carlsbad Unified School District. The Zone 13 plan indicates that existing facilities meet the adopted performance standard and that school facilities will meet the adopted performance standard with required fees through build out of Zone 13. Applicable non-residential school fees will be paid to the Carlsbad Unified School District at the time of building permit issuance. No significant impact to the Carlsbad Unified School District, or other school districts located within the City of Carlsbad is anticipated. Any indirect effect from employment is anticipated to be small, and would be mitigated through implementation of applicable fees. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.9-12 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • See Sectior: 9.0 Respon,e N-1 • • Impact on School Districts Su"ounding the City of Carlsbad As housing costs in Oceanside, San Marcos, and Vista are generally lower than in other northwestern County communities, school districts serving these areas may also be affected through new employees moving into these areas. According to SANDAG (Population and Housing Estimates, January 1995) total housing units increased by 5% in Carlsbad, 2% in Encinitas, 14% in San Marcos, 5% in Vista and 9% in Oceanside between 1990 and 1995. The median housing costs were highest in Encinitas (4th in San Diego County) followed by Carlsbad (5th), Vista (9th), San Marcos (10th), and Oceanside (11th) according to SANDAG (1990). As a comparison, the median household cost in Encinitas in 1990 was $285,659, while in San Marcos and Oceanside the median household cost was $172,184 and $170,235 respectively. Some of these districts may experience a small increase in student enrollment as an indirect impact of the project's employment generating uses. The overall net increase in students will be absorbed by the six different school districts in the north county area and it anticipated to be small within each district. Each of these districts have school impact fees and/or Mello-Roos financing options available for any new home construction. No significant impact to schools located outside of the City is anticipated. MITIGATION MEASURES No mitigation measures are proposed, as no significant impact has been identified . CUMULATIVE IMPACT Development under the proposed specific plan together with the development of other related projects will not result in a significant cumulative impact to schools. Implementation of financing mechanisms available to each school district for new development will reduce cumulative impacts to less than significant levels. Please refer to Section 7 .1 for a detailed discussion of cumulative impacts. WATER SUPPLY/RECLAIMED WATER ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Water The City of Carlsbad is served by three water districts. These consist of the Carlsbad Municipal Water District, the Vallecitos Water District and the Olivenbain Municipal Water District. The project site is located entirely within the boundaries of the Carlsbad Municipal Water District. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.9-13 City of Carlsbad November 1995 The Carlsbad Municipal Water District has established two performance standards to ensure the provision of adequate water services within the District's service area, • pursuant to the City's Growth Management Ordinance. These performance standards serve to ensure water line capacity to meet demand and require that a minimum 10-day average water storage capacity be provided. These performance standards must be met before any development can occur on the project site. Currently the CMWD water storage capacity is 12.9 days. The projected storage capacity at buildout within the CMWD boundaries is 254.5 million gallons with an average daily demand estimated to be 24.54 million gallons. This will provide for a projected storage at buildout of 10.4 days. (Ref. C-4) According to water meter readings taken from 1991 through 1993, water usage for agricultural purposes on-site was 436,333 gallons per day.1 The project site will be served by two water pressure zones. Property lying within lower elevations will be provided water service from the lower 255 Pressure Zone. The remaining properties will be provided service from the higher 375 Pressure Zone. (Ref. C-8) Figure 5-21 depicts the existing water facilities on the project site. The existing water facilities for the 255 Pressure Zone include: • A 1.5 million gallon (MG) steel tank reservoir located adjacent to the east boundary of the specific plan. • Two pressure reducing stations, one at the 1.5 MG steel tank, and the other at the intersection of Palomar Airport Road and the proposed Armada Drive. • A 16-inch and 12-inch pipeline from the 1.5 MG steel tank aligned_ southwesterly to Palomar Airport Road. • A 10-inch pipeline in Palomar Airport Road from the proposed Armada Drive to Paseo Del Norte. • A 12-inch pipeline in Paseo Del Norte and Car Country Drive. The existing water facilities for the 375 Pressure Zone include: • One 8.5 MG steel tank reservoir (now under construction to replace 1.25 MG). • A 16-inch pipeline in Palomar Airport Road. 1 Carltas, 1995. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.9-14 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • at full buildout of the specific plan. As depicted in Table 5-20, estimated water demand for the buildout of the entire Carlsbad Ranch is projected to be approximately 1,434,573 gallons per day (gpd). The two holes of golf proposed on the SDG&E parcel is estimated to generate a demand for approximately 97,284 gpd. The total project demand is 1,531,857 gpd representing an increase of approximately three times the existing daily average. The increase in water demand projected by the proposed project is consistent with the projections for LFMP Zone 13. As stated previously, buildout of all land uses in Zone 13 (including the proposed project), will comply with the storage capacity requirement of a minimum 10-day average storage capacity. Although the proposed project will be consistent with LFMZ 13 requirements, the increase in demand for water is considered a significant impact due to the limited water supply available in Southern California. Implementation of Mitigation Measures 1 and 2 will reduce impacts to a level of insignificance. Mitigation Measures 1 and 2 require the project to utilize reclaimed water to the extent feasible throughout the project site. An analysis of the domestic water demand reductions that can be obtained through the utilization of reclaimed water is provided below. Reclaimed Water As stated above, in order to reduce or minimize the use of domestic water for the proposed project, the use of reclaimed -water is required. The most likely use of reclaimed water will be for agricultural and landscape irrigation. The following are several uses which could utilize reclaimed water: • • • • • Agricultural (flowers) irrigation; Golf course irrigation; Landscape irrigation; Dual plumbing in buildings; and Construction water . However, reclaimed water alone will not be sufficient to satisfy the water demand of these uses; some potable water will also be used. For the purposes of this analysis, estimates are provided to quantify the reclaimed water use potential within the proposed project_. Agricultwal, Golf Course, Landscape Irrigation Irrigation is a common use of reclaimed water and can represent a nieans to reduce the projected demand on domestic water by over 50-percent. As shown in the water use estimates presented in Table 5-20, "Exterior Use" for irrigation purposes is _ approximately 65-percent of the total projected water use of the project. The agricultural flower fields and golf course alone represent approximately 35-percent of the project's estimated water use. These uses can be · assumed to utilize reclaimed water. Other irrigation includes landscape irrigation in and around commercial and resort developments, in addition to road parkway and median landscape irrigation. A conservative estimate would assume 50-percent to 75- percent of this total "exterior use" for irrigation of landscape other than the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.9-17 City of Carlsbad November 1995 TABLE 5-20 ESTIMATED WATER DEMAND FOR CARLSBAD RANCH Interior Use Exterior Use No. Land Use/ Net Area Water Use Average Assumed Area Water Use Average Total Development Area (SF) Factor Water lrrig. ( Acres) Factor Water Water (Acres) (GPD SF) Use Area (GPD/AC) Use Use (GPD) b% or (GPD) (GPD) ross) 1 Agriculture/ 53.42 0 0.00 0 100% 53.42 4020 214,748 214,748 Ex. Flower Fields 4 2 a,b ~ec\alty eta1I 26.65 300,000 0.10 30,000 15% 4.00 4020 16,080 46,080 3 Golf Course 45.61 0 0.00 0 100% 45.61 4020 183,352 183,352 (4 holes) 4 a,b,c G.I.A. Vocational 28.93 550,000 0.10 55,000 50% 14.47 4020 58,169 113,169 School 5 Golf Course 26.46 0 0.00 0 100% 26.46 4020 106,369 106,369 (3 holes) 6-12, Research & 40.01 800,000 0.20 160,000 15% 6.00 4020 24,120 184,120 14-15 Develooment 13 Street "D" 1.97 0 0.00 0 10% 0.20 4020 804 804 (orivate) ' 0.00 0 0% 0.00 4020 0 0 16 OJen S~ace 10.00 0 { atura -non 1rri2) 17 Resort (700 52.80 647,000 0.20 129,400 20% 10.56 4020 42,451 171,851 suites) 18 LEGOLAND 128.32 425,750 0.20 85,150 50% 64.16 4020 257,932 343,082. Carlsbad 19 LEGO Drive 0.94 0 0.00 0 10% 0.09 4020 362 362 <orivate) 20 Comm. 10.48 212,080 0.20 42,416 15% 1.57 4020 6,311 48,727 Hotel/Retail (280 rooms) .--·· Public Roads 21.81 0 0.00 0 25% 5.45 4020 21.909 21.909 TOTAL ... 447.40 2,934,830 501,966 231.99 932,607 1,434,573 Source: Daniel Boyle Engineering, Inc. Notes: 1. Exterior irrigable area is assumed to include landscape,-water features, etc. 2. Irrigation estimated to average 4.5 acre-feet per acre per year (=4020 gpd/ac). 3. Roads and streets assumed to have irrigated landscape parkways and/or medians . • • • • • • Reclaimed Water The Carlsbad Municipal Water District operates and maintains two reclaimed water pipelines in the vicinity of the project site. There is an existing 8-inch pipeline in Palomar Airport Road. Another 8-inch pipeline is in Hidden Valley Road extending from Palomar Airport Road north to the vicinity of an existing 1.5 MG steel tank at the eastern boundary of the site. The water pressure in these pipelines is the same as the 375 Pressure Zone for domestic water. Figure 5-21 depicts the existing reclaimed water facilities adjacent to the project site. The City of Carlsbad has adopted an interim Reclaimed Water Use Policy for new land development projects. The policy states that all new development shall use reclaimed water when reasonably available and that the installation of dual irrigation systems may be required subject to the terms of the Water Reclamation Master Plan. · THRESHOLD FOR DETERMINING SIGNIFICANCE For the purposes of this EIR, expansion of existing services due to project demand does not constitute a significant impact unless the provider anticipates great difficulty in providing increased service. Due to the limited water supply available in Southern California, an increase in demand for water is considered significant if water conservation measures are not implemented. Additionally, exceedence of the threshold standards as identified in the LFMZ 13 plan for each facility will constitute a significant impact. LFMZ 13 thresholds: 1) Water line capacity to meet demand. 2) A minimum 10-day average water storage capacity. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT Water Demand Implementation of the proposed project will result in the demand for water to serve proposed development. In order to provide a detailed estimate of water use for the proposed project, water use was evaluated based on the net development and type of development instead of applying a factor to a "gross area". The goal of this approach is to take into account the actual scope of the proposed facility, evaluating the water use on the square footage of a building to estimate "interior use" as well as estimating an "exterior use" generally applied to landscape irrigation. This approach additionally accommodates the evaluation of utilization of alternative water sources such as reclaimed water. Table 5-20 depicts the estimated water use Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.9-15 City of Carlsbad November 1995 f-w14:..I 1 w14:...1 ~-RWs:.., EXISTING WATER LINES FRwa:...i PROPOSED WATER LINES lliJ EXISTING RECLAIMED [I] WATER LINES LP.= LOW PRESSURE H.P. = HIGH PRESSURE SOURCE: Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan, 1995 I . I O' 600' 1200' north PROPOSED RECLAIMED WATER LINES EXISTING PRESSURE REGULATION STATION PROPOSED PRESSURE REGULATING STATION Figure 5-21 Existing and Proposed Water and Reclaimed Water Facilities Carlsbad R.anch Specific Plan Amendment ProgramEIR 5.9-16 City of Carlsbad • • • • • agriculture and golf course can be supplied by reclaimed water. With these assumptions, irrigation in the range of 718,538 gpd to 825,572 gpd may be supplied by reclaimed water. Dual Plumbing in Buildin&r The use of reclaimed water has expanded into other areas to reduce the use of domestic water. Dual plumbing systems can be installed in commercial type buildings which utilize domestic and reclaimed water. Studies of interior use within commercial type buildings have concluded that water used for flushing toilets comprises from 70-percent to 85-percent of the total interior water use, using 70- comprises percent as a conservative factor. (Ref. C-27) Because the installation of dual plumbing represents an additional construction cost to development,-it may not be realistic to assume that all commercial type buildings will accommodate this use for the proposed project. However, for estimating purposes of this study to provide a conceptual quantification of this potential reclaimed water use, an assumption of 15-percent to 25-percent of the commercial type development may be practical in providing dual plumbing. From these assumptions, emphasizing the application of dual plumbing systems where possible in the project may represent a reclaimed water use of approximately 50,000 mgd to 90,000 mgd. Construction Water Another application for domestic water conservation is the use of reclaimed water for construction grading. This is a temporary use of reclaimed water for dust control and facilitating compaction. The proposed project will require a significant amount of grading over several phases. The use of reclaimed water during . construction will significantly reduce the demand for domestic water duri:Qg the construction phases of the project. Water Facilities The proposed project will require the installation or modification of water facilities to adequately serve proposed development, consistent with the requirements of LFMP Zone 13 and the CMWD thresholds. To provide adequate water service, the following facilities are required in the 375 Pressure Zone: • A 16-inch pipeline in Hidden Valley Road extending from Camino de Los Ondas north to the vicinity of the existing 1.5 MG reservoir. This will enable the fire flow to be provided to the area from the 8.5 MG reservoir now under construction. • A 12-inch pipeline extending in an easement across Parcel 11 from Hidden Valley Road to Cannon Road . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.9-19 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • A 16-inch pipeline in Armada Drive from Palomar Airport Road to Cannon Road. • A 10-inch pipeline in LEGO Drive. • A minimum 8-inch pipeline in "D" Street. • A minimum 12-inch pipeline east of Car Country Drive to the easterly boundary of Zone 13 in Cannon Road. • A pressure reducing station east of Car Country Drive. The following facilities are required in the 255 Pressure Zone: • A 16-inch pipeline from the existing 1.5 million gallon reservoir to Palomar Airport Road. • Removal of the existing 12-inch and 16 inch transmission lines. The location and sizes of the facilities listed above have been approximated in the specific plan document. Figure 5-21 provides a conceptual recommendation of where these facilities will be located. The exact sizes and locations will be determined as areas within the specific plan develop. The water distribution system interior to the project site will be designed at the time of the development of final engineering plans. Upon approval of the project, the specific plan will lie entirely within the boundaries of Zone 13 which currently conforms with the adopted performance standards. Since the water district requires development to install domestic water and fire flow needs as conditions of approval to future development, conformance with the adopted standards will be maintained to ultimate development of the project. No impacts to water facilities is anticipated. Reclaimed Water Facilities The proposed project will require the installation or modification of reclaimed water facilities in order to reduce projected demand on the domestic water supply, and comply with the City's Interim Reclaimed Water Use Policy. In order to utilize the reclaimed water supply available the following will be required: • A 12-inch pipeline in future Hidden Valley Road and an easement from Palomar Airport Road to Cannon Road. (There is an existing temporary 8-inch water line in Hidden Valley Road from Palomar Airport Road to the reservoir.) Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.9-20 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • • A 20-inch pipeline in Cannon Road from Car Country Drive to the proposed 12-inch pipeline described above. · • An 8-inch pipeline in Armada Drive from Palomar Airport Road to Cannon Road (Carlsbad Ranch Unit No. 1 has been designed and approved as a part of CT 92-07 on December 23, 1993.) • An 8-inch pipeline in LEGO Drive. • An 8-inch pipeline in Paseo Del Norte from Palomar Airport Road to Car Country Drive. There also exists a 16" line located within and south of Palomar Airport Road belonging to the Vallecitos Water District. The City of Carlsbad has the rights to use reclaimed water from that line. That line has the capacity of two million gallons per day. As long as there is a surplus of reclaimed water available, development within this project could use this pipeline as a source of reclaimed water. The Encina Water Pollution ControlFacility currently does not have the capability to generate reclaimed water and no transmission or distribution lines have been constructed from the facility. Studies are now being performed regarding the construction of such facilities. The generating capacity requirements or the location of such a facility have not yet been determined. · As mentioned earlier, new development must agree to use reclaimed water when feasible and available. The existing pipeline in Palomar Airport Road makes access to reclaimed water feasible and readily available as long as surplus reclaimed water capacity exists. Although reclaimed water will be used in the landscape irrigation of the commercial and office complexes, its greatest use will be for the proposed golf course and agriculture fields. Therefore, a reclaimed water irrigation system shall be installed for this project as required in Mitigation Measure 1. No specific impacts to reclaimed water facilities have been identified. MITIGATION MEASURES 1. Reclaimed water shall be utilized for all agriculture, golf course, and landscaping on the project site to the extent feasible. The reclaimed water facilities shall be installed in accordance with the conceptual reclaimed water facility plan as proposed in the specific plan, and City of Carlsbad requirements. 2. Dual plumbing shall be required for office, commercial, and industrial uses, and the LEGOLAND Carlsbad project as deemed feasible by the Carlsbad Municipal Water District. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.9-21 City of Carlsbad November 1995 IMPACT AFIER MITIGATION The project impacts to water supply are potentially significant. Implementation of mitigation measures 1 and 2 will reduce impacts to a level of less than significant. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The proposed project, in conjunction with other cumulative projects, will not result in an impact to water supply as the project's demand on water will be reduced to a less than significant level. Please refer to Section 7.1 of this document for a detailed discussion of cumulative impacts. Carlsbad Ranch ~pecific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.9-22 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • • 5.10 SOLID WASTE Information contained in this section is based on the Solid Waste Management Report for the Carlsbad Ranch (SCS Engineers, June 1, 1995). The solid waste assessment is located in Appendix J of this EIR. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Solid waste generated by Carlsbad is collected by Coast Waste Management. Coast Waste Management is the City's franchise hauler responsible for the collection and disposal of municipal solid waste from residential, commercial, and industrial sources. The City has directed Coast Waste Management to utilize the most cost- effective, environmentally sound facilities available for the disposal and diversion of solid waste. Because of high disposal costs ($55 per ton) at county landfills, solid waste is currently disposed of at number of out-of-county facilities where combined disposal and haul costs are lower. Recently waste generated in Carlsbad has been disposed of as far away as Los Angeles County and the State of Arizona. Neither the City or the franchise hauler have entered into long-term agreements for disposal capacity. In the near future, it appears that tipping fees will be increased at the San Marcos Landfill and other facilities operated by the County. Although the Solid Waste Authority, a joint powers agency of the County and six cities, recently recommended that the County Board of Supervisors approve a system-wide tip fee of $47.50 per ton effective July 1, 1995 the County is now considering an increase to $68.50 per ton to offset the costs associated with operating a materials recovery facility at the San Marcos Landfill. This tipping fee increase will make local disposal alternatives less cost-competitive with out-of-County or out-of-state alternatives in the near future. Irrespective of disposal cost, the future availability of disposal capacity in north San Diego County is problematic. A recently approved vertical and horizontal expansion of the San Marcos landfill extended the life of this facility for several years. The San Marcos City Council recently took action to suspend disposal activities at this facility effective March 11, 1997. In 1993, approximately 81,603 tons of municipal solid waste (MSW) was generated in the City of Carlsbad. Of this total, 68,020 tons (83.4%) was disposed with the remainder (16.6%) diverted through various recycling programs. This information shows that diversion was achieved through a residential curbside collection program (5,864 tons), generator-specific commercial recycling programs (3,276 tons) and through use of a regional compost facility which utilizes source separated green waste (6,376 tons) as a feedstock. Small quantities were also diverted through the use of drop-off and buy-back centers . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.10-1 City of Carlsbad November 1995 Disposal data from the last quarter of 1994 and the first quarter of 1995 indicates that approximately 30% of the City's waste stream is residential, 50% commercial, • and 20% from industrial sources. • THRESHOLD FOR DETERMINING SIGNIFICANCE For the purposes of this EIR, the project will have a significant impact if it breaches published national, state, or local standards relating to solid waste or litter control. These standards include recycling in compliance with AB939 and standards related to the disposal and handling of solid waste. Additionally, a significant impact would occur if the proposed project results in a significant increase in the generation of solid waste which in turn may affect the availability and cost of local transfer and/or disposal facilities. IMPACTS The Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan proposes a mix of non-residential uses which will add substantially to the quantity of commercial waste generated in the city. Approximately 50% of the proposed development is scheduled for buildout by 1999. The remainder of the project will be build-out by the year 2010. Based on the amount of waste anticipated to be generated, the proposed project will have a significant effect on the solid waste system for two reasons: (1) Uncertainty regarding the availability and cost of local transfer and/or disposal facilities. (2) Unless a "fair share" of waste generated by the project is diverted from disposal facilities, it will become more difficult for the City to . achieve the diversion mandates of the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939). This legislation requires 25 percent diversion by 1995 and 50 percent by the year 2000. The availability of transfer and/or disposal facilities to serve waste generated by the . project (and elsewhere in Carlsbad) is uncertain from both short-and long-term perspectives. Currently, private companies are in the process of obtaining permits for transfer stations and disposal facilities in North San Diego County. The County is also proceeding with the siting and permitting of new north and south county landfills. The availability, size and cost of new facilities for the disposal of waste generated by the project cannot be determined at this time. For the immediate future. it is anticipated that the City's franchise hauler will dispose of waste generated by the project in the same manner in which other waste generated in the City is disposed, i.e. by utilizing the most cost-effective and environmentally sound facilities available. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendmellt Final Program EIR 5.10-2 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • The Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan area will contribute approximately 3,000-4,000 full-time jobs which is equivalent to approximately 7 to 10% of the total citywide employment anticipated in the year 20051 according to SANDAG's Series 7 Growth Forecasts. Assuming that the proportion of residential to non-residential (commercial/ industrial) waste generation remains constant in the future, full build out will generate between 11,000 and 15,000 tons of municipal solid waste on an annual basis. According to the City's Source Reduction and Recycling Element (SRRE), total waste generation for the year 2005 is estimated at 225,838 tons. Assuming that the current proportion of the City's waste stream generated by commercial/industrial sources (70%) remains constant in the future, commercial/industrial waste generation is estimated at 158,086 tons in the year 2005. Waste generation from the project was estimated assuming that the project would generate the same share of the commercial/industrial waste stream as the project's share (7% to 9.5%) of the City's forecasted employment growth in the same year. The estimates of 11,000 and 15,000 tons per year are roughly 7% and 9.5% of the estimated amount of commercial/industrial waste generation (158,086 tons) anticipated in the year 2005. This methodology, which scales estimated waste generation to the amount of anticipated employment growth in the City is viewed as more reflective of future waste generation trends than the City's SSRE which estimates future waste generation rates by simply multiplying Series 7 population forecasts for future years by a 12.5 pound per day per capita waste generation rate. The amount generated is equivalent to between 36 and 48 tons per day ( assuming a six-day week). This generation rate would comprise between 4.8 and 6.6% of the citywide waste generation forecast for the year 2005 (225,838 tons) . The composition of the waste stream generated will vary significantly by Planning Area. Areas designated for agricultural use and golf course will generate significant quantities of green waste (grass, branches, leaves). The waste stream generated in the GIA Planning Area and the Research & Development/Office Planning Area will be similar to that of many existing office/institutional land uses. The waste stream associated with these types of land uses typically consists of large quantities of paper wastes, plastics and food waste. Resort areas will likely generate substantial quantities of green waste, paper, and food waste. Based on information from other amusement park/resort areas, the waste stream anticipated from the LEGOLAND Carlsbad will likely consist mainly of paper (newsprint, corrugated, office paper, mixed paper), glass and food waste with smaller quantities of plastic (mainly high density polyethylene), and aluminum cans. The generation of additional solid waste is a potentially significant impact. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 1 will reduce this impact to a level of less than significant. 1 Because the waste generation forecasts in the City's AB 939 Source Reduction and Recycling Element (SRRE) extend only to the year 2006, the year 2005 is used in this analysis to compare the waste generation forecasts in the SRRE to the Series 7 Growth Forecasts . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.10-3 City of Carlsbad November 1995 MITIGATION MEASURES 1. As a condition of any future site development plans for the project, the applicant shall submit a solid waste management plan for review and approval by the City of Carlsbad. This plan shall provide the following: (1) The approximate location, type and number of containers to be used to collect refuse and recyclables. (2) Refuse and recyclable collection methods to be used in each planning area. (3) A description and site plan for any planned on-site processing facilities or equipment (balers, compactors). ( 4) A description of the types of recycling services to be provided and contractual relationships with vendors to provide these services. (5) The estimated quantity of waste generated and estimated quantities of recyclable materials in each planning area. This plan shall also evaluate the feasibility of the following diversion programs/measures: • (1) Source separated green waste collection for specific plan areas • ' designated for agriculture, golf and developed areas with substantial landscaping (in particular the LEGOLAND Carlsbad planning area). (2) Cardboard recycling in office, retail, and warehousing areas. (3) Office and retail programs which provide for the separation of wet (disposable) and dry (recoverable) materials. ( 4) Where feasible, providing compactors for non-recyclables to reduce . the number of trips to disposal facilities. (5) Glass recycling in restaurants. ( 6) Providing on-site recycling containers accessible to the public to encourage the diversion of glass, and aluminum in LEGOLAND Carlsbad. (7) Where feasible, implement source reduction measures such as reducing excess packaging, paper and polystyrene cups. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.10-4 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • IMPACT AFTER MITIGATION Implementation of Mitigation Measure 1 will reduce impacts associated with solid waste collection and disposal to a level of less than significant. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The proposed project in conjunction with cumulative projects will result in a cumulative impact on solid waste disposal, but will be mitigated to a level of insignificance through compliance with AB939 requirements and other source reduction and recycling mechanisms. Please refer to Section 7.1 for a detailed discussion of cumulative impacts . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.10-5 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • 5.11 VISUAL AESTHETICS/GRADING ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Landfonn The project site consists of gently rolling topography with three north to south trending ridges. Elevations on the project site range from 60 feet above mean sea level in the southwestern portion of the project site to 280 feet above mean sea level in the northeastern portion of the project site. A majority of the project site has been previously graded as a result of the historical agricultural use of the site. An approximately 10 acre area in the northeastern portion of the project site is undisturbed and contains native veget.ation. C The most prominent visual-feature on the project site is the ranunculus flower field(s) that is cultivated on the western slope of the site (facing the Interstate 5 Freeway). The ranunculus fields flower for approximately 2 months in the spring time creating spectacular bands of color visible from. locations to the northwest, southwest, and west of the project site. The flower fields are considered an important scenic resource in the City and are recognized in the general plan as such. Specifically, Agriculture Goal C.4 of the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan states, "Attempt to preserve the flower fields or lands east of 1-5 to the first ridgeline between Cannon Road and Palomar Airport Road, through whatever method created and most advantageous to the City of Carlsbad." Existing views on to the project site from immediately surrounding land uses are currently limited to the areas to the west of the site (Car Country Carlsbad, Pea. Soup Andersons), and the 1-5 Freeway. Views of the project site from Palomar Airport Road are partially limited due to the steep slopes immediately adjacent to Palomar Airport Road. Distant views on to the project site are available from most areas north of the site across the Agua Hedionda Lagoon, and from hillsides south of the site. Views from the west of the site are limited to the first ridgelin~. 1-5/Cannon Road Interchange Project Area A visual analysis was conducted by Caltrans for the 1-5/Cannon Road interchange component of the project. This study is contained in Appendix K of the EIR. According to the study, the 1-5/Cannon Road interchange improvements component of the project contains freeway landscaping consisting of mature eucalyptus, acacia, pepper and pine trees and ground cover consisting of ice plant, fountain grass, and other non-native grasses. There are no other visual features within the limits of the 1-5/Cannon Road interchange improvements portion of the project as this portion of the project is either developed with existing freeway, or confined to areas immediately adjacent to the freeway . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.11-1 City of Carlsbad November 1995 THRESHOLD FOR DETERMINING SIGNIFICANCE For purposes of this EIR, a significant impact would occur if implementation of the proposed project would result in an obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to t~e public or result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public VIew. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT Grading The grading shown on approved plans for the previous tentative map for the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan approved in 1992 [(CT 92-07), Units 1, :2, and 3)] will be completed prior to the proposed project grading. A total of 1,045,140 cubic yards will be moved during the previously approved CT 92-07 grading. The grading concept for the proposed specific plan portion of the project will result in the grading of a total of an additional 2,083,900 cubic yards of material on-site. Figure 5-22 depicts the grading concept for the proposed Carlsbad Ranch specific plan. As depicted in Figure 5-22, most of the areas of extensive cut and fill operations will be concentrated at the southern portion of the project site. Light grading with cut or fill depths of 1' to 10' is proposed on the west facing slope. The proposed grading for the Carlsbad Ranch project will take place in three • phases. Figure 5-23 depicts the phased grading concept of the specific plan. The • phased grading concept will allow for all material to be balanced on-site therefore, no off-site transport will be required. · Phase I grading activity would occur within lots 2,3,4,8, 10, 11, 12, and a small portion of 18. A total of 380,000-cubic yards of cut and 340,300 cubic yards of fill would occur during grading of Phase I. Phase II grading activity would occur within lots 5,6,7,9,13,14,15,17,18, and 19. A total of 1,608,900 cubic yards of cut, and 1,502,400 cubic yards of fill would occur during grading of Phase II. ~ Phase III grading activity would occur within lots 2 and 3 .. A total of 95,000 cubic yards of cut, and 78,500 cubic yards of fill are proposed in this phase of grading. This phase will consist of light grading with cut or fill depths of 1' to 10'. The Carlsbad Ranch Specific plan has established guidelines to ensure appropriate grading designs. These guidelines incorporate programs and policies from the Mello II segment of Carlsbad's Local Coastal Program . as well as City policies and programs dealing with grading and erosion control. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.11-2 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • AGUA HEDIONDA LAGOON Grading to be determined previous to site development approval. (·----. ··--·· - . ~ \ \~ ~. ~G» LIGHT GRADING (cut or Fill Depths of l' to 1 O") EZJ MODERATE GRADING (Cut or Fill Depths of 1 O'. to 20') -EXTENSIVE GRADING (Cut or Fill Depths of 20' to SO') SOURCE: Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan, 1995 t O' 600' 1200' · · north Carlsbad Ra,:zc~ Specific Plan Amendment ProgramEIR 5.11-3 • • I Figure 5-22 Gra~ing Concept City ofC~rlsbad • AGUA HEDIONDA LAGOON PACIFIC OCEAN .--•·--. ··--··--•• ,, "--"-"-"-"-"•-"/''-"''--"•"-"~,,_,._,XHX_,.:><,,_J',_~~'11 C c! OO<.::~><XX~:>•O<.:::;•:-,~'~.·~,~,:✓:,',~~,/-~"",✓:V,v-✓:v.~·"v:~::')::,✓-:✓":~::-✓',✓:',(,,':~:1-1-: ffl .:r \ti~t,~l~~-=~,,:,~✓--✓>Ox,~'·'~v~:=~.::,~::~::~::::~.::~:::,~=~.=~::_~~-:x,Q<,x;,~"'i~i • '"'/""'"vv·vv·.:,,",Z',(/'('/<:'.)<.>.(.Y.Y.:><>.C,<:X:XX~~ .:::. XXX>CX:><:XX:Xil\~ ~.__,;,.._,'. "" "✓...,,.._ -✓✓-",,.: ",,,; '· -~,;_ '"'--'q·' ~X,,c '><:X><~JOC<:>CX"><~ \ ~ ,, v,,-" ,, ,., ✓--~ "" " " ,_. .t.. ··•·.•'•· ··"-/'""'"~✓-~.~/,~," ~✓-,:io ,., ,--,:X~):,)(J.<__"KX:X.X~):Oz;;(:X.~•' , ,,. ,,.;;,.;:;,,;:--,(/'<✓'<'J"'v"'✓'v,.._, -✓,, ",, '"'✓-' ",,,.· ✓...~/• f, -•;·~~~!!!-;':n~~:!:? ~\~ o • PALOMAR ~ m PHASE I (380,000 cy cut, 340,300 cy fill) PHASE II (1,608,900 cy cut, 1,502,400 cy fill) SOURCE: Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan, 1995 t O' 600' 1200' north Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment ProgramEIR 2ZJ []]] PHASE Ill (95,000 cy cut, 78,500 cy fill) G_RADING ALLOWED UNDER PREVIOUS APPROVALS Figure 5-23 Earthwork Phasing Concept 5.11-4 City of Carlsbad • • • • Additionally, all grading will comply with City of Carlsbad Ordinances including: • Excavation and Grading Ordinance • Hillside Development Regulations • Zone 13 Local Facilities Management Plan • City of Carlsbad Landscape Manual • City of Carlsbad Master Drainage Plan • City of Carlsbad Planning Depariment Policies • City of Carlsbad Engineering Department Policies • Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program Construction The project site will be visually disrupted during the construction phase of the project. Similar to any project, new construction, landscaping, and other construction related work will result in unavoidable temporary aesthetic impacts on- site. Overall, aesthetic impacts as a result of construction activities will be minimal as only portions of the. site are visible from any single location due to the intervening topography and steep slopes along Palomar Airport Road. The western slope of the ridge-line closest to the Interstate 5 Freeway is currently the most visible portion of the site. Construction will occur at the western most boundary of the project site, however no construction other than minor grading activity will occur within the existing flower fields. The construction activities will not result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public . Development Figures 5-24 through 5-27 depict a computer simulation of the proposed project from three views taken towards the project site from surrounding areas. Figure 5-24 depicts the locations that each of the photos were taken from and the corresponding view angle from each location. As depicted in the computer simulation, the project does not have the potential to block scenic views from the closest residential areas surrounding the project site. Building height limitations, landscaping and setbacks will reduce any aesthetic impacts to insignificant levels. Future development of the specific plan will be compatible with existing urban development in the surrounding area including Car Country Carlsbad, Pea Soup Andersons and commercial retail areas to the south. A potential impact existed where proposed development in the commercial retail area could potentially block existing views on to the project site of the flower fields. Approximately 53 acres of the specific·plan will be retained for flower fields, which will be located primarily in the same place as the existing fields. The computer simulation indicates that any development that would be permitted within this area would not preclude a view of the flower fields from this area . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.11-5 City of Carlsbad November 1995 See Section 9.0 Response F-2 1-5/Cannon Road Interchange Project Area The ramp widening and merge lane construction associated with the I-5/Cannon Road interchange improvements will result in the removal of mature trees and associated landscaping. Implementation of Mitigation Measures 1, 2, and 3 will reduce any visual impacts to a level less than significant. These shrubs will be replaced with enhanced landscaping through agreements between Caltrans, the City and ·LEGOLAND Carlsbad: Caltrans has committed to additional landscaped enhancements to be installed beyond the landscaping mitigation proposed. Appendix K of this EIR depicts the plant removal and planting plan for all affected areas of the I-5/Cannon Road improvements component of the proposed project. Other than the removal of vegetation from the project site, no significant visual impacts are anticipated as a result of the I-5/Cannon Road Interchange component of the proposed project. MITIGATION MEASURES No mitigation measure is proposed for the specific plan portion of the project as no significant impact has been identified. For the I-5/Cannon Road Interchange project area the following mitigation measures shall be followed: 1. Trees shall be replaced at a 5:1 ratio. These trees shall be planted at Cannon Road and Palomar Airport Road, with supplemental water systems. Shrubs shall be replaced at a 1:1 ratio at Cannon Road only. Replacement trees shall be 15 gallon and replacement shrubs shall be 5 gallon. Species selection shall be determined by the Caltrans project landscape architect. 2. I-5/Cannon Road landscaping shall be installed concurrently with the interchange construction project in order to allow the planting to become established in time for the opening of LEGOLAND Carlsbad in 1999. 3. A plantable wall system ( e.g. crib wall) shall be utilized to reduce the visibility and aid in graffiti deterrence of the proposed retaining walls. If cast-in-place type walls are used, a form-liner texture ( e.g. "ripped rope") shall be incorporated into the design. Furthermore, the walls shall be aligned to allow the planting of vines and shrubs at the base of -the walls for graffiti deterrence and to help blend the walls into the surrounding landscape. An agreement shall be reached with the property owner immediately adjacent to this area to plant and maintain on the owner's property. IMPACT AFfER MITIGATION No significant impact to visual aesthetics/grading has been identified for the specific plan portion of the project. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.11-6 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • Implementation of Mitigation Measures 1, 2, and 3 will reduce aesthetic impacts associated with the I-5/Cannon Road Interchange improvements to a level less than significant. CUMULATIVE· IMPACTS The proposed project in conjunction with other cumulative projects will not result in a significant cumulative visual aesthetics/grading impact. Please refer to Section 7.1 of this document for a detailed discussion of cumulative impacts. · Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR · 5.11-7 City of Carlsbad November 1995 0 1000' 2000· north Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment ProgramEIR ,. 5.11-8 L Figure 5-24 Photo Locations and View Angles City of Carlsbad • • • • • View 1. Existing Conditions. This photograph was taken from the north end of Mariner Street in the Seagate project south of Palomar Airport Road. The Price Club parking lot is visible on the left side of the photo, and the existing water tank is visible on the ridgeline at the right. Palomar Airport Road crosses the photograph, visible as a light strip approximately one half inch below the horizon. This image shows the full width of the frame of a photo taken with a 20mm lens on a 35mm camera, and encompasses a horizontal angle of approximately 84 degrees . View 1, With Proposed Project. This view shows the effect of the proposed project as viewed from the Seagate project. Armada Drive joins Palomar Airport Road directly opposite the Price Club parking lot entry drive. The large road cut presently visible to the left of center will be graded down gently to Palomar Airport Road and used for flower fields. At a height of 35 to 45 feet above grade, office buildings and a proposed hotel in the center of the project will appear on the skyline. To the right in this view, the Legoland parking area will be visible in the foreground, with landscaping and low buildings of the amusement park visible farther in the distance below the water tank. Landscaping will soften the skyline compared to this computer illustration. which shows only building massing. If the resort area includes structures on the highest points of the site, those structures will also be visible from this location. as shown here at 35 to 45_ feet above grade just to the left of the water tank to the right of center. Figure 5-25 Visual Impacts of Project as Viewed·from the South Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.11-9 City of Carlsbad November 1995 View 2. Existing Conditions. This photograph was taken from the bridge over the railroad just east of lnt:Erstate 5. The photograph was taken looking east northeast toward the water tank on the ridgeline in the center of the photo. At the left just below the sk),ine are existing buildings in tr,e Car Country auto sales area At the right are retail stores along Palomar Airport Road This view shows the full width of c. photo taken with a 20mm lens on a 35mm camera. and encompasses a horizontal angle of approxin:,ately 84 degrees. View 2, With Proposed Project. This view st1ows the ellect ol the p1oposed pro1ec1 as viewed lrom the Palomar Airporl Road bridge over the Santa Fe ra11tond 11acks 1us1 west ot tn1erstate 5 At a t1e1g111 ol 35 tee110 45 teet. olltce buildings in the cent:;-r of the project will break the skyline and could block the view of the ex1s1tng water tank Because the ex1s1tng 60-loot road cul will be graded -no:e gently toward Palomar Airpor! Road than it ,s today. llower ltelds will be less v1s1ble on the nghl edge ol the view than today from this view point. The massing of the prev1ousl/ approved Gemolog,cal lns1,1u1e school facility is shown al left behind the large power pole. Landscaping will soften. th2 view and the skyline substantially. This computer-drawn view of potential new developments shows buildings only, and does not indicate landscaping. Figure 5-26 Visual Impacts of Project as Viewed from the West Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.11-10 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • • View 3. Existing Conditions. This photograph was leken looking south from lhe view walk al lhe rear of properties along Sunnyhill Drive north of Agua Hedionda Lagoon The exis1tng waler lank is visible al the left of the photo. and existing buildings in lhe Car Country auto sales area are visible al the righ1. This view shows the lull widlh of a photo taken with a 35mm lens on a 35mm camera. and encompasses a horizontal angle of approximately 54 degrees < . .-::, ... l ~ .. t._..::~?· ••_, ........ View 3, With Proposed Project. This view shows lhe elfect of the proposed project as viewed from the north across Aqua Hedionda Lagoon The new alignment of Cannon Drive cuts across the view about one quarter inch below the horizon al right. rising to jusl below the buildings at center Proposed 35-loot ar:id 45-1001 high oll1ce buildings ,n the center of the proposed pro1ec1 are visible in the center of the view. The buildings shown in lighter tone ;us1 right oi center are the previously approved Gemological lnstilule school. The resort hotel area. with 35-foot and 45-foot tall buildings. is shown at the left. Landscaping for a new golf course will be visible on either side of the office complex. Landscaping will also soften the views of the office and retail buildings and the skyline compared to the image shown. This computer-drawn view of potential new development shows buildings only. Figure 5-27 Visual Impacts of Project as Viewed from North Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.11-11 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • 5.12 WATER QUALITY Information contained in this section is summarized from the Water Quality.Report Carlsbad Ranch (Ninyo & Moore June 1, 1995). The water quality assessment is located in Appendix H of this EIR. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Hydrologic Setting The Carlsbad Ranch project site contributes stormwater to two watersheds. To the north, the Agua Hedionda Creek watershed discharges into the Agua Hedionda Lagoon and Pacific Ocean. To the south, the Canyon de las Encinas watershed discharges into the Pacific Ocean. According to the Regional Water Quality Control Board (1994), the project site is located in the western portion of the Carlsbad Hydrologic Unit. This Unit is a roughly triangular area of approximately 210 square miles, extending from Lake Wohlford on the east to the Pacific Ocean on the west, and from Vista on the north to Cardiff-by-the-Sea on the south . The northern portion of the project site is located in the Agua Hedionda Hydrologic Area, drained principally by Agua Hedionda Creek. The southern portion is located in the Encinas Hydrologic Area, drained principally by Canyon de las Encinas and its tributaries. Surface Water Surface water at the project site does not exist in perennial water bodies. However, California Department of Water Resources (1988) reported results of surface water testing of two water samples from Agua Hedionda Creek (a perennial stream located east of the site). Both water samples exceeded the recommended level for total dissolved solids (TDS) content. The report indicated that other chemical constituents in the surface water were also found in the ground water samples. The quality of the surface water was reported generally slightly better than that of groundwater. The Agua Hedionda Lagoon is a nearby surface water body of particular concern to the RWQCB. According to the "Water Body Fact Sheet" dated May 19, 1992, prepared by the RWQCB, this lagoon has had a problem with sedimentation. The RWQCB has identified land grading related to urban and agricultural uses in the watershed as causing large inflows of sediment during periods of heavy rainfall. The sedimentation has threatened the water quality and has affected the aquatic habitat (a beneficial use) of this water body. Also of concern are elevated levels of Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.12-1 City of Carlsbad November 1995 coliform bacteria which have affected the lagoon's use for recreation ( another beneficial use). • Groundwater Specific groundwater conditions are not known at the project site. General groundwater conditions were studied for the Agua Hedionda Basin by the Department of Water Resources (DWR) (1988). Reportedly groundwater depths roughly follow topography and range from 10 to 50 feet below ground surface in the lower (western) end of the basin. According to this study, groundwater quality of the Agua Hedionda Basin was found to be poor to marginal for municipal uses. Every well sampled exceeded secondary drinking water standards for recommended maximum contaminant levels for TDS. The groundwater was found to range from marginal to unsuitable for irrigation. The TDS content of water in the basin tends to increase in the downstream direction (toward the project site). Among specific chemical components, Agua Hedionda Basin groundwater contains relatively high levels of chlorides, sulfates, calcium, magnesium, and sodium. It is classified as "hard" to "very hard" water. It should be noted that the locations of water samples collected for the DWR study were upstream of the project area. Groundwater information specific to the Carlsbad Ranch project area is not available at this time. However, according to the R WQCB List of Leaking Underground Storage Tanks, several nearby downgradient sites have reportedly impacted the groundwater with petroleum hydrocarbons, notably gasoline. Based on the beneficial use designation of groundwater in this area, and no reported • impact to groundwater at the Carlsbad Ranch, specific recommendations for controlling groundwater quality for the project area are not made at this time. Statutory /Regulatory Background The Regional Water Quality Control Board -San Diego Region (RWQCB), has developed policies, rules, and procedures, and has been granted the authority to implement and enforce the laws and regulations requiring the control of water quality. The principal federal and state laws pertaining to the regulation of water quality are known respectively as, the 1972 Federal Water Pollution Control Act (also known as the Clean Water Act) and Division 7 of the 1969 California Water Code (also known as the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act). The laws are similar in many ways. The fundamental purpose of both laws is to establish beneficial uses and to provide for their protection. An important distinction between the two is that the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act addresses both ground and surface waters while the Clean Water Act addresses surface water only. The policies, rules, and procedures pertinent to the proposed project are discussed in detail in the Water Quality Technical Report contained in Appendix H of this EIR. . Carlsbad Ra11clz Specific Plan Ame11dme11t Final Program EIR 5.12-2 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • Beneficial Water Uses Beneficial uses of groundwater and surface water have been established for each water body within the San Diego County Region. According to the Basin Plan (RWQCB, 1994), beneficial uses have been designated for specific coastal water bodies, inland surface waters, and groundwaters. The waters potentially impacted by the project area are the inland surface waters of Agua Hedionda Creek and Canyon de las Encinas, the coastal waters of Agua Hedionda Lagoon, and the Los Monos Hydrologic Subarea and the Encinas Hydrologic Area. Appendix H provides a detailed description of each water body and the potential beneficial uses. Stormwater Runoff A growing concern of regulatory agencies and the public is that surface runoff from roadways and urbanized areas has the potential to transport harmful pollutants, either as dissolved or particulate matter, to nearby sensitive receptors such as wetlands, surface water and groundwater. Pollutants are generally classified as heavy metals ( e.g., lead, copper, cadmium, iron, zinc, chromium, manganese, nickel), oil and grease, nutrients (nitrate, nitrogen, phosphorus, phosphate) and residue (particulates). These pollutants are derived from a number of sources such as vehicles, unauthorized releases related to accidents, winds and fallout of air pollutants. The adverse impact of these pollutants on sensitive receptors would be related to their toxicity, oxygen consuming, biostimulation and aesthetic characteristics. The magnitude of the impact would be a function of these characteristics as well as pollutant concentration and/or total pollutant load reaching the receptor(s) from a single storm event (acute impact) or over a period of years (chronic impact). Best Management Practices (BMPs) BMPs were originally developed to protect water quality by controlling erosion and sedimentation at the source. They have since been expanded to include controlling the volume and concentration of chemical pollutants entering waters of the United States. BMPs include such standard practices as lengthening detention periods, covering bare areas with mulches, constructing infiltration facilities, and providing public education as to the consequences, both legally and environmentally, of illicit discharges to storm drains. Quality control BMPs are further subdivided into source control and treatment BMPs. As the name implies, source control BMPs are designed to prevent pollution of stormwater, while treatment BMPs are used to treat other types of runoff pollution. According to these documents, the most practical approach is to use source control BMPs as the primary system, and treatment BMPs as the secondary system. Treatment BMPs are more effective and efficient when used to handle pollutants that get past the source control BMPs. Quantity control BMPs are Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.12-3 City of Carlsbad November 1995 subdivided into volume control (e.g., infiltration and retention BMPs) and those directed toward peak rate control (e.g., detention facilities). • To maximize efficiency and minimize costs, treatment and quantity control BMPs can be designed into a single facility. An example is the use of a wet pond, which treats storm-water by allowing solids to settle out and promoting biological assimilation of dissolved pollutants through the use of an extended retention period. Peak rate control is then obtained through the controlled release of water from the pond. In order to select, design and implement the most effective and efficient BMPs, certain parameters have to be established. Important items to consider include identification of target pollutants, physical and chemical characteristics of those pollutants, anticipated volumes and concentrations of pollutants and stormwater, and any regulatory action levels (e.g., drinking water standards, nondegradation policies). THRESHOLD FOR DETERMINING SIGNIFICANCE For the purposes of this EIR, a significant impact would occur if implementation of the proposed project would result in a substantial degradation of water quality. This would include violation of standards set by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) or Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) to maintain water quality. Water quality standards set by the SWRCB or RWCB take various forms and include compliance with established practices and policies to reduce water • quality degradation. Specific standards and measures are determined on a project level at the time of application of required permits from these agencies. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT Potential Impacts of Project on Water Quality Implementation of the proposed project will result in the introduction of urban uses on a site currently used for agricultural operations. The proposed project will result in the short-term water quality impacts related to construction and grading activity, and long-term water quality impacts related to urban runoff. Ninyo & Moore assessed the stormwater management concept as proposed in the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment ("Plan"), Specific Plan 207(A), prepared by Hofman Planning Associates and O'Day Consultants, dated February 27, 1995. Policy 6-B of the Plan is "Establish a storm water management system which utilized, to the extent feasible, natural drainage courses and best management practices to improve environmental quality of water runoff prior to discharge from the site." The proposed stormwater management infrastructure system design concept utilizes a comprehensive system of water conveyances and detention basins. The detention facilities will be designed to remove pollutants and sediment prior to discharge to the adjacent watersheds. Fundamental to the Plan is to ensure that Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.12-4 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • urban runoff does not flow over agricultural land. The Plan recognizes that segregating the stormwater runoff by land use should increase the effectiveness of the system to reduce degradation of the Agua Hedionda and Canyon de las Encinas Watersheds. Three proposed land uses are identified by the Plan: urbanized areas, landscaped open space and golf course areas, and agricultural areas. Different runoff characteristics and potential pollutants are recognized for each of the proposed land uses. The stormwater management plan proposes to utilize specific structures and facilities to handle runoff from each area based upon land use. As proposed, ongoing maintenance will be essential for ensuring the success of the stormwater collection system. In urban areas, regular street and parking lot sweeping are proposed to reduce loading of the system with debris and pollutants. As proposed, landscape and open space areas shall institute integrated maintenance and pest control policies to avoid unnecessary application of fertilizers and pesticides. The management system, as proposed, is intended to remove silt and other contaminants from the stormwater. In order to remain effective, cleaning of accumulations will be performed routinely (e.g., vegetated filter strips will need to be regraded and replanted). Because trapped sediment in detention ponds and sedimentation basins will reduce their storage capacities and effectiveness, these facilities will be regularly inspected, periodically dredged, and maintained . Specific designs of the detention structures and pollution trapping facilities need to take into account reasonable maintenance access, in addition to effective pollution- control design. The proposed project will not have a significant, direct negative impact on surface or groundwater quality. The stormwater management concept proposed will effectively reduce all potential water quality impacts to less than significant levels. Unauthorized sources of contamination introduced during the preconstruction, construction, and/or maintenance phases of the project could increase the risk of water quality degradation. However, proper design, planning, quality assurance/quality control, construction techniques/materials and maintenance procedures will greatly reduce any risk that the proposed project may pose to surface and groundwater quality, erosion and sedimentation. The project may have a positive effect on erosion and sediment loads. A majority of the project area is currently used for agriculture or contains exposed soils. The specific plan will retain 53.42 retail 59.42 acres of agricultural land. When the project is built, negative water quality impacts as a result of agriculture use should be significantly less than they are presently. With the proposed stormwater control structures in place, the current sediment loads and associated agricultural runoff will be reduced . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendmelll Final Program EIR 5.12-5 City of Carlsbad November 1995 The project has the potential to increase rates of surface runoff locally and, therefore, reduce infiltration of precipitation and groundwater recharge by increasing • the area of paved or dressed surfaces. However, this increase will be mitigated to some degree by the proposed use of surface impoundments, retention basins, unlined, vegetated drainage swales, and/or other types of engineered surface water conveyance and/or collection systems. The project site has not been identified as a significant source of groundwater or groundwater recharge area. Pollutant concentrations and loads flushed from a road surface during storm events would be reduced as flow moves overland or downstream. The amount of attenuation depends upon the specific design of the collection, diversion and/ or conveyance system, first flush pattern (initial runoff after a heavy rain) of the pollutants, engineering management practices employed, and soil/vegetation characteristics of the downstream drainages. With implementation of measures proposed in the specific plan, no impact related to water quality is anticipated. Potential Impacts of Project on Erosion Major grading projects can result in increased erosion and sedimentation which have the potential to adversely impact the quality of local surface runoff and groundwater. This potential, greatest during the construction phase, continues until the landscaping has been established to stabilize graded or exposed slopes. The project is proposed to be implemented in phases, and the erosion control (grading) concept as outlined in the Specific Plan calls for a series of guidelines, which, if followed, should be effective in controlling erosion. Implementation of the guidelines and • incorporating appropriate engineering design ( e.g., runoff collection/ diversion systems) further decreases the short-term and long-term potential for project-related erosion and sedimentation to impact water quality. For long-term effectiveness of the stormwater control system to reduce pollution and prevent flooding, it is emphasized that a hydrologic engineer collaborate in the design of the stormwater system. The system design should be sufficiently robust to control anticipated peak flows from the fully developed site without exceeding the maximum current undeveloped peak flows. The design concept for the Carlsbad Ranch project calls for grading to be performed in three phases. Phase I calls for a cut of 380,000 cubic yards ( cy) and fill of 340,300 cy. Phase II calls for a cut of 1,608,900 cy and fill of 1,502,400 cy. Phase III calls for a cut of 95,000 cy and fill of 78,500 cy. There is currently grading activities taking place on the project site associated with the implementation of the Site Development Permit for the G.I.A. campus which was previously approved in the 1992 Program EIR. The majority of the grading for the proposed project will consist of cut and fill depths less than 10 feet, with some areas of extensive grading with cut and fill depths up to 50 feet. According to the plan, slope ratios will not exceed 2:1 (horizontal to vertical). The maximum slope height is 30' for 2: 1 slopes per City's Hillside Ordinance. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Ame11dme11t Final Program EIR 5.12-6 City of Carlsbad November 1995 •• • • ••• ;:=.~t-,~('i ~:~ •·.:~~- ~ ..... Project-related erosion and sedimentation will not have any irreversible short-term or long-term adverse impacts on water quality provided that the policies listed in the Specific Plan and other relevant construction practices and codes are followed during the planning, construction and maintenance phases of the project ( e.g., Caltrans Standard Specifications, 1990). With implementation of measures proposed in the specific plan, and compliance with R WQCB requirements, no significant impacts to erosion and sedimentation are anticipated. MITIGATION MEASURES Erosion, sedimentation and urban runoff filtration systems proposed in the specific plan are adequate to reduce potential water quality impacts. No additional mitigation measures are required. · IMPACTS AFfER MITIGATION With implementation of measures proposed in the specific plan, in addition to compliance with RWQCB requirements, impacts related to water quality will be reduced to less than significant levels. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The proposed project in conjunction with cumulative projects will not result in a · cumulative impact to water quality degradation. Impacts will be mitigated to a level of insignificance through the application of proper urban runoff control techniques and best management practices. Please refer to Section 7.1 for a detailed discussion of cumulative impacts. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 5.12-7 . : . :- City of Carlsbad November 1995 • 6.0 Alternatives \. • • • • 6.0 ALTERNATIVES CEQA requires the consideration of alternative development scenarios and the analysis of impacts associated with the alternatives. Through comparison of these alternatives to the proposed project, the advantages of each can be weighed and analyzed. Section 15126( d) of the CEQA Guidelines require that an EIR, "Describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which could feasibly attain the basic objectives of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives." (Sec~ion 15126(d)). Additionally, Section 15126(d) of the Guidelines state: 1. If there is a specific proposed project or a preferred alternative, explain why the other alternatives were rejected in favor of the proposal if they were considered in developing the proposal. 2. The specific alternative of "no project" shall also be evaluated along with the impact. If the environmentally superior alternative is the "no project" alternative, the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives. 3. The discussion of alternatives shall focus on alternatives capable of eliminating any significant adverse environmental effects or reducing them to a level of insignificance, even if these alternatives would impede to some degree the attainment of the project objectives, or would be more costly. 4. If an alternative would cause one or more significant effects in addition to those that would be caused by the project as proposed, the significant effects of the alternative shall be discussed but in less detail than the significant effects of the project as proposed. 5. The range of alternatives required in an EIR is governed by 'rule of reason' that requires the EIR to set forth only those alternatives necessary to permit a reasoned choice. The key issue is whether the sele.ction and discussion of alternatives fosters informed decision-making and informed public participation. An EIR need not consider an alternative whose effect cannot be reasonably ascertained and whose implementation is remote and speculative. Pursuant to the guidelines stated above, a range of alternatives to the proposed project are considered and evaluated in this EIR. These alternatives were developed in the course of project planning and environmental review. The discussion in this section provides: 1. A description of alternatives considered; · Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final. Program EIR 6-1 City of Carlsbad November 1995 ... 2. An analysis of whether the alternatives are feasible (as defined by the CEQA Guidelines in Section 15364 ), and meet the objectives of the project (described in Section 3.0 of this EIR). 3. A comparative analysis of the alternatives under consideration and the proposed project. The focus of this analysis is to determine if feasible alternatives are capable of eliminating or reducing the significant environmental effects of the project to a level of insignificance. Table 6-1 provides a summary of this analysis. Alternatives under consideration The alternatives considered in this EIR include: 1. No Project/No Development . 2. Development Under Existing Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Designations 3. Alternative Location Alternatives rejected from further consideration Several alternatives were identified early in the planning process but have been rejected from further consideration as they did not eliminate or reduce any potential impacts of the proposed project, were infeasible, and did not meet the basic objectives of the proposed project as identified in Section 3.0 of this document. These alternatives included: 1. Alternative land use designs. During the preliminary planning stages of the specific plan amendment, several alternative land use designs were developed. These land use designs were examined during the preparation of this EIR in the context of their ability to reduce or avoid any significant impacts identified for the proposed project. These alternatives were rejected from further consideration as they did not reduce or avoid any significant impacts identified with the proposed project. 2. Alternative location within LFMP Zone 14 (previously identified and analyzed in Program EIR 91-03). No feasible alternative locations were identified within the •City of Carlsbad associated with the previously approved Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. The Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan EIR (EIR 91-03) examined• the feasibility of development of the site at an alternative location within Zone 14 of the City. Because the currently proposed project is of a similar size and proposes uses similar to the original Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan, and the basic reasons for rejecting the previous site have not changed, no additional suitable site has been located within the City. This alternative location would not avoid or reduce significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed project. 3. Alternative Locations within San Diego County. A series of seven site locations within .San Diego County were examined. Six of these sites were rejected as it was determined that the site could not reduce or avoid significant impacts associated Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 6-2 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • • with the project, did not meet the objectives of the project, or were technically infeasible as they did not meet a minimum acreage requirement of approximately 400 acres for a viable specific plan. The proposed project encompasses 471.70 acres. In order to provide similar land uses and level of development as the proposed project, while maintaining the viability of the land uses, the alternative location would require a minimum of approximately 400 acres. The locations of these sites and the rationale for rejecting the sites are described in detail under Section 6.3 . . Site # 1 (Lawrence Canyon, Oceanside) This site was rejected as infeasible as it met only three of the site requirements to accommodate the proposed project. It does not have a minimum acreage of approximately 400 acres which would allow all of the land uses proposed in the specific plan to be accommodated and viable. Additionally, this alternative location does not meet the basic objectives of the project as identified in Section 3.0. Site # 2 (Center City, Oceanside) This site was rejected as infeasible as it did not meet the minimum site acreage requirement of 400 net acres. This site met only four of the site requirements to accommodate the proposed project. Additionally, this alternative location does not meet the basic objectives of the project as identified in Section 3.0. Site #4 (South Coast Oceanside) This site was rejected as infeasible as it met only three of the nummum site requirements to accommodate the proposed project. It does not have a minimum acreage of approximately 400 acres which would allow all of the land uses proposed in the specific plan to be accommodated and viable. This site met only three of the site requirements to accommodate the proposed project. Additionally, this alternative location does not meet the basic objectives of the project as identified in Section 3.0. Site #5 (City of Chula VISta, adjacent to 1-5, between E and F Streets) This site was rejected as infeasible as it met only three of the minimum site requirements to accommodate the proposed project. This site met seven of the site requirements, however it does not have a minimum acreage of approximately 400 acres which would allow all of the land uses proposed in the specific plan to be accommodated and viable. Additionally, this alternative location does not meet the basic objectives of the project as identified in Section 3.0. Site # 6 (City of Chula Vista Sweetwater Road) This site was rejected as infeasible as it met only three of the nummum site requirements to accommodate the proposed project. This site met seven of the site requirements, however, it does not have a minimum acreage of approximately 400 acres which would allow all of the land uses proposed in the specific plan to be Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 6-3 City of Carlsbad November 1995 accommodated and viable. Additionally, this alternative location does not meet the basic objectives of the project as identified in Section 3.0. ,. Site # 7 (San Ysidro, Otay Mesa) This site was rejected as it was determined that overall impacts would be significantly greater than the proposed project, and the site would not avoid or reduce any potential impacts associated with the proposed project. This alternative met six of the site requirements to accommodate the proposed project. This alternative site is located in an area that is currently in a natural condition and would result in significant impacts to biological resources not identified for the project. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 6-4 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • TABLE 6-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT Descrietion. The Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment proposes to develop 28.93 net acres (550,000 square feet of building) of GIA campus, 40.01 net acres (300,000 square feet of office and 500,000 square feet of research and development) of office/research and development, 10.48 net acres (280 room hotel, 20,000 square feet of retail) of community hotel and retail, 128.32 net acres for LEGOLAND (425,750 square feet of building area), 52.8 net acres of resort (700 suites), 26.65 net acres (300,000 square feet) of specialty retail, 53.42 acres for flower field preservation, 72.07 net acres for golf course, and 10 acres of natural open space. Additionally, the project involves development of 21.16 acres of the SDG&E parcel for golf course use, and improvements to the I-5/Cannon Road Interchange. -· -. A11ricullural Resources The proposed project will result in the conversion of existing agricultural lands to Significant impacts: urban uses, and the early removal of 181.2 acres of lands currently under Williamson Act Contracts. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program Em NO PROJECT/ NO DEVELOPMENT This alternative assumes that the site would not be developed with the proposed project, and the site would remain in its existing condition. No impacts as a result of the conversion of existing agricultural · uses on-site to urban uses, or the early cancellation of Williamson Act contracts would result as the project site will remain in its existing condition. 6-5 EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN This alternative assumes that the project site would be developed under the existing approved Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan designations. The existing specific plan designates the project site as professional office/research and development, community commercial, travel service/community commercial, community commercial/office/research and development, open space, and non- residential reserve. This alternative assumes that no amendments to the existing plans (specific plan, general plan, local coastal plan) would be required for development under this scenario. Buildout under the existing Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan designations would allow for the development of a maximum of 1,450,000 square feet of office, 220,000 square feet of retail, and a 280 room hotel. The specific plan also allows for a golf range, and lhe retention of approximately 306 acres of agriculture. The existing Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan encompasses a Iota! of 423.5 acres. No impacts as a result of the conversion of existing agricultural uses on-site to urban uses, or the early cancellation of Williamson Act contracts would result as this alternative woutd· retain a majority of the agriculture on-site and would not result in the early cancellation of Williamson Act land on-site. ALTERNATIVE LOCATION This alternative assumes the development of the proposed project at an alternative location. The alternative location is located in Oceanside, north of Oceanside Boulevard, east of El Camino Real, and south of Mesa Drive. No impacts as a result of the conversion of existing agricultural uses on-site to urban uses, or the early cancellation of Williamson Act contracts would result as the alternative location does not contain any agricultural resources or land under Williamson Act contract. City of Carlsbad November 1995 TABLE 6-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT Mitigation required to reduce impact The project's contribution to the statutory to a level less than significant: provision for the payment of fees, in combination with the permanent preservation of 53 acres of agriculture on- site, and implementation of specific plan policies related to agriculture on-site will reduce the project's impact related to the direct conversion of agricultural land to a less than significant level. Monitoring: No monitoring would be required. Air Quality Air pollution emissions will increase as a result of increased traffic, construction Significant impacts: activity, and gas and electric use (which requires the combustion of fossil fuels). Mitigation required to reduce impact I. Individual development projects within to a level less than significant: the specific plan area shall be required to implement the following mitigation measures, as determined feasible on a project-by-project basis by the City. These measures include: . Provide preferential parking spaces for carpools and vanpools and provide 7'2" minimum vertical clearance in parking facilities for van access unless surface parking is provided for vans. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR NO PROJECT/ EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN NO DEVELOPMENT No mitigation measures are required. No mitigation measures are required. No monitoring would be required. No monitoring would be required. No increase in short-term or long Potentially significant construction term air emissions would result as no related impacts from dust emissions additional development would occur and construction-related traffic. on-site. Vehicular emissions from the proposed project would be significant both on a project level and cumulatively. No mitigation measures are required. Mitigation measures would be similar to those of the proposed project. 6-6 • ALTERNATIVE LOCATION No mitigation measures are required. No monitoring would be required. Air pollution emissions will increase as a result of increased traffic, construction activity, and gas and electric use (which requires the combustion of fossil fuels). Mitigation measures would be similar to those of the proposed project. City of Carlsbad November 1995 • Mitigation: • • TABLE 6-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALT~RNATIVE • ISSUE PROPOS.ED PROJECT NO PROJECT/ EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN ALTERNATIVE LOCATION • Implement on-site circulation plan in parking lots to reduce · vehicle queuing (stacking up). • Provide shade trees to reduce building healing/cooling needs. • Use energy efficient and automated controls for air conditioning . . ' • Use energy-efficient low- sodium parking lot lights. • Provide adequate ventilation . systems for enclosed parking facilities. • Use'!ight colored ro~f materials to reflect heal. • Synchronize traffic lights on streets impacted by development. • Schedule truck deliveries and pickups for off-peak hours, • Require on-site truck load.ing zones. • Require employers to provide commuter infom1ation areas. r- Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR . . NO DEVELOPMENT 6-7 . ). City of Carlsbad November 1995 Mitigation: TABLE 6-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT NO PROJECT/ EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN ALTERNATIVE LOCATION • Implement compressed work week schedules where weekly work hours are compressed into fewer than five days: -9/80 -4/40 -3/36 • Develop a trip reduction plan lo achieve 1.5 A VR for businesses with less than 100 employees or multi-tenant worksites. • Construct on-site or off-site bus turnouts, passenger benches, or shelters as deemed necessary by the North County Transit District. • Construct off-site pedestrian facility improvements such as overpasses and wider sidewalks. • Provide shuttles to major rail transit centers. multi-modal stations, and other local destinations for all uses within the specific plan. • Contribute lo regional transit systems (e.g., right-of-way, capital improvements, etc.). • Sile development plan applications should contain the following: -Bicycle parking facilities, such as bicycle lockers. -Showers for bicycling employees' use. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR • NO DEVELOPMENT 6-8 • City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • TABLE 6-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT Monitoring: Monitoring would occur on a site-by-site basis within the specific plan area at time of site development plan approval. Archaeological and Paleontological Implementation of the proposed project Resources will result in impacts to archaeology sites CA-SDl-6132/W-I 19, and CA-SDl-8797, Significant impacts: which have been identified as significant. The proposed project will result in grading · in an area identified as having a high potential for yielding significant paleontological resources. The I-5/Cannon Road interchange improvement portion of the project is located in an area that potentially contains paleontological resources. Mitigation required to reduce impact I. Prior to issuance of a grading permit to a level less than significant: for the area north of Cannon Road, a data recovery program shall be completed for CA-SDl-6132 for the portion impacted north of Cannon Road. The data recovery program shall be completed in compliance with the City of Carlsbad's "Cultural Resource Guidelines". Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR NO PROJECT/ EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN NO DEVELOPMENT No monitoring would be required. Monitoring would be the same as under the proposed project. No significant impacts associated Potentially significant impacts to with development of the site. archaeological resources. However, sites could be subject to vandalism by "pot hunters" or inadvertent impacts by agricultural operations. No mitigation measures are required. Mitigation measures would be similar to those of the proposed project. 6-9 ALTERNATIVE LOCATION Monitoring would be the same as under the proposed project. Impacts to archaeological and paleontological resources are unknown. Because this site has been extensively graded associated with aggregate mining activities, the potential for impacts to archaeological resources is considered low. A site specific cultural resources study would identify any significant sites, and recommend appropriate mitigation measures. City of Carlsbad November 1995 Mitigation: TABLE 6-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT NO PROJECT/ EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN ALTERNATIVE LOCATION 2. A portion of site CA-SDl-8797 within the Carlsbad Ranch was identified as significant/important under City of Carlsbad and CEQA criteria and was recommended to be mitigated of impacts through avoidance (Gallegos and Kyle 1992). This site shall be placed within an open space easement and capped. Capping shall include placement of 1-2" of sand followed by 12 to 24 inches of sterile fill soil. Vegetation allowed within the fill soil should include grasses and other shallow rooted plants that will not penetrate the underlying prehistoric site. This area could also be used for a parking area, upon completion of capping. Placement of utility lines or other underground lines shall be placed outside this sensitive area. 3. Mitigation of impacts for that portion of CA-SDI-8797 wilhin the additional survey area shall be achieved through avoidance or the completion of a City of Carlsbad approved data recovery program. If a data recovery program is conducted for this site, the program shall be completed in compliance with the City of Carlsbad's "Cultural Resource Guidelines". Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR • NO DEVELOPMENT 6-10 • City of Carlsbad November 1995 • Mitigation: • • TABLE 6-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM . FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT 4. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall provide written evidence that a certified archaeologist has been retained, shall be present at the pre- grading conference, shall establish procedures for archaeological resource surveillance, and shall establish in cooperation with the project proponent, procedures for temporarily hailing or redirecting work to pennil .the sampling, identification, and evaluation of artifacts as appropriate. If additional or unexpected archaeological features are discovered, the archaeologist shall report such findings lo the applicant and to the City. If lhe archaeological resources are found lo be significant, the archaeological observer shall determine appropriate actions, in cooperation with the applicant for exploration and/or salvage. These actions, as well as final mitigation and disposition of the resources, shall be subject to the review of the City. 5. • Prior to issuance of a mass0grading pem1it the developer shall present a letter to the City of Carlsbad indicating that a qualified paleontologist has been retained to carry out an appropriate mitigation program. (A ·qualified paleontologist is defined as an individual with a MS or Ph.D. in paleontology or geology who is familiar with paleonlological procedures and technique~.) • A qualified paleontologist shall be present at the pre-construction meeting to consull with the grading and excavation contractors. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR NO PROJECT/ NO DEVELOPMENT EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN • I ALTERNATIVE LOCATION ·City of Carlsbad November 1995 Mitigation: TABLE 6-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT NO PROJECT/ NO DEVELOPMENT EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN ALTERNATIVE LOCATION • A paleontological monitor shall be on-site at all times during the original cutting of previously undisturbed sediments of the Santiago Formation to inspect cuts for contained fossils. Periodic inspections of cuts involving the Lindavista Formation is also recommended. In the event that fossils are discovered in the Lindavista Fomiation it may be necessary to increase the per/day in field monitoring time. Conversely, if fossils are not being found then the monitoring should be reduced. (A paleontological monitor is defined as an individual who has experience in the collection and salvage of fossil materials. The paleontological monitor shall work under the direction of a qualified paleontologist.) • When fossils are discovered, the paleontologist (or paleontological monitor) shall recover them. In most cases this fossil salvage can be completed in a short period of time. However, some fossil specimens (such as a complete large mammal skeleton) may requiie an extended salvage period. In these instances the paleontologist (or paleontological monitor) shall be allowed to temporarily diiect, divert, or halt grading to allow recovery of fossil remains in a timely manner. Because of the potential for the recovering of small fossil remains, such as isolated mammal teeth, it may be necessary in certain instances, to set up a screen-washing operation on the site. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR • 6-12 • City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • ISSUE Mitigation: • TABLE 6-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE PROPOSED PROJECT • Fossil remains collected during the monitoring and· salvage portion of the mitigation program shall be cleaned, - repaired, sorted, and cataloged. • Prepared fossils, along with copies of all pertinent field notes, photos, and maps, shall be deposited (as a donation) in a scientific institution with permanent paleontological collections such as lhe San Diego Natural History Museum. Donation of the fossils shall be accompanied by financial support for initial specimen storage. • A final summary report shall be completed that outlines the results of lhe miligation program. This report shall include discussions of the melhods used, slratigraphic sections(s) exposed, fossils collected, and significance of recovered fossils. 6. A certified paleontologist shall monitor all grading activity associated wilh the improvements to the 1-5/Cannon Road interchange. If buried cultural malcrials are unearthed during construction, work shall be hailed in the vicinity of the find until a qualified paleontologist can assess ils significance. If the tesling demonslrates that a resource is significant, then a dala recovery program will be necessary. Compliance wilh lhis measure shall be verified by Caltrans. NO PROJECT/ NO DEVELOPMENT EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN ALTERNATIVE LOCATION 'Monitoring: Complelion of archaeological mitigation program would be required prior to issuance of the grading pemtit. No monitoring would be required. Monitoring would be the same as under the proposed project. The sile specific cultural resources study would identify appropriate monitoring. Paleontologicai resources would be ntitigated as determined by the paleo monitor should any resources be uncovered during grading. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 6-13 City of Carlsbad November 1995 TABLE 6-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE ISSUE Biological Resources Significant impacts: Mitigation required to reduce impact to a level less than significant: Mitigation: PROPOSED PROJECT The proposed project will result in impacts to I.I acres of Diegan coastal sage scrub, and potential indirect impacts to sensitive resources immediately adjacent to the project site. NO PROJECT/ NO DEVELOPMENT Implementation of this alternative would not impact biological resources. Direct Impacts No mitigation measures would be required. 1. Diegan coastal sage scrub impacts should be mitigated by creation or restoration at ratios of 2: I and I: 1, respectively, within Preserve Planning Area 3 or the purchase or preservation at a 1: I ratio within the HCP area of Carlsbad. 2. · To avoid direct impacts to the area proposed as natural open space and to the proposed open space deed restriction, the boundaries of these areas should be surveyed and fenced. The erection of fencing and its proper location should be verified by a biologist or planning department representative. After projection completion, pern1anent fencing may need to be established to prevent human intrusion into the areas. Indirect Impacts 3. It is anticipated that the gnatcatcher pair located immediately off-site to the east of the project will be taken during construction of the municipal golf course being proposed by the City of Carlsbad. As a result, no mitigation for construction noise impacts that may occur to this pair are proposed. If through final design of the City proposed golf course it is determined that this gnatcatcher pair is not taken, then the following mitigation measure for noise impacts shall be implemented: Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 6-14 • • EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN Impacts to wetlands habitat are not considered significant because of the limited value as related to sire and disturbance and impacts associated with runoff. To offset the loss of riparian vegetation the specific plan proposes to include a series of sedimentation basins to capture runoff to remove urban pollutants. In addition, the sedimentation basins will.be landscaped with wetland associated species. ALTERNATIVE LOCATION Impacts to biological resources are unknown. Due to the extensive grading that has taken place on this site, biological resources are anticipated to be minimal, although there are areas at this location with native vegetation remaining. The site specific biological resources report would identify impacts and appropriate mitigation measures. Sensitive siting of the project on this alternative site would minimire any potential impacts to biological resources. City of Carlsbad November 1995 Mitigation: • • TABLE 6-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE • ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT NO PROJECT/ NO DEVELOPMENT EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN ALTERNATIVE LOCATION During the gnatcatcher breeding season (February 15 through August 15), noise levels during grading shall not exceed 65 decibels, averaged over a one-hour period on an A-weighted decibel (dBA), measured at the edge of Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat that is occupied by the coastal California gnatcatcher. Grading could be initiated in areas adjacent to occupied gnatcatcher habitat prior to August 15 if the pair has successfully · fledged young and the fledglings are at least three weeks out of the nest. Grading will be allowed adjacent to habitat occupied by unpaired individual birds after July I. 4. Lighting should be selectively placed, shielded, and directed away-from the areas listed above, in particular to avoid potential impacts to the coastal California gnatcatcher(s) cast of the future LEGOLAND Carlsbad and any that may occur in the proposed open space. 5. During project construction and oper:ition, measures should be implemented to control erosion, sedimentation, and pollution (fertilizers and pesticides from the proposed golf courses) that could impact the proposed natural open space or that could impact Agua Hedionda Lagoon. These measures could include bem1s, interceptor ditches, sandbags, filtered inlets, debris basins, and sill traps. 6. Landscaping adjacent to the open space shall include non-invasive plant species. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 6-15 City of Carlsbad November 1995 . TABLE 6-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT NO PROJECT/ EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN ALTERNATIVE LOCATION NO DEVELOPMENT Monitoring: Periodic monitoring would be required No monitoring would be required. Periodic monitoring by a qualified The site specific biological resources during construction and operation of the biologist would be required as a report would identify mitigation proposed project that will impact the condition of approval of the Specific measures and the appropriate sensitive biological resources to ensure Plan. monitoring. proper implementation of mitigation measures. Traffic/Circulation The proposed project will result in an Implementation of this alternative Thirteen of twenty-five intersections Traffic impacts for this alternative are increase in traffic and congestion in the would not increase the vehicular trips are expected to operate at unacceptable unknown. It can be anticipated that Significant impacts: area which will reduce intersection level of the surrounding roadway network. levels of service during the morning traffic impacts would be similar. of service at various locations and time peak hour period and fifleen of twenty- periods on roadways surrounding the five intersections are expected to project site. operate at unacceptable levels of service during the afternoon peak hour. Mitigation required to reduce impact 1. The following mitigation measures No mitigation measures would be The recommended mitigation measures Since site specific impacts are unknown, to a level less than significant: shall be implemented to reduce significant required. to reduce circulation impacts are a site specific traffic analysis would be impacts on two intersections under the phased as follows: required to determine the required Year 2000 conditions and seven mitigation measures. intersections under Buildout conditions to Year 19931 a level of less than significant. • Construct ultimate improvements The recommended street improvements at the 1-5/ Palomar Airport Road and their phasing. based on ultimate iJ1terchange, which are scheduled lo buildout conditions, are as follows: begin construction in mid to late 1992. 1997 1-5 Northbound Ram[!S & . Install traffic signal at the Palomar Air[!0rt Road {CMP intersection of Road A/ Palomar Location) -Reslripe the Airport Road. westbound Palomar Airport· Road approach for the • Construct ultimate improvements following: two through lanes, at El Camino ReaVPalomar Airport one shared through/right-tum Road intersection, three lane lane, and one exclusive right approaches, dual lefl tum lanes, and tum lane. right tum only lanes on all legs. It should be noted that the proposed project contributes less that two percent to the traffic at this location. . 1 The circulation improvement years identified for the existing specific plan were established based on anticipated project phasing which has occurred later than originally projected. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program ElR • 6-16 • City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • ·, • TABLE 6-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE • ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT NO PROJECT/ EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN ALTERNATIVE LOCATION 2000 1-5 Northbound Rames & Cannon Road {CMP Location} - Restripe the westbound Cannon Road approach for the following: one through lane, ·one shared through/right-tum lane, and one exclusive right- tum lane. 2006 El Camino Real & Cannon Road {CMP Location} - Restripe the southbound El Camino Real approach for the following: one left-tum lane, ·two through lanes, one shared through/right-tum lane, and one exclusive right-tum lane. 2007 Avenida Encinas & Palomar Ai!l!ort Road {CMP Location} - Restripe the northbound Avenida Encinas approach tci provide the configuration: one exclusive left-tum lane, one through lane, and one right-tum lane. 2008 El C1mino Real & Palomar Ai!l!ort Road {CMP Location} - Reslripe the northbound El Camino Real approach for the following: one left-tum lane, two through lanes, one shared through/right-tum lane, and one exclusive right-tum lane. Carlsbad Ranch S_pecific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR NO DEVELOPMENT 6-17 • Widen Palomar Airport Road to four lanes between El Camino Real and the eastern City limits. Again, it should be noted that the proposed project contributes less than two percent to the traffic at this location. .. City of Carlsbad November 1995 Mitigation: TABLE 6-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE •· ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT NO PROJECT/ EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN ALTERNATIVE LOCATION 2008 1-5 Northbound Rames & Cannon Road {CMP Location} - Restripe the westbound Cannon Road approach for the following: one through lane, one shared through/right-tum lane, and one exclusive right- tum lane. In addition, provide an additional eastbound Cannon Road left-tum lane. The resulting lane configuration on the eastbound approach would be two exclusive left-tum lanes and two through lanes. , Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR • NO DEVELOPMENT 6-18 • Year 1995 • Install traffic signals at Cannon Road/1-5 Northbound Off-Ramp, Cannon Road/1-5 Southbound Off- Ramp, Cannon Road/Pasco de! Norte, and Cannon Road/ Car Country Drive. • Widen westbound approach on Palomar Airport Road at Pasco de! Norte for a right-tum only lane. Year 2000 • Widen Cannon Road to provide three westbound lanes between Pasco de! Norte and the 1-5 Northbound On- Ramp. • Construct ultimate improvements at the El Camino Real/Cannon Road intersection. Year 2005 • Widen Cannon Road/ 1-5 Northbound and Southbound Off- Ramps to provide three lanes at the off-ramp junction. • Restripe Cannon Road at the 1-5 Soulhbound Off-Ramp to provide dual left-1um lanes for !he wes1bound 10 southbound on-ramp movement. • Widen Cannon Road belween the 1-5 Northbound Off-Ramp and Pasco de! Norte for a righ1-tum only lane. City of Carlsbad November 1995 • Mitigation: • • TABLE 6-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE • ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT NO PROJECT/ EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN ALTERNATIVE LOCATION Buildout Paseo del Norte & Cannon Road (CMP Location) -The southbound approach (SDG&E driveway) should be constructed and striped as follows: one exclusive left- tum lane, one shared through/right-tum lane, and one exclusive right-tum lane. In addition, llie eastbound Cannon Road approach would require an additional left- tum lane. The resulting lane configuration in the eastbound direction would be two exclusive left-tum lanes, one through lane, and one through/right tum lane. Also, at a point cast of the intersection, an additional westbound Cannon Road through lane would be required. At the intersection, this would result in the following lane configuration in the westbound direction: one exclusive left-tum lane, two through lanes, and a shared-through/right-tum lane, Huildout Pasco del Norte & Palomar Air(!Ort Road - Restripe the nonhbound and southbound Pasco dcl None approaches to provide lhc following: two exclusive left-tum lanes, one shared through/right-tum lane, and one exclusive right-tu~ lane. lf Cannon Road is not extended to El . Camino Real by the Year 2000 the following improvements would be necessary: Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR NO DEVELOPMENT 6-19 Street Classifications • The cumulative average daily traffic impacts projected at buildout of the Carlsbad Fully Constrained General Land Use Plan plus the development proposed for Zone 13 would be mitigated with the following street classifications: -Six-Lane Primary Arterial: Palomar Airport Road El Camino Real -Four-Lane Secondary Arterial: Cannon Road College Boulevard -Four-Lane Secondary Arterial: Paseo del Norte Road A Kelly Drive Faraday A venue (College Boulevard to east of El Camino Real) -Two-Lme Collector: Car Country Drive Road B Faraday Avenue (Cannon Road lo College Boulevard) . City of Carlsbad November 1995 '- Mitigation: TABLE 6-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT NO PROJECT/ EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN ALTERNATIVE LOCATION 1997 1-5 Northbound Raml!s & Palomar Air(!ort Road {CMP Location) -Restripe the westbound Palomar Airport Road approach for the following: two through lanes, one shared through/right-tum lane, and one exclusive right tum lane. 1997 College Boulevard & Palon1ar Aimort Road {CMP Location) - Restripe the southbound College Boulevard approach for the following: one left-tum lane, one shared through/right-tum lane, and one exclusive right- tum lane. 2. In addition, the Congestion Management Plan (CMP) prepared for the project requires the development and implementation of a deficiency plan for freeway segments. The deficiency plan could include the following: . Assisi in Funding Other Improvements -This option would involve providing funds which would be utilized in the construction of other improvements. Several funding mechanisms already exist in the City of Carlsbad and are listed in the Zone 13 Local Facilities Management Plan Finance Plan for impacted facilities. These include: -Traffic Impact Fees -Transnet Funds -Public Facilities Fees -Community Facility District Moneys -Private Developer Construction Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR • NO DEVELOPMENT · 6-20 • It is recommended that Cannon Road be ultimately constructed with six lanes between the 1-5 Northbound Ramps and Paseo de! Norte, three westbound lanes and two east bound lanes plus a right-tum only lane at Paseo de! Norte. Although the street segment perfom1ance standard is met with four lanes, the intersection performance standard compliance would require an additional eastbound right-tum only lane at Paseo de! Norte and an additional westbound right-tum only lane at the 1-5 Northbound Ramp intersection. This segment would, therefore, need to be widened ultimately to six lanes. Mitigation measures would be conditions of occupancy permits. City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • TABLE 6-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT Mitigation: The Carlsbad Ranch development project is already conditioned on financial participation in four of the above five funding mechanisms. • Implement Transportation -Demand Management (fDM) Measures -For applicable land uses within the -development, implementation of a TDM program would be a way of reducing the peak hour trips and thus lessening the impacts on the affected facilities. These TDM measures could include but are not limited to: incentives for employees to carpool/vanpool; telecommuting and flex- time; and providing a shullle from the commuter rail station at Poinsellia Lane. Monitoring: Monitoring of required transportation improvements as conditions of occupancy pem1its. Ha7A'lrdous Waste/Pesticide Residue The project site has historically been utilized for agricultural production, and Significant impacts: could potentially contain soil contamination due to historical pesticide use, and surface stainage from above ground fuel tanks. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR NO PROJECT/ NO DEVELOPMENT No monitoring would be required. The potentially contaminated soils would remain in place and not be disturbed by the mass grading associated with the proposed project. 6-21 EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN Monitoring would be conditions of occupancy pennits. The project site has historically been utilized for agricultural production, and could potentially contain soil contamination due to historical pesticide use, and surface stainage from above ground fuel tanks. ALTERNATIVE LOCATION Monitoring would be similar to the proposed project. Impacts are unknown and would require a hazardous waste assessment. City of Carlsbad November 1995 TABLE 6-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE ISSUE Mitigation required to reduce impact to a level less than significant: PROPOSED PROJECT 1. During grading, observations shall be made by a qualified hazardous materials specialist for areas of possible contamination such as the presence of underground facilities, buried debris, stained soils, waste drums, and tanks or odorous soils. Should such materials be encountered, further investigation and analysis shall be required to identify the significance of the potentially contaminated area. Soil remediation measures to address any potentially contaminated areas shall be implemented based on the ·recommendations of the hazardous materials. specialist. I 2. Randomly selected surface samples shall be collected after each phase of grading and chemically tested for pesticides to verify that toxaphene and DDT plus its derivatives are below the established TTLC and STLC action levels. 3. During site development, soils contaminated with petroleum hydrocarbons shall be mitigated. Mitigation techniques shall include: • Place the affected soil beneath a proposed road/parking area as a base material; • Recycle the affected soil; or • Bio remediate the affected soil on site. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR • NO PROJECT/ NO DEVELOPMENT No mitigation measures are required. 6-22 • EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN Potentially significant hazardous materials/waste impacts would be mitigated to below a level of significance through incorporation of the following measures: • During site development, soils contaminated with petroleum hydrocarbons could be mitigated by various techniques which include: -Place the affected soil beneath a proposed road/parking area as a base material; -Recycle the affected soil; or -Bio remediate the affected soil on site. • During site development, observations would be made for areas of possible contamination such as the presence of underground facilities, buried debris, stained soils, waste drums, and tanks on odorous soils. Should such materials be encountered, further investigation and analysis may be required. • Grade the project as planned, then collect up to 10 randomly selected surface samples and chemically test each individual sample for pesticides to verify that toxaphene and DDT plus its derivatives are below the established TTLC and STLC action levels. ALTERNATIVE LOCATION Since site specific impacts are unknown, a site specific hazardous materials assessment would be required to determine the required mitigation measures. City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • TABLE 6-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT Mitigation: 4. A report documenting results of any future testing shall be prepared. This report shall indicate the measures taken to mitigate contamination, as appropriate. The report shall be submitted to the City of Carlsbad Engineering Department. No mitigation measures are required. Mitigation measures are the same as those of the proposed project. A site specific assessment would be required to identify the potential impacts and mitigation measures. Monitoring: Monitoring would occur during grading of areas with potential hazardous materials. Land Use Comi?atibilit~ The proposed project will result in the conversion of the project site to an Significant impacts: intensive ulban use which may result in land use compatibility impacts, and will require amendments to the general plan, local coastal plan, existing specific plan, and local facilities management plan. Mitigation required to reduce impact 1. Any future site development permit to a level less than significant: associated with the specific plan or 21.16 acre SDG&E parcel (golf course) shall be reviewed for _consistency with the specific plan and related discretionary actions including the general plan and local coastal plan amendment, zone change, local facilities management plan amendment, and hillside development permit. The Planning Department shall make a determination that the site development plan is consistent with these plans, prior to approval of the permit. Monitoring: Monitoring of compliance would occur upon approval of site development permit. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR NO PROJECT/ EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN NO DEVELOPMENT • Prepare a report documenting results of testing and indicate the measures taken to mitigate contamination, as appropriate. Submit report to City of Carlsbad Engineering Department. It should be noted that selected mitigation techniques would require the review and approval of the San Diego County Department of Health Services and the Regional Water Quality Control Board prior to implementation. No monitoring would be required. Monitoring would be the same _as that of the proposed project. No significant impacts are anticipated No significant land use compatibility with the continued agricultural use. impacts were identified with the The pressure to develop the land original Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. would continue as the surrounding area becomes more ulbanized. No mitigation measures are required. No mitigation measures are required. No monitoring would be required. No monitoring would be required. 6-23 ALTERNATIVE LOCATION The site specific hazardous assessment would identify appropriate monitoring. Potential land use compatibility impacts could occur with surrounding land uses, and impacts related to consistency with land use designations on-site. Mitigation measures would be similar to those of the proposed project. Monitoring would be similar to those of the proposed project. City of Carlsbad November 1995 TABLE 6-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE ISSUE Significant impacts: Mitigation required to reduce impact to a level less than significant: PROPOSED PROJECT The specific plan's most sensitive uses, a community hotel and a part of the resort hotel site, are located within the 60 dB CNEL contour of the McClellan-Palomar Airport. The airport's Noise/Land Use Compatibility Implementation Directives state that all transient lodging buildings, within the CNEL 60-70 contours must be subjected to an acoustical study to determine that interior levels do not exceed CNEL 45. I. The interior noise level of the proposed community hotel building(s) (planning area 3), and resort hotel buildings (planning area 5) shall not exceed 45 dBA CNEL. As stated in the McClellan- Palomar Airport's Noise/Land Use Compatibility Implementation Directives, all transient lodging buildings, within the airport's 60-70 CNEL contours must be subjected to an acoustical study to detem1i.ne that interior levels do not exceed CNEL 45. 2. An avigation easement for noise shall be required to be recorded with the County Recorder as a condition of approval of the project. A copy of the recorded easement is to be filed with the affected airport operator. For all property transactions, appropriate legal notice shall be given to all purchasers, lessees and renters of property in "conditionally compatible" or "interior only, conditionally compatible" areas which clearly describes the potential for impacts from airplane noise associated with airport operations. Notice also will be provided as required on the state Real Estate Disclosure form. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR • NO PROJECT/ NO DEVELOPMENT No construction noise or increase in noise levels associated with the increase in vehicular traffic would occur. The existing agricultural operations are compatible with noise levels associated with the airport. No mitigation measures are required. 6-24 • EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN Construction noise impacts would not be significant as long as the developer adheres to the City's noise ordinance and building codes. The combination of traffic-related noise and noise related to the airport would result in potentially significant impacts for interior noise level for hotel uses. No significant construction noise impacts were identified; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. Precise grading and architectural plans for the hotel would be reviewed by an acoustical specialist set forth in the Comprehensive Land Use Plan for Palomar Airport. ALTERNATIVE LOCATION Construction noise impacts are not expected to be significant; therefore, no mitigation measures are required. A site specific noise analysis would be required to identify significant impacts and to recommend mitigation measures. Recommended mitigation measures are anticipated to be similar to the proposed project. Monitoring would be similar to the proposed project. City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • TABLE 6-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT Monitoring: Monitoring would occur at time of issuance of site development permits. Public Services and Utilities The proposed project will result in an increased demand for police protection Significant impacts: services and water supply/reclaimed water. Mitigation: Police Protection Services I. Prior to Site Development Plan approval, developers shall submit security plans for review and approval by the Carlsbad Police Department. The plans shall be submitted prior to Site Development Plan approval, and shall include infom1ation about internal security programs, security systems anci devices and any other information required by the Police Department. Water Supply/Reclaimed Water I. Reclaimed water shall be utilized for all agriculture, golf course. and landscaping on the project site to the extent feasible. The reclaimed water facilities shall be installed in accordance with the conceptual reclaimed water facility plan as proposed in the specific . plan, and City of Carlsbad requirements . 2. Dual plumbing shall be required for all office, commercial, and industrial uses, and the LEGOLAND project as deemed feasible by the Carlsbad Mu_nicipal Water _ District. Monitoring: Monitoring would occur at approval of site -development permit for each planning area. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR NO PROJECT/ NO DEVELOPMENT No monitoring would be required. No increase in demand on public services and utilities would occur. No mitigation measures are required. No monitoring would be required. .- 6-25 EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN Certification by the acoustical specialist to ensure that interior noise levels of the hotel meet compatibility standards would be a condition of the building permit. Impacts would be similar to the proposed project. Mitigation measures would be similar to the proposed project. Monitoring would be similar to the proposed project. ALTERNATIVE LOCATION Impacts would be greater than the proposed project. Mitigation measures would be similar to the proposed project. Monitoring would be similar to the proposed project. City of Carlsbad November 1995 TABLE 6-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT Solid Waste The proposed project will result in the generation of solid waste associated with Significant Impacts: development of specific plan land uses. Mitigation required to reduce impact I. As a condition of any future site to a level less than significant: development plans for the project, the applicant shall submit a solid waste management plan for review and approval by the City of Carlsbad. This plan shall provide the following: (I) The approximate location, type and number of containers to be used to collect refuse and recyclables. (2) Refuse and recyclable collection methods to be used in each planning area. (3) A description and site plan for any planned on-site processing facilities or equipment (balers, compactors). (4) A descriptioi1 of the types of recycling scivices to be provided and contractual relationships wilh vendors to provide these seivices. (5) The estimated quantity of waste generated and estimated quantities of recyclable materials in each planning area. This plan shall also evaluate the feasibility of the following diversion programs/measures: Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR • , NO PROJECT/ NO DEVELOPMENT Implementation of this alternative would not result in the generation of additional solid waste beyond existing levels. No mitigation measures are required. 6-26 • EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN The project-related impacts are not significant; however, cumulative impacts to landfills are significant. Mitigation measures would be similar to the proposed project. ALTERNATIVE LOCATION The generation of solid waste would be similar to the proposed project. Mitigation measures would be similar to the proposed project. City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • TABLE 6-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT Mitigation: (1) Source separated green waste collection for specific plan areas designated for agriculture, golf and developed areas with substantial landscaping (in particular the LEGOLAND planning area). (2) Cardboard recycling in office, retail, and warehousing areas. (3) Office and retail programs which provide for the separation of wet (disposable) and dry (recoverable) materials. (4) Where feasible, providing compactors for non-recyclables to reduce the number . of trips to disposal facilities. (5) Glass recycling in restaurants. (6) Providing on-site recycling containers accessible to the public to encourage the diversion of glass. and aluminum in the LEGOLAND family park area. (7) Where feasible. implement source reduction measures such as reducing excess packaging, paper and polystyrene cups. Monitoring: Monitoring would occur prior to approval of any development pem1its within the specific plan area. , . . Visual Aesthetics/Grading No visual aesthetics/grading impacts associated with the specific plan were Significant impacts: identified. The ramp widening component of the I- 5/Cannon Road interchange improvements will result in the removal of mature trees and associated landscaping. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR NO PROJECT/ EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN NO DEVELOPMENT No monitoring would be required. Monitoring would tie similar to the proposed project. Implementation of this alternative As long as the building setbacks and would not change the landscape or landscape buffers proposed in the views. Specific Plan are .implemented, no ' significant visual impacts would result from implementation of the proposed project. -. 6-27 ALTERNATIVE LOCATION Monitoring wouid be similar to the proposed project. Impacts would be similar to the proposed project. Implementation of setbacks, landscaping and sensitive siting would reduce any potential visual impacts. - City of Carlsbad November 1995 TABLE 6-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT Mitigation required to reduce impact 1. Trees shall be replaced at a 5: 1 ratio. to a level less than significant: These trees shall be planted al Cannon Road and Palomar Airport Road, with supplemental water systems. Shrubs shall be replaced at a 1:1 ratio at Cannon Road only. Replacement trees shall be 15 gallon and replacement shrubs shall be 5 gallon. Species selection shall be determined by the Caltrans project landscape architect. 2. 1-5/Cannon Road landscaping shall be installed concurrently with the interchange construction project in order to allow the planting to become established in lime for the opening of the Lego themepark in 1999. 3. A plantable wall system (e.g. crib wall) shall be utilized to reduce the visibility and aid in graffiti deterrence of the proposed retaining walls. If cast-in-place type walls are used, a form-liner texture (e.g. "ripped rope") shall be incorporated into the design. Furthermore, the walls shall be aligned to allow the planting of vines and shrubs at the base of the walls for graffiti deterrence and to help blend the walls into the surrounding landscape. An agreement shall be reached with the property owner immediately adjacent to this area to plant and maintain on the owner's property. Monitoring: Monitoring would be required by Caltrans after completion of improvements to the interchange. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR • NO PROJECT/ EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN NO DEVELOPMENT No mitigation measures are required. No mitigation measures are required. No monitoring would be required. No monitoring is required. 6-28 • ALTERNATIVE LOCATION ' No mitigation measures are required. No monitoring is required. City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • TABLE 6-1 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION, AND MONITORING/REPORT PROGRAM FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND EACH ALTERNATIVE ISSUE PROPOSED PROJECT Water Q!!alit:t No impacts to water quality were identified. Significant impacts: ' Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. Monitoring: No monitoring would be required. .... ...i r : ,. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR · NO PROJECT/ NO DEVELOPMENT No significant water quality impacts are expected to occur. , - No mitigation measures are required. No monitoring would be required. 6-29 EXISTING SPECIFIC PLAN The proposed drain system would be adequate to handle project runoff and would direct runoff away from Agua Hedionda Lagoon; therefore no significant water quality impacts are expected to occur. No mitigation measures are required. No monitoring would be required. ALTERNATIVE LOCATION Impacts to water quality are unknown, but they are expected to be similar to those identified for the proposed project. No mitigation measures are required. No monitoring would be required. City of Carlsbad November 1995 6.1 NO PROJECT/NO DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVE Description of Alternative CEQA requires the analysis of the No Project Alternative (Public Resources Code Section 15126). This alternative assumes that the site would not be developed with the proposed project, and the site would remain in its existing condition. The existing uses of the site for agricultural production would continue indefinitely as market conditions, and constraints on agriculture (i.e. water costs) dictate. Under this alternative, a majority of the impacts identified in this EIR would not occur. Because the project site would not be graded, impacts to short-term air quality and landform alteration would not occur. Long-term impacts including air quality emissions from stationary and mobile sources, noise, traffic/circulation, solid waste generation, and public services and utilities would not occur. Conclusion The "No Project" alternative is considered environmentally superior to the proposed • project since no new significant environmental impacts would result. This • alternative is not feasible as it does not meet the objectives of the proposed project as defined in Section 3.0 of this document. These objectives include the establishment of a mixed-use development by combining complementary uses around LEGOLAND Carlsbad that will become a focus and activity center for the City of Carlsbad and the establishment of an attractive, mixed use development which preserves the open space character of the Carlsbad Ranch and enhances the scenic qualities and identity of the Carlsbad community. 6.2 DEVELOPMENT UNDER EXISTING CARLSBAD RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN DESIGNATIONS Description of Alternative This alternative assumes tha~ the project site would be developed under the existing approved Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan designations. The existing specific plan designates the project site as professional office/research and development, community commercial, travel service/ community commercial, community commercial/office/research and development, open space, and non-residential reserve. This alternative assumes that no amendments to the existing plans (specific Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 6-30 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • plan, g_eneral plan, local coastal plan) would be required for development under this scenano. Buildout under the existing Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan designations would allow . for the development of a maximum of 1,450,000 square feet of office, 220,000 square feet of retail, and a 280 room hotel. The specific plan also allows for a golf range, and the retention of approximately 306 acres of agriculture. The existing Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan encompasses a total of 423.5 acres. Agricultural Resources Implementation of this alternative would retain approximately 306 acres for agricultural uses. The portions of the project site that are planned for development are not part of the current agricultural preserve contract with the exception of the 24.5 acre area proposed for the golf driving range. This alternative would avoid the early cancellation of the. Williamson Act contracts associated with the proposed project, however, no significant impacts have been identified related to this issue. This alternative does not permanently preserve any agricultural lands on-site. Once the existing contracts expire (2001 and 2006), these areas could be potentially developed with urban uses except for 39.1 acres subject to an open space easement and open space general plan designation. As with the proposed project, no significant project-specific impacts to agriculture would occur. However, the conversion of the agricultural lands on the site that could occur from future development would contribute to a significant cumulative impact on agricultural resources . Air Quality This alternative would result in less short-term air quality impacts associated wiih grading and construction. Because development would be concentrated in the central portion of the project site, PM10 emissions associated with grading activity would be less. Project-specific long-term emissions from mobile and stationary sources would be similar to the proposed project. The agricultural fields would continue to generate PM10 emissions. This alternative would result in significant long-term air quality impacts. Implementation of mitigation measures similar to the proposed project could reduce project-specific impacts to a level of insignificance. As with the project, cumulative. impacts would remain unavoidable. Archaeological and Paleontological Resources Development of this alternative would result in significant project-specific impacts to archaeological resources on-site. The proposed project would result in direct impacts which would require implementation of mitigation measures including a data recovery program and the capping of one significant archaeological site. Although no fossils have been identified on-site, the project site is located in an area of high paleontological sensitivity. The same type of mitigation measures proposed for the proposed project would be implemented under this alternative which reduce Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 6-31 City of Carlsbad November 1995 AGUA HEDIONDA LAGOON OCEAN ~ OFFICE g GOLF RANGE (850,000.square feet) -(24.5 acres) t2S2Sa RETAIL D AGRICULTURE (140,000) (306.4 acres) Ir.II OFFICE/RETAIL/HOTEL sl~''.1~ (6001</B0K}/280 rooms SOURCE: Carlsbad Ranch Specific Pion, 1993 ♦ O' 600' 1200' north Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment ProgramEIR 6-32 • • I • • I •• I.I .. • • I • • I • • I • • Figure 6-1 Existing Specific Plan · Alternative City of Carlsbad • "11 C -i C :II m ::i::: 0 • ~ ~ l: ~ ~ i ~ • • • • potential impacts to paleontological resources to a less than significant level. Overall, impacts associated with this alternative would be similar to the proposed project. Biological Resources Implementation of this alternative would result in similar biological impacts a:s the proposed project. As with the proposed project, this alternative would not result in development on the approximately 10 acres of natural habitat on the northeastern comer of the project site. A portion of the riparian scrub and freshwater marsh would be disturbed from development. However, as with the proposed project, this would not represent a significant project-specific impact to biological resources. Traffic/ Circulation Implementation of this alternative is anticipated to result in thirteen of twenty-five intersections to operate at unacceptable levels of service during the morning peak hour period, and fifteen of twenty-five intersections to operate at unacceptable levels of service during the afternoon peak hour. Implementation of mitigation measures previously recommended as part of the 1992 Program EIR for Carlsbad Ranch are anticipated to reduce impacts to a level of insignificance. Hazardous Waste/Pesticide Residue Potential impacts related to hazardous waste/pesticide residue on the project site would be similar under this alternative as the proposed project. Development under this alternative would require the implementation of the same types of mitigation measures as have been identified for the proposed project to address any potential significant project-specific impacts related to soil contamination on the project site to a level less than significant. Land Use Compatibility No land use compatibility impacts have been identified for the proposed project, therefore this alternative will not avoid or . reduce any significant land use compatibility impacts. This alternative would not require amendments to existing land use plans. Development of the project site pursuant to the existing specific plan designations would be consistent with the existing land use designations of the project site. This alternative would result in the same types of land use compatibility issues between proposed urban and agricultural uses.as the proposed project, but are insignificant with the implementation of specific plan policies and standards related to agricultural compatibility with other land uses. Noise Implementation of this alternative would result in short-term construction noise, and long-term impacts associated with traffic generated roadway noise. Noise levels on the project site would be similar to the proposed project. •As· with the proposed Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 6-33 City of Carlsbad November 1995 project; compliance with existing codes and standards for interior noise levels would attenuate interior noise levels to acceptable limits and result in no significant • impacts. Public Services and Utilities This alternative would result in significant impacts related to an increased demand on public services and utilities. The existing Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan would have to comply with the threshold requirements as established in the Zone 13 Local Facility Management Plan and require the implementation of mitigation measures to reduce impacts related to water use to a less than significant level. Overall, the demand on public services and utilities would be similar to the proposed project. Solid Waste Implementation of this alternative would result in similar impacts related to solid waste as the proposed project, as solid waste generation is anticipated to be significant. Implementation of a recycling program similar to the program identified for the project would reduce impacts to less than significant levels. Visual Aesthetics/Grading This alternative would result 1n similar changes to the project site as a result of future development. No significant impacts were identified for the proposed project, therefore this alternative would not avoid or reduce any visual aesthetic/grading impacts. The development and design standards contained within this specific plan are similar to the proposed project, including setbacks, building heights, and landscaping. This alternative would result in significantly less grading and landform modifications than currently proposed as development would be concentrated in the second north-south trending ridge. However, no significant impacts were identified for the proposed project. Water Quality Implementation of this alternative would result in a significant increase in impervious surfaces on the project site, in addition to the continuation of agricultural operations on the project site. The Storm Water Management Plan and measures to control urban runoff similar to those of the proposed project would be implemented to reduce pote.ntial significant project-specific short-term and long-term impacts associated with this alternative to a level less than significant. Overall, impacts would be similar to the project. Conclusion The "Development Under Existing Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Designations" is not environmentally superior to the proposed project. This alternative would not reduce or avoid any significant impacts identified for the proposed project to less than significant levels. This alternative could potentially lessen the impact to Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 6-34 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • agricultural resources as development is concentrated in the central portion of the project site, however it does not ensure the long-term viability of agriculture production nor guarantee agricultural preservation of the site past January 1, 2006. However no significant impacts to agricultural resources have been identified for the proposed project. This alternative is not feasible because it does not meet the objectives of the project related to the provision of the LEGOLAND themepark, resort hotel, and golf course uses. These objectives include the establishment of a family oriented theme park and destination resort that will benefit both the citizens of and visitors to the City of Carlsbad. Although the existing plan will accommodate a 280 room hotel and golf driving range it will not accommodate a resort hotel, golf course, and the LEGOLAND themepark which. requires significantly more area. 6.3 ALTERNATIVE LOCATION Description of Alternative This alternative assumes the development of the proposed project at an alternative location. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Site Selection The alternative site analysis examines the impacts associated with the entire Carlsbad Ranch project at an alternative location. The identification of a site within the region that could accommodate the proposed project, meet the basic objectives of the project, and reduce significant environmental jmpacts associated with the proposed project (i.e. cumulative air quality, cumulative agriculture, and cumulative traffic) involved a two-tiered screening approach for suitable sites. The first step involved an assessment of the original project site screening analysis conducted by the LEGO company for the themepark as these site criteria represent the minimum requirements necessary to implement the entire Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. From these preliminary site selection criteria, an analysis was conducted to determine which of the seven sites considered meet the proposed project's minimum acreage requirement of approximately 400 acres, meet the project's basic objectives, and could potentially avoid or reduce iinpacts associated with the proposed project. The methodology for selection of a potential alternative site is described below. Siles Previously Considered but Rejeded A series of alternative sites have been studied in selecting an alternative site for the proposed project in San Diego County. A total of seven sites were considered during this process. The sites were analyzed for their ability to accommodate the proposed project (i.e. a minimum acreage of approximately 400 acres), meet the basic project objectives, and reduce or avoid any potential significant impacts Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR {,-35 City of Carlsbad November 1995 identified with the proposed project. Table 6-2 on the following pages provides a matrix of what criteria were met for each individual site. The locations of each of these sites within the county are depicted on Figure 6-2. The following identifies the criteria that was utilized in defining the most suitable location for the proposed project. Site Selection Criteria 1. Population base of 15 million people within 3 hours drive from the site. 2. Maximum distance from major metropolis of 30 minutes drive. 3. Site acreage of minimum 400 net acres. 4. Site to be an integral element of a significant Mixed Use project with compatible uses. 5. Transportation: 5.1 Direct Interstate/Freeway access via major arterial road. 5.2 Maximum distance from the Interstate/Freeway interchange to the site of 2 miles. 5.3 No access through residential neighborhoods. 5.4 Proximity to Rail Service. 6. Utilities available nearby. 7. Land Owner and Developer capable of undertaking following responsibilities: 7.1 Undertake zoning and land development of neighboring commercially zoned parcels being components of the Mixed Use. 7.2 Develop suitable ancillary projects compatible to the quality of the LEGOLAND themepark project. 8. Commitment to suitable Master Plan from Developer and City covering all surrounding properties to secure quality developments surrounding the LEGOLAND themepark and safeguard against neighboring and undesirable "spin-off' developments. 9. Neighboring private and public projects to primarily include low density projects · with high quality landscaping compatible to the emphasis on landscaping and environmental sensitivity in the LEGOLAND project. · Based on the preliminary alternative site investigation, the alternative location that is the most suitable site for the entire Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment and SDG&E component project is in Oceanside, north of Oceanside Boulevard, east of EI.Camino Real, and south of Mesa Drive (location# 3 on Figure 6-2). This site would be able to accommodate the entire Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment land uses, could meet some of the basic objectives of the project, could avoid some impacts associated with the proposed project without resulting in additional Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 6-36 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • ·• • • • • significant impacts not associated with the proposed project and is currently planned for non-residential uses. Additionally, this site meets the criteria identified for minimum site acreage, distance to freeway, no access through residential neighborhoods, and proximity to rail service. It does not meet the remaining eight criteria which includes a maximum distance from a major metropolis of 30 minutes, site part of a mixed-use with compatible uses, direct freeway access, utilities available nearby and the landowner and developer performance requirements. , Agricultural Resources Implementation of this alternative would not result in impacts to agricultural resources. No agricultural operations are known to exist at this location. This alternative would avoid the early cancellation of the Williamson Act contracts and the conversion of existing agricultural land to urban uses. This alternative would not result in a significant cumulative impact on agricultural resources. Air Quality This alternative would result in similar short-term and long-term impacts as the proposed project. Because this site is also located in a "non-attainment" basin, increases in stationary and mobile emissions associated with development of the specific plan at this location would result in a significant impact. Implementation of mitigation measures similar to those proposed for the project would reduce project-specific impacts to a level less than significant. Cumulative air quality impacts would remain significant. Archaeology and Paleontological Resources This alternative would avoid impacts of the proposed project associated with archaeological resources. Because a majority of the site has been disturbed through aggregate mining operations, the likelihood of the presence of archaeological resources is low. A site specific archaeological resources survey would have to be conducted to determine the presence and significance of any potential archaeological resources. Any potentially significant impacts could be expected to be mitigated to below a level of significance by avoidance, data recovery, or a capping program. Biological Resources The presence and significance of any biological resources would have to be determined through site specific biological surveys. . An analysis of an aerial photograph at this location indicates that a majority of the site has been disturbed by aggregate mining activities. Some locations of this area appear to contain significant stands of vegetation. Any significant biol~gical resources encountered on- site could be reduced to insignificant levels through avoidance and mitigation . · Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 6-37 City of Carlsbad November 1995 Site Lawrence Canyon, Oceanside (site # 1) ' Center City, Oceanside (site # 2) Rancho del Oro (site# 3) TABLE 6-2 MATRIX SUMMARY OF SITE ANALYSIS FOR THE PROJECT IN THE SAN DIEGO REGION Qualification Criteria Compliance Location No Item Oceanside, adjacent to 1 Population base of 15 mil. people within 3 hours drive 1-5 north of Bush 2 Max. distance from major metropolis of 30 min. (Fourth) Street and 3 Site acreage min. 400 net acres south of San ~uis Rey 4 Site part of Mixed-Use with compatible uses River s Transportation 5.1 Direct Interstate/Freeway access via major arterial road 5.2 Max. distance from the Interstate/Freeway of 2 miles 5.3 No access through residential neighborhoods 5.4 Proximity to rail service 6 Utilities available nearby 7 Land Owner and Developer performance requirements 7.1 Capable of undertaking Zoning/Land Development 7.2 Commitment to develop suitable ancillary projects 8 Commitment to suitable Master Plan from Developer & City 9 Low density neighbor projects with quality landscaping Oceanside, adjacent to 1 Population base of 15 mil. people within 3 hours drive 1-5, south of Mission 2 Max. distance from major metropolis of 30 min. Avenue, north of 3 Site acreage min. 400 net acres Oceanside Blvd. 4 Site part of Mixed-Use with compatible uses 5 Transportation 5.1 Direct Interstate/Freeway access via major arterial road 5.2 Max. distance from the Interstate/Freeway_ of 2 miles 5.3 No access through residential neighborhoods 5.4 Proximity to rail service 6 Utilities available nearby 7 Land Owner and Developer performance requirements 7.1 Capable of undertaking Zoning/Land Development 7.2 Commitment to develop suitable ancillary projects 8 Commitment to suitable Master Plan from Developer & City 9 Low densitv nei2hbor nroiects with oualitv landscanin2 Oceanside, north of 1 Population base of 15 mil. people within 3 hours drive Oceanside Blvd., east 2 Max. distance from major metropolis of 30 min. of El Camino Real, 3 Site acreage min. 400 net acres south of Mesa Drive 4 Site part of Mixed-Use with compatible uses 5 Transportation 5.1 Direct Interstate/Freeway access via major arterial road 5.2 Max. distance from the Interstate/Freeway of 2 miles 5.3 No access through residential neighborhoods 5.4 Proximity to rail service 6 Utilities available nearby 7 Land Owner and Developer performance requirements 7.1 Capable of undertaking Zoning/Land Development 7.2 Commitment to develop suitable ancillary projects 8 Commitment to suitable Master Plan from Developer & (:ity 9 Low density neighbor projects with quality landscanine. (Yes) (No) Yes No No No No Yes No Yes No No No No No Yes No No No No Yes No Yes Yes No No No No Yes No Yes No No Yes Yes Yes No No No No No Carlsbad Ranch Specific.Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 6-38 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • • Site South Coast Oceanside (site #4) .. Chula Vista Midbay Site (site #5) ~7':'. ~ ·.i, " '. TABLE 6-2 MATRIX SUMMARY OF SITE ANALYSIS FOR THE PROJECT IN THE. SAN DIEGO REGION (Continued) Qualification. Criteria Compliance Location No Item Oceanside, south of 1 Population base of 15 mil. _people within 3 hours drive State Route 78, east of 2 Max. distance from major metropolis of 30 min. College Blvd. 3 Site acreage min. 400 net acres 4 Site part of Mixed-Use with compatible uses 5 Transportation 5.1 Direct Interstate/Freeway access via major arterial road 5.2 Max. distance from the Interstate/Freeway of 2 miles 5.3 No access through residential neighborhoods 5.4 Proximity to rail service , 6 Utilities available nearby 7 Land Owner and Developer performance requirements 7.1 Capable of undertaking Zoning/Land Development 7.2 Commitment to develop suitable ancillary projects . I 8 Commitment to suitable Master Plan from Developer & City 9 Low density neiehbor oroiects with auality landscaoine City of Chula Vista 1 Population base of 15 mil. people within 3 hours drive adjacent to 1-5, 2 Max. distance from major metropolis of 30 min.· between E and F 3 Site acreage min. 400 net acres Streets 4 Site part of Mixed-Use with compatible uses 5 Transportation 5.1 Direct Interstate/Freeway access via major arterial road 5.2 Max. distance from the Interstate/Freeway of 2 miles 5.3 No access through residential neighborhoods 5.4 Proximity to rail service 6 Utilities available nearby 7 Land Owner and Developer performance requirements 7.1 Capable of undertaking Zoning/Land Development 7.2 Commitment to develop suitable ancillary projects 8 Commitment to suitable Master Plan from Developer & City 9 Low densitY neiehbor oroiects with aualitY landscaoine (Yes) (No) Yes No No No No Yes No Yes No No No No No Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No No Pointe Resort City of Chula Vista 1 Population base of 15 mil. people within 3 hours drive Yes Chula Vista (site# 6) Sweetwater Road 2 Max. distance from major metropolis of 30 min. Yes 3 Site acreage min. 400 net acres No 4 Site part of Mixed-Use with compatible uses No 5 Transportation 5.1 Direct Interstate/Freeway access via major arterial road No 5.2 · Max. distance from the Interstate/Freeway of 2 miles No 5.3 No access through residential neighborhoods No 5.4 Proximity to rail service No 6 Utilities available nearby Yes 7 Land Owner and Developer performance requirements 7.1 Capable of undertaking Zoning/Land Development Yes. 7.2 Commitment to develop suitable ancillary projects Yes 8 Commitment to suitable Master Plan from Developer & City Yes 9 Low density neiehbor oroiects with auality landscaoin2 Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 6-39 Yes City of Carlsbad November 1995 Site San Ysidro, Otay Mesa (site #7) TABLE 6-2 MATRIX SUMMARY OF SITE ANALYSIS FOR THE PROJECT IN THE SAN DIEGO REGION (Continued) Qualification Criteria Compliance Location No Item San Ysidro, near 1 Population base of 15 mil. people within 3 hours drive Mexican-US border 2 Max. distance from major metropolis of 30 min. 3 Site acreage min. 400 net acres 4 · Site part of Mixed-Use with compatible uses 5 Transportation 5.1 Direct Interstate/Freeway access via major arterial road 5.2 Max. distance from the Interstate/Freeway of 2 miles 5.3 No access through residential neighborhoods 5.4 Proximity to rail service 6 Utilities available nearby 7 Land Owner and Developer performance requirements 7.1 Capable of undertaking Zoning/Land Development 7.2 Commitment to develop suitable ancillary projects (Yes) (No) Yes Yes Yes No No Yes No Yes No Yes No 8 Commitment to suitable Master Plan from Developer & City No 9 Low density neiehbor projects with quality landscapine Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR No City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • • Camp Pendleton . . Valley Cenier Lau~onl ~ L,,u HOISMW -·· .®······ 0 C" ... SAN DIEGO SOURCE: LEGO, 1995 ; -♦ (C.txi) north no scale Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment ProgramEIR . . . . . . ···®··· ' { ~~ ......__,,.,-+-_ ···--·· • Figure 6-2 Alternative Locations Considered City of Carlsbad Traffic/ Circulation The proposed alternative site is bounded by Oceanside Boulevard and El Camino Real, and future Rancho del Oro Drive. These roadways take regional access off of Interstate 5 and State Route 78. It is anticipated that due to the anticipated average daily trips associated with buildout of the proposed land uses, mitigation measures and circulation system improvements will be required to be implemented in order to reduce traffic impacts to less than significant levels. Cumulative traffic impacts are anticipated to be significant. Hazardous Waste/Pesticide Residue The presence of hazardous waste/pesticide residue is unknown. It is reasonable to anticipate that there is a potential for contaminated soils on-site due to the fact that the site has been utilized for aggregate mining operations, and surrounding properties are known to have been used for agricultural purposes in the past. Any significant hazardous waste impacts could be expected to be mitagable to a level below significance. Impacts would be similar to the proposed project. Land Use Compatibility Although existing land use designations of this site are industrial, implementation of this alternative would result in potential land use compatibility impacts with surrounding land uses in the area. This site is bordered to the north and east with existing and planned residential land uses. The specific plan land use plan and • development standards could be designed on a site specific basis to address any potential land use conflicts with surrounding land uses, however it is anticipated that specific mitigation measures would need to be implemented in order to reduce significant land use compatibility impacts to less than significant levels. Due to this site's proximity to residential land uses, land use compatibility impacts could be greater than the project as no residential land uses are located immediately adjacent to the project site. This alternative could result in commercial, research and development, resort, or the themepark being located adjacent to existing residential uses. Noise Development of the site would result in the generation of substantial average daily trips over existing conditions. The generation of additional traffic would result in the increase in noise levels on surrounding roadways. Primary access to this location is provided by El Camino Real and Oceanside Boulevard. These roadways would be expected to experience the highest increase in noise levels associated with the increase in traffic. The noise levels would not be expected to be significant due to the fact that residential land uses are not located immediately adjacent to these roadways in the vicinity of the project. Noise impacts to future on-site uses could be mitigated through standard noise attenuation measures integrated into building design .. Overall, impacts would be similar to the proposed project. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • Public Services and Utilities Development at this locaiion would place a significant demand on existing public services and utilities that would serve the project site. Development at this site would result in an increased demand for public services and facilities that have not been planned for in this area. Extension of infrastructure including sewer and water lines would be required. Significant impacts to public services and utilities could be mitigated, however significant impacts would remain if a demand is placed on utilities and infrastructure beyond the utility purveyor's ability to provide the service. Overall, impacts would be greater than the proposed project. Solid Waste Implementation of this alternative would result in the generation of a significant · amount of solid waste. Project-specific impacts could be mitigated to less than significant levels through the implementation of a comprehensive solid waste recycling program. Impacts would be similar to the proposed project. Visual Aesthetics/Grading A majority of the alternative location site has been disturbed and heavily graded associated with the aggregate mining operations. It is anticipated that any future grading of the site would not result in significant visual impacts due to the historical and existing condition of the site. Aesthetic impacts associated with development of the site could be avoided through proper land use design and landscaping techniques. As with the proposed project, no significant impacts would be anticipated. Water Quality Impacts to water quality would be expected to be similar to the proposed project. Potential impacts as a result of increased urban runoff, could be mitigated through the use of Best Management Practices, and provision of an urban runoff management system with detention basins and desiltation basins. Conclusions The "Alternative Location" is considered environmentally superior to the proposed project as it could avoid the proposed project's impact to archaeological resources and the project's contribution to the cumulative impact on agriculture. This alternative is not feasible as it does not meet the overall objectives of the project as are identified in Section 3.0 of this EIR and is not owned by the project developer. The site is currently not designated under the applicable General Plan or the Specific Plan for the uses contemplated by the project. It is outside the jurisdiction of the City of Carlsbad . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 6-43 City of Carlsbad November 1995 ·• .J • 7 .0 A!1~1ysis of Long-Term Effects • 1 •. · • • • 7.0 ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires the discussion of cumulative impacts, growth-inducing impacts, significant irreversible environmental changes, unavoidable significant environmental impacts, and areas of no significant impact. The following discussion addresses these issues as they relate to the development of the proposed project. · 7.1 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS CEQA Guidelines define cumulative effects as· "two or more individual effects that, when considered together, are considerable or which compound or increase other environmental impacts." The Guidelines further state that the individual effects can be the various changes related to a single project or the change involved in a number of other closely related past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects (Section 15355). The Guidelines allow for the use of two alternative methods to determine the scope of projects for the cumulative impact analysis: • List Method -A list of past, present, and reasonably anticipated future projects producing related or cumulative impacts, including those projects outside the control of the agency. • General Plan Projection Method -A summary of projections contained in an adopted General Plan or related planning document which is designed to evaluate regional or area wide conditions (Section 15130). For the purposes of this EIR, the General Plan Projection Method has been utilized for analysis of cumulative impacts. The cumulative analysis is based on buildout assumptions of the SANDAG Series 7 forecasts, on a subregional level, and the City's General Plan buildout projections which coincide with the City's Growth Management Plan buildout projections. The SANDAG Series 7 Forecast Future traffic volumes (without Zone 13 development) were developed based on data from the San Diego Association of Governments' (SANDAG) traffic model for the City of Carlsbad. Trip generation estimates for the Zone 13 land use components including the proposed project were then added to the SANDAG projections resulting in future traffic forecasts for conditions with the Zone 13 implemented. The SANDAG Series 7 model includes projected buildout of the City of Carlsbad General Plan . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 7-1 City of Carlsbad November 1995 Cumulative impacts related to the proposed project will encompass environmental changes resulting from the combined effects of the proposed project and other existing or planned local developments. These include existing residential communities and other planned land uses in and around the project area. This cumulative analysis takes into consideration buildout of the City of Carlsbad, and Subregional Planning Area's (SRA's) 40, 42, 43, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, and 55 which are depicted on Figure 7-1. Table 7-1 depicts the residential dwelling units, population, and square footage associated with buildout of the City. Table 7-2 depicts the project population and housing units for the North County West and North County East SRA's. Figure 7-1 depicts the boundaries of the North County West and North County East SRA's. TABLE 7-1 CI1YWIDE CUMULATIVE BUILD-OUT ASSUMPTIONS Residential Dwelling Units In Other In Zone 13 2 In Total Adopted Total Adopted Adopted Zones Citywide Zones 1 Plans 3 Population 4 non- residential Square Footage 5 Existing 28,662 0 28,662 66,433 15,524,142 2000 30,772 0 30,772 71,324 20,944,918 Buildout 52,340 0 52,340 121,314 47,242,135 (2019) . Total 53,003 0 53,003 122,851 47,242,135 Source: Zone 13 LFMP Notes: (1) Dwelling units in Other Adopted Zone Plans are those projected in the LFMP for Zones 1-12, 14-16, 18-24. (2) No residential land uses proposed in Zone 13. (3) Total adopted dwelling units include the adopted zones 1-13, 14-16, 18-24. (4) Existing citywide population is the base population used for projecting Adopted Zone ·Ptan· Populations. (5) Total citywide square footage is based on square footage projected from adopted LFMZ's 1-25. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 7-2 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • • 4 NOR COUNTY WE MAJOR STATISTICAL AREAS SUBREGIONAL AREAS -CITY OF CARLSBAD SOURCE: San Diego Association of Governments, Odober 1984 0 4 smiles north Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Program EIR 7-3 m.oo 30 . Figure 7-1 SANDAG· Series 7 Subregional Areas Map City of Carlsbad Total Acreage City of 25,409 Carlsbad SRA'S1 535,291 TABLE 7-2 CUMULATIVE BUILD-OUT SUBREGIONAL AREA Projected Population 1986 1995 2000 2010 1986 55,914 91,322 102,478 125,410 22,103 481,335 662,579 726,252 861,785 169,121 Source: SANDAG Senes 7 Regional Growth Forecast, 1986-2010. ~RA -Subregional Planning Area. SRA's include SRAs 40, 41, 42, 43, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55. Total Housing Units 1995 2000 2010 37,257 42,591 52,636 248,069 278,434 336,164 Major projects included within the City buildout assumptions include Carlsbad Pacific Industrial Park, Airport Business Center, Huntington Palomar and Green Valley Ranch projects. Cumulative Impacts Agricultural Resources Direct cumulative impacts on agricultural resources include the conversion of agricultural land to urban uses. Indirect cumulative impacts result from increased water cost due to the rising demand for water as a result of increased urbanization, and conversion of wildland to agricultural uses, pollution, fragmentation of agricultural land and pressure to convert existing agricultural land to urban uses as a result of increased urbanization. The 1992 agricultural resources report titled "Agriculture in Carlsbad Today and Implications for the Future" (City of Carlsbad, March 1992) identified 10 specific projects that have been approved by the City that when developed, will result in impacts to farmland. An additional three projects are proposed that if approved, will result in impacts to farmland within the City. The proposed project will result in the direct conversion of existing agricultural land to urban uses. However, with the exception of the SDG&E property immediately north of the project site, there are no agricultural lands adjacent to the project site. The proposed project is an infill development in that it is surrounded to the west and south by existing urban uses. Light industrial uses have been approved immediately to the east of the project site. Because no large contiguous areas of agricultural lands are located adjacent to the project site, the conversion of agricultural land on the project site will not lead to the conversion of adjacent agricultural lands to urban uses. Additionally, the project will not result in the fragmentation of agricultural land which would impact the viability of adjacent farmland. Development of the proposed project would result Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR. 7-4 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • • in the isolation of the remammg agricultural lands under SDG&E ownership immediately north of the site. However, this land is currently leased on a yearly basis, and is not zoned for agriculture but for an ultimate use of tourist commercial and public utilities. The project will retain approximately 53 acres for the flower field use. The specific plan provides for specific policies and measures in an effort to preserve the viability of these fields on a long-term basis. However, due to the fact that the project will directly convert existing agricultural uses, the project in conjunction with the buildout pursuant to Series 7 will result in a cumulative decline in agricultural land and is significant. The project in and of itself will not create a trend for the conversion of other agricultural lands to urban uses. Air Quality Buildout of Series 7 will result in an increase in air emissions in the area. Projected buildout will result in the generation of additional vehicular trips commensurate with the level of development anticipated to occur through adopted plans. Increased traffic will contribute to the generation of air emissions. Additional emissions will be generated through stationary sources as a result of electricity and natural gas consumption. Implementation of the proposed project will contribute to the emissions in the area. Cumulative air quality impacts are anticipated to remain significant and unavoidable. Archaeological and Paleontological Resources The proposed project, in conjunction with cumulative projects, will not result in a significant cumulative impact to archaeological and paleontological resources. Buildout of land uses as projected in the City General Plan and Series 7 forecasts would result in impacts to cultural resources, but can be mitigated to less than significant levels through data recovery and site avoidance techniques. The proposed project's contribution to the cumulative impact would be insignificant, as project-specific impacts will be mitigated to less than significant levels. Biological Resources Continued urbanization in areas of open space and vacant land will contribute to the cumulative degradation of biological resources within the North County area. The proposed project will not result in significant impacts to biological resources as no grading or construction is proposed in areas of sensitive biological resources on- site or immediately surrounding the site. The proposed project, in conjunction with cumulative projects will not result in a significant impact to biological resources. Traffic/Circulation The traffic analysis prepared for the proposed project was based on Series 7 modeling projections for the buildout horizon of 2010. The conclusions of the traffic analysis indicate that project specific . impacts can be mitigated to less than significant levels. This is a requirement of the .City's Growth Management Plan as implemented through the Local Facility Management Plan for Zone 13. The Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 7-5 City of Carlsbad November 1995 proposed project, in conjunction with cumulative build-out forecasts, will result in a significant cumulative impact to traffic and circulation on the following facilities • prior to impJementation of mitigation measures: . • 1-5 Northbound Ramps & Cannon Road (PM peak hour) ·• 1-5 Northbound Ramps & Palomar Airport Road (PM peak hour) • Paseo del Norte & Cannon Road (PM peak hour) • El Camino Real & Cannon Road (AM peak hour) • 1-5 Freeway north of Cannon ·Road (PM peak hour) _ • SR-78 southeast of Mar Vista Drive (both peak hours) (Source: Congestion Management Plan for the Carlsbad Ranch, Kaku Associates, May 23, 1995). Implementation of recommended improvements contained in the Congestion Management Plan for the Carlsbad Ranch would allow local facilities to operate at acceptable levels of service. However, the cumulative impact to the ·1-5 freeway and SR-78 would remain significant. Although no project-specific traffic impacts on beaches in the vicinity of the project were identified, the proposed project will contribute to the cumulative effect on existing parking shortages at beaches within the City.and adjacent areas. Air quality mitigation measures have been proposed within this EIR which require the provision of shuttle services. The City has recognized the existing deficiency in beach parking and is currently exploring ways of providing additional parking in these areas. Hazardous Waste/Pesticide Residue Impacts related to hazardous waste/pesticide residue are site specific. Mitigation measures proposed within this EIR will reduce any potential impacts from hazardous materials on-site to a level of insignificance. Hazardous wastes identified on other sites within the cumulative project area can also be mitigated to less than significant levels with the implementation of standard soil remediation techniques. The proposed project in conjunction with cumulative projects will not result in a significant cumulative impact to hazardous waste/pesticide residue. Land Use Compatibility Land uses in the North County area will significantly change during buildout of the area. Development consistent with regional and local plans will accomplish objectives pertaining to achieving orderly growth in the area. Mitigation and adherence to adopted plans will reduce each individual project included within the cumulative scenario land use impacts to less than significant. Noise Noise levels will generally rise as development occurs through buildout of Series 7, · including the City's projected buildout. Increases in development will increase the traffic generated noise on surrounding roadways, and also in ways typically associated with urban uses. Airport operations at the McClellan-Palomar Airport Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 7-6 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • will gradually increase, however according to the CLUP for the airport, the existing area of noise impact will stay about the same with the increase in aircraft operations and change in aircraft mix. The proposed project will result in an increase in ambient noise levels, which together with projected Series 7 development, will result in a cumulative impact on noise levels. Implementing local noise ordinances, constructing buildings according to state acoustical standards, and proper land use planning can mitigate noise impacts to noise-sensitive land uses to less than significant levels. Public Services and Utilities Demands· on public services and utilities will increase with regional buildout. Increased water consumption may lead to significant impacts due to the limited water supplies and periodic drought conditions in Southern California. Sewage disposal may require expansion of the existing facilities and the creation of new treatment plants. Significant impacts will be incurred, however mitigation measures such as stringent water conservation techniques and recycling programs reduce impacts to less than significant levels. Although the proposed project will have an impact to schools on a subregional level, the cumulative impact to each individual District is not anticipated to be significant as any increase in demand from the proposed project will be accommodated by all school districts in the subregional area and can be mitigated through the collection of applicable fees. Cumulative impacts to public services and utilities have been planned for in the City's Growth Management Plan, and Local Facilities Management Plans. These plans control development by ensuring the public service and utility thresholds are met and the appropriate level of service is provided before any new development within a specific zone can take place. Because the proposed project will comply with the City's Growth Management Plan threshold requirements, the project's contribution to the cumulative impact on Public Services and Utilities will be less than significant. Solid Waste Efficient solid waste disposal will become more difficult as disposal locations become less available, and waste quantities increase. Because landfill space is limited in San Diego County, the cumulative impact could be substantial. If the Source Reduction and Recycling Element for each city within the North County West MSA is fully implemented, solid waste generation will be reduced _by 50 percent by 2000. The proposed project's contribution to the cumulative impact will be mitigated through the preparation and implementation of a solid waste management plan. The proposed project, in conjunction with cumulative projects, will not result in a significant impact to cumulative solid waste generation. Vzsual Aesthetics/Grading Buildout consistent with the Series 7 projections would result in a cumulative impact to aesthetics of the region. New development in currently undeveloped areas will alter the natural terrain and produce man-made topography. Regional and local Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 7-7 City of Carlsbad November 1995 planning efforts, including specific policies related to visual resources can mitigate aesthetic impacts as a result of development activity. The cumulative landform • alteration/ aesthetic impact is less than significant. · , Water Quality Surface land changes associated with regional development will substantially increase impervious surface cover over the buildout of the North County area. Increased impervious surfaces and increased urban runoff would be anticipated commensurate with increased urban development. Typical mitigation measures including compliance with Regional Water Quality Control Board regulations and implementation of best management practices will reduce impacts from cumulative projects to a level less than significant. 7.2 GROWTH-INDUCING IMPACTS This section of the EIR considers the ways implementation of the proposed project could directly or indirectly encourage economic or population growth in the region. CEQA refers to growth inducement as ways in which the proposed project would foster economic or population growth, or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment [CEQA Section • 15126(g)]. Induced growth is any growth which exceeds planned growth and results from new development (i.e., extension of infrastructure) which would not have taken place in the absence of the proposed project. The proposed project will have growth-inducing impacts on the City of Carlsbad. This impact will result in the direct creation of jobs through the proposed retail, commercial, office, research and development, resort and LEGOLAND Carlsbad land use, and spin-off related employment associated with each of these uses. The project's creation of employment opportunities may result in individuals relocating to Carlsbad or nearby areas from outside the region. The proposed Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment project will be located in an area that has been extensively planned and previously considered for future development with the · currently adopted Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. Development commensurate with the proposed project has been previously considered for this portion of the city, and is addressed in City planning documents. The proposed project has been included in the buildout assumptions of the Zone 13 Local Facilities Management Plan. The LFMP process includes restrictions on the timing and phasing of development in relation to the provision of community services and infrastructure. The City's Growth Management Policies which are enforced in the LFMPs would continue to monitor growth in the area to maintain adequate levels of service for the people living in the City of Carlsbad. With the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Ame11dme11t Final Program EIR 7-8 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • See Section 9.0 Response H-5 • • incorporation of the LFMP process and the City's Growth Management policies, development cannot proceed until adequate infrastructure is financially guaranteed to meet demand. The project site is located adjacent to an ex1stmg circulation network. Major extensions of infrastructure (i.e. sewer trunk line) will not be required for implementation. Extension of infrastructure from Palomar Airport Road and Cannon Road will not open new areas for development. The proposed project could potentially contribute to an increase the pressure to develop the remaining agricultural land adjacent to the northern boundary of the Specific Plan for other urbanized uses. This parcel is not zoned for agricultural use. Development adjacent to agriculture tends to lead to the ultimate conversion of the adjacent agriculture lands to urbanized uses. However, it sbould be recognized that existing pressures already are creating a demand for conversion of agriculture to urbanized uses. The site is located within an urbanized City, near major existing and proposed circulation networks (1-5, Palomar Airport Road and Cannon Road). Existing and continued economic conditions and environmental regulations discourage the continued agriculture operations. Economic returns on agriculture are minimal due to pay scales, water costs and restrictions on use of herbicides and pesticides. (Ref. C-26) Economic pressure is also felt with products being available from Mexico which has a much lower pay scale and minimal environmental regulations. Products from Mexico are often available at lower costs than that produced by United States agriculture. Approximately 53 acres will be retained for agriculture use under the proposed specific plan. · This project would provide temporary construction_ jobs and permanent jobs associated with the various office, research and development, vocational school, commercial and retail, hotel uses, golf course, and LEGOLAND Carlsbad. The short-term nature of the construction jobs is not anticipated to lead to significant long-term growth trends. In summary, growth inducement is generally focused on (1) developing an undeveloped parcel and the potential extension and demand for services, (2) inducing agriculture land in the vicinity to develop and (3) increasing employment and an indirect demand for housing as a result of employment. Existing growth management policies of the City address the provision of adequate services prior to allowing development to occur. The project will result in the conversion of existing agricultural uses on site, however, it will not lead to the conversion of significant agricultural land surrounding the site. Finally, the demand for housing generated by this project for jobs and housing will substantially be met by existing housing or new development planned in the subregion . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 7-9 City of Carlsbad November 1995 7.3 SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES Development of the proposed project will result in the consumption of nonrenewable energy resources which will have a significant irreversible effect on such resources. The proposed project will result in the development of an urban use in an area that is currently vacant and utilized for agriculture production. Approximately 181.2 acres of the project site are proposed to be removed early from the existing Williamson Act Contracts. Once developed, reverting to a less urban use or open space is highly infeasible. Development of the project site will constrain future land use ,options. Several irreversible commitments of limited resources would result from implementation of the proposed project. The resources include, but are not limited to, the following: lumber and other related forest products; sand, gravel, concrete; asphalt; petrochemical construction materials; steel, copper, lead and other metals; and water consumption. 7.4 UNAVOIDABLE SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Analysis of environmental impacts caused by the proposed project has been performed, and is contained in Section 5.0 .. Unavoidable significant environmental impacts were identified for the following impact areas analyzed as part of this EIR: • Cumulative air quality • Cumulative agriculture • Cumulative traffic 7.5 AREAS OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Analyses of environmental impacts caused by the proposed project has been performed, and are contained in Section 5.0. The following impact areas were analyzed as part of this EIR and were found to be less than significant: • Water Quality -the specific plan provides for erosion, sedimentation and urban runoff filtration systems which will reduce potential water quality impact to less than significant levels. The project will be required to comply with Regional Water Quality Control Board standards for urban runoff. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 7-10 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • • • . ..,."r.., Visual Aesthetics/Grading -the project does not have the potential to block views from residential areas. The specific plan provides for building height limitations, landscaping, and setbacks that will reduce the aesthetic impact to a less than significant level. • Fire Protection Services -the Carlsbad Fire Department has indicated that the project will not significantly affect the Department's ability to provide fire protection services to the area. • • • Existing City requirements, including construction in compliance with Title 24 of the Uniform Building Code and payment of Public Facilities Fees of 3.5 percent of buildings' valuation at issuance of the buil~ing permit, will result in the provision of adequate fire protection seIVIces. Sewer Line Capacity and Treatment Plant Capacity -the City's existing requirements of imposing appropriate conditions on individual development projects requiring the developers in the South Agua Hedionda and the Buena/Vallecitos Sewer Basins to construct the necessary facilities concurrent with development, together with the existing requirement for payment of sewer connection fees, will result in adequate sewer f~cilities. · Development under the proposed specific plan amendment will generate approximately 298,056 gallons ( or 0.3 mgd) of sewage per day. The Zone 13 ZFMP projected a flow of 7.37 mgd of sewage at buildout of the entire Carlsbad Service Area in 2010, resulting in excess capacity of 1.87 mgd. This remaining capacity is adequate to accommodate the projected flows from the specific plan area. Schools -the proposed project's indirect impact on schools as a result of the generation of employment in the area is less than signifkant. Although the project will result in an indirect generation of students within and outside the City of Carlsbad the incremental increase within each district will be small. Any new housing units occupied by future employees within or outside of the City, will be subject to . applicable school development fees within each district. Agricultural Resources -impacts associated with the conversion of existing agricultural land and the early cancellation of Williamson Act land will be reduced to a less than significant level through the payment of conversion fees in compliance with the City's Coastal program, the preservation of 53 acres of agricultural land on-site and through the implementation of agricultural land use policies contained in the specific plan . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 7-11 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • I r ' \ 1/ • • I (. 8.0 References • • • • 8.0 REFERENCES A. Persons Responsible for Preparation of the EIR , 1. Lead Agency City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, California 92009 Contact: Don Neu, Senior Planner 2. Primary Preparers of the EIR Cotton/Beland/ Associates, Inc. 6310 Greenwich Drive, Suite 220 .San Diego, California 92122 (619) 625-0056 747 E. Green Street, Suite 400 Pasadena, California 91101 (818) 304-0102 Preparers: Donald A. Cotton, AICP, Principal-in-Charge John E. Bridges, AICP, Project Manager Tim Gnibus, Environmental Planner Irena Finkelsztein, Environmental Planner Patrick Mann, AICP, Principal Joseph S. Risse, Environmental Planner Marianne K. Wright, Graphics Responsibility: Overall preparation and coordination of EIR. Pat Gibson Kaku Associates 1453 3rd Street Suite 400 Santa Monica, California 90401 (310) 458-9916 Responsibility: Preparation of transportation analysis . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 8-1 City of Carlsbad November 1995 Larry Sward Sweetwater Environmental Biologists, Inc. 3838 Camino del Rio North, Suite 270 San Diego, California 92108 (619) 624-2300 Responsibility: Preparation of biological assessment. Dennis Gallegos Carolyn Kyle Gallegos & Associates 5671 Palmer Way, Suite A Carlsbad, California 92008 (619) 929-0055 Responsibility: Preparation of Archaeological Tom Demere PaleoServices P.O. Box 33671 San Diego, California 92163 (619) 738-9905 Responsibility: Preparation of Paleontological Assessment Steve Geyer Ninyo & Moore 10225 Barnes Canyon Road, A-112 San Diego, California 92121 (619) 457-0400 Responsibility: Preparation of water quality analysis. Daniel B. Boyle, P.E., Managing Engineer Daniel Boyle Engineering, Inc. 3142 Vista Way, Suite 209 Oceanside, California 92056 (619) 433-8710 Responsibility: Preparation of water demand analysis. Mark Alpers SCS Engineering 3711 Long Beach Boulevard, Ninth Floor Long Beach, California 90807 (310) 426-9544 Responsibility: Preparation of solid waste analysis. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 8-2 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • • B. Persons and Organizations Contacted · The following literature, persons, and organizations were consulted in the preparation of this Environmental Impact Report. The reference code to the left of each item corresponds to citations made in the document. B-1 B-2 B-3 B-4 B-5 B-6 B-7 C. C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 C-5 C-6 C-7 C-8 C-9 Brett ·Berry, Carltas Company, May 25, 1995. Dennis Cunningham, Carlsbad Unified School District. Joseph Greybill, Oceanside Unified School District. John Nugut, Larry Johnson, Vista Unified School District. Dave Allmen, San Marcos Unified School District. Sharon South, Encinitas Unified School District. Joanne Redman, San Dieguito High School District. Documents City of Carlsbad General Plan, City of Carlsbad, April 20, 1994. City of Carlsbad Zoning Ordinance, City of Carlsbad, August 1994. Transportation Analysis for the Carlsbad Local Facilities Management Plan - Zone 13, Kaku Associates, August 1994. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment, Hofman Planning Associates, February 27, 1995; revised April 1995. Traffic Study for the Carlsbad Lego Family Park, Kaku Associates, April 1994. City of Carlsbad Open Space and Conservation Resource Management Plan, Wallace, Roberts & Todd, June 1992. City of Carlsbad Landscape Manual (Policies & Requirements), City of Carlsbad, November 13, 1990. City of Carlsbad Growth Management Plan Zone 13 Local Facilities Management Plan, Hofman Planning. Associates, February 27, 1995. City of Carlsbad Draft Project Study Report, Caltrans, May 15, 1995. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 8-3 City of Carlsbad November 1995 C-10 Agriculture in Carlsbad Today and Implications for the Future, City of Carlsbad, March 1992. C-11 A Guide to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, California Department of Conservation, November 1994. C-12 Williamson Act -Agricultural Land/CEQA and the Legoland Project, California Department of Conservation, March 1, 1995. C-13 The Impacts of Farmland Conservation in California (JSA 89-164), Jones & Stokes, Inc., January 24, 1991. C-14 City of Carlsbad Phase I Environmental Site Assessment of the 26.04-Acre Parcel North of the Future Extension of Cannon Road and 20.66-Acre Parcel North of Palomar Airport Road and West of the Future Hidden Valley Road, Leighton & Associates, April 13, 1995. C-15 Agua Hedionda Land Use Plan, City of Carlsbad, 1982. C-16 City of Carlsbad Comprehensive Land Use Plan McClellan-Palomar Airport, SANDAG, April 1994. C-17 City of Carlsbad Local Coastal Program Amendment, City of Carlsbad, July 5, 1994. C-18 City of-Carlsbad Historic Preservation, City of Carlsbad, July 1991. C-19 City of Carlsbad Cultural Resources Guidelines, RECON, December 1990. C-20 Noise Study for the Interstate 5/Cannon Road Interchange Revision, Caltrans, April 3, 1995. C-21 Results of Biology Review for Interstate 5/Cannon Road, Caltrans, April 3, 1995. C-22 Visual Study, Calt~ans, April 20, 1995. C-23 Historic Property Survey Report -Negative Findings, Caltrans, April 19, 1995. C-24 Air Quality Project Impact Analysis, Caltrans, March 31, 1995. C-25 Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan, Hofman Planning Associates, December 1992. C-26 Final Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Program EIR, P&D Technologies, November 1992. · C-27 Water and Reclaimed Water Analysis for the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan· Amendment EIR, Daniel Boyle Engineering, Inc., May 31," 1995. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 8-4 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • • • • • • C-28 Soil Survey -San Diego Area, U.S. Department of Agriculture, December 1973. C-29 Solid Waste Assessment for the Carlsbad Ranch, SCS Engineers, June 1995. C-30 Biotechnical Report for Carlsbad Ranch, Sweetwater Environmental Biologists, Inc., July 13, 1995 . Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 8-5 City of Carlsbad November 1995 • \. • I. 9.0 Responses To Comments On Draft EIR • r • • • 9.0 RESPONSE TO COMMENTS The Draft EIR was made available for public review and comment pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines (Section 15087(c)) for a period of 45 days. During this review period, comments have been received in response to the Draft EIR. These responses include written comments from the public and responsible agencies. In accordance with State CEQA Guidelines, the Final EIR shall respond to comments received during the noticed period and, "the Lead Agency shall evaluate comments on environmental issues received from persons who reviewed the Draft EIR and shall prepare a written response" (Section 15088(a)). Comments on the Draft EIR were received from interested agencies, organizations, and individuals. Copies of each comment letter received are in this section. The individually addressed comments have been given a reference number in the left margin. Any additional information or changes that may be incorporated into the text of the Draft EIR in response to a comment are identified with this reference number adjacent to the text within the margin. The following is a ·list of agencies and other interested parties that submitted comments on the Draft EIR during the noticed review period: 1. James W. Royle, Jr., San Diego County Archaeological Society (October 1, 1995). 2. Mary Jane Jagodzinski, Carltas Company (September 20, 1995) . 3. George Rodgers, (October 10, 1995). 4. Christopher C. Calkins, Carltas Company (October 10, 1995). 5. Pat Bleha, Sierra Club (October 8, 1995) 6. Bill Dillon, Department of Transportation (October 6, 1995). 7. Christopher C. Calkins, Carltas Company (October 11, 1995). 8. Jason R. Marshall, Department of Conservatioµ (October 10, 1995). 9. Bill Hofman, Hofman Planning Associates (October 13, 1995). 10. Renata B. Mulry, Bexen Press (October 10, 1995). 11. Neighbors Involved in Carlsbad's Future (October 13, 1995). 12. Dori L. Rose, San Diego Gas & Electric (October 13, 1995) . . 13. · Morris Vance, City of Vista (October 13, 1995). 14. Sharon South, Encinitas Union School District (October 10, 1995)~ 15. Antero A Rivasplata, Governor's Office of Planning and Research (October 12, 1995). ·-· -·- Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program EIR 9-1 City of Carlsbad November 1995 San Diego County .Archaeological Society To: Subject: Environmental Revie11 Committee Hr. Don Neu Plannint Department City or Carlsbad OctobP.r l, 1995 RECEIVED OCT 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, California 92009 Oraft Environmental Impact Report Carlsbad Ranch/Legoland Project Dear Hr. Neu: 4- s 1995' OCT 1995 PUNlilNC O[PJ;RJ!.llNI CityO/ wrlsbJd I have reviewed the cultural resources aspects of the subject DEIR on behalf of this committee of the San Diego County Archaeological Soclety, Based on the information contained in the DEIR and the historical and archaeological survey and test report prepared by CallP-gos & Associates for the project, we have the following com,nents: ( (1) According to the DEIR and the Gallegos & Associates report, mitigation for SDI-10,671 Is presently In process, by Brian r. Smith and Associates. We .-A-1 assume that this Is mitigation for the entire site, not just that portion affected by the Cannon Road extension. Is this correct? [ (2) The DEIR notes, on page 5.3-1, that if the portion of SDI-6132 north of A-2 Cannon Road will be impacted, a data recovery program will need to be developed and executed. This should be reflected in mitigation measure l on page 5.3-6. A-3 [(3) The DEIR refers to a Callesos & Associates report dated July 1995, i,hile the report sent to SDCAS is dated September 1995. If the September report replaced an earlier version, the DEIR should be updated as necessary. Other than the above, we concur in the Impact analysis and mitigation measures presented in the DEIR. Thank you for Including SDCAS In the City's environmental review process for this project. cc: Gallegos & Associates SDCAS President file • Sincerely, ~\~»-Environmenta\e~e~~~~ ~~~:!e • . . . , SO1-10 671 is for lhc entire silc which includes Iha\ p_orlion of the A-1. The m1t1ga11on ,or , site south of Cannon Road. 3-6 has been revised 10 specify 1ha11he data recovery A-2. Mitigation measure 1 on page S. DI 6132 for \he portion impacted norlh of Cannon program shall be complclcd for CA-S h. II onclusions of 1he Drafl EIR related lo Road. This revision docs not change I e overa c . archaeology. . . . r the re aration of the Draft EIR is dated A-3. The cullural resources report u11hz;dii°R has te:n revised to reference the dale of September 199S. Page S.3-1 o.~ the Ora t \he report as "S.cptcmbcr 199S . • • ~CARlTAS -~ comPAnY _____ ~----- September 20, 1995 Mr. Don Neu Senior Planner City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009 RE: Comments, Carlsbad Ranch: Draft Program Environmental Impact Report for Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment (EIR 94-01), August 1995 Dear Don: The Carlsbad Ranch Project engineer, O'Day Consultants, recently prepared updated depictions and calculations of land within the Agricultural Preserve and of land requested for cancellation of Williamson Act contract. The updated calculations resulted in two minor changes in acreage, compared ·with that used in the Draft ElR: (I) updating of acreage amounts requested for cance_llation, from 181.2 acres· to 182.49 acres; and, (2) correciion of the Agricultral Preserve acreage amounts, from 330.9 acres to 328.84 acres. Accordingly, the enclosed depiction correctly reflects the Agricultural Preserve boundaries and acreage summaries for land requested for cancellation and land remaining · under non-renewed contracts. It should be used to correct Figure 5-4 on page 5.1-1 J. In addition, the following references in the text need to be corrected: I. Paragraph 5 on page 3-14 should refer to I 82.49 acres, rather than 181.2 acres: 2. Paragraph 8 on page 5.1-8 should refer to 328.84 acres, rather than 331 acres. 3. Paragraph 3 on page 5.1-12 should refer to 182.49 acres and 328.84 acres, rather than 181.2 acres and 331 acres, respectively. .... 56<1WA'Ot:NIDA ENCINAS SUITE 100 •· CARLSBAD, CALJFORNIA 92008 U.S.A. (619) 431-5600 FAX (619\ 431-9020 • • D-1. Figure 5-4 and the text on pages 3-14, 5.1-8, 5. 1-12, and 5.1-14 have been revised to reflect the adjusted acreage calculations of land within the Agricultural Preserve and of land requested for cancellation of Williamson Act contract. These revisions do not change the overall conclusions of the Draft EIR related to agricultural resources. 8-1 . (cont'd.) Mr. Don Neu September 20, 1995 Page 2 4. Paragraph 3 on page 5.1-12 should refer to 146.35 acres, rather than 149.7 acres. 5 . Paragraph 3 on page 5.1-12 should refer to 118.56 acres, rather than 145.28 acres. 6. Paragraph 2 on page 5.1-14 should refer to 182.49 acres, rather than 181.2 acres. Please let us know if you have any questions. Sincerely, r--:~ Mary Jane /jodzinski Enclosure cc. Monica R. Browning, Carltas Company ./ John E. Bridges, Cotton/Beland/Associates, Inc. Lauren Sevrin, California Trade and Commerce/CPA .... 9/20195 • • • B-1 Continued 8001 1600' I SCA!.£: I. = BOO' WIUIAMSON ACT LANDS CJ fZZZ3 t:-:-:-:-:-:-:-::-:-.-.-1 NON-WIWAMSON ACT LANDS: 118.56 k.res WIWAMSON ACT LANDS REMAINING UNDER CONTRACT: 146.35 k.res WIWAMSON ACT LANDS TO BE REMOVED: 182.49 Acres 09/05/95 l;m,: 11: PC /I nl!••:\J0BS\891014\l(c:)!:XWA.l)WC • • C-1 /lt/:-,,.l)on /Y'e u ,1.. e ;;o/;;na" ?'rore~1 POINTS to PONDER What reaction will the 2300 111e111bers, who worked so long, hard and spent lots of their own money to get voter approval for an 18 hole affordal,lc municipal cow·sc, have to nllocaling and guaranteeing 33% of tJ1e available tee times to a G00-700 room destination type hotel The 9 hole " Lagoon " cou1·sc is about 2/3 mile :11rny rro111 11:t, Hidden Valley Road site clubhouse. What fmancial effect has resulted from the sale of ahou: I 5 a1:res . on Hidden Valley Road. The .9 hole •~.Lngoon " course site would be perfect fo1· :111 18 lwk, walkal,lc and affordable, short course even "ithout the 2 lwies north of Canon Road . The game of golf is more than swinging sticks , it i.•; :,Lo t!t'~ enjoyment of beautiful surrow1di11gs ,cxcrcizc, walking , 1101 l'idi,1g ;, golf cart. Most golf courses arc owned by their meml,crs and m:maged l;y their members . The 54 hole concept of the CARLSBAD GOLF CLUB would have something for everyone and l,e worthy of Carlsbad's golf status and its citizens. The city's 18 hole championship course needs to be built A.S.A.I'. or they will be paying about 2/3 of their golf budget on taxes . Taxes ---S.D.G.&E. • Gl::OltCE llOIJGEltS C,749 Uusstlia Cl. Corfsl.1tu..l, CA !•1009 RECf~!V~~D OCT 1 0 1~9~ Co/lv ,ti V. C,'!Hl{l 10 -/o. 9S .Jj71 • C-1. The leller from Mr. Rodgers docs not comment on the adequacy of the Draft EIR nor does it raise environmental impacts related to the proposed project. No response is necessary. • • r. ~CARLTAS ~ COffiPAnY _________ _ D-1 D-2 October I 0, 1995 RECEIVED OCT 1 2 1995 Mr. Don Neu Senior Planner City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009 RE: Comments: Draft Program Environmental Impact Report for the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Ameudment (Case ElR 94-01) Dear Don: Carltas Company has received and reviewed the Draft Program Environmental Impact Report for the Carlsbad Specific Plan Amendment . Following are our comments for your consideration: I. 2. Sec1ion 5 I AGRICllLTURAL RESOllRCES· Figure 5-2 Figure 5-2 on page 5.1-4, depicts existing agricultural leaseholds of the project site. · However, it is not an accurate representation of land currently in production. As referenced in the EIR text, on page 5.1-3, in 1995 approximately 70 acres are being farmed by Mellano, as approximately 112 acres were removed form production due lo development of the Gemological Institute of America site. Further, as referenced in the EIR text, on page 5.1-5, in 1995 approximately 86 acres are being currently farmed by Tabata. The depiction should be modified to represent areas in current production. Section 5 I AGRICllI.TURAL RESOllRCES· Frazee Flowers Inc The following language is suggested for inclusion in this section, at Page 5.1-3. The Draft EIR does not fully recognize the recent reduction in the amount of land which will continue in agricultural production as a result of current entitlements, regardless of approval of this project. The proposed modification is to insert the following qualifying comments after "acres in 1995", and delete the remainder of that sentence: The reduction in farmed lands is a result of anticipated construction associated with the Gemological Institute of America site. Development of that land was approved in 5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS • SUITE 100 • CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 U.S.A. ,~10\ t1'l1.c:~nn CAV IC◄n\ "'"'"' nnnn • • D-1. Comment noted. Figure 5-2 on page 5.1-4 is intended to depict the agricultural leaseholders on the project site -not existing agricultural production. Pages 5.1-3 and 5.1-5 of the Draft EIR provide-a discussion of the amount of acreage in production. D-2. Comment noted. The Draft EIR recognizes that agricultural production on the project site has declined significantly over the past several years. It is recognized that there are existing entitlements on the project site, and as stated on page 5.1-3 of the Draft EIR reductions in agricultural production have occurred as a result of construction associated with the previously approved Gemological Institute of America campus. Mr. Don Neu October 10, 1995 Page 2 ·0-2 (cont'd,) 0-3. 3. the existing Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan, which authorizes the development of approximately 1.88 million square feet of research and development/office and commercial uses, including the Gemological Institute of America, on lands outside the Agricultural Preserve of the Williamson Act. Most of those lands have been recently farmed. Therefore, regardless the approval of this project, there has already been a recent reduction and, in the near future, there will likely be a further reduction in lands used for agriculture due to development which was approved under the existing Specifk Plan. Section 5 I AGRICULTIJRAL RESOURCES· Soils/Important Fannland Some analytical observations concerning the data in Tables 5-2, 5-3, and 5-4, should be included in the text on page 5.1-8 to recognize that, for CEQA purposes, only the categories of Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, and Unique Farmland, have significance, according to Public Resource Section 21060.1. Therefore, the following observations with regard to those relevant categories of land should be made in the EIR: a. Regarding Table 5-2, the relevant consideration for Net Acreage Changed between 1990 and I 992, is the total of just these three relevant categories, or 1,552 acres, not 6,287 acres. b. Regarding Table 5-3, the relevant consideration for Land Committed to Nonagricultural Use between 1990 and I 992 is the total of just these three relevant categories, or 98 acres, not 3, l 87 acres. c. Regarding Table 5-4, the relevant conclusion is that, for the three relevant CEQA categories of land, conversion to non-agricultural uses between 1990 and 1992 was approximately 2,983 acres, rather the 9,524 acres that the table suggests. In addition, it is relevant to observe that 787 acres were converted from farmland of local importance and grazing land into the three relevant categories. And, approximately 1,297 acres were converted from urban and other uses into the three relevant categories ofland. Therefore, the net conversion out of the three relevant categories during 1990 to 1992 was approximately 899 acres. • • D-3. Comment noted. Tables 5-2, 5-3, and 5-4 provide agricultural inrormation ror the County as part or establishing the existing setting and context for the project. This information was provided in response to a comment received from the Department or Conservation on the Notice or Preparation or the Drart EIR. While it is recognized that Public Resource Section 21060.1 defines "agricultural land" as prime farmland, rarmland of statewide importance, or unique farmland, the information in Tables 5-2, 5-3 and 5-4 docs not form the basis for the project-specific impacts in the EIR. As such no modifications to the text are necessary. • • Mr. Don Neu October I 0, 1995 Page 3 4. D-4 5. D-5 6. D-6 Section S I AGRIClll,TIJRAL RESOURCES· Mitigation Measures and Impact After Mitigation Cancellation of lands _under Williamson Act contracts are subject to a . cancellation fee equal to 12.5% of the unrestricted market value of the lands, as determined by the County Assessor and certified by the City Council before approving a Certificate of Tentative Cancellation. Fees are paid by the landowner to the County Treasure, for transfer to the State General Fund. This substantial fee should be recognized as one of the mitigation measures on page 5.1-16, and the impacts will additionally be reduced due to payment of this mitigation fee. Section 5 4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES· Indirect Impacts Conversion of agricultural lands will result in a substantial mitigation fee to be paid by the landowner. The following language is suggested on page 5.4-12, following Paragraph "6": 7. The coastal program of the City of Carlsbad is subject to special. statutory requirements, including the convers_ion of agricultural lands. Pursuant to Public Resources Section 30171.5, the landowner will pay a substantial mitigation fee "io the State ·coastai Conservancy, for the benefit of natural resources within the coastal zone and the City of Carlsbad. Section 7 I CUMULATIVE IMPACTS: Agricultural Resources We believe that the Draft EIR does not fully place in perspective the recent conversion of agricultural land. Therefore, it is suggested that on Page 7-5, Paragraph I, the sentence beginning with "However, due to the fact.." , be eliminated, and that the following proposed language be inserted after .Paragraph I: Analysis of the Department of Conservation's 1990-92 conversion tables for San Diego County, in conjunction with the other regional and local infonnation; suggests that the cumulative net loss of both fannland acreage and agricultural production will be something less than the gross loss suggested by projected· buildout rates· and associated site conversion. During the two year time frame • • D-4. Comment noted. Please refer to response H-4. Additionally, it should be noted that the Department of Conservation does not consider the Williamson Act Cancellation _Fee requirements as "project mitigation". D-5. Comment noted. Because the coastal program requires the payment of the conversion fee, no project specific mitigation measure has been recommended. The project will be required to pay the fee. As stated on page 5.1-12 of the Draft EIR, "The coastal program adopted for Carlsbad includes a statutory provision for mitigation by payment of a fee for agriculture permanently converted to non-agricultural uses." Additional language · has been added to this paragraph in responsew comment H-4. Please refer to response H-4. D-6. Comment noted. The Draft EIR: has analyzed a "worst-case" scenario in assessing project-specific and cumulative impacts. No changes to the conclusions of the Draft EIR are required. Mr. Don Neu October 10, 1995 Page 4 D-6 (corKd,) D-7 7. represented by Tables 5-2, 5-3, and 5-4, the cowity gained nearly as much prime farmland (i.e., 487 acres) as it lost (i.e., 602 acres). Moreover, it experience a net loss in all categories of farmland considered even potentially significant for CEQA purposes of only 1,552 acres, a portion of which may be attributed to the reclassification of the San Dieguito Lagoon Open Space Preserve. Factors such as the intensification of agricultural uses, the shifting of tenancy operations from higher to lower cost areas, the relative unimportance of soil quality and characteristics as opposed to other factors, and the changing market and technology associated with specialty crops suggests. that the adjustment of the local and regional agricultural production base is a continuous process in which urbanization is only one factor, and current or increased values of agricultural production may be achieved from a progressively smaller production acreage using iMovative, technological, and capital-intensive processes. Viewed in this context, even though the Project would arguably be said to directly convert existing agricultural uses, and in conjwiction with the buildout pursuant to Series 7 may result in a cumulative decline in agricultural land, these impacts are not significant. In addition, the project will in and of itself not create a trend for the conversion of other agricultural land to urban uses. Section 7 1 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS· Coastal Resources We believe that the Draft EIR does not fully consider policies of both regional and statewide importance regarding coastal protection. It is suggested that the following language be added as a new category wider Cumulative Impacts on page 7-5: Coastal Protection The development of the project will further and implement a number of policies declared to be of statewide importance by the California Coastal Act and, more particularly, by Chapter 3 of that Act. These policies include the provision of coastal access, the pnonty for "visitor serving commercial recreational facilities designed to enhance • • D-7. Comment noted. The information offered by the commentor can be construed as positive impacts of the proposed project. CEQA does not require an analysis of positive impacts. 0-7 l (cont'd.) • Mr. Don Neu October I 0, 1995 Page 5 public opportunities for coastal recreation", concentration of development, and enhancement of coastal access through transit related location. · We trust that you will consider these comments for inclusion in the Final EIR. Please let us know ifwe can provide you or Conon/Beland/Associates, Inc. any assistance. cc. John E. Bridges, Conon/Beland/Associates, Inc. Lauren Sevrin, California Trade and Commerce/CPA • • E-1 Coastal North Counly Group ol lhc Sierra Club 7720 B El Camino Real Box 229 Carlsbad CA 92009 Oct. 8, 1995 Donald Neu Carlsbad Planning Dept. . 2075 Las Palmas Drive ... Carlsbad CA 92009 ;\4,;:Re;. Com~!fa~· on Draft EIR for Carlsbad Ranch/Lego land Project"'. Dear Mr. Neu~ Your plan for this area is an aflront to -citizens who have been living here many years such as myself. Are you planning !or the community or once again for developers? 1) One almost needs a magnifying glass to see the open space you have indicated on the map! Where are the land corridors for our . every dwindling wildlife. Why don't you keep in mind that San Diego County has more varieties of plants and animals then any other county in the U.S. and start accounting for that in your plans? People come here to enjoy this beauty --not to see still more of the same big box retail and ho-hum amusement parks. E-2· .·. ·2) . Where are public access. routes for the many residents who are joggers, bicyclists,'·.and hikers so they can take advantage of the na_tural beauty in this area? Space for a trail system should be set aside now while the land is still available. (In addition, for those interested in the economic benefits of a trail system, why don't you and the City Council investigate trail systems in Minnesota where restaurants and shops have benefited from the extra sales trail users bring in when they stop during their travels?) (continued) • • E-1. This comment docs not address the completeness or adequacy of the Draft EIR; however, the following information is offered in response to the comment: The Specific Plan proposes to retain 10 net acres in Natural Open Space (Planning Area 9). This is the only area within the project site that has been identified as containing sensitive biological species. As indicated on page 5.4-6 of the Draft EIR, the northeas1ern corner of the project site is part of a MHCP biological core and linkage area (San Diego Association of Governments 1994). This northeastern corner of the project site is proposed to ·be retained in an natural open space preserve as part of the proposed project. The project proposes placing a total of 135.49 acres (30%) of the Carlsbad Ranch property into Open Space land uses and planning designations. An additional 24.2 acres outside the boundaries of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan will also be utilized for open space uses and designated as such on the City's land use plans. The end result will be that 34% of the project area will be open space. E-2. This comment docs not address the completeness or adequacy of the Draft E,IR, however the following information is offered in response to the comment: The Specific Plan proposes a system of pedestrian, bicycle, and golf earl trails that will provide access to all land uses proposed within the specific plan. The trail system is designed to tie into the future citywide trail system. Page 188 of the Drart Specific Plan describes the proposed trail system and is available for review at the City of Carlsbad . • • [ 3) Still another golf course planned in an area saturated with them E-3 and next to the lagoon to boot. Have any provisions been made for runoff from nitrates and pesticides from that golf course? 4) Your area marked number 6 on the map, Speciality Realty, will almost totally obliterate the view of the flower fields from travelers on 1-5. The only people who will easily be able to see it are the hotel guests. Again, why are the interests of residents being E-4 ignored? Additionally, Specialty Realty should not include big box retail or discount houses. 1-5 is the front door to our community. It should not be cheapened by such ti,;-tac which lowers. our properly values. and the image of our com111unity as an upscale place. Are you ·. hrying. to make ·carlsbad into another Vista or San Marcos.? . ··,~W-t~.··.· .. :..(;·. Pat Bleha Co-chair Coastal North County Group Sierra Club and 19-year Carlsbad resident P.S.: Why don't you and City Council members attend our next Sierra Club meeting at 7:30 pm Tues. Oct. 17 at Aviara Oaks School, 6900 Ambrosia Way, La Costa, to hear Jim Bell speak on ecologically sustainable development and a thriving economy. He has received numerous awards for his designs from cities Including San Diego. Information on him Is enclosed. · For more information call 436-7853. cc: Carlsbad City Council members • • E-3. Please refer to pages 5.12-1 through 5.12-7 of the Draft EIR for a detailed discussion of Water Quality issues. The proposed project includes implementation of a storm water management/urban runoff system which consists of a comprehensive system of water conveyances and detention basins designed to remove urban pollutants from runoff exiting the project site. According to the water quality analysis provided in the Draft EIR (Ninyo and Moore), no impacts to water quality arc anticipated. ( E-4. Please refer to pages 5.11-1 through 5.11-7 of the Draft EIR for a detailed discussion of Visual Aesthetic/Grading issues. A computer visual simulation was conducted for the · proposed project and is included in the Draft EIR which depicts existing and future views on to the site after development of the Specific Plan. No significant impacts to visual aesthetics/grading have been identified. A site development permit is required to be approved for Planning Area 6 prior to development. The site development plan must be in conformance with the development standards and design guidelines for this area which require primarily single story structures with reduced building height to retain to the greatest extent possible, views of the flower fields while providing the ability to create a design that is architecturally appealing. ~tter E Attachment Coastal North County Group of the SIERRA CLUB . . . •· Invites you to join us the third Tuesday ev·ening of the month Aviara Oaks Elementary School Auditorium 6900 Ambrosia Lane, La Costa ---~~:i\l~. ·,------------, . •· '17 pm Tues. Oct. 171 CAN THE ECONOMY AND THE ENVIRONMENT PEACEFULLY COEXIST? presented by Jim Bell, author-lecturer, ecological designer, and national talk show guest Bell, who gives over 100 lectures a year, is known for·his lively presentations and will • provide an entertaining talk on how the regional economy can provide more jobs in a way : which will also ensure there's a livable planet here for the next generaliori. Bell will show : how it is possible to have an expanding, dynamic construction industry for the next 40 years • and make the region less vulnerable to water, food or energy shortages while still employing • ; :_: ·conservation principles:"-1•'-~'. .. . · · • ·. · Co-project director for a proto-typewastewater recycling plant in Tijuana, he received • ; a Waler Conservation Design Award from the City of San Diego. He is a frequent keynote • speaker at professional conferences including the University of Oregon's Visions for a Sus- ; tainable Future, and the American lnstitule of Architecture's state-wide conferences. Ambrosia Lane Is 3 blocks west of El Camino Real off Alga Road. (From 1-5, • take the Poinsettia exit east. Poinsetta will become Alga Road.) .• Outings, Educational Programs, Environmental Projects for North County Coastal Area (Del Mar to Camp Pendleton) For more information, call the Coastal North County Group of the Sierra Club at 431-1 605 or 436-7853 • • • • ~fAf~ Ot° CAlFON4A -8USN;$6. TAAi,NgPOffAflOH NlD WVca,ao NJC.Ha'f DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ..... . . . tIT5~£o~SN40fEJ>o. UI~ •.,. Octobor 6, 190S ,•-:• :,-:i . ·. 1i:.SD-005 .... i:;.:'.·47,~.5 Mr. Chris Bolsky Stata Clearinghouse 1400 Tenth Street 61)Cf'Qmento, CA 966 t 4 Dear Mr. Belsky; QrafLE.18 foe Iba Csrtebad Bea,j] Si,nciD<; Pion Ameo,tmml;SGH osos1~/ i:·:C·, F-1 F-2 F-3 F-4 F-5 Caftr.:ins District 11 comments em 116 foaows: Pago 2•7, Thrfflc Circulation, Mitigation M111umres: The deaerlpl!on ;,,.1tw/,/\ .. proposed Improvement& ls "°' complete. lne width of lhe.e,clOtlng ~~-·, · sod Ion Is l=doquala for rostriplng, and rooonslrUCtlon wffl be ~-In ·Olilor 1o · P.rovtda additional lanos. The geom«11r1c: lmprovemef\tl! at th& lnlsrstata Rou!a·S (I-SJ/Cannon Road Interchange wlll be deCenn1ned by Callnms as P!1lt of 1tl(f · · .: • Prajocl Study Repo11 (PSR) for the Cannon Road lmm'change' ~ ,A Cotrq)f11!11 ·. descmuon of the proposed lmprovamenla can be found In 1M ·Drift PSA 'Whk:11 •. · was circulated In Mey 1995. . . . :'·.: · · . . . • . ··-···,··.·· "I'; . Th& phasing. dates for the impnlvernents Is not accurato alnce all ~,iiii(j: . ..- required to meet the 2020 projo~lons WII be oonwucto<I as part Qt tl)e·lnteidlitnge project. Thia pro)&et 16 &c:heduled for comp~ by Caltnl(I, In 1991k · · ···: · ·· ·· · ·. [ Page 2:12, Vlsua! Aesthetlca/G~cllng, M!lgallon Measuiu ~; ·~e or._fhf: · con&tl'l!Jnad width adjacent to 1h11 ramp, tt,e proposed re~ want· ... not have adequate space behind them for lhe planllng of Y111t111 and'ahrube; 1hltrefoi:, ·an . agreement wlU have to be reached with lhe a~eent property owner io ·• end maintain on the ownel's prope11y, ·. · · • ,_..,. • · [ Pago 2·20, Trame: Cln:ulatlon, rmlgadon: See commom .1 ~-::;: · · · [ Page 3·2, Agure S-1, Regional Loc4tlon and Local·Vlc&llty:. ~ale~. ·. =~:.ild be rovlsed to include lhO 1-5/Connon R~,~~-~ -~ oJ~ prcj)ect [ Paga 5.7•9, Paragraph 4 • ~Cannon Roa~-•~ Prvf!ICC.~, · : .· .. Sentence 3: , "Ad<itlOMI rlght-<>f-way wta nood·to b& aoqund for rlgt\Uum Ja~ : .. widening aloni1 Carmon Road.■ "lllld wldeni'lg along lhe '9(ilhb.ound.~-ramp.• ·, . ' .•. · ....... ,· • .,, , ........... ·.:.,.1, •. -: .... ·\•···-··•·· ·_;//".:::··.)(::: . ··_; :~·: : ·:' . -~ : • • F-1. Comment noted. The phasing dates were intended to provide an estimated timeframe which identified when the particular improvements would be necessary. As stated in the comment, the improvements would be completed by 1999 which would be prior to the phasing date identified in the traffic analysis. Therefore, improvements would be in place before the anticipated need which would be beneficial. f'-2. Page 2-12 of the Draft EIR, Mitigation Measure 3 has been revised to include a requirement to reach an agreement with the adjacent property owner to plant and maintain landscaping in this area. This revision does not change the overall conclusions of the Draft EIR related to aesthetics. f'-3. Please refer to ·response f': 1. f',4. figure 3-1 has been revised to depict the location of the Interstate 5/Cannon Road Interchange as part of the project site. This revision docs not change the overall conclusions of the Draft EIR. f'-5. Page 5.7-9 of the Draft EIR has been revised to include the additional wording, " ... and widening along the southbound on-ramp." This revision does not change the overall conclusions of the Draft EIR . • Mr. Chris Belsky Octol>or 6, 1995 Page Two Our contaot peruon tor Traffic Operations Is Fred Yudan, (619) 688~881: J=or 1-S;our contaot pcl'SDO la Mojld KherraU, Dasil)n Branch. (618) 89:8~:,20. • • • • ~CARlTAS ~ COffiPAnY ___________ _ October 11, 199S Mr. Don Neu City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Valm .. Driyc, Carlsbad, C:a 92009-4859 Rt: Clllisbad RAnch 6p«lnc Plan J>raR li:uYlrvna1total ln,pad Rcpnrt, Coashll Sage Scrub Mlll1taU011 Requirements Dear Don: The purposo of this letter I.a to addre .. the I.I acre of Dicgao coastal sage scrub loootcd on tho southern bolD!dary slope or the C8rlsbad Ranell alto. The constJUctlon of J'alomu Airport Road essendally ctelllcd lhls site by u,lng "nal!ve" vegetatlon seed mlx 118 · onwncnt.al landscaplne. Attnched ic a letter froni J)udclc & Msoc:lates Enalnoerlng & Bnvlronmcntal Sciences, doscrlblng tho alto IIS dirl\ubcd co!>SIIII scnib oon,lsdn1 ll>Ollly 0£ IOWeT quality G· 1 buckwheat sorub. As idcnUlied in the Environmental Impact R.epon, Ihle site hu U«lc biologic..! funetlon or voluo. We believe tho appropriate rcplaeotnenl rallo should not exceed I: I. ~future replacement sites 1hould ·be ln<:ruscd to Ibo enllro HCP &tO<l of Carlsbad. gpccificaJJy, lfoffsltc mltfgallon ts required, aoqulslttoo within~ C11lstlng mitigation bank such as Carlsbad Highlands should be pennlueJ. Thi, hobital Is appnmxl by the agencies and le oomplollo whh rnaiotcrumoo oflho alee. enclosure bb/CCC 5600 AYENIDA ENCINAS • SUITE 100 • CAALSBAO, C'ALIFOFINIA 92008 U.S.A. (619) 43Hl600 l"AX (019) 431·9020 • • G-1. Comment noted. The Draft EIR recognizes that this area is of limited value as it is disturbed and isolated from other areas of native vegetation. The purchase or preservation al a 1:1 ratio within the HCP area of Carlsbad would mitigate the impact to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measure 1 of Section 5.4 . Biological Resources has been modified lo read: I. Diegan coastal sage scrub impacts should be mitigated by creation or restoration at ratios of 2: 1 and I: 1, respectively, within Preserve Planning Area 3 or the purchase of preservation at a 1:1 ratio within the HCP area of Carlsbad. The revised language does not change the conclusions of the Draft EIR. DUDEK & ASSOClATES, INC, ------=-:.·••==,-c=·:: :. Enr,ln=rlng & Envlrm,mcnt(ll Sclt.nc"" 12 Octobor 1995 Mr. Bn,t Berr)' CarltU Company .5600 AVentoa Encloag, SUIIC 100 CarJ.sbad1 Calltomla 92008 r . .,...,.....,,llf'w,11 60; n..i '"""' Cd..._11t-.C"'.A Y101A (019) .. ,,,,., FM (Oto) 6.1U)hM Oin,• 00\on IISO()(ync,l,:.lt.im: IOI o. ....... t:A91119 ("°")l'/9'.1111 J:.. 19091170-11$) 9S~t BYallfarion of <Ao,tal &J&e Send, llobllal Along PalOITIM Alrpo" Rc>ad on 1M Cm-/.Jbad llanch Property. DeatMr. :Berey: ~r yout recet11 teqUe$1, I conllucled a brtda~y orlbc 1.l-acro pe(Chof •QO.,.tal sego acnat,• mappclS by Swcetwala: Euvb'anmeltlB1 Biologists (1995) alODS die sautbem OOIIIJJ.lary of Cart.bad . Ranch, lmmedial.ely lllll'OII Pab1mar Airport RDGd from the Pr10o ctub pa.rklDJ lot. Tho lllllVC)' w-.. ~ on 9 OclX>ber 1995, Md OOll8lstal Of llo'IYtJ w&lldng lhrotlgh the habitat JJ'ldl. Tbc putpOSe of tbJs lcuu 11 to dcu:rlbc Ille quality of die habit.Ill and COIDlll£m oa 1bc appropr1alenen 0£ reoommendcd ml1lf1At1on ~- Tbe subject patch of habitat ocaiplcs Ille IOp 2,.3oi or too mcp slope d1ll1 face., Pato.nar Alrpon Road. The slope appcan to I?,&~ been a1abillz.ed by coDGtJUOli011 or~ •1errace-. • Native plants epparanly wac wed by the City of Carlabad to _vegemo a,o slope fo!IO'll'lng oonstNctton. The S!U'llb = Is a Unear band varyll,g from appro:dmatdy :zo.,o t'cet ...,ldo and approxlm.atcly 600 feet long. Tbo bond la comprlaecl prlmarily (aboul ~ ~) of &t,,top buclcwbcat (Er1<,go11JU11 faJCJClllau,m), wtlh the rcmalnlng , l(, rq,resenled by ludiYiduaJa of eat1rom1, sagebru$b (A1Wnt.da cali/i)mka) 1111d deuwi,cd (LDrlU ICOparlu.l). OthDr apeclcs pretem are Of1lllllllllll2 clover (Tr(foawii rp.) and 1. vuldy of weedy DOD-11Bthte, lnctudl.ng red bromo (JJrvmuJ madrltms/1 var. rub«,u), 1lcnder wild oat (A11rrnr l,arbat,J), oomoioo hDrl1:Wl:>Cd (Conyza cxma<Urutf), Au.clJ'llllAn sahbatb. (Ml1ptex 1ftlllbacautt), mid• n,.., od,c-n, tfo DAlivo undcratory species were detoctcd and DOile 1, likely 110 l>t present. TbC slope la doc:ply aodcd In eev,;pl placec and suppolU l)ll'CC D&ItOW concrde •~-• 11 ls lil<dy lha1 • ~orl.ty af !he slope ~ • reveeowton e(fllft Intended to luhibit ..,!\ Cl'Osion. Although tbc habitat t>ll!Cll II best chAtwzrtn:,d 11 "bucl:wbcat ■•a11b, • It WOllld be moppo4 u dlstul'bod c:oastal 16.GC 11erub under lhc standard vegewlon c1amfic.tlon l)'lllcm developed for San 01&30 CQunty. VCJC181lon mapplns .Y.16111S arc bucd on ~ oondltlons, lbc species pre<!ent, AJl4 seneral pbyriognomy, lllCI do 00\ cxmsldcr bftbllat value, qualll)', 01 orlg\n. )tcnca, eve11 tboUSh ttie veS91&tlon ma, have bc:,cn lnlcDdcd IO runcdon as landicapli,a cw Cl'Oll011 eomrol, i1 must be catcgot\1.ecl tnm one or the elll>dudlud ve~011 c:mcgutfes. Tho pa!Ch Is t. dcgradod. frpgruent, totally 1UTT0Undcd by hl8bly Clenloped/dlstmbed hobll!I\ • erod,,d, cut 1I~ and Palomar Alcport Road 10 !he tmmed]ate BOU!h, and active flowm-/airf,cllllllral fidda to d... Immediate north, Bued QI\ tis small llzc, Isolation tram nallve habitat, and hJtl.,l,y degraded QOodltlon, Ill& ~'bltat value of lhe p11Cb IJ extremely low, • • • ffi ~ :::c 0 ~ < ..... I C, • BfflBeny carte\)!(! Ranch pago 2 Because o! the m:coodl.Dgl)' I~ bloloaltal valu~ Of tl>e ~. lmpaCIS to 1h14 habitat ahould be inldgalled by roYCgCtatlon ar o.cqulaltlon a1 a 11'14.tlmun, ndo or 1:1. Although S-wtter l:!nvironmonlal Biologists (199S) reconnuen4cd mldga!Son Wllhin Ibo ,ame Cli;y of Cai:taba.d "Arca,• l do not ~lleve tb&1 tbl! II necce5111')'. Por cxarnpk, the purchue of a 1....cr-c collllttVlltlon oredU In the Ca.rl1bad IDgblaii<I, 111lt1gall0tl bani,. would be mor-o than adcqualc mltlgllllon for ttie loss or !his highly degraded P•tch• LUerllllUC Cl!Cd Swmwal« Eovironmental Blologlm. 1995. Bl~ Report for Culsl,ad Ranch. 2.9 pp. If )'Oil have aey questions i:egarding the flll'VCY or this loller, pkuc, reel free IO call me or Howie wter al (61.9) 94W147 • VU'/ trDly yours, • H-1 H-2 H-3 Slate o( Califonila MEMORANDUM To From Pmjeer Coordinator Rc.,ourcc:s Agency Mr. Donald Neu Ci1y of Carlsbad, Planning Dopartment 207S Le., Palmas Drive Carlsbad, California 92009-1576 Department of Conl<!rvatloa TilE RESOURCES AGENCY Date: October 10, 199S ]~1 !£~: "! ti.:·.:;.-; :;~; :-. .. Omce Or Governmental aad l:avln>a111enbll Rdatloiu Subject Onft Program £nvironmcn1el Impact Report (EIR) for the Carlsbad lunch Specific Plan Amendment. SCH# 95051001 The Department of Conservation (Depa,1men1) bas reviewed the Draft Program E.lR (DPEIR) for the propo,od Carlsbad Ranch Specilic Pb.n Amendment (SI' A). The SPA proposes development of areas currently designated and used as productive agricul!Ural land. 'Oiose lands include ,u-eas defined as Prime Farmland by the Departmeafs Farmland Mappin& and Monitoring Program (FMMP). Approximately 331 acres of the 447 acre project site is cun-ently enrolled under California Land Coiuervation (Williamson) Act contrael. Implementation of the project will require cancellation of the contract on about 181 acres. Tht Depo.r1Jncnt pr,;viously commented on issues pcrtaininri lo the environment:al dooument for the SPA during the early scoping (California Trade and Commerce Agcney'• Office of Penn It Assistance Environmental Red Team Early-Conrullalfon Meeting of ~h I, 199S) and Notice of Prcplll'3tlon (NOP) phases of the projeo:t proposal (NOP comment letter dated May 31, 199S). To ensure a complete Final Prog.-am EIR, the Oepa.rtro01t offers the following additional comments. Site Pmdpl1Pu The cection ~Ing agricultura.l resources In the Draft Program EJR (pages S.1-1 to 5.1-16) provides a good overview of the projec;t silo utting. 11,e project 1i1D .i;etting will bo used as a baseline for comparison to potentia.l projece lmpacu. To strengthen this baseline description, the Department suggests that the dlscussion include precise evldtnce. For eumple, aupporting evidence could be provided for tho statement !Mt tho primary problem for agricultural o~tions on the project site • ... is the basic Inability to realize an adequate cconornic return fi'oDI the sale of the field grown productr." (p.age S. 1-12) Such evlde"ce could lncludo reference to existing Tablo S-1 (showing acres, crops, and yields cllltffltly associated with the proposed project site) combined with the economic value of yield$ in relation to opcnrlng co,ts. A poulble source for this type of data is tho United States Department of Agriculture's Natun.J Rtso~ Conservation Service. [ The DPEIR states on_J)lgo S.1-11 that there "arc no agricultural lands contiguous to the project site with the e><ccption of the land currently under production immediately north of the slto.M However, the map on page S.1-2 fllustra1cs tho existence of two large areu, one to the immediate south and ono to the lmmedialo ~st of lhe project sito which tho Dcpanmcnrs FMMP hu defined as Farmland of Local lmpertance. Other aneas, not immediately contiguous lo the project sire, are also defined as Prime Fannland. Farmland of Statcwido Importance, and Unique Flll'ntland. This information may prove useful in making a final dekmlination of the projec:(s cumulative Impacts. • • H-1. The comment noted. Please refer to response to comments H-2 through H-6. H-2. Page 5.1-12 of the Draft EIR has been revised to ~r~vidc additional fac1ual information related to economic viability of the site. The modtf1ed text docs not change the overall conclusions of the Draft EIR related to agricultural resources. I-1-3. figure 5-1 dcpicls the Important farmlan_d classi_ficat~ons surrounding the project ~ite which is based on maps provided by the State of Cahforma Departmcn_t of Conscivauon. figure 5.1 docs not reflect existing land use conditions surrounding lhc sue as development has occurred in these areas subsequent to the preparation of the maps by the Dc~a~lment of Conseivation. The text on page 5. t-1 has been modified to clarify that the cxh1bll does not depict existing land uses as development has occurred in some areas subsequent to the preparation of the Important farmlands map for the area. ~e modified text docs not change the overall conclusions of the Draft EIR related to agricultural _resources . H-4 H-5 • Mr. Don Neu October JO, 199S Paga l SlculGcaat Effccu and J\:Jiticatfou Appendix G(y) of the California Environmenral Qiality Act (CEQA; California Code of Regulation• (CCR) Title 14, Dl_vi•i~ 6, Cluipter 3, Section I $000 et. seq.) states th.at a Mproject will normally have a sfgnific:Mlt effe<:t on the environment If it wlll convert prime agricultural !And to nonagricultural use Ot impair the agricultural productivity of prime agriculrural land." CEQA also requites dLat mitigation measures be propose<! to minimize significant environmental effects (CCR ISl26(c]). The DPE;IR <tales thot tho Impacts of prime agricultural land conversion wUI include the preservation of SJ acres on-site "through the Implementation of the agricultural land use policies · contained lo the specific plant and the "paym■nt of convcnion foes in compli.ancc wilh lhe City's Coutal program." . The preservation of a portion of the agrlculrural lands within the proposed project site apparently seeks IO "minimize impacts by limiting ... the magnitude of the (proposed) action." (CCR Section IS370(b]). CCR Section IS370 also notes that mitigatloo can tal<e the form of "ellminating the Impact over time by preservation and maintenance,• •avoiding the impact altogether,• or "compensating (Of' the impact by replacing or providing substiMe resources.• It is unclear whether the propoud p3yn,ent of conversion fees Is in!Qldcd as mitigation. Payment of those fee, to an organization which supports the preservation and enhaneement of open space and agricultural !And could also constitute mitigation. If additional mitigation measurH arc to ho considered for the Final Program EJR. thb orpniz:alion may provide a valuable soun,e of altcmatlvco and assistance. lndh::tt( IQd CpmplatiYC Impacts The discussion regarding Indirect Conversion ofagriculrunl land (page S.1-1S) a.sseru that Nimplementatlon of the proposed project would not result in indirect impacts to agricultural lands off- . slai, or In the early conversion of agricultural lands off-site." However, the discussion of Growth- Inducing Impacts (as required by CCR Section ISl26(g)) on pagH 7-8 to 7-9 notes that "tho proposod project will have arowth Inducing impacts on the City of Carlsbad," and "the proposed project could incn:,ase the pressure IO develop the remaining alUicultural land adjacent to the northffll boundary of the Specific Plan for other urbanized uses." The _Department suggests that these sections be reeoncilcd to clarify the issue of potential growth-Inducing Impacts to off-site agricultural operatiom idcntlJied in · the DPEIR and by !he Dcpanmcnt above. The Department appreciates the opportunity lo comment on the Draft Prog7111D E.IR. If we can [ be of l'utthcr asslst4Dcc with thu review or In otrering advisory comments during drafting of the H-6 Williamson Act contrad cancellation findl.ogs subsequent to CEQA, please contact me (916-44S-8733) ,..~ T..., ....,., o.-~ .,...,.c_....,, ,.,~d'~ ~ Acting Assl111aot Director Office of Governmental and Environmental Relations cc: Michael Mantell, Undcrsecrewy for Resources, Resources Agency B.B. Blevins, Chief Deputy Director, Dcputment of Col!Sffllatioo Lauren Scvrin, Trade and Commcrcc Agency, Office of Permit Assistance Kenneth E. Trott, Manager, Office of Land Conscn,adon Palomar, Romona, Julien Resource Conservation District • • H-4. Page 5.1-12 of the Draft EIR has been modified to provide a more ~etail~d description of the Coastal Program agricultural conversion fees. The proposed proJcct will be required to mitigate impacts through the payment of conversion fees. Section 30171.5 of the Public Resources Code, Division 20, California Coastal Act states 1ha1 the amount of mitigation fee for development " ... shall be determined in the applicable se~ment of the local coastal program of the City of Carlsbad, but shall not be less than five thousand dollars ($5,000), nor more than ten thousand dollars ($10,000) per acre." These fees can be applied to restoration of natural resources and wildlife habitat in Batiquitos Lagoo~, development of an interpretive center al _Buena Vista Lagoon, provi_sion of access lo public ,. beaches in the City of Carlsbad, or any other project or activity benefiting natural resources in the coastal zone which is consistent with CCR Section 15370. The modified text does not change the overall conclusions of the Draft EIR related to agricultural resources. H-5. The Draft EIR concludes that the proposed project will not result in the termination of agricultural use on adjacent property. Page 7-9 of the Draft EIR stales, "The ~roposed project could increase the pressure to develop the remaining agricultural land_ adpcent to the northern boundary of the Specific Plan", but further states that the parcel 1s not ~oned for agricultural use and existing pressures already are creating a demand for conversion of agriculture to urbanized uses. The text has been modified to clarify the conclusion of the Draft EIR. The modified text docs not change the overall conclusions of the Draft EIR related to agricultural resources. H-6. Comment noted. • Hofman Planning A soc ates October 13, 1995 Don Neu 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, Ca. 92009 RE: COMMENTS ON TIIB DRAFT EIR FOR THE CARLSBAD RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT Dear Don: Hofman Planning Associates has the following comments on the Draft EIR for the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment: Page 2-3 -Air Quality -Mitigation Measures I. "Whenever feasible" should be added after the word "shall" because some of these implementation measures may not be feasible to implement in all of the buildings that will be 1-1 developed in the Specific Plan area. For example, it is our understanding that Carlsbad does not allow low sodium parking lot lights. This revision would make everyone aware that these measures would be implemented where feasible, but not mandate them where they are not. This same change should be reflected in the Mitigation Monitoring Program and the summary of impacts section of the EIR. [ Page 3-6 -Specialty Retail (Planing Area 6) The fourth sentence of this section states that there will be a focus on food service at the end 1-2 of the pedestrian access to the flower fields. This does not reflect the wording of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan which calls out for a focus point at this area with gardens or a plaza with benches for foot traffic. The Specific Plan does not call out for food service at this area. The EIR should accurately reflect the Specific Plan. • • 1-1. No changes to the Draft EIR arc necessary. The commentor's concern is reflected in Mitigation Measure I. Page 2-3 Mitigation Measure I states: I. Individual development projects within the specific plan area shall be require~ to implement the following mitigation measures, as de1ermined feasible on a proJcct- by-project basis by the City ... 1-2. Page 3-6 of the Draft EIR has been modified. It should be noted that restaurants_ are a pcrmilled use in Planning Area 6. This revision docs not change the overall conclusions of the Draft EIR. • • MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM As ~ritten, the Mi~gation Monitoring Program will be difficult to implement for both the applicant and the City. It divides the timing of the mitigation measures into Pre- Constru~tion, During Construction and Post Construction. Pre-Construction mitigation s~o~ld tied ~o speci~~ points in time, such as final map, grading permit or building permit s1m1l~ t~ City cond111on_s of approv~. I:?uring cons~ction should be linked to occupancy f~r build_mgs or compleuon and certificauon of grading for lots without buildings. A definite ume penod should also be established for post construction mitigation measures. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions regarding these comments. Sincerely, /3,d( .¥t~ Bill Hofman • • 1-3. Comment noted. It sho~ld be noted that the mitigation measures proposed in the Draft EIR and incorporated into the Mitigation Monitoring program tie the timing of the measure 10 specific timeframes e.g. prior to issuance of a grading permit, specific years (traffic mitigation), during grading, prior to Site Development Plan approval, etc. It should be noted that several mitigation measures require the implementation of one or any combination of several measures that would · be required al different stages in the development process. These measures will be tied into conditions of approval for future site development plans. J-1 October 10, 1995 Hr. Don Neu Planning Department City of Carlsbad OCT I 3 1~15 Subject: Draft EIR for the Carlsbad Ranch --Comments from: Bexen Press P.O. Box 1865 Carlsbad, CA 92018-1865 (619)929-0609 Dear Hr. Neu: We have examined the DEIR and are submitting the following comments, addressing these subjects: Agricultural Lands and Open Space Airport Compatibility Alternative Sites Housing Public Services Traffic and Circulation Water [ The project can only be considered as one entity; although LEOOLAND is the anchor, the combined impact of all the J-2 tenants has to be considered, particularly that now regional retail is proposed, with almost as many square feet as LEGO. J-3 Our introductory comments are based on the old saying "Be careful what .rou wish for; .rou may get it." The LEGO project was never a local land-use decision. genesis was 100\ political, including the personal involvement of Governor Wilson. This DEIR completely validates and reinforces all the concerns raised by those who oppose the LEOO project. • Its • J-1. Comment noted. Please refer to responses J-2 through J-20. J-2. The Draft EIR analyzes impacts associated with buildout of the entire Specific Plan. J-3. Comment noted. This comment does not address the completeness or adequacy of the Draft EIR. • J-4 J-5 • -2- Host of the significant impacts identified can never be mitigated; in fact, many mitigation measures proposed are tired, outdated cliches which have no basis in reality. Bicycles, 12-hour work days, reclaimed sewage water usage in convnercial buildings, and other proposals are nothing more than Band-Aids. In fact, most of the mitigation measures really do nothing more than showcase how severe the impacts from this project are going to be. It is the position of Bexen Press that, at this point in time, given the traffic and population congestion of coastal Southern-California, it is. impossible to build any theme park of more than minimal proportions along the coast. · Locally, we have an annual ·three-week summer fair at Del Har. I.t's convnon knowledge the traffic congestion this causes, particularly on I-5. Eventually, with LEGO, Carlsbad will have a modified perpetual Del Har Pair -- 365 days a year, 12-14 hours a day, There will be only peak and more peak hours. Otherwise, the project will not succeed economically. By now, many officials in Carlsbad, elected and staff, have made trips to LEGO Denmark and now LEGO Windsor. All have returned with glowing reports. However, their plea~ant trips. have little relevanc~ for LEGO Carlsbad. It's a different country. • • J-4. The Drart EIR identifies foasible mitigation measures which will reduce each project- specific impact identified to a level less than significant. However, as identified on page 2-1 or the Drart EIR, signiricant cumulative impacts lo air quality, tramc, and agricultural resources remain artcr implementation or mitigation measures. These impacts occur as a result or regional growth and are beyond the jurisdiction or the City. J-5. Comment noted. This comment docs not address the completeness or adequacy or the Drart EIR. A detailed traffic analysis has been prepared for the proposed project and is summarized in Section 5.5 or the Drart EIR. J-6 -3- Agricultural Lands and Open Space The Carlsbad Ranch development proposal says that the flower fields, 53 acres, are not an economic certainty. To continue their existence, other agricultural lands, now set aside under Williamson Act incentives, will have to be developed to provide an economic base tor these flower fields. Essentially, the flower fields are being held hostage. They are an integral part of the city, widely admired (visited by over 200,000 this spring, with considerable weekend traffic jams on Paseo del Korte) and considered a permanent fixture. To cancel the agricultural land set-aside, Carlsbad Ranch has to pay a cancellation fee of 12.S\ of the lands' market value for non-agricultural use. It's time now for Carlsbad to fish or cut bait. Let this city now use ·eminent domain for acquisition of these fields. J-7 [ Incidental 1 y, the present configuration of the Ranch development may block viewing them from the west. J-8 J-9 [ The schematic for the Ranch indicates an open space designation for a parcel in the extreme north-east corner, Since this area is desccibed as rugged and probably not suitable for anything, even recreation, it is more surplus land than anything else. It seems vaguely deceptive to tout it as required open space land for this Ranch. Airport Compatibility He do not agree that this project is compatible with the CLUP of any airport, especially not a very busy one like Palomar, He do not think that the FAA, in approving the noise contours, FAZ, etc. for Palomar Airport, ever considered a theme park located practically at the end of the runway, Actually, what seems compatible with an airport with almost 300,000 flights a year are low-level, box-like • • J-6. Comment noted, This comment docs not address the completeness or adequacy of the Draft EIR. J-7. Please refer to Section 5.11 Visual Aesthetics/Grading of the Draft EIR for an analysis of the proposed project related to Visual Aesthetics/Grading issues. Figures 5-24 through 5-27 provide a computer visual simulation of future conditions of the proposed project site from three vantage points surrounding the project site. A site development permit is required 10 be approved for Planning Arca 6 prior to development. The site development plan musl be in conformance with the development standards and design guidelines for this area which require primarily single story slruclures with reduced building height to retain to the greatest extent possible, views of the flower fields while providing the ability to create a design that is architecturally appealing. J-8. Comment noted. This comment docs not address lhc completeness or adequacy of the Draft EIR. J-9. The Draft EIR provides an analysis of land use compatibility utilizing policies and criteria for land use compatibility as identified in the Comprehensive Land Use Plan for the McClellan-Palomar airport. No impact to land use compatibility with the McClellan- Palomar Airport has been identified. As stated on page 5.7-17 of the Draft EIR, "Although the project si(e is located within the Airport Influence Arca, it is not located within the boundaries of a Runway Protection Zone (RPZ), or Flight Activity Zone (FAZ). These are the areas of highest accident potential." The Draft EIR requires mitigation to address potential noise from aircraft operations on the community hotel and resort hotel buildings. The noise avigation easement is a requirement as identified in the CLUP. No additional impact from aircraft noise has been identified. • • -4- lstructures, no windows, few people, and certainly little outdoor activity. J-9 Creating a noise easement doesn't remove the noise. (conl'd.) J-10 J-11 Frankly, we are disappointed with this DEIR chapter. The discussion is perfunctory and less than analytical. Alternative Sites Since the minimum acreage required is 400, ft is unclear why the seven sites identified were selected in the first place. No sites off the 1·15 corridor were included, although it would seem likely that more 400 acre sites are available inland than in the vicinity of I-5. Three of the sites selected are in Oceanside --if there are already siting problems in Carlsbad~ how is it possible that a neighbor city would not experience the same? Even considering these three sites is an exercise in futility. Additional sites need to be considered in different locations.· Poway was interested. Rousing In the Consideration of Environmental Impact, the DEIR estimates 3000-4000 service jobs will be created at build-out. Furthermore, the jobs will generally pay low or · moderate wages, the proportion of low to moderate not identified, although given service jobs in general, low wage jobs will predominate. · · It is specifically stated in th€ report that these new employees will commute and not relocate to Carlsbad. This creates a direct conflict with official Carlsbad policy which supports the concept of employees living here if they work here. In fact, recently the City Council has created hundreds of new lower-income units ·through its inclusionary housing policy, leveling fees on residential development to fund these units. . • • J-10. As stated on page 6-2 or the Draft EIR, "Several alternatives were identified early in the planning process but have been rejected from further'consideration as they did not eliminate or reduce any potential impacts of the proposed prpject, were infeasible, and did not meet the basic objectives of the proposed project as identified in Section 3.0 or this document." · J-11. Page 5.9-1 of the Draft EIR states that some of the jobs generated from the proposed project will be filled by residents of Carlsbad and surrounding communities, and that it is anticipated that some of the future employees will relocate within the City of Carlsbad and surrounding areas. This is not a conflict with City policy. _Carlsbad's Housing Element requires that a minimum of 15% of all approved units in any residential specific _ plan or qualified subdivision (to be defined) shall be set aside and be made affordable to lower income households. · J-11 (confd.) J-12 J-13 -s- Therefore the City immediately faces a dilemma. According to its policy, Carlsbad needs to create a huge number of additional lower-income units. But to pay for them, it has to go to developers, as it certainly would face great difficulty going to the voters. Since the Carlsbad Ranch will generate these jobs, it is the logical and only source of funding. Otherwise, residential developers would have ample reason to declare that their f~es are arbitrary and unfair. Public services Wherever there are crowds of vehicles or people, at a mall, a beach, a stadium, a park, there is always a need for more police presence. (Just think back on the incidents at the Del Har Fair.) The police is needed for crowd control, traffic control, medical emergencies, disputes, etc. The private security this DEIR stipulates augments police; it doesn't substitute for it. Unhappily, where there are people, there is crime. And one thing that this project hopes to bring to Carlsbad is people! We have continually heard concern about public safety at meetings, not only for Carlsbad Ranch but other projects. As a start there is a need for a police sub-station. A good location might be near SDG&E along Carlsbad Boulevard. The Ranch facilities fee can fund this. Unless additional police presence is introduced ill'llledlately, eventually this city will have to come to the voters to approve police bonds. Asking for bond approval is usually a sign of poor planning. One fire engine is hardly sufficient to serve all the residences in the sprawling Southwest Quadrant and this massive project. At least, there is a need for an additional engine. The Batiquitos station can probably be expanded to accommodate this. Eventually, an emergency vehicle logically should be located near the Ranch itself. • • J-12. As stated on· page 5.9-3 of the Draft EIR, "According to the Carlsbad Police Department, development under the specific plan amendment is not anticipated to significantly affect the Department's ability to provide adequate services." The Draft EIR identifies that there will be an increase in service calls associated with the proposed project, however implementation of Mitigation Measure I, in addition to compliance with the City requirement for payment of a Public Facilities f(!e of 3.5 percent of building's valuation, will result in adequate police protection services.\ J-13. As stated on page 5.9-2 of the Draft EIR, 'The Carlsbad Fire Department has indicated that the project will not significantly affect the Department's ability to provide fire protection services to the area." Page 5.9-2 of the Draft EIR states, "Existing City requirements, including construction in compliance with Title 24 of the Uniform Building Code and payment of Public Facilities Fees of 3.5 percent of the buildings' valuation at issuance of the building permit, will result in the provision of adequate fire protection services." Please refer to pages 5.9-1 through 5.9-2 for a detailed discussion of impacts related to fire services. • J-13 (cont'd,) J-14 • -6- Carlsbad has not one full-service emergency medical facility. All patients have to be transported (often by air) out of the city to Encinitas, La Jolla, or Oceanside. In fact, we believe that a hospital proposed along the Palomar corridor was rejected some years ago because of traffic. We have not independently verified this fact. However, the lack of medical care is hardly addressed at all in the DEIR. Traffic and Circulation For traffic impacts from the Carlsbad Ranch, this DEIR is grossly deficient. Why are we assuming that all visitors to the Carlsbad Ranch would exit 1-5 at Cannon or Palomar Airport Road? Would no visitors approach through downtown Carlsbad or from the south along 101? Or approach from the east from Vista, San Marcos, or via 1-15? All the emphasis is on Zone 13. Does Zone 13 exist in a vacuum? Other ~ones are neither isolated nor insulated from Zone 13. For the corranunity, the traffic impact is one of the most critical issues that has to be considered. J-15 Visitors to theme parks, hotels, and malls in this country do not arrive by bicycle or on foot. Maybe there are a few tour buses, perhaps a taxi or two. The automobile is the preferred and usual mode of transportation. There is a railroad level grade crossing near Cannon and I-5 which becomes more dangerous as the nwnber of vehicles on Cannon increases. There has to be a grade separation here. [ When the General Plan, Growth Management Plan, and other J-16 standards for Carlsbad were put in place, locating a theme park in the center of the city was never a consideration. J-17 r A member of this city's Planning Co11'111ission has claimed that LEGOLAND will generate no more daily traffic than a Ralphs' parking lot. Recently, the Carlsbad City Council rejected siting one supermarket on El Camino Real because of traffic. • • J-14. The traffic analysis does not assume that all trips to Carlsbad Ranch would exit 1-5 at Cannon or Palomar Airport Road. Figure 5-10 Year 2000 LFMP Zone 13 Trip Distribution and Figure 5-12 Buildout Conditions LFMP Zone 13 Trip Distribution depict the trip distribution percentages. As depicted in these figures, the traffic analysis assumed that 33% will access the project site from the 1-5 southbound approach, and 36% will access the site from the 1-5 northbound approach. Approximately 2% of project trips will access the site via Carlsbad Boulevard onto Palomar Airport Road, and approximately 2% of total trips will access the site via Carlsbad Boulevard onto Cannon Road. The analysis also takes into consideration vehicles accessing the site from the east via Cannon Road, El Camino Real, and Palomar Airport Road. Please refer to Figures 5-10 and 5-12 on pages 5.5-14 and 5.5-16 of the Draft EIR for a depiction of anticipated trip distribution. J-15. The traffic analysis is not limited to Zone 13 traffic. Rather, the analysis includes traffic generated from Zone 13 in conjunction with traffic volumes from surrounding developments that is projected at the study locations. The traffic analysis includes an analysis of existing and future traffic volumes from the proposed project in conjunction with future potential traffic in the City from buildout of land uses in the vicinity of the project. J. 16. This comment docs not address the completeness or adequacy of the Draft EIR, however the following information is offered in response to the comment: As indicated on pages 3-12 through 3-20 of the Draft EIR, discretionary actions included as part of the proposed project include amendments to the General Plan, and Local Facilities Management Plan lo reflect the land uses proposed as part of the Specific Plan. The Zone 13 LFMP Amendment has been prepared which includes the proposed thcmcpark land use, and is available for review at the City. J-17. According to the traffic analysis prepared by Kaku Associates, the project-specific traffic impacts as a result of the development of Carlsbad Ranch can be mitigated to a lever less than significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measures 1 and 2 proposed in Section 5.5 of the Draft EIR. Cumulative unavoidable traffic impacts are anticipated to remain on State Route 78 and the Interstate 5 freeway even after the implementation of the recommended mitigation measures. These impacts arc regional in nature and occur in areas outside of the jurisdiction of the City. As stated on pages 2-1 and 2-2 of the Draft EIR, to approve the project the City must adopt a "Statement of Overriding Considerations" pursuant to Sections 15093 and 15126(b) of the CEQA Guidelines identifying why the benefits of the project outweigh unavoidable adverse environmental impacts. -7- • mitigated and that fact alone is a basis for rejecting the J 17 lThe traffic impacts from Carlsbad Ranch cannot be (cont'd.) type of development proposed. J-18 Hater Reclaimed water is treated sewage water. Its use carries considerable health risks, many of which may not even be kno\ffi. That's why there are rigid restrictions on its use. f It is difficult to understand why a childrens' theme park would want to assume the risk of using reclaimed water. . # Bringing dual plumbing into1-commercial structures carries with it considerable hazards. Pipes burst, pipes leak, back-flow devices fail, among other problems. The DEIR does not hide the fact that the project faces a fresh water shortage. This shortage will absolutely affect the residents of Carlsbad. Our domestic supply will be priced higher and higher to discourage consumption, build more local storage, and subsidize the reclaimed water users. • • J-18. This comment does not address the completeness or adequacy of the Draft EIR, however the following information is offered in response to ,the comment: Mitigation Measures I and 2 identified on page 5.9-21 of the Draft EIR require the project to utilize reclaimed water as feasible, to be determined by the City of Carlsbad and the Carlsbad Municipal Water District. • J-19 • -8- We have never talked with anyone, either locally or out- of-area, who has said anything else than "LEGO is a Done Deal." It seems that most of the development problems are being pigeonholed into convenient, often ridiculous solutions. Hot enough water? Just re-use it, over and over. Noisy airport? Create an easement.· Want to visit from Fullerton? Ride a bicycle. cut down on commuting? Work 12-hour shifts. Bad air quality? Telecommute. These jobs are mainly in services. How can hotel maids, gardeners, and retail clerks telecommute? Leaves do not get raked by computer. These solutions only highlight the inherent problems, not remove them. [ The Carlsbad Ranch development is too intense for its site and unsuitable for its location. It severely compromises J-20 the quality of life in this city. Since the development components are regional in scope, their benefit locally is unclear and possibly minimal. Sincerely, R 0u..bv-t-&.,JJ . ('..{ 1J..lw Renata B. Mulry \I Director~ Research Bexen Press P.O. Box 1865 Carlsbad, CA 92018-1865 (619)929-0609 • • J-19. As required by CEQA the Draft EIR identifies significant environmental impacts of the proposed project and mitigation measures designed to reduce or avoid those impacts. J-20. Comment noted. This comment does not address the completeness or adequacy of the Draft EIR. K-1 Defined Neighbors Involved In Carlsbad's Future . Carlsbad Ranch Plan Erivtronmental Impact Report . . ~-. Analysis And Response. October 13, 1995 OST 1 3 1995 Neighbo,..,, Involved In Carlsbad'• Future I• a group or Carlsbad resldenls and businesses who aro concerned about the long term vision or our city. Our members are lndivlduals from all eoonomlc levels, various backgrounds and all walks of life. Our motivation Is slmple .. to preserve the quality of life found In our community. Unlike our neighbors to the north In Orange County and Los Angeles, Carlsbad has an ldenUty. There are not many places left which possess the quality of life we enjoy In Carlsbad. We eooourago everyone to slay Informed and Involved In the Issues that affect Carlsbad's future. Mission NICF has followed this project for the last 2 years. It Is not our goal to slop this project but rather to accomplish the following goals: 1) Provide a vehicle for any and all lndivlduals to voice their concerns regarding this project and have them communicated to the appropriate organizations. 2) Insure that all pertinent Issues which win have long term lmpacls on the city aro clearly and adequately communicated to all citizens, 3) Wori< together with the project developers to Insure that the project mruclmlzes Its success while minimizing Impacts. Most Importantly, Insure that our community learns from the mistakes of our neighbors to the north. The following polnls summarize the most significant Issues as they pertain to this project and EIR. We feel these to be the most Important Items which deserve Immediate attention. MIXED USE lssua NICF has always been concerned with the mixture or us~ within such a close proximity. Typically In large scale mixed use projects a theme Is developed and followed. In this parUcular project up to 7 different uses within the project area have been defined. Not only do these uses lack a transition from one area to the next, In some cases they represent connlcUng uses. It Is OtJf' opinion that the project lacks a central theme or vision. · Proposition Hire a planner with experience In large scale, successful projects to review the mixed use strategy. • Neighbors Jnvolwt-d In Cerhb•d"1 futur• Carf1bad A1nch ProJect EIR An■lytlt AM RHponH October 13, 1095 • K-1. Comment noted. This comment docs not address the completeness or adequacy of the Draft EIR. • K-2 K-3 K-4 • SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS lssuo Aller thorough review of the Carlsbad Ranch Environmental Impact Report. NICF ha• recognb:ed that throughout the docwnent reference• are made to •:11gnHicant lmpacu which cannol lM mitigated'. It Is our concern that the clt.b:ens who have not been able to read this report In detail, will not be Informed of these Impacts unUI a Iler the project lo completed. Every ell'ort should be made to slmplify and publlsh these Impacts. (Please see exhibit A) Propo:1ltlon a) Slmplify the Impacts In order for the average citizen to have the Ume to read and understand them. b) Adequately publish "The Statement Of Overr1ding ConslderaUons". c) Provide a public forum for these Impacts to be discussed prio< to council acUon. IGNORANCE OF REGIONAL IMPACTS lssuo Many of the projects which are being considered In Carlsbad wlll ulUmalely contributo to the overall growth In the North San Diego County area. _It Is our concern that due lo non linear development ,chedules, all the Impacts of the proposed projects cannot be considered at one Ume. This result.s In uncontrolled growth which has been e~perfenced In The Los Angeles and Orange County areas. Proposition a) Create a central North County Development Agency which Is responsn,te for disseminating development lnforrnaUon from numerous ciUes. b) Manda le that lmpa.ct.s from neighboring c~munlUes be considered when fonnulaUng Environmental Impact Reports. NO RECOURSE OP,TIONS lssuo If significant omissions or mistakes have been made throughout the planning process, NICF Is concerned that the clt.b:ens and city have no avenue for ree<>urse. Proposltlon To lnlllate a mechanism which would enable the citizens and city to Identify, measure and decide the necessary mlUgaUon to be provided by the developer on an ongoing basis. THE WILLIAMSON ACT lssuo This project requires that the property be removed from the constralnls of the Willlam~n AcL Aller careful K-5 analysts NICFls sUII unable to understand how the city Is planning to address this Issue. Proposition Reduce to layman's .terms and educate NICF members and the general public on how this process will take place. Included In this educaUon wlll be lhe process itself, agencies Involved as well as a report on how any financial windfalls would be spenL . . . Heighbou involved In Carhb•d'1 future Carhbad Ranch Pro;acl EtR An1ly1lt And Ruponu Oclobar U, 199~ • • K-2. Section 2.0 Executive Summary of the Draft EIR provides a brief summary of 1he environmental impacts and mitigation measures of the proposed project. As part of the certification process of the Final EIR, public hearings will be held before the Planning Commission and City Council before final action is taken by the City Council. The Draft Statement of Overriding Considerations will be available from the City before public hearings begin. The City has developed an extensive mailing list of persons interested in the project which will be utilized in conjunction with advertising in several newspapers 10 inform citizens of the public hearings. K-3. An analysis of cumulative effects has been provided in Section 7.1 Cumulative Impacts of the Draft EIR. The cumulative analysis is based on buildout assumptions of the SANDAG Series 7 forecasts, on a subregional level, and the City's General Plan buildoul projections which coincide with the City's Growth Management Plan buiidoul projections. These cumulative assumptions take into consideration the development from surrounding communities. Please refer lo Section 7.1 of the Draft EIR for a delailed analysis of cumulative impacts. K-4. This comment does not address the completencs~ or adequacy of the Draft EIR, however the following is offered in response: Public hearings will be held on the project by the Planning Commission and City Council prior to final action by the City Council. Based on public comments received, the City Council may · modify mitigation measures in the EIR to the extent that any modified measures are feasible, reduce impacts, and do not result in significant impacts themselves. K-5. Comment noted. This comment does not address the completeness or adequacy of the Draft EIR, however the following is offered in response: A discussion of Williamson Act cancellation requirements/process is provided in Section 5.1 Agricultural Resources of the Draft EIR. K-6 The following questlon• represent L,sue• and questions which have been Identified as a result of careful analysis of this EIR. The following represent, the process In which these questions should be addressed. a) It Is the posltlon of NICF that these que•tlon• be adequately published In order for the general public to be aware of Issues which they may not have had the time nor lncllnatlon to research. b) NICF also request.. that a formal response be Issued to these questions by any and all appropriate private and public agencies Involved In this process.• c) Flnally, NICF requests that a public hearing be scheduled In order for each and every one ol U,eso Issues to be addressed In an open and Interactive formal QUESTIONS GENERAL K-7[1. Does the EIR lake into consideration children's safely al Legoland In respect to air traffic from Palomar Airport? · K-8 [' K-9[3· K-10[4· K-11l° K-12L' K-1{ K-1{ ,.,. Does the EIR report lake Into conslderatlon other developments In the area? a. Carlsbad Industrial Parl< Is 50"/4 built out Remaining 50"/4 to be bulltover tho next 10 to 15 years. b. Expansion of Airport. (sphere ol lnffuence). c. Over 3,000 homes bullt within the Carrillo Ranch project Just down the street d. Conslructlon of 1.2 million sq. feel of retail In South Carlsbad (Green Valley) and Encinitas. e. Numerous other projects under consideration In the city. ' Pg. 3-6 of the report reference a 9 hole golf course that will be open to the pubfic. Whose golf course will It be? What will green fee• be? Will this golf course be In direct competition with the city owned golf course? Who granted use of the 24 acres for the golf course? To whom and for how much? Whal happened to the city parl< or1glnally slated ror this area? If SOG&E declines to grant the 24 acres, what Impact will this have on the golf course? If the course ls reduced to a 7 hole golf course with no connection between the first 4 holes and the last 3, how wlll the golf course survive? What else would be planned for the area If the golf course ls not granted the 24 acre•? In reference to sectlon 3-4, wfll lhe student residents at the Gemology ln•titute be considered In the calculatlons for Growth Management populations and also where are the amenities which will support this populatlon? Pg. 3-7 of the EIR slates that one of Its "goals" Is mixed uses within the Carlsbad Ranch proJecl Most traffic engineers and city planners see this as a problem, with loo many uses that are Incompatible with each other, Pg. 3-10 of the EIR report says "Carlsbad Ranch wfll have a variety of compa!Jble land uses", Which I• It? Pg. 3-11 of the EIR state Legoland, the retail center, & the Point Resort wlll draw from 15 mllllon people In Southern Callfomla alone, Are we prepared to have this Increase In transient populallon? The EIR report only mentions tanglble aspecb; I.e.: traffic, utJIIUes, crime, elc, It never menlloned the personality of a town, It's people. How does the growth management plan protect us from these Impacts? • N•lghbon Involved &n C•rt1bad'1 fut.u,• Ctrhbad Ranch Prof•cl EIR Analyah And Aetponu October U, 1995 • K-6. The comment leller is included in the Final EIR. and is part of the public record for the project. Please refer to responses K-7 through K-49 below. Public hearings will be held by the Planning Commission and City Council before final action on the project is taken by the City Council. K-7. Section 5.7 Land Use Compatibility of the Draft EIR provides an analysis of the proposed project's compatibility with the McClellan-Palomar Airport operations. K-8. Please refer 10 response K-3. K-9. This comment does not address the completeness or adequacy of the Draft EIR, however the following information is offered in response: The referenced 9 hole golf course will be privately owned and operated in conjunction with the resort. As an alternative, if mutually agreed 10 between the City and the property owner the 9 hole golf course may be developed as part of the City's Municipal Golf Course planned on property east of future Hidden Valley Road. K-10. This comment does not address the completeness or adequacy of the Draft EIR, however the following information is offered in response: The property is owned by SDG&E. The city park is planned 10 be located east of the project site, and is not a portion of the SDG&E property proposed for a golf course use as part of this project. K-11. This comment does not address the completeness or adequacy of the Draft EIR. However, the following information is offered in response. The SDG&E parcel planned for the golf course use is a portion of the project. Any alternative use would require environmental review and the processing of required land use approvals. K-12. The impacts created by any dormitories will be considered as non-residential development in the Growth Management calculations. Hotel, motel, time-share, board and care, and housing units without kitchen facilities are not counted as units for the purpose of dwelling unit calculations under the Citywide Facilities and Improvement Plan. • K-1s[o. K-16{1°· K-17(11. K-18[12· K-19 [ 13. K-20 [ 14. K-21 [ 15. K-22 [ 16. • • Pg. 3-13 of the report slats 100.000 aq. fl of ·spedalty retalr will be bulltln 1996. Was It approved? Old Im, Ecke family receive any financlal lnc:entlve and or lax credit for assigning their land Into the Willlamson l.Jlnd Prole<:lion Act? Should the Ecke family be held accountable lo continue the Willlamson Land Act and c:omplele their promise and oommitmenl? Would Cartsbad"s way of life be better If tho land continued within the Williamson Acl? Pg. 5.1-12 of the report says that a payment of a fee can be made lo remove fanmland from Inventory and build on iL Who gels that fee? Will Carlsbad aet the fee slnc:e tho removal of tho land camo from Carlsbad and the city will expertenco the most Impact from the project? Pg. 5.1-14 of the report slate numerous Items must be complel.ed In order lo cancel the Willlamson l.Jlnd Protection Act conlracL When will the City of Carlsbad hold the hearings? One of the quallfications In order lo cancel the Willlam•?n Act Is for the city lo prove that cancellation of the Act only If It Is In the public lnteresL How can that be when the EIR report slates significant Impacts with no polenUal mltigaUon? .. / Pg. 5.2-5 & 5.2·6 of the EIR slates "long term Impact on sir qusfily "(11/-be significant· The report also assumes technology advances within the next 10-15 years. If advances are not forthcoming. smog figures will be Inaccurate. How can we be conr.denl of these assumptions? Pg. 6.2-8 Cumulative Impacts • -,-,,,, developm11nl sntlclpsled under tht1 proposed llptJClfic plan amt1ndment together with thtJ development of other related proj11cLs will havtJ a :,lgnlficanl and unavoldabfe cumufatlve Impact on the region's sir quality.• How are clllzens protected under the growth management plan? FLOWER FIELDS K-23[11. K-24[18· K-25 [ 19. Will the view of the flower fields be blocked by construction of the relall cent.er? Pg. 2-3 of the EIR slate '\viii preserve 53 acres of agrlcullural (flower fields) on site•. How do the cillzens of Cartsbad guarantee that? Under what mechanism will this be accomplished? Pg. 5.1-8 of the report talks about lhe Willlamson AcL It mentions a method for local govenvnenls to protect fanmlands. Will this be used lo protect lhe Flower Flelds as promised to the people of Carlsbad? If The Williamson Act Is being modified lo meet the requlremenb of this project how will the flower fields be protected In perpehilty? . TRAFFIC Pg. 2-7 of the report llsl several road Improvement projecls that must lake place. Who Is going lo pay for this? Much of the road Improvement will not be completed unUI the year 2006-2008, what do we do In the meantime? Pg. 2-21 slates that 15 of 25 lnlersecUons In Carlsbad are expected to operate at unacceptable levels. How does this Improve lhe quality of Ille In Carlsbad? MIUgatlon Is expensive, who will pay? Pg. 5.5-10 & 11 or lhe report state that In lhe year 2,000 (1st year of operation), 41,980 dally trips wlll be made to lhe Carlsbad Ranch Projecl Upon build out. 69,380 dally trips will be made. CurTently, how many aally trips are made to the Carlsbad Ranc:h project? Ntlght>o,-1 inYOfv•d In C1thb1d•1 Future C1,1tb1d R1nch Proj,cl EIR Analy1l1 And Ruponu Oclob1r 13, 1995 K-l3. The mixture of uses proposed are considered to be compatible with on~ another and surrounding uses. Please refer to Section 5.7 of the Draft EIR for an analysis of land use compatibility. K-14. The purpose of the City's Growth Management Plan is to address the provision of public facilities concurrent with need. K-15. Table 3-2 on Page 3.13 of the Draft EIR depicts conccprual development phasing that would occur on the project site if the project is approved. As stated on the table, the phasing schedule is for the purpose of facility planning only. Actual de_velopmenl may occur sooner or later than shown, so long as adequate facilities are provided concurrent with development in accordance with the Zone 13 Local Facilities M~na~ement Plan. The 100,000 square feel of "specialty retail" has not been approved at this 11mc. K-\6. This comment does not address the completeness or adequacy of the Draft EIR, however the following in offered in response: The lands currently under Williamson Act contracts have received tax credit consistent with the Williamson Act provisions. K-17. This comment does not address the completeness or adequacy of the Draft EIR. K-18. This comment does not address the completeness or adequacy of the Draft EIR. K-19. As stated on page 5.1-12 of the EIR, the coastal program adopted for C_arlsbad includes a statutory provision for mitigation by payment of a fee for agriculture permanently converted to non-agriculture uses. As stated in Section 30171.5 of the coastal program, all mitigation fees are appropriated and expended by the State Coastal Conservancy. Per Section 30171.5 the amount of mitigation fee for development" .... shall be determined in the applicable segment of the local coastal program of the Cily of Carlsbad but shall not be less than five thousand dollars ($5,000), nor more than ten thousand' dollars ($10,000) per acre." These fees can be applied to res'.oration ~f natural resources and wildlife habitat in Batiquitos Lagoon, development of an mterprcuvc center at Buena Vista Lagoon, provision of access to public beaches in the City of Carlsbad, or any other project or activity benefiting natural resources in the coastal zone. K-20. Toe hearings on the Williamson Act Cancellation arc t~ntat_ively sc~cdulcd _10 oc~ur in January, 1996. As required by the Williamson Act, the City will provtde pubhc ~ollce of these hearings at least ten days prior to the hearing date. Additionally, ~ s~ated m the Draft EIR, the City will be required to make findings as part of the W1lha~on ~cl cancellation. These findings will be available for public review prior to the pubhc heanng for the Williamson Act cancellation. K-2 I. The mobile air· quality emissions have been calculated utilizing the Mobile Assessment for Air Quality Impacts (MAAQI) model developed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District. MAAQI is an air quality modelling program designed by SCAQMD to estimate vehicular and energy emissions. This model is a standard model for projecting project emissions and is considered by the SCAQMD to be an accurate method of estimating future emissions. K-22. Air Quality is not addressed in the City's Growth Management Program. The purpose of the City's Grow1h Management Plan is lo ad~r~ss _the provision of_ publ_ic facilities concurrent with need. The Draft EIR proposes nu11ga11on measures which will reduce the proposed project's air quality impacts to a level less than significant. ---. (Please refer to previous page for comments K-23 through K-29) • • K-23. Section 5.11 Visual Aesthetics/Grading provides an analysis of visual impacts associated with the proposed project. As stated on page 5.11-5 of the Draft EIR, • A potential impact existed where proposed development in the commercial retail area could potentially block existing views on to the project site of the nower fields ... The computer simulation· indicates that any development that would be permitted within this area would not preclude a view of the nower fields from this area." The view onto the site was taken from the bridge over the Santa Fe railroad tracks. Please refer to Figures 5-24 through 5- 27 of the Draft EIR for the computer visual simulation. A site development permit is required to be approved for Planning Area 6 prior to development. The site development plan must be in conformance with the development standards and design guidelines for this area which require primarily single story structures with reduced building height to retain to the greatest extent possible, views of the nower fields while providing the ability to create a design that is architecturally appealing. K-24. This comment does not address the completeness or adequacy of the Draft EIR, however the following is offered in response: The Specific Plan designates the 53 acres of agricultural land (Planning Area 7 -nower fields) for continued use as nower fields. Specific provisions have been incorporated into the project design and specific plan policies in order to facilitate preservation of this area. Please refer to page 5.1-12 of the Draft EIR which describes factors provided by the specific plan which will contribute to the preservation of the 53 acres of agriculture on-site. K-25. This comment does not address the comp!etcncss or adequacy of the Draft EIR, however the following is offered in response: The 53 acres will be designated as Open Space on the General Plan Land Use Map and be zoned Open Space. The uses permilled in this area by the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan are agriculture and related uses, as well as public recreation. The Williamson Act contract on the nower field area will expire on January I, 2006 as a result of the Notice of Non-renewal filed on all property under Williamson Contract. K-26. Please refer to response K-24 and K-25. K-27. The project will be responsible for the contribution of its fair share to recommended roadway improvements. As the project is developed, certain levels of development would trigger the need lo implement the identified improvements. Based on the anticipated phasing scheme, particular intersection improvements were identified for implementation during a particular year. As noted in the comment, "much of the road improvements will not be completed until the year 2006-2008." It should be noted that the improvements which were identified would not be ~ until the specified year. Therefore, it is not that the improvements wouldn't be completed by 2006-2008, but rather they wouldn't be needed · until that time. This means that the lane configurations at the specific intersections, prior to the year identified for a particular improvement, could acceptably accommodate the additional trips associated with Carlsbad Ranch development up to the· identified year. K-28. The project will be responsible for the contribution of its fair share to recommended roadway improvements. K-29. Table 5-10 of the Draft EIR depicts the existing peak hour volumes on roadway segments surrounding the project site. Currently, average daily trips to the project site are nominal and the site is not a significant generator of daily trips . • K-30( 24 · K-31 [ 25. K-32 [ 26. K-33[21· K-34L8 " • • Pg. 5.5-23 suggest traffic and street, will operat.e al acceptable levels If all street won< Is done. Why doesn't the EIR report highlight tho Impact of 69,380 dally trips on tho freeway? What effect will other development within Carlsbad have within this area? Pg. 5.5-25 of the report highlights beach parking. The report slates that an Increase In tourists will not result In an Increase In demand for parking at the beach. Given the fact that during the sumner months It Is almost Impossible lo park along Carlsbad beaches, how can this Increased transient population not Impact beach parking? The EIR report never addresses freeway traffic In any detail. However, the millions of people coming to the Carlsbad Ranch project would have to use the freeway to gel here. Whal Impacts are we going to e•pericnce on the freeway when the project Is fully operational? _,/ Pg. 5.5-29 of the EIR report slate "However, Iha overall cumulal/vo Impact on traffic remains significant and unavoldablo. • How does the growth management plan address this? What provisions If any have been made for _tho Increase of traffic traveling from the projed to the beach via Canon road, through the residential beach nelghbomoods? SEWER 6.9-5 states that developer., pay sewer connectlon fees. Since we have no other project like this In Carlsbad, how wlll Carlsbad determine the amount to charge? How much of our latest Increase went lo pay for the l'aclllUes needed lo adequately 1upply the Ranch project? How much of our next Increase will go to build this Infrastructure? 0el Mar Is currenUy refunding over $1 million dollars In e.cess sewer rees charged to their cltllens due to the negaUve Impact of the fair grounds and the racetrack. Whal makes Carlsbad different? WATER K-36 [ 30. p1. K-37L K-38 [ 32. K-39 [33· K-40[34 • K-41@5· Pg. 2-11 says reclaimed water shall be used. When, l,i the reclaimed water going to come trom? Who Is going to pay for It? Carlsbad already has the highest waler rates In North County. How much or this Increase went to pay for faclllUes to be used by Lego & Carlsbad Ranch? I.e.: alorag<1 tanks, water lines, etc.? Pg. 6.9-13 <?f the EIR report reads as follows, '77,e City of Carlsbad ha!l II policy that no now constrvcllon can take place unUI Iha city has ·con!llrvctod new storage tanks to hold 11 10 day supply of water.• Is this a true statement? At the moment, the EIR report slates that the city has 12.9 days In storage. Arter the project Is bulll the 12.9 days will be reduced to 10.4 days. Since the cltllens of Carlsbad paid for that extra storage, shouldn't Carlsbad ranch pay for Its fair share or storage? Pg. 6.19-16 of tho EIR state that the project wlll use 1.6 million gallons a day or water, therefore, ahouldn't they build alorage for 16 million gallons of water? 5.9-17 of the report Informs the reader that reclaimed waler can be used on the projecl Ooesn·t reclaimed water have limitations, I.e.: high In sail health hai.ards, county restrictions, availability? At the moment the City of Carlsbad does not reclaim any water, they purchase IL Carlsbad clt.lzens have been walUng for 10 years ror reclaimed water. Should a foreign corporation gel priority over Carlsbad citizens? Pg. 5.9-19 of the EIR report lists numerous capital Improvements needed to the water and sewer faciliUes. Who Is going to pay for all these Improvements? Neighbou invO,vad In Carhbad'1 future Car11b1d Ranch Projecl flR An1ly1i1 And Ruponu Octob11 13, 1995 • K-30. Please refer to pages 7-5 through 7-6 of the Draft EIR for a discussion of cumulative impacts on the 1-5 and SR-78 freeways. As stated on page 7-6 of the Draft EIR, significant unavoidable cumulative impacts will remain on the 1-5 and SR-78 freeways even after implementation of recommended mitigation measures. K-31. The Draft EIR docs not state that the increase in tourists will not result in an increase in demand for parking at the beach. Page 5.5-25 of the Draft EIR states: 'The project is anticipated to result in an increase in demand for parking in the beach areas as a result of the additional visitors 10 the City. This increase is not considered significant. Mitigation Measures proposed in the Air Quality section of this EIR require the provision of a shuttle for all specific plan land uses which reduce the project's contribution to the overall demand on beach parking." Mitigation Measure l proposed in the Air Quality section requires the specific plan to provide shuttles to major rail transit centers, multi-modal stations, and other local destinations for all uses within the specific plan as determined feasible by the City. K-32. Please refer to pages 7-5 through 7-6 of the Draft EIR for a discussion of cumulative impacts on the 1-5 and SR-78 freeways. A significant unavoidable cumulative traffic impact to SR-78 and 1-5 has been identified. K-33. The unavoidable impact on traffic is a cumulative impact, -and occurs as a result of development of the proposed project and other regional development. The impact occurs outside the jurisdiction of the City of Carlsbad, and therefore is not directly addressed in the City's Growth Management Plan. K-34. Based on the projected land uses ( e.g., retail, office, research and development) of the Carlsbad Ranch development, beach related trips are expected to be minimal. It is recognized that the hotel uses could generate some beach related trips. The trip generation and distribution estimates for the hotel uses did account for the beach as an attraction. However, based on the average length of slay, a trip to LEGOLAND and the beach on the same day" is unlikely. Pages 5.5-26 through 5.5-28 of the Draft EIR identify the recommended roadway improvements and phasing of improvements based on buildout conditions. The traffic analysis included an analysis of the intersection al Cannon Road and Avenida Encinas. This intersection has been recommended to be signalized in order to mitigate impacts anticipated from buildout of Local Facilities Management Plan Zone 13. According to the traffic analysis prepared for the proposed project, approximately 2% of the total average daily trips generated from the project will utilize Cannon Road west of 1-5. K-35. This comment does not address the completeness or adequacy of the Draft EIR; however, the following is offered in response. The project will be required to install sewer facilities and pay fees consistent with LFMP Zone 13 requirements. (Please refer to previous page for comments K-36 through K-41) • • K-36. Please refer lo pages S.9-13 through S.9-21 of the Draft EIR for a detailed discussion of reclaimed water. K-37. This statement is incorrect, and is not an accurate quotation from the Draft EIR. Page S.9-13 of the Draft EIR stales: "The Carlsbad Municipal Water District has established two performance standards to ensure the provision of adequate water services within the District's service area, pursuant to the City's Growth Management Ordinance. These performance standards scrv~ to ensure water line capacity to meet demand and require that a minimum 10-day average waler storage capacity be provided. These performance standards must be met before any development can occur on the project site." K-38. As slated on page S.9-13 through S.9-21 of the Draft EIR, the proposed project will require the installation or modification of water facilities to adequately serve proposed development, consistent with the requirements of LFMP Zone 13 and CMWD thresholds. K-39. There arc limitations in the use of reclaimed water. Page S.9-17 of the Draft EIR slates that reclaimed water alone will not be sufficient lo satisfy the water demand in these uses, and that reclaimed water will likely be used for agricultural and landscape irrigation. The Draft EIR does not assume that reclaimed water can be used for all uses. Page S.9-17 of the Draft EIR stales: "A conservative estimate would assume SO-percent to 7S-percenl of this total "exterior use" for irrigation of landscape other than the agriculture and golf course can be supplied by reclaimed water." Additionally, Mitigation Measures I and 2 in the Water Section require the use of reclaimed water as de1ermined feasible by the City of Carlsbad and Carlsbad Municipal Water District. K-40. This comment does not address the completeness or adequacy of the Draft EIR. K-41. The capital improvements will be funded by the project applicant as identified in the LFMP Zone 13 plan. • • • 136. K-42l TRASH K-43r7· re. K-44L Pg. 5.9-21 of tho report slate. -nio project Impacts t.o water supply are polenf/slly significant -In the event ol a drought what mechanisms will be put In place lo Insure that residents an, not penal~ed for the water oonsumplion of the project. I.e. water amusements, green golf oourses. and other oommercial water uses? Pg. 2-12 of the report states that solid waste (trash) will be reduced lo a level of lnslgnlfica~. How can 2 million people do that? Pg. 5.10-2 slates the project will have a significant effect on trash In the city. The EIR also slates that the City Of Carlsbad will have trouble meeUng oounty requirement.. and will be subject to fines. What mechanisms have been considered lo address this Issue? ALTERNATIVES K-45~9- K-46fo. K-47 f1· Pg. 6-1 says the EIR report must look al alternatives, Including a "No Project" alternative, and Identify the environmentally superior alternative. Has this been considered? Pg. 6-5 & 6-28 list 23 full pages of significant Impact.. while tho "No Project'' altematlve has none. Why? Pg. 6-29 slates the "No Project'" sltematlve Is considered environmentally :,uperlor t.o the proposed project'". II this Is the case why should the project be oonsldered? CUMULATIVE In summary, Pg. 7-5 of the EIR report slate the •cumulative sir quality Impacts remain slgnHicant and unsvo/dsble. -is this not Inconsistent with AQMD's mandate for the slate? N1ighb«1 Involved In C1r11biid'1 future C1thb1d Ranch ProJ•ct EIR An1ly1l1 And Ruponu October 13, 1995 •• K-42. Page 5.9-21 or the Draft EIR slates: 'The project impacts 10 waler supply arc polcnlially significant. Implcmentalion or mitigation measures I and 2 will reduce impacts 10 a level or less than significant." The use or reclaimed water for the golf course, agricultural and landscape purposes, in addition lo the installation of dual plumbing systems as determined feasible by the Carlsbad Municipal Waler District would significantly reduce the project's demand on the potable water that is used by the residents or Carlsbad for domestic uses. In the event or a declared water emergency the policy of the Carlsbad Municipal Water District requires all users, residential and non-residential, lo conserve water. K-43. Page 2-12 or the Drari EIR stales: "Implementation or Mitigation Measure I will reduce impacts associated with solid waste collection and disposal to a level of insignificance." Please refer lo Page 2-11 of the Draft EIR which describes the measures that will need to be implemented in order lo reduce impacts related lo trash disposal. K-44. The Draft EIR stales that unless a fair share or waste generated by the project is diverted from disposal facilities, it will become more_ difficult for the City to achieve the diversion mandates or the California Integrated Waster Management Act or 1989 (AB 939). Mitigation Measure 1 has been proposed which will reduce project specific impacts to a level less than significant. K-45. An analysis of the "no project" alternative is provided on page 6-29 of the Draft EIR. The "Alternative Location" has been identified as the environmentally superior alternative, and is evaluated on pages 6-34 through 6-42 of the Draft .EIR. K-46. The "no project/no development" alternative assumes that the site would not be developed with the proposed project, and the site would remain in its existing condition. No impacts associated with the implementation of this alternative have been identified as no new development would occur on-site. K-47. The City is required by the California Environmental Quality Act to consider the "No Project" alternative, but is not required to deny approval of a proposed project because its environmental impacts are greater than the "No Project" alternative. K-48. No. A regional air quality strategy plan is in place to improve air quality, but at this time the air quality is below federal and State standards. The plan is designed to accommodate continued growth while implementing strategics lo improve air quality. K-49 EXHIBIT A These exhibits are from the appendices of the EIR Report Prepared By Colton/Beland/Associates, Inc. We request that every effort be made to communicate this summary of impacts to the citizens of Carlsbad. • Neighbou Involved ln Carhbad•• Future C1rf1b1d Ranch Project EIR Analytlt Arrd RetponH Oclob1r tl. 1095 K-49. Commcn1 nolcd. • • • • • PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT WlLl 1liE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: ~ YES NO (Iii) (wia) I. Result la uast.able earth coadltloDJ or lncreue •.he exposure or people or property 10 geologic hazard.a? ---.1L.. 2. Appreciably change the lopograpby or any uaJque phy,ICAI features? -1L 3. Resull in or be affee1ed by eros_loa of solli either oa or off the 1lte? ----1L ~ 4. Resull la changes In the deposltloa of beach w sands, or mod18catloa or the channel of a ~ river or llream or the bed of the ooean or J: any bay, lnlc( or lake? ..1L 0 --~ s. Resull i.o subst.aodal advone effecU oo <( ambieal aJr quality? -1L -~ 6. Resull la_ substantial chaogea In air a: movemeol, odor, mol.!ture, or temperature? ----1L s 7. Substantially change the counc or Oow of water (marine, fresh or Oood waten)? ----1L _,J 8. Affect the quandty or quality of surface water, ground water or pubUc water 1upply? .1L. 9. Substaadally lacroa.sc usage or cause depletioo of any natural resources? ----1L 10. _Use substantial llll'.IOUDIJ of fuel or eaergy? ---1L 11. Alter a slgnlfieaat artheolog!cal, paleoalologlcal or hhtorlcal alto, • structure or object? -2L -~ BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT WILL TIIE PROPOSAL DIRECil. Y OR INDIRECil. Y: YES YES NO (d1) (l.iuia) 12. Affect the divenlty of apeclea, habit.at or numben of any 1pecles of plants (lncludlng trees, shrubs, grass, mJcroflora and aquatic plants)? 13. Introduce new apeclu of planu Into an area, or a barrier to tho normal replenlahment of ~ existing speclea? ...x_ w 14. Reduce tho amount of acreage of any ~ agricultural crop or affect prime, unique :x: or other farmland.of slate or local u Im porta.nee? -1L ~ IS. Affect the dfvenlty of 1pecles, habit.at <C or numben of any 1pecle1 of anlmal1 (birds, ~ land animate, all water dwelling organlsm a: and Insects? ~ 16. l.otroduce new 1pecle1 of anlmala Into an area, or result In a barrier to .the mJgration or movement of anlmala? ...x_ HUMAN ENVIRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECil. Y OR INDIRECil. Y: YES YES NO (di) (hula) 17. Alter the present or planned land uao of an area? -1L. 18. Substantially affect public utilltfe1, schools, police, fire, emergency or other public service,? • • • • • • HUMAN ENVIRONMENT WILL Tiffi PROPOSAL DIREC11. Y OR INDIRECTI, Y: YES YES NO (df) {wl,) 19. Result In the need (or new or modl8ed 1ewcr sy1tems, solld waste or buardow waste control systems? ...x_ 20. Increase exhtiDg noise levels? ...x_ 21. Produce new Ught or glare? ---.1L 22. Involve a significant rule or an explosion or the releaae of hazardous substances (lncludlng, but not Umlted to, oil, !z pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? ---.1L w 23. Substantially alter the den.slty of the :E human population of an area? ...1L :::c u 24. Affect existing housing, or create a demand ~ for additional bowing? ---.1L < 25. Generate substantial additional traffic? ...1L ::.:::: 26. Affect e:dstiDg parldng facilities, or a: · create a large demand for new parldng? ...1L ~. 27. Impact existiDg transportation rystems or alter present patterns or circulation or movement of people and/or goods? ...1L 128. Alter waterborne, rail or air traffic? ...1L 29. Increase traffic baziirdJ to motor vehicles, bjcyclbu or pedcetrl1111.1? ----.1L 30. Interfere with emergency rc1pon.se plans or emergency evacuation pl1111.1? _x_ 31. Obstruct any socnlc vista or create an aesthetically offeDJlvc pubUc view? _x_ 32. Affect the quaUty or quantity of existing recreational opportunltlea? ----.1L .5 • .... MANDATORY FlNDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE WILL TI-IE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES NO (di) (Lo.ail 33. Docs the project have the poteodal to substandally dogrado tho quality of the environ.meat, aubstandally ~ reduoc the habitat of a Bsh or wild· Ufe 1pecle1, cause a 61h or wlldUfe w populadoo to drop below solf-1ustalnlog :E . leve!J, threaten to ellmJnato a plant or :c animal commuolty, reduce tho number or u restrict the range of a rare or en• ~ dangered plant or animal, or ellmJnato Important ewnplea of the major periods <-of Callforola hlltory or prehistory. _x_ :::-::: Docs the project havo the possible 34. a: eovlroo.meota.J offecta which are In• ~ dlvldually Um.Jted but cumulatively cooslderable? ("Cumuladvely oon• slderablo" meaoJ that the lncremeota.J ..J ef!ecu of an Individual project are comldorable when viewed In connection wftb tbo offecu of put projocu; tho effects of other current projecta, and tbe effects of probable future projects.) __x_ 35. Doc1 the project have eovfronmeota.J effecu which will cause 1ub1tandal adveno ef!ecta on human belnp, either directly or Indirectly? _x_ -6- .. • • • L-1 • ,.. SOG£ San Diego Gas & Electric ,o,101t1a1•.,...MOO.c.tr11&,,,11,o,t1•,,.J0:10 October 13, 1995 City of Carlsbad Mr. Don Neu, Sr. Planner Planning Department 2075 Las Palmas Dr. Carlsbad, CA 92008 RE: CARLSBAD RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT D.E.I.R: Dear Don: Thank you for the opportunity to review the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Draft Program Environmental Impact Rcpon (DEIR), August 1995. On review of the document we would like to see a more specific reference to the 21.16 golf course area north of Cannon Road when.discussed under the Land Use Compatibility Section and matrixes. The referral to SDO&E parcel could denote more than the golf course area. The following pages iri the DEIR are references to the "SDO&E parcel": • page 2-31, Summary of lmpactS, 4th row, 2nd column page 5.7-17, Mitigation Measures, number I • page 19, Mitigation Monitoring Checklist Should you have any questions regarding these issues, please feel free to give me a call. rr·1v~ DonL. Rose Sr. Land Planner 696-2409 • • I,.}. Pages 2-31 and 5.7-17 of the Draft EIR have been modified to clarify the reference to the SDG&E parcel. M-1 • . . City of Vista RECEIV~D October I J, 1995 OCT 1 3 1995 err-=,·-:;~ ( ;·!.-· ....... . Don Neu Carlsbad Planning Department 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, California 92009 Re: Comments on Environmental Impact Report for the Carlsbad Ranch/Lego Land Project Dear Mr. Neu: Thank you for allowing the City of Vista to comment on the diaft Environmental Impact Report for the Carlsbad Ranch/Lego Land Project. At its October I 0, 1995 meeting, the City Council authorized me to send you the following comments. The City believes that the project as outlined in the EIR, with the mitigating measures set forth, will have a significant unmitigated impact on the City of Vista in the area of traffic. We believe this for the following reasons: I. The analysis of the traffic impacts in the Em. on Palomar Airport Road east of El Camino is inadequate. Therefore, it is difficult to analyze any impacts that would result on the City of Vista, specifically on Business Park Drive which currently is the southerly connection of the City of Vista to Palomar Airport Road. According to the guidelines for CMP Transportation Impact Report developed by SANDAG and used generally throughout the region, it is necessary to analyze a traffic impact if there are fifty trips during the peak hour on that road segment. It appears, based on the EIR, that there will be at least SO trips on Palomar Airport Road east of El Camino Real and on Business Park Drive during the peak hour in both the year 2000 and at build out. Therefore, Vista is requesting that a full analysis of the traffic impacts on Palomar Airport Road easi of El Camino Real and on Business Park Drive and Melrose be completed as part of the final Environmental Impact Report. 600 EUCALYPTUS AVENUE • P.O. BOX 1988 • VISTA, CALIFORNIA 92085 • 619n26-1340 • FAX 6191945,7659 • • M-I. It is recognized that the proposed project would contribute over 50 peak hour trips on Palomar Airport Road east of El Camino Real. As slated in the comment, under CMP guidelines this location would be a candidate for analysis. For this reason, the roadway segment of Palomar Airport Road east of El Camino Real was included in the traffic analysis (sec the Congestion Management Plan for Carlsbad Ranch included as an appendix 10 the EIR). The analysis of this particular roadway segment showed that excellent operating conditions (LOS A) would be expected for both peak hours under year 2000 and buildout conditions. In addition, the intersection of Palomar Airport Road and El Camino Real was analyzed in the traffic analysis. Based on CMP standards, this intersection is projected 10 operate at acceptable levels during both peak hours under year 2000 and buildout conditions. It is anticipated that as the project related trips move further from the project site (in this case, east of El Camino Real on Palomar Airport Road), the impacts associated with these trips lessen as trips disperse in different directions. Therefore, because both the Palomar Airport Road street segment and the intersection of Palomar Airport Road and El Camino Real analyzed in the traffic analysis are projected to operate at acceptable levels of service, impacts on locations to the east of El Camino Real (e.g., Business Park Drive, Melrose Drive, San Marcos Boulevard, etc.) are expected to be minimal. • M-2 M-3 M-4 • Don Neu Carlsbad Planning Depa11men1 October 13, 199S Page 2 2. [ 3. [ 4. Based on the City of Vista's knowledge of the si1uation, we believe that the impacls on Business Park Drive and 1he intersec1ion al Business Park Drive and Palomar Airpo11 Road/San Marcos Blvd. will be significant and unmi1igated in both cumula1ive and project impact in bolh lhe year 2000 and al build oul. These impacls are based on 1he fact that Business Park Drive is currently carrying a large volume of traffic; and Palomar Airpol1 Road and ullimately San Marcos Blvd., Business Park Drive and southern Vista will have to handle a significanl additional amount of traffic from the project area. Since Business Park Drive is a collec1or, and parallels Melrose Drive which is a prime a11erial of between four and six lanes, we believe that the impact on Business Park Drive and, to a ce11ain extent, Palomar Airpo11 Road and San Marcos Blvd. can be mitigated by the completion of Melrose Drive from the south Vista city limits ai its current terminus southerly to Palomar Airpo11 Road. The City of Vista fimher believes that an adequate analysis would show that this segment would significantly reduce traffic congesiion in the area when completed, and that a good po11ion of that traffic will be generated from the developinent analyzed in the · · Environmental Impact Repol1. If you have any q11estions, please contact Jack Larimer, Principal Planner, at 726-1340 ext. 34S0. Thank you again for allowing us 10 comment We are looking forward to your response. ~,J~&-_ City Manager MV:je uoo.Ln • • M-2. Please refer lo response M-1. M-3. With the extension of Melrose Drive, operating conditions of 13usiness Park Drive would be anticipated to improve. However, as stated in response M-1, the project generated traffic volumes associated with lhe Carlsbad Ranch would have a minimal effect on operating conditions along Melrose Drive and Business Park Drive and would nol create the need for the extension. Therefore, while the extension of Melrose Drive south to Palomar Airport Road may significantly reduce traffic congestion in the area as slated by the commcntor, the commentor is incorrect in the conclusion that " a good portion of that traffic will be generated from the development analyzed in the Environmental Impact· Reporl." The development of the Carlsbad Ranch project will not require the extension of Melrose Drive. M-4. Please refer to response M-3. ~.ilt!trl6t6 .JNION SCHOOL DISTR CT N-1 N-2 ... Hlgb Performnrrce Lenr11i11g i11 n S11n11ri11g E11rlro11111e11t ... October 10, 1995 Mr. Don Neu, Senior Planner Carlsbad Planning Department CITY OF CARLSBAD 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, California 92009 SUBJECT: Draft Program Environmental Impact Report, EIR 94-01 (SCH# 95051001) Dear Mr. Neu: [ This document summarizes the comments of the Encinitas Union School District relative o the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment dated August 1995. These comments are submitted in accordance with the Notice dated August 30, 1995 as issued by the City of Carlsbad, requiring written comments on the DEIR be submitted to the City of Carlsbad on or before October 14, 1995. The Encinitas Union School District ("District") does hereby suggest that the DEIR does not provide the necessary information, analysis, and conclusions required by the District and CEOA. The District further suggest that the DEIR is inadequate and not in compliance with CEQA regulations, and therefore, should be re-written and recirculated for public inspection. The District's reasons for its opposition to the DEIR include: 1) The DEIR's lack of factual and quantitative information; a) misrepresented the qualitative and quantitative analysis as to the impacts of the Project on the District; b) misrepresented the authority and alternatives available to the City to mitigate the impacts of the Project on the District; and c) lack of evidence to support conclusions. 2) The DEIR is inadequate and has not been prepared in accordance with California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code 21000 ~ ~- and the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act. Board of Truslees Tracy Casey , Shannon Kuder Superintendent Pauicia Clark Whrte, Ed. 0. Assistant Superintendents /llliam Parker Calhy Regan Catol Sl(iljan Bonila Orolel. Ed.0. Douglas P. Devore. Ed.O Educalional Services Administrative Sen,1ces 101 S. Rancho San1a Fe Road. Enciniras. CA 92024 • • N-1. Comment noted. It should be noted that a majority of the comments contained in the letter submitted _by the Encinitas Unified School District arc based on the assumption that significant indirect impacts to the District will occur as a result of the generation of project related employment in the region, which will result in new households locating to the region, which will in turn increase enrollment within the District's schools. The analysis provided in the Draft EIR recognizes that the District may experience a small increase in enrollment; however, this increase was determined to be less than significant. The analysis in the Draft EIR indicates that no direct or indirect significant impact will occur to schools. Please refer to pages 5.9-7 through 5.9-13 for a detailed analysis of school impacts. Pages 5.9-11 and 5.9-13 have been modified to renect minor clarifications. These modifications do not change the overa!I conclusions of the Draft EIR. Furthermore, it should be noted that the recent court decision rendered in the case of Goleta Union School District v The Regents of the University of California found that an increase in school enrollment or potential school overcrowding are socioeconomic concerns and not a physical environmental impact which triggers CEQA review. The court held that socio-economic effects of a project are not treated as significant effects on the environment unless they create physical changes. The Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Draft EIR has found any increase in enrollment anticipated to be experienced by the Encinitas School District to be a less than significant impact. This conclusion is based on the analysis that any indirect impact to the District from employment generating uses would be minimal because the majority of new jobs generated by the project are expected to be filled by existing residents in the area and new residents attracted by these jobs are expected to be dispersed throughout several school districts, especially districts other than Encinitas. Statutory school fees and other local financing methods are available to accommodate capital expansion. Therefore, no significant physical impacts on the environment are anticipated. The Goleta Union School District y, The Regents of the University of California court decision reaffirms that CEQA requires an analysis or physical impacts to the environment. Section 21065 of the Public Resources Code has recently been amended to redefine the term "project" as "an activity which may cause either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment...". N-2. Comment noted. This comment does not address specific information contained in the Draft EIR, rather it is a summary or the more specific comments provided in Attachments A and B of the Encinitas School District correspondence. Please refer to responses N-3 through N-65 for a response to each specific issue identified by the District. • N-2 (cont'd.) N-3 • Mr. Don Neu CITY OF CARLSBAD October 10, 1995 Page 2 The District is requesting that the City's decisions relative to the acceptance of the DEIR and Specific Plan Amendments t·SPA'l be deferred until the inadeguacjes deficiencies inconsistencies and violations of applicable State statutes are corrected and the direct and indirect impacts on Jhe District resuUing from the Project are addressed in an adequate and acceptable manner It should be noted that the District does not have jurisdiction directly within the boundaries of the Specific Plan Area, with the exception of transferring students. However; the District is within reasonable close proximity of the Project location, and is a public agency providing educational facilities and services within the regional area that will be directly or indirectly impacted by the Project in terms of population, housing, employment, and traffic, in particular. The District does not oppose the economic development or revitalization of any property; area, city, or part of the County of San Diego or the regional area of which the District is a part. Certainly, economic development and revitalization has its advantages and disadvantages for local jurisdictions. The local cites, the County of San Diego, and the State of California can certainly benefit from the economic aspects of any regional project that provides an injection of investment into and area resulting in new employment, revenue generation, and economic capture opportunities. However, such regional Projects should be pursued with sensitivity towards their impacts on the social, economic, physical and environmental characteristics of the region, and should be required to provide appropriate mitigation measures and remedies, so that the Project is not pursued al the .=xpense of the public services and facilities provided to that region by all public agencies. The Project as proposed is a significant development program which will impact an area far greater than the immediate area surrounding the Project and possibly the jurisdiction of the City of Carlsbad. In addition, the Project will provide a catalyst or inducement for subsequent residential and non-residential developments Immediately adjacent to the Project, and In other areas surrounding the Project, both within and outside the City of Carlsbad. These other residential and non-residential development projects will have potentially significant impacts on the region. [ lthough the District opposes the approval of the DEIR and SPA, the District wants to assure the City and the Applicant that it is prepared to work in good faith and cooperation N-4 with the City and the Applicant towards attaining remedies that will address the direct and ndirect impacts of the Project on the District, individually, and all of the affected school districts, collectively. The District believes that the creativity and experience of the City and · he,Applicant, together with the commitment of the District, can result in a "win-win" • • The letter submitted by the Encinitas Union School District provides comments that relate directly to the content of the Dra"rt EIR. However, it should be noted that the commentor also recites several sections of the CEQA Guidelines, Public Resources Code and Government Code which do not in and of themselves require a response. Specifically, the commentor recites the following: CEQA Guidelines Sections recited in comment letter: 15358 15002 15003 15021 15042 15043 15090 15091 15092 Public Resources Code Sections recited in comment leuer: 21083 21002 21002.1 21004 Government Code Sections recited in comment letter: 65996 65995 N-3. Comment noted. Please refer to Section 7.0 Analysis of Long-term Effects for a discussion of cumulative impacts, and growth inducing impacts of the proposed project. N-4. Comment noted. Mr. Don Neu CITY OF CARLSBAD October 10, 1995 Page 3 N-4 I approach which will attain our common objectives, and which will not constrain the Project, (oont'd.) ~he Applicant, or the City of Carlsbad. N-5 The Project is of regional significance, and as such, it should be considered in terms of the overall region. The adverse and/or beneficial effects of the Project and any potentially induced development activity must be cons!dered in a cumulative regional context in terms of their relationship to all directly or indirectly affected public agencies, and the overall environment of the region. That "region" or regional envelope certainly goes beyond political and jurisdictional boundaries, and may extend beyond the jurisdiction of the County of San Diego itself. ~ One should only look at the effects Disneyland, Disney World, Epcot Center, and Sea N-6 World have had on the surrounding regions since their inception, in terms of growth nducement and the catalytic effect such a development has on the growth of a region, to dentify the magnitude of the regional implications of such developments. ~ he District, therefore, has an obligation to its present and future constituents, and the City of Carlsbad and the Applicant have a present and future responsibility to all of the regional N-7 public agencies that service these areas, to ensure that the benefits obtained by the Applicant and the City as a result of the implementation of this Project, are not gained at . he expense of the public agencies who will have to continue to serve their constituents. N-8 N-9 The disagreement between the City and the Applicant, and the District with regard to the Project is based upon certain conclusions made by the City, Applicant. and City's consultants, as follows: 1) The Project will not cause a direct impact on the District in terms of increased enrollments and subsequent capital facility demands and costs, due to the fact that the Project does not include a residential development component. . 2) The Project will not cause an indirect impact on the District in terms of increased enrollments and subsequent capital facility demands and costs, due to the fact that the employment of the Project will be primarily part time non-primary family wage earners that will not result in families locating and/or relocating closer to the Project in existing and/or new residential units within the jurisdiction of the District. .,_N-10 j 3) The Project will not cause an indirect impact on the District in terms of increased enrollments and subsequent capital facility demands and costs, • • N-5. The Draft EIR analyzes the regional impacts of the proposed project. No significant project-specific or cumulative unavoidable impacts lo schools were identified. Regional effects are analyzed in Section 7.0 of lhe Draft EIR. Additionally, the Draft EIR provides an analysis of impacts lo school districts within and surrounding the City of Carlsbad. Please refer to pages 5.9-7 through 5.9-13 of the Draft EIR. N-6 The commenlor suggests lhal the proposed project will have similar growth inducing effects 10 Disneyland, Disney World, Epcol Center, and Sea World, however offers no basis for this delerminalion. The Drafl EIR provides an analysis of growth-inducing effects of the proposed project. Please refer 10 response N-5. N-7 Comment noted. As slated on page 2-1 of the Drafl EIR, if the City Council approves the project the City will be required to adopt a "Statement of Overriding Considerations" pursuant 10 Sections 15093 and 15126(b) of the CEQA Guidelines for unavoidable significant impacts associated with cumulative air quality, agriculture and traffic. N-8 Comment noted. This comment docs not raise a specific issue related 10 the adequacy of the Drafl EIR, rather ii slates disagreement with the conclusions of the Draft EIR .. N-9 Comment noted. This comment docs not raise a specific issue related to the adequacy of the Draft EIR, rather it states disagreement with the conclusions of the Draft EIR. N-10 Comment noted. This comment does nol raise a specific issue related 10 the adequacy of the Draft EIR, rather it slates its disagreement with the conclusions of the Draft EIR. • • Mr. Don Neu CITY OF CARLSBAD October 10, 1995 Page 4 N-10 l (cont'd.) · due to the fact that the Project will result in a.broad dispersion of employees of the Project throughout the metropolitan region. Therefore, it is unlikely that the area within the jurisdictional boundary of the District will absorb any significant increases in enrollment due to families locating and/or relocating closer to the Project in existing and/or new residential units within the jurisdiction of the District. N-1{ .4) The provisions of Sections 65995 and 65996 of the Government Code precludes the City Council from imposing mitigation of school district and enrollment impacts resulting from the Project, other than the limited statutory development fees for the benefit of the school districts within which the Project is located. !he·se four (4) basic conclusions or assumption are attempted to be supported by the documentation prepared on the Project and the presentations made by the City, the City's N-12 consultants, and the Applicant. The District believes that the documentation and presentations misrepresent factual information, thereby, falsely supporting these conclusions. The following discussion set forth in Attachments "A" and "B" addresses each of these points. ~ he Distr.ict appr_e~iates the City's considera_tion of th7 com~~nts and testimo~y which it as provided herein, and requests that the City defer its dec1s1on on Draft Environmental N-13 mpact Report No. 94-01 (SCH# 95051001) and accompanying Specific· Plan · Amendments, until the inadequacies and deficiencies in the DEIR and Project are . corrected and the impacts on the District are disclosed and mitigation measures identified. ~ n accordance with the appellate decision in Murrieta YaUey Unjfjed School District v. ~ County of Rjyersjde rM.u.o:ifila"), the City Council has the statutory responsibility to require N-14 CEQA compliance, and can deny the GPA and SPA on the grounds of inadequate school · acilities. Certainly, if District impacts are disclosed ·and appropriate mitigation measures are provided, the District would rem_ove from the record its opposition to the Project. The District would like to make it perfectly clear that they are not in any way seeking remedies to correct existing physical or financial deficiencies in the District. Rather, they are seeking appropriate remedies to the direct and indirect impacts which the Project will N-15 cause to the District. In addition, the appropriate mitigation is not the jurisdiction of the Applicant. The City of Carlsbad is the Lead Agency on the DEIR, and it is the City of Carlsbad that has the jurisdiction to certify as to the adequacy of the DEIR, including the determination of the appropriate mitigation measures, in order for the Project to proceed. • • N-11. The basis of this comment is unclear. The Draft EIR does describe payment of statutory school fees as a mitigation measure; however, the Draft EIR does not state that Sections 65995 and 65996 of the Government Code preclude the City Council from imposing other mitigation measures for school district and enrollment impacts. N-12. Please refer to responses N-3 through N-65 which respond to each specific comment raised in the Attachments A and B as referenced in this comment. N-13. Comment noted. Please refer to pages 5.9-7 through 5.9-13 for a discussion of project-specific impacts on schools. No project-specific significant impacts to schools have been identified. N-14. Comment noted. This statement docs not raise a specific issue related to the Draft EIR. N-15. Please refer to pages 5.9-7 through 5.9-13 for a discussion of project-specific impacts on schools. No project-specific significant impacts to schools have been identiricd. Mr. Don Neu CITY OF CARLSBAD October 10, 1995 Page 5 Those mitigation measures can be both financial and non-financial. This written testimony is presented to the City for the purpose of establishing the public record of the District, and to protect and preserve the administrative and legal remedies N-16 of the District. _Thank you for the opportunity to provide this written testimony relative to Carlsbad Ranch Spedfic Plan and LEGOLAND C~r1sbad Resort. If you have any questions or need additional information, please advise the District accordingly. Sincerely, ENCINITAS UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT attachments cc: Marshall B. Krupp Community Systems Associates, Inc. • N-16. Comment noted. • • N-17 A. • ATTACHMENT "A" ENCINITAS UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT COMMENTS ON THE CARLSBAD RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN DRAFT PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT SCH #95051001 EIR 94-01 ocr'199S ~omrol,l(Hl atyOI c,,t,bod Toe Project will not cause a direct Impact on the District In terms of Increased enrollments and subsequent capital facility demands and costs, due to the fact that the Project does not Include a residential development component The District acknowledges that the Project will not contain the development of residential units. However, Section 15358 of the CEOA Guidelines defines "effects" as follows: 15358, "Effects" and "impacts"' as used in these Guidelines are synonymous. (a) Effects include: (1) Direct or primary effects which are caused by the project and occur at the same time and place. (2) Indirect or secondary effects which are caused by the project and are later in time or farther removed in distance, but are still reasonably foreseeable. Indirect or secondary' effects may include growth . inducing effects and other effects related to induced changes in the pattern of land use, population density, or growth rate, and related effects •on air and water and other natural systems, including ecosystems. (b) · Effects analyzed under CEQA must be related to physical change. A-1 • • N-17. A majority of this comment recites CEQA Guidelines Section 15358 and Public Resources Code Section 21083. The following responds to the specific issues raised in the comment: The Draft EIR discusses potential direct and indirect impacts to schools as a result of implementation of the proposed project. Please refer to pages 5.9-7 through 5.9-13 for a discussion of project-specific impacts on schools. No project-specific significant impacts to schools have been identified. The EIR's analysis is not limited to the boundary of the Specific Plan. An analysis of potential impacts to school districts within and su.rrounding the City has been provided. Impacts are considered less than significant N-17 (confd.) Further, Section 21083 of the Public Resources Code states: 21083. State Guidelines The Office of Planning and Research shall prepare and develop proposed guidelines for the implementation of this division by public agencies. The guidelines shall include objectives and criteria for the orderly evaluation of projects and the preparation of environmental impact reports and negative declarations in a manner consistent with this division. The guidelines shall specifically include criteria for public agencies to follow in determining whether or not a proposed project may have a "significant effect on the environment." The criteria shall require a finding that a project may have a "significant effect on the environment" if any of the following conditions exist: (a) A proposed project has the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, curtail the range of the environment, or to achieve short- term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals. (b) The possible effects of a project are individually limited but cumulatively considerable. As used in this subdivision, "cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects. (c) The environmental effects of a project will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly .... CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines do not place greater weight on direct impacts versus indirect impacts, but rather suggest that regardless of the their designation being "direct" or ''Indirect" the effects are required to be considered and disclosed in an environmental impact report, and mitigation measures and alternatives to the Project are required to be discussed to address the environmental impacts. In essence, the impacts are required to be disclosed regardless of their significance. The Issue of the significance or insignificance of the Impact is determined as a result of the analysis which goes into the disclosure of information. The comment that the Project will not cause a direct impact on the District in terms of increased enrollments and subsequent capital facility demands and costs, due to the fact that the Project does not include a residential development component or that the District is able to collect statutory development fees if affected, Is no Justification for the DEIR to ignore or not disclose the direct or indirect impacts on the District, particularly the regional impacts, or to suggest that the DEIR's analysis should end at the Specific Plan Boundaries of Carlsbad Ranch. A-2 • • • • lTherefore, the mere fact that the Project does not contain a residential development N-17 component or other easily discemable direct impacts is no justification lo minimize the (cont'd.) significance of the impacts of the Project on the District. Further discussion contained herein will substantiate the significant environmental impacts on the District which will be caused, induced, and/or indirectly a result of the implementation of the Project. N-18 8. The Project will not cause an indirect Impact on the District In terms of Increased enrollments and subsequent capital facility demands and costs, due to the fact that the employment of the Project will be primarily part time non-primary family wage earners that will not result In families locating and/or relocating closer to the Project In _existing and/or new resldentlal units within the Jurisdiction of the District The documentation attempts to justify this conclusion based upon the estimated employment structure of amusement parks and the associated support services and suggests that the operations of the Project will result in a distribution of employees that will not be primary wage earners and therefore will not generate additional students. In addition, the doa.,mentation suggests that the employees of the Project will come from the surrounding area and thus will not cause new residents to migrate into the District's boundaries. However, the DEIR and other documentation of the City and Applicant, support the District's contentions that the Project will result in some level (which has not been mutually agreed upon by the District and the Applicant) of full-time equivalent (FTE) primary and secondary wage earners. Although the District, and City and Applicant may disagree as to the magnitude of these FTE primary wage earners, there is an acknowledgement in the DEIR of at least 3,000 -4,000 net direct jobs, but the DEIR does not specify the amount of FTE primary wage earners resulting from the Project. In addition, the DEIR also suggests that there would be 1,000 -2,000 additional jobs generated by the research and development and the vocational school uses. Again, the DEIR fails to identify the FTE primary wage earners. The failure of the DEIR to provide this lnfonnation to the District is an example of the inadequacy of the DEIR. Therefore, a proper analysis of the direct or indirect Impacts of the Project upon the District and the region in general cannot be completed. To the degree employment opportunities are made available in the Mure in the Carlsbad region, immigration will be increased. Similarly, as employment opportunities are made available to the service oriented ethnic/racial and economically disadvantaged minorities, this migration will become even more significant where housing opportunities are the greatest. A lack of analysis as to where the immigrating residence will wish to locate due to cost, availability, convenience, etc. is not provided and invalidates the DEIR's assumption that there will be no adverse effects on District's serving areas removed from the Project area. Furthennore, the conclusions reached by the DEIR as to the adequacy A-3 • • N-18. As stated on page 5.9-11 of the Draft EIR, 'The employment generating uses proposed within Carlsbad Ranch could increase the demand for housing within and outside the City of Carlsbad." The Draft EIR provides an analysis of this potential increase of demand for housing within and outside of the City, and the potential impacts to schools that could result. No significant impacts have been identified. Additionally, the following information is offered: As stated on page 5.9-12 of the Draft EIR, " ... housing costs in Oceanside, San Marcos, and Vista are generally lower than other northwestern County communities ... ". Housing opportunities and development potential arc generally greater in Carlsbad, Oceanside, Vista and San Marcos than the City of Encinitas. This is based on general plan growth projections, and the availability of subdivided and vacant land in these surrounding jurisdictions. The Draft EIR has been modified to indicate housing growth and costs within these jurisdictions for the period 1990-1995. These modifications do not change the conclusions of the Draft EIR. II is recognized that a portion of the EUSD is located within the City of Carlsbad, however a majority of the District is within the City of Encinitas. The City of Encinitas has limited vacant land for potential residential development, and has adopted growth management measures which limit residential development potential within the City. The impact to school districts within the cities surrounding the project site are discussed on pages 5.9-12 through 5.9-13 of the Draft EIR. lof Statutory Development Fees lo mitigate any incoming new construction as a direct or N-18 indirect result of the Project are severely doubted given the superficial analysis in the (cont'd.) DEIR. Moreover, the lack of complete or more accurate employment generation figures precludes the District or any other entity from undertaking an accurate assessment of the capture rate of Project employees that will reside within the boundaries of the District. N-19 C. The Project will not cause an Indirect Impact on the District In terms of Increased enrollments and subsequent capital faclllty demands and costs, due to the fact that the Project will result In a broad dispersion of employees of the Project through the metropolitan region. Therefore, It Is unlikely that the area within the jurlsdlctlonal boundary of the District will absorb any significant Increases In enrollment due to famllles locating and/or relocating closer to the Project In existing and/or new residential units within the Jurisdiction of the District The DEIR provides no substantial or quantitative analysis to support such a conclusion, yet relies heavily on this assumption to state there will be no substantial impact to the District, and what impacts do occur can be mitigated with existing Statutory Development Fee collection levels. !The DEIR fails to fully appreciate the regional impact that such a project and facilities can produce. Noteworthy examples Include: Disneyland, Disney World, Epcot Center, and Sea N-20 World, just to name a few. The vocational school will also serve as a vehicle for increased use of the area. Combining such destination oriented land uses combined with the labor ntensive services provided at such facilities can only underscore the ability to affect a broad region. ~ The DEIR provides no substantial evidence that the employees for the Project will or·can ome from the surrounding area. The Project has the ability to attract and import many N-21 new employees. The DEIR also fails to provide an available housing inventory analysis which would ascertain if the City will require new housing above and beyond what Is already planned. The DEIR again bases its conclusions on unsubstantiated assumptions. !The DEIR also fails to provide an area or commuting distance which is expected to generate employees which work within the Project boundaries. If no such information is N-22 provided, the District Is unsure how the DEIR can be certain that no significant effects will . be caused by new employees residing within the District's boundaries. The District believes that the regional cumulative effect will impact areas far in excess of those denlified within the DEIR. . A-4 • • N-19. Please refer to response N-18. Page 5.9-12 of the Draft EIR states: "However, these districts will collect construction fees from new residential development within their jurisdictions that could occur as a result of project- generated employees. These fees, together with state funds for facilities, state funds per pupil, successful bond enactment by individual districts, and funds from Mello- Roos districts formed by school districts for new residential development are the funding mechanisms available to those school districts to reduce impacts of new development." N-20. Please refer to responses N-5 and N-I8. N-21. Please refer to response N-5 and N-18. N-22. Please refer to response N-5, N-6, N-18. • N-23 D. • The District has no authority Inside the boundaries of the Profects area, and as such, the City and/or Applicant need not provide for the mitigation that may be required to address any level of Impact In Increased enrollments caused to the District by the Project The District acknowledges that they do not have jurisdiction inside of the Project area. However, the City has a responsibility under CEOA and the CEOA Guidelines to ensure that the DEIR provides a full and complete disclosure.of the existing conditions, impacts, mitigation measures, and alternatives, so that the decision-makers can make an informed decision. As the City of Carlsbad is the lead agency in the preparation of the DEIR, ii is required to comply with the requirements and provisions of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines. Section 21002 of the Public Resources Code states: 21002. Approval of Project The Legislature finds and declares that it is the policy of the state that public agencies should not approve projects as proposed If there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such projects, and that the procedures required by this division are Intended to assist public agencies in systematically identifying both the significant effects of proposed projects and the feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures which will avoid or substantially lessen such significant effects. The Legislature further-finds and declares that in the event specific economic, social, or· other conditions make infeasible such project alternatives or such mitigation measures, individual projects may be approved in spite of one or more significant effects thereof. Further, Section 21002.1 of the Public Resources Code states: 21002.·1. Use of Envlronmental Impact Reports · In order to achieve the objectives set forth in Section 21002, the Legislature finds ·and declares that the following policy shall apply to the use of environmental impact reports prepared pursuant to this division: · · (a) The purpose of an environmental Impact report is to identify the significant effects of a project on the ·environment, to identify alternatives to the project, and to indicate the manner in which those significant effects can be mitigated or avoided. A-5 • • N-23. Please refer to response to comment N-17. The remainder of this comment is a recitation of Sections 21002, 21002.1, and 21004 of the Public Resources Code. N-23 (cont'd.) (b) Each public agency shall mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment of projects it approves or carries out whenever it is feasible to do so. (c) In the event that economic, social, or other conditions make ii infeasible to mitigate one or more significant effects of a project on the environment, such project may nonetheless be approved or carried out at the discretion of a public agency, provided that the project is otherwise pennissible under applicable laws and regulations. (d) In applying the policies of subdivisions (b) and (c) to individual projects, the responsibility of a public agency which is functioning as a lead agency shall differ from that of a public agency which is functioning as a responsible agency. A public agency functioning as a lead agency shall have responsibility of considering the effects, both individual and oollective, of all activities involved in a project. A public agency functioning as a responsible agency shall have responsibility for considering only the effects of those activities involved in a project, which ii is required by law to carry out or approve. This subdivision applies only to decisions by a public agency to carry out or approve a project and does not otherwise affect the scope of the comments the agency may wish to make pursuant to Section 21104 or 21153. Further, Section 21004 of the Public Resources Code states: 21004. Declaration of Leglslatlve Intent In mitigating or avoiding a significant effect of a project on the environment, a public agency may exercise only those express or implied powers provided by law other than this division. However, a public agency may use discretionary powers provided by such other law for the purpose of mitigating or avoiding a significant effect on the environment subject to the express or implied constraints or limitations that may be provided by law. The Legislature finds and declares as follows: (a) The enactment of Section 21004 of the Public Resources Code by this Act is intended to clarify the scope and meaning of various provisions of Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code. A-6 • • • N-23 (oonfd.) • Such clarification is necessary because of contentions that the provisions of Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code, by themselves, confer on public agencies independent authority to levy fees, impose exactions, and take other actions in order to comply with the general requirement of that division that significant effects on the environment be mitigated or avoided whenever it is feasible to do so. The provisions or Division 13 (commencing with Section 2.1000) of the Public Resources Code confer no· such independent authority. Rather, the provision.s of that division-are intended to be used in conjunction with df scretionary powers granted to a public agency by other law in order to achieve the objectives of mitigating or avoiding significant effects on the environment when it is feasible to do so: Compliance with the requirements of that division identifies the manner in which significant effects of a project can be mitigated or avoided, and imposes an additional requirement that these mitigating ·or avoiding actions·be taken whenever it is feasible to do so .. In order to fulfill that latter requirement, a public agency Is required to select from the various powers which have been conferred upon it by other law, those which it detennines may be appropriately .and legally exercised to avoid or mitigate the significant effects of the project as required by that division. Thus, for example, if the California Constitution, a charter, a statute, or some other law generally CO(lfers upon a public agency the authority to levy a fee orto impose another type of exaction for public welfare purposes, that public agency may, to the extent expressly or impliealy pennitted by such other law, choose to impose that fee or exaction for the purpose of mitigating or avoiding a significant effect on the environment which has been identified. pursuant to Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) or the Public Resources Code. Or, if a public agency is generally authorized to exercise the power of condemnation, it may, to the extent expressly or Impliedly pennitted · by such other law, choose to do so in order to mitigate or avoid a significant effect. on the environment which has been identified pursuant to that division. The provisions or Section 21004 or the Public Resources Code do not modify the holdings expressed In Golden Gate Bridge, etc.,'Dist. v. Muzzi, (1978) 93 Cal.App. 3d 707; and San Diego Trust & Savings Bank v. Friends of Gill, (1981) 121 Cal.App. 3d 203. A-7 • N-23 (cont'd.) N-24 (b) There is currently in litigation the question of whether or not Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code, prior to its amendment by this Act, does, or does not confer on public agencies an authorization to impose fees and other exactions, which is wholly separate and independent from any authorization conferred on such agencies by other law. The Legislature, therefore, declares that, by adding Section 21004 to Division 13 (commencing-with Section 21000) of the Pubiic Resources Code, it makes no statement, either directly or by indirectly, as to whether that division, prior to its amendment by this Act, did or did not confer on public agencies independent authorit¥ to impose fees or other exactions. It is clear that the City has a responsibility under CEQA to preform an environmental analysis and pursue a project in a manner which protects the environmental characteristics of the surrounding area. Political jurisdictional boundaries cannot be cited as the basis for limiting the geographic area to which the environmental analysis should apply. Section 15002 of the CEQA Guidelines state: 15002. General Concepts (a) Basic Purposes of CEQA. the basic purposes of CEQA are to: (1) Inform governmental decision-makers and the public about the potential, significant environmental effects of proposed activities. (2) Identify the ways that environmental damage can be avoided or significantly reduced. (3) Prevent significant, avoidable damage to· the environment by requiring changes in projects through the use of alternatives or mitigation measures when the govern~ental agency finds the changes to be feasible. (4) Disclose to the public the reasons why a governmental agency approved the project in the manner the agency chose if significant environmental effects are involved. (b) Governmental Action. CEQA applies to governmental action. This action may involve: (1) Actions directly undertaken by a governmental agency, or (2) Activities financed in whole or in part by a governmental agency, or (3) Private activities which require approval from a governmental agency. A-8 • • N-24. Please refer to response lo comment N-17. The remainder of this comment is a recitation of Sections 15002, 15003, ~nd 15021, 15042, 15043, 15090, 15091, and 15092 of the CEQA Guidelines and Seclton 65996 of the Government Code. • N-24 (cont'd.) • (c) Private Action. Private action is not subject to CEQA unless the action involves governmental participation, financing, or approval. (d) Project. A "project" Is an activity subject to CEQA The tenn "project" has bE!en interpreted to mean far more than the ordinary dictionary definition of the tenn. (See: Section 15378). (e) Time for Compliance. A governmental agency is required to comply with CEQA procedures when the agency proposes to carry out or approve the activity. (See: Section 15004). (f) Environmental Impact Reports and Negative Declarations: Ari environmental Impact Report (EIR) is the public document used by the governmental agency to analyze the significant environmental effects of a proposed project, to identify al!ernatives, and to disclose possible ways to reduce or avoid the possible environmental damage .. ( 1) AA EIR Is prepared when the public agency finds substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. (See: Section 15064(a)(1 ).) (2) When the agency finds that there is no substantial evidence that a project may have a significant environmental effect, the agency will prepare a "negative Declaration" instead of an EIR. (See Section 15070.) (g) Significant Effect on the Environment. A significant effect on the environment is defined as a substantial adverse change in the physical conditions which exist in the area affected by the proposed project. (See: Section 15382.) Further; when an EIR identifies a significant effect, the government agency approving the project must make findings on whether the adverse environmental effects have been substantially reduced or if not, why not. (See: Section 15091.) · (h) Methods for Protecting the Environment. CEQA requires more than merely preparing environmental documents. The EIR itself does not control the way in which a project can be built or carried out. Rather, when an EIR shows that a project would cause substantial adverse changes in the environment, the governmental agency must respond to the infonnation by one or more of the following methods: (1) Changing a proposed project; (2) Imposing conditions on the approval of the project; A-9 • • N-24 (oonl'd.) (3) Adopting plans or ordinances to control a broader class of projects to avoid adverse changes; (4) Choosing an alternative way of meeting the same need; (5) Disapproving the project; (6) Finding that changing or altering the project is not feasible; (7) Finding that the unavoidable significant environmental damage is acceptable as provided in Section 15093. (i) Discretionary Action. CEQA applies in situations where a governmental agency can use its judgment in deciding whether and how to carry out or approve a project. A project subject to such judgmental controls is called a "discretionary project." (See: Section 15357.) (1) Where the law requires a governmental agency to act on a project in a set way without allowing the agency to use its own judgment, the project is called "ministerial," and CEQA does not apply. (See: Section 15369.) (2) Whether an agency has discretionary or ministerial controls over a project depends on the authority granted by the law providing the controls over the activity. Similar projects may be subject to discretionary controls in one city or county and only ministerial controls in another. (See: Section 15268.) U) Public Involvement. Under CEQA, an agency must solicit and respond to comments from the public and other agencies concerned with the project. (See: Sections 15073, 15086, 15087, and 15088.) · (k) Three Step Process. An agency will nonnally take up to three separate steps in deciding which document to prepare for a project subject to CEQA (1) In the first step the Lead Agency examines the project to detennine whether the project is subject to CEQA at all. If the project is exempt, the process does not need to proceed any farther. The agency may prepare a Notice of Exemption. (See: Sections 15061 and 15062.) (2) If the project is not exempt, the Lead Agency takes the second step and conducts an Initial Study (Section 15063) to detennine whether the project may have a significant effect on the environment. If the Initial Study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the A-10 • • • N-24 (oont'd.) • project may have a significant effect, the Lead Agency prepares a Negative.Declaration. (See: Section 15070 et. seq.) (3) If the Initial Study shows that the project may have a significant effect, -the Lead Agency takes the third step and prepares an EIR. (See: Section 15080 et. seq.) · (I) Certified Equivalent Programs. · A number of environmental regulatory programs have been certified by the Secretary of the Resources Agency as involving essentially the same consideration of environmental issues as is provided by use of EIR's and_ Negative Declarations. Certified programs are exempt from preparing EIR's and Negative Declarations but use other documents instead. Certified programs are discussed in Article 17 and are listed in Section 15251: (m) This section is intended to present the general concepts of CEQA in a simplified and introductory manner .. If there are any conflicts between the short statement of a concept in this section and the provisions of other sections of these Gu_idelines, the other sections shall prevail. Further, Section 15003 of the CEQA Guidelines states: 15003. Policies In addition to the policies declared by the Legislature concerning environmental protection and administration of CEQA in Sections 21000, 21001, 21002, and 21002.1 of the Public Resources Code, the courts of this stale have declared the following policies to be implicit in CEQA: (a) The EIR requirement is the.heart of CEQA (County of Inyo v. Yorty, 32 Cal.App. 3d 795.). (b) The EIR serves not only to protect the environment but also to demonstrate to the public th.at it is being protected. (County of Inyo v. Yorty, 32 Cal.App. 3~ 795.) (c) The EIR is to inform other governmental agencies and the public generally of the environmental impact of a proposed project. (No Oil, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles, 13 Cal. 3d _68.) (d) The EIR is to demonstrate to an.apprehensive citizenry that the agency has, in fact, analyzed and considered the ecological implications of its action. (People ex rel, Department of Public Works v. Bosio, 47 Cal.App. 3d 495.) A-11 • • N-24· (oont'd.) (e) The EIR process will enable the public to determine the environmental and economic values of their elected and appointed officials thus allowing for appropriate action come election day should a majority of the voters disagree. (People v. County of Kern, 39 Cal.App. 3d 830.) (f) CEQA was intended to be interpreted in such manner as to afford the fullest possible protection to the environment within the reasonable scope of the statutory language. (Friends of Mammoth v. Board of Supervisors, 8 Cal.3d 247.) Section 15021 of the CEQA Guidelines states: 15021. Duty to Minimize Environmental Damage and Balance Competing Public Objectives (a) CEQA establishes a duty for public agencies to avoid or minimize environmental damage where feasible. (1) In regulating public or private activities, agencies are required to give major consideration to preventing environmental damage. (2) A public agency should not approve a project as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or mitigation measures available that would substantially lessen any significant effects that the project would have on the environment. (b) In deciding whether changes in a project are feasible, an agency may consider specific economic, environmental, legal, social, and technological factors. (c) The duty to prevent or minimize environmental damage is implemented through the findings required by Section 15091. (d) CEQA recognizes that in determining whether and how a project should be approved, a public agency has an obligation to balance a variety of public objectives, including economic, environmental, and social factors and in particular the goal of providing a decent home and satisfying living envirorvnent for every Californian. An agency shall prepare a statement of overriding considerations as described in Section 15093 to reflect the ultimate balancing of competing public objectives when the agency decides to approve a project that will cause one or more significant effects on the environment. A-12 • • • N-24 (oonl'd.) • Section 15042 of the CEQA Guidelines· states: 15042. Authority to Disapprove Projects A public agency may disapprove a project if necessary in order to avoid one or more significant effects on the environment that would occur if the project were approved as proposed. A Lead Agency has broader authority to disapprove a project than does a responsible Agency. A Responsible Agency may refuse to approve a project in order to avoid direct or indirect environmental effects of that part of the project which the Responsible Agency would be called on to carry out or approve. For example, an air quality management district acting as· a Responsible Agency would not have authority to disapprove a project for water pollution effects that were unrelated to the air _quality aspects of the project regulated by the district. Section 15043 of the CEQA Guidelines states: 15043. Authority to Approve Projects Despite significant Effects A public agency may approve· a project even though the project would cause a significant effect on the environment if the agency makes a fully informed and publicly disclosed decision that: (a) (b) There is no feasible way to lessen or avoid the significant effect (see Section 15091); and Specifically identified expected benefits from the project outweigh the policy of reducing or avoiding significant environmental impacts of the project. Section 15090 of the CEQA Guidelines states: 15090. · The Lead Agency shall certify that: (a) The final.EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA; and (b) The final EIR ~as presented to the decision-making body of the Lead Agency and that the decision-making body reviewed and considered the information contained in the final EIR prior to approving the project. A-13 • • N-24 (oont'd.) Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines states: 15091. Findings (a) No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been completed which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding. The possible findings are: (1) Changes or alteratior:is have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the final EIR. (2) Such changes or alternations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. (3) Specific, economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR. (b) The findings required by subsection (a) shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record. (c) The funding in subsection (a)(2) shall not be made if the agency making the finding has concurrent jurisdiction with another agency to deal with identified feasible mitigation measures or alternatives. Section 15092 of the CEQA Guidelines states: 15092. Approval (a) Mer considering the final EIR and in conjunction with making findings under Section 15091, the Lead Agency may decide whether or how to approve or carry out the project. (b) A public agency shall not decide to approve or carry out a project for which an EIR was prepared unless either. (1) The project as approved will not have a significant effect on the environment, or A-14 • • N-24 (oonfd.) • (2) The agency has: (A) Eliminated or substantially lessened all significant effects on the environment where feasible as shown in findings under Section 15091, and (8) Determined that any remaining significant effects on the environment found to be unavoidable under Section 15091 are acceptable due to overriding concerns as described in Section 15093. (c) With respect to a project which includes housing development, the public agency shall not reduce the proposed number of housing units as a mitigation measure if it determines that there is.another feasible specific mitigation measure available that will provide a comparable level of mitigation.· Section 65996 of the Government Code states: 65996. Conditions for approval of development projects; adequacy of school facllltles; mitigating envlronmental effects (a) The following provisions shall be the exclusive methods of mitigating environmental effects related to the adequacy of school facilities when considering the approval or the establishment of conditions for the approval of a development project by administrative or legislative action pursuant to Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code:_ (1) Chapter 22 (commencing with Section 1TTOO) of Part 10 of the Education Code. (2) Chapter 25 (commencing with Section 1 TT85) of Part 10 of the Education Code. (3) Chapter 28 (commencing with Section 17870 of Part 10 of the Education Code. · (4) Article 2.5 (commencing with Section 39327) of Chapter 3 of Part 23 of the Education Code. (5) Section 53080 of the Government Code. (6) Chapter 2.5 (commencing with Section 53311) of Division 2 of Title 5 of the government Code. A-15 • • N-24 (oonl'd.) N-25 (7) Chapter 4.7 (commencing with Section 65970) of Division 1 of Tille 7 of the Government Code. (b) No public agency shall, pursuant to Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources code or Tille 7 (commencing with Section 65000), deny approval of a project on the basis of the adequacy of school facilities, or impose conditions on the approval of a project for the purpose of providing school facilities that exceed the amounts authorized pursuant to this chapter. (c) This section shall have prospective application only, and shall not affect any action taken by a local agency prior lo the effective dale of this section. (d) This section shall remain in effect only until the dale that Assembly Constitutional Amendment 6 of the 1991-92 Regular Session fails to receive the approval of a majority of the voters voting on the measure, and as of that dale this section is repealed. The provisions of CEOA. the CECA Guidelines (some of which have been stated herein) and Section 65996 clearly suggest that the DEIR should address the school impact and mitigation issues in greater detail than is presently set forth in the DEIR. In addition, these requirements suggest that the City, as lead agency, has a greater responsibility for ensuring full and complete disclosure of the existing conditions, impacts, and mitigation measures than is presently set forth in the DEIR. Finally, these provisions suggest that the analysis should go beyond the Specific Plan Boundaries, directly affected District(s), jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Carlsbad, and should consider the direct and indirect regional impacts which the District has suggested is not addressed in the DEIR or responses. E. The provisions of Sections 65995 and 65996 of the Government Code preclude the City Council from Imposing mitigation of school district and enrollment Impacts resulting from the Project, other than the limited statutory development fees for the benefit of the school districts within which the Project Is located. • N-26 The DEIR and the City have misrepresented the mitigation responsibilities and authority of the City. Although the City is limited to specific mitigation measures as are set forth in Sections 65665, 65995.3 and 65996 of the Government Code with regard to "development projects," a specific development project which entails a subdivision map, parcel map, issuance of permit, conditional use permit, and granting of a zoning variance, etc. is considered an administrative act or discretionary action subject to the limitations and requirements of Sections 65995, 65995.3 and 65996 of the Government Code. A-16 • • N-25. Please refer to response to comment N-17. N-26. This is not a direct quote from the EIR. The EIR does not state that the City Council is precluded from imposing mitigation beyond limited statutory development fees for the benefit of the school districts within which the project is located. No significant impact to schools has been identified. The EIR discusses a variety of methods available to school districts to mitigate impacts from potential development. Page S.9-9 of the Draft EIR discusses the City's General Plan and Growth Management Plan Policy/Standards that have been identified in order to accommodate the projected demand on schools as a result of future growth within the City. The City recognizes that the proposed project involves amendments to the General Plan and Existing Specific Plan. In response to this, an amendment to the Zone 13 Local Facilities Management Plan has been prepared and will be considered for adoption as _part of the proposed project. Please refer to Section 3.0 • N-26 (oonl'd.) • Section 65995 of the Government Code states: 65995. Levies against development projects for construction or reconstruction of school facllltles (a) Except for a fee, charge, dedication, or other requirement authorized under Section 53080, or pursuant to Chapter 4. 7 (commencing with Section 65970), no fee, charge, dedication, or other requirement shall be levied by the legislative body of a local agency against a development project, as defined in Section 53080, for the construction or reconstruction of school facilities. (b} In no event shall the amount of any fees, charges, dedications, or other requirements authorized under Section 52080, or pursuant to Chapter 4. 7 (commencing with Section 65970), or both, exceed the following: (1) One dollar and seventy-two cents ($1.72) per square foot of assessable space in the case of residential development. For this purpose, all of the square footage within the perimeter of a residential structure, not including any carport, walkway, garage, overhang, patio, enclosed patio, detached accessory structure, or similar area. The amount of square footage within the perimeter of a residential structure shall be calculated by the building department of the city or county Issuing the building permit, in accordance with the standard practice of that city or county in calculating structural perimeters. (2) In the case of any commercial or Industrial development, twenty-eight cents ($0.28) per square foot of chargeable covered and enclosed space. This mea"ns the covered and enclosed space determined to be within the perimeter of a commercial or industrial structure, not Including any storage areas Incidental to the principal use of the development, garage, parking structure, unenclosed walkway, or utility or disposal area. The determination of the chargeable covered and enclosed spaces within the perimeter of a commercial or industrial structure shall be made by the building department of the city or county issuing the building permit, in accordance with the building standards of that city or county. (3) The amount of the limits set forth In paragraphs (1) end (2) shall be increased in 1990, and every two years thereafter, according to the adjustment for inflation set forth in the statewide cost Index for Class B construction, as determined by the Staie Allocation Board at Its January meeting, which Increase shall be effective as of the date of ttiat meeting. The Staie Allocation Board shall not raise the amount of the district matching share calculated under Section 17705.5 of the Education Code, as a result of the increase.under this paragraph, until at least 90 days after the date of that increase. · A-17 • • Project Description for a discussion of Discretionary Actions associated with the proposed project. Pages 5.9-9 and 5.9-10 of the Draft EIR provides an analysis of the LrMP Zone 13 update in relation to school impacts. The Local racilities Management Plan is part of the City's Growth Management Plan. Additionally, as described on page 5.9-12 of the Draft EIR the neighboring school districts outside of the project area will not have the authority to collect applicable construction school fees from project developers. However, funding mechanisms available 10 these school districts include the collection of construction fees from new residential development, state funds for facilities, stale funds per pupil, successful bond enactment by individual districts, and funds from Mello-Roos districts formed by school districts. No significant impact to surrounding school districts is anticipated. The remainder of the comment is a recitation of Sections 65995 and 65996 of the Government Code. N-26 (contd.) (c)(1)' Notwithstanding any other.provision of law, during the term of any contract entered into between a subdivider or builder and a school district, city, county, or city and county, whether general law or chartered, on or before January 1, 1987, that' requires the payment of a fee, charge, or dedication for the construction of school facilities as a condition to the approval of residential development, neither Section 53080 nor this chapter applies to that residential development. (2) Ally development project for which a final map was approved and construction had commenced on or before September 1, 1986, is subject to only the fee, charge, dedication, or other requirement prescribed in any local ordinance in existence on that date and applica6Ie to the project. (d) For purposes of Section ·53030 and this chapter, "residential, commercial, or industrial development" does not include any facility used exdusively for religious purposes that is thereby exempt from the property taxation under the laws of this state, any facility exdusively as a private, full-time day school as described In Section 48222 of the Education Code, or any facility that is owned and occupied by one or more agencies of federal, state, or local government. In addition, "commercial or industrial development" Includes, but is not limited to, any hotel, inn, motel, tourist home, or other lodging for which the maximum term of occupancy for guests does not exceed 30 days, but does not indude any residential hotel, as defined in paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) of Section 50519 of the Health and Safety Code. (e) The Legislature finds and dedares that the subject of the financing of school facilities with development fees is a matter of statewide concern. For this reason the Legislature hereby occupies the subject matter of mandatory development fees and other development requirements for school facilities finance to the exclusion of all local measures on the subject. (f) Nothing in this section shall be interpreted to limit or prohibit the use of Chapter 2.5 (commencing with Section 53311) of Division 2 ofTitle 5 to finance the construction or reconstruction of school facilities. Finally, Section 65996 of the Government Code states: 65996. Conditions for approval of development projects; adequacy of school facllltles; mitigating envlronmental effects (a) The following provisions shall be the exclusive methods of mitigating environmental.effects related to the adequacy of school facilities when considering the approval or the establishment of conditions for the approval of a development A-18 • • • N-26 (oont'd.) • project by administrative or legislative action pursuant to Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) or the Public Resources Code: (1) Chapter 22 (commencing with Section 17700) or Part 1 o or the Education Code. · (2) Chapter 25 (commencing with Section 17785) or Part 10 or the Education Code. · (3) Chapter 28 (commencing with Section 17870 or Part 10 or the Education Code. (4) Artide 2.5 (commencing with Section 39327) or Chapter 3 or Part 23 or the Education Code. (5) Section 53080 or the Government Code. (6) Chapter 2.5 (commencing with Section 53311) or Division 2 or Title 5 or the government Code. (7) Chapter 4.7 (commencing with Section 65970) of Division 1 of Title 7 or the Government Code. (b) No public agency shall, pursuant to Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources code or Title 7 (commencing with Section 65000), deny approval of a project on the basis of the adequacy of school facilities, or impose conditions on the approval of a project for the purpose of providing school facilities that exceed the amounts auth_orized pursuant to this chapter. (c) This section shall have prospective application only, and shall not affect any actio·n taken by a local agency prior to the effective date of this section. · (d) This section shall remain in effect only until the date that Assembly Constitutional Amendment 6 of the 1991-92 Regular Session fails to receive the approval of a majority of the voters voting on the measure; and as of that date this section is repealed. In contrast, the adoption or amendment of a general plan, zoning ordinance, redevelopment. plan, specific plan, and development agreement, etc. are legislative actions, and the provisions of Sections 65995, 65995.3 and 65996 do not apply. There are ,:io limitations on the mitigation which can be applied to a legislative action. A-19 • • N-26 (cont'd.) The present provisions of Sections 65995, 659.95.3 and 65996 of the Government Code were enacted by S.B. 1287 during the 1991-1992 Legislative Sessions (Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992) and were approved by the Governor on September 30, 1992. The legislation has received much scrutiny and interpretation as to its applicability to development projects and discretionary acts, and legislative actions. To date, no legal action has been brought to darify the intent of the Legislature in enacting these provisions. In addition, there has been no legal action sustained which would suggest that the provisions of S.B. 1287 apply to legislative actions. There is, however, case law which provides the basis for a legislative body to deny a legislaiive action on the grounds of the inadequacy of school facilities. Murrieta Valley Unified School District v. County of Riverside ("Murrieta"); William S. Hart Union High School District v. Regional Planning Commission of County of Los Angeles ("Hart"); and Mira Development Corporation v. City of San Diego ("Mira") each reinforce this police power authority of the legislative body, and the ability for the City Council to deny General Plan Amendment No. 331 and Specific Plan Amendment No. 92-1 on the grounds of inadequate school facilities. [ Even if the specific Project, and not the SPA were being considered at this time, the provisions of Section 65996 enable the legislative body to impose a Mello-Roos N-27 Community Facilities District which has no financial limitations. The DEIR and the City and the Applicant have failed to acknowledge this mitigation provision. N-28 On December 4, 1992, the Legislative Counsel of California issued a legislative opinion as to the application of S.B. 1287 to discretionary projects and legislative actions. The . opinion, in part, states, " .... it is our conclusion that Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 does not prohibit a city, county, or city and county from considering the adequacy of school facilities in the course of adopting or implementing a general plan, zoning ordinance, or other legislative land use policy." Inasmuch as the adequacy of school facilities.can be considered, the legislative body, therefore, through its policy power, has the ability to deny the legislative action on the grounds of inadequate school facilities, again reinforcing the findings of Mi@. t.1fil1 and Murrieta. In an attempt to apply the limitations of Sections 65995 and 65996 of the Government Code to legislative actions, Senate Bill No. 735 was introduced to the legislature on March 3, 1993 by Senator Dills. However, Senator Dills has withdrawn the bill, and there is no evidence to suggest that the Legislature intends to interpret S.B.1287· as has been previously discussed. In addition, there are several findings in Mira, !:!fill and Murrieta that are worth noting: 1) School district was not required to allege that it had taken action under statutory scheme allowing school districts to bring overcrowding to attention of cities and counties before it could file mandamus action alleging A-20 • • N-27. Please refer to response N-26. The Draft EIR recognizes the formation ·of Mello- Roos districts as a method of funding. N-28. Comment noted. This comment is a summary of several court cases and does not offer a specific comment on the adequacy of the Draft EIR. · • N-20· (cont'd.) • Inadequacy and inconsistency in county's general land development plan based on plan's conflicting policies of allowing unrestricted future land uses without consideration of impact on public schools facilities and providing for coordination between county and school district as to land use and development so as to mitigate net impact. Murrieta Valley Unified School District v. County of Riverside (App. 4 Dist.1991) 279 Cal.Rptr. 421, 228 Cal.App.3d 1212, review denied. 2) ff county, based upon erroneous legal advice, believed that ii had no choice but to grant zoning changes requested by developer, even though such proposed changes would have adverse Impact on school and infrastructure, and county therefore did not sufficiently consider impact on school facilities that proposed zoning change would have or what mitigation measures if any might be required, county did not discharge its responsibilities under its development monitoring system and its general plan. William S. Hart Union High School Dist. v. Regional Planning Com'n of County of Los Angeles 3) · (Shapell/Monteverde Partnership) (App. 2 Disl 1991) 2TT Cal.Rptr. 645, 226 Cal.App.3d 1612, rehearing denied and modified, review denied. If challenged findings of local zoning agencies concern approval of development project and relate to school overcrowding and mitigation of that overcrowding and mitigation of that overaowding vis-a-vis county's development monitoring system, challenges to those findings would necessarily be limited; School Facilities Legislation sets out only mitigation measures that local zone agencies can dem_and of developers when considering approval of their proposed development project, and also prohibits agencies from denying development project on basis of inadequacy of school facilities. William S. Hart Union High School Dist. v. Regional Planning Com'n of County of Los Angeles (ShapelV Monteverde Partnership) (App. 2 Dist. 1991) 277 Cal.Rptr. ~5 Cal.App.3d 1612, rehearing denied and modified, review denied. · 4) School districts could challenge board of supervisors' decision to allow proposed development on ground that board did not do all they were committed to do under school facilities legislation to mitigate adverse impact that proposed project would have on schools. William S. Hart Union High School Dist. v. Regional Planning Com'n of County of Los Angeles (Shappell/Monteverde Partnership) (App. 2. Dist.1991) 277 Cal.Rptr. 645, 226 Cal.App.3d 1612, rehearing denied and modified, review denied. 5) This section does not prohibit county from denying zoning change even though that denial is based on adequacy of school facilities so long as one of essential requirements or requirements for project· is zoning change prohibition against denying development projects on basis of adequacy of A-21 • • N-28 (contd.) school facilities effects only development projects. William S. fiart Union High School Dist. v. Regional Planning Com'n of County of Los Angeles (Shappell/Monteverde Partnership) (App. 2. Dist.1991) 277 Cal.Rptr. 645, 226 Cal.App.3d 1612, rehearing denied and modified, review denied. 6) This section which prohibited any public agency from denying approval of project on basis of adequacy of school facilities did not prohibit city council from relying on school overcrowding issue as basis for denying application to rezone property from single family to multifamily density, as this section refers only to approval of development projects and makes no reference to zoning decisions. Mira Development Corp. v. City of San Diego (App. 4 Dist.1988) 252 Cal.Rptr. 825,205 Cal.App.3d 1201. 7) County's authority lo specify land use and mitigation measures in connection with amendment of its general plan was not preempted by this section; county has authority to consider and provide feasible land use and development mitigating measures in environmental impact report and in general plan amendment to which it relates, which plan amendment allegedly contributed to student overcrowding and adversely affected existing condition of inadequate school facilities in district. Murrieta Valley Unified School District v. County of Riverside (App. :4 Dist.1991) 279 Cal.Rptr. 421, 228 Cal.App.3d 1212, review denied. 8) School District stated valid cause of action against county for violation of California Environmental Quality Act by alleging that county had approved environmental impact report which failed to adopt, adequate mitigating measures related to environmental impact of future development on school facilities, which contained findings not supported by adequate evidence and which failed to adopt statement of overriding considerations to justify approval of project. Murrieta Valley Unified School District v. County of Riverside (App. 4 Dist 1991) 279 Cal.Rptr. 421,228 Cal.App.3d 1212, review denied. 9) School district stated valld cause of action under California Environmental Quality Act by alleging that there was not substantial evidence to support county's finding that impact on school facilities would be considerably mitigated by plan and that county did not make alternative statement to overriding consideration to justify approval of project in face of unmitigated impact on school facilities. Murrieta Valley Unified School District v. County of Riverside (App. 4 Dist.1991) 279 Cal.Rptr. 421, 228 Cal.App.3d 1212, review denied. A-22 • • • N-29 • Th~re are no statutory or legal limitations on the City Council in implementing actions on · their own to address the impacts of legislative decisions on public agencies. Toe District suggests the following alternative mitigation measures: 1) Voluntary project development fees in excess of Government Code Section 65995 and 6599.3 statutory fees 2) Voluntary capital facilities construction 3) Reimbursement of Stale revenue proceeds from the Project 4) City imposed park entrance.fee or tax 5) City imposed parking fee of tax 6) City imposed increased transient occupancy tax 7) Area-wide benefit assessment district 8) City-wide parcel tax or increased property tax rates 9) City-wide general obligation bond . 10) Increased convention center user fees Although each of these alternative mitigation measures may require different procedures on be~a_lf of the. City In order to. implement, they each Individually or collectively provide a realistic and·v1abl!3 approach to addressing the impacts raised by the District. N-aO Applicant, _City, and City's .consultant have prepared a DEIR which is not a full and . . [The District has provided substantial ~vidence herein to support its claims that the .. complete disclosure of the concerns and issues raised by the District. They further have not provided the decision-makers with ihe factual infonnation that would enable them to make an accurate detennination as to the adequacy of the DEIR. 10110195 oncusd\1183e~.• A-23 • N-29. No significant impact to school districts has been identified; therefore, there is no nexus for the implementation of the mi!igation measures suggested by the commentor. N-30. Please refei to response to comments N-1 through N-29. N-31 N-32 -~\ ATTACHMENT "B" /c'; 0Cf' ·-.-•. · COMMENTS OF THE ENCINITAS UNION SCHOOL DISTRlct.;; PIAHHING~!~ ;, ON THE M OtyOf _.. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT \ C.J!sbad FOR THE DRAFT CARLSBAD RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN '<'( . . ..... Failure of the DEIR to Address the Information Requested to be Included In the DEIR The District would suggest that the City did not provide the information as was requested by the District to be included in the DEIR, in· order to provide a full analysis and disclosure of the environmental impacts of the adoption of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan ("Project') and to identify the appropriate corresponding mitigation measures. The District did on May 25, 1995 transmit a letter in response to the Notice of Preparation of the Draft EIR for the preparation and adoption of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. That letter requested that the DEIR address specific topics important to the District and relevant to determining the Impacts and necessary mitigation measures to be addressed in the DEIR. The following presents the District's comments on the City's compliance with the requests made by the District. 1. The square footage of all non-residential development activities planned for the project, including phasing of land uses and projections of permanent, part-time, and temporary employees. Comment: • The District would like to acknowledge that there was identification of the non-residential uses that are to be located -in the Project. However, the DEIR makes reference to employees, none of which were classified as to full-time, part-time, or temporary, as requested by the District. The DEIR also fails to mention how many employees of the Project will be new residents end thus require new housing units. The DEIR does not provide information or analysis as to how many units will be required or the ability of the region to provide these units. The District agrees with the DEIR in that some of the new residents will reside in existing units. The DEIR goes further in suggesting that many new units will be constructed to accommodate the increased immigration caused by the Project. There is no mention as to the amount of new units that will be needed, nor any mention of where these units will most likely be located. B-1 • N-31. The Draft EIR has been prepared in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act. The analysis provided in the Draft EIR is consistent with the General Plan and Growth Management Program of the City of Carlsbad. The District requested a level of analysis well beyond that which is necessary and requested by other school districts. The District has not provided any factual basis that would warrant the level of analysis requested for inclusion in the Draft EIR. N-32. The comment requests the EIR to engage in speculation in determining the number of employees that will be new residents and require new housing units. The Draft EIR provides an analysis of indirect impacts related to the generation of new jobs in the area. The Draft EIR also states that as housing costs in Oceanside, San Marcos, and Vista are generally lower than other northwestern County communities, school districts serving these areas may also be affected through new employees moving lo the area. Please refer 10 pages 5.9-11 through 5.9-13 for a detailed discussion related 10 this issue. ·• N-32l (conl'd.) 2. N-33 3. N-34 • • The District feels that for these reasons the DEIR has failed to fulfill the request. The qualitative and quantitative identification of the location where employees will reside within the region. Comment: The DEIR fails to provide an analysis as to where Project employees will reside and the associated effects of new employees on the District as a result of employment in the Project. Ironically, the DEIR assumes that many of the employees will come from the localities surrounding the Project. The District suggests that as far as the information provided _in the DEIR Is concerned, the assumptions are unfounded and, as a ·result, are in non-compliance with CEQA regulations. The quantitative and qualitative identification of: a) employees which will reside in new housing in the locales identified; b) employees which will move into the locales and reside in existing housing; and c) employees which already reside in the locales. Comment: The DEIR fails such information. In general, the DEIR provides assumptions that employees will move Into existing housing, or that the employees will already be established residents within the region. The District questions the validity of these assumptions, sighting the lack of quantitative or qualitative supporting evidence and associated analysis. The DEIR gives no mention of models or comparable regions upon which they draw for the conclusions. This lack of reasonable analysis suggests that the DEIR fails to comply with the regulations of CEQA and is inherently flawed. The District requires the information in part •a• to asses the potential for new housing growth within their boundaries, and the associated student generation and costs. Part "b" will fulfill the requirements of Identifying the students which will enter the District without development impacts fees to ease the financial burden. And finally, part ·c• will assess the validity of the DEIR's assumption that most employees will already reside in the community and are currently being served by the District. B-2 • • N-33. Page 5.9-12 of the Draft EIR identifies the potential locations of where future employees will reside in the region. N-34. Please refer to response N-1 and N-33. The Draft EIR docs provide an estimate of overall employee generation for the proposed project. N-34 (confd.) 4. N-35 5. N-36 The District is distressed at the lack of information for several reasons, namely the inability to determine the regional effects of the Project and how the Project will affect the District. The DEIR assumes that the Project will not affect the District. Without evidence to support such a theory, the District can only assume the opposite is _as equally true. The identification of the age, socio-<lemographic characteristics, and ethnic make- up of the employees. Comment: Again, the DEIR fails to address information requested by the District. The DEIR does not attempt to identify the characteristics of the future employees generated by the Project The DEIR broadly identifies that there is expected to be 1,000 -2,000 employees for the vocational' school use and 3,000 -4,000 employees at the Legoland theme park use. The DEIR, however, assumes that the employees will be non- primary wage earners. To make such assumptions it would be logical to provide substantiation, which. should Include the profile as requested by the District. The DEIR, In its failure to provide such information, fails to comply with CEQA In regards to providing analysis as to the actual regional effects. The DEIR, in its haste, only Identifies effects located within the immediate Project area and fails to recognize the regional effects of the Project. The quantitative and qualitative location of school sites, school bus stops, student pedestrian movement patterns to the school sites, bus routes, etc. serving the District where such employees will reside. Comment: • The DEIR does provide a map Identifying the School District boundaries within the Project and City, bu1 fails to Include the remainder of the requests. The DEIR, by failing to fulfil District request No. 2 will not be able to provide much requested information. As such, the DEIR's assumption that the District will not be adversely Impacted by the Project Is virtually unfounded as sta·ted in the DEIR. By not identifying the location of employees' residential areas, no analysis can be made as to which Districts will be affected by an Increase In students. 8-3 • N-35, The Draft EIR does not assume that the employees will be non-primary wage earners. Page 5.9-11 of the Draft EIR states that approximately 3,000-4,000 service jobs will be generated from the resort hotel, community hotel, restaurants, retail/commercial and LEGOLAND and that these jobs will generally pay low and moderate wages. This does not include employment generated from the other uses of the project including the research and development/office or gemological institute of america uses. Additionally, the Draft EIR does not state that there is expected to be 1,000 • 2,000 employees for the vocational school use. Rather, the Draft EIR states, "The research and development and the vocational school uses could generate an additional 1,000-2,000 jobs upon full buildout." The Draft EIR discusses regional impacts and docs nol limit the impact discussion to the immediate project area. Please refer to pages 5_9:7 through 5.9-13 for an analysis of schools which-includes impacts on a regional level. N-36. The Draft EIR states that employees may reside in Carlsbad or other surrounding communities and provides an analysis of potential impacts to the school districts located within each of these communities. Please refer to Section 5.5 Traffic/Circulation which provides a detailed traffic analysis of the proposed project. Please refer to Section 5.2 Air Quality which provides a detailed air quality analysis of the proposed project. • N-36 (conl'd.) N-37 6. • Furthermore, bus routes are not depicted in the DEIR; however, the bus routes will be affected by the increases in traffic generated by the Project. Therefore, ii is important that busing routes be analyzed in relation to current street services and traffic levels, and those projected for the year 2010. As part of this analysis, the increase of . air pollution should also be considered. Student pedestrian movements are also of great concem to the District. With the development of the Project and subsequent cumulative effects, student pedestrian pattems may change and encroach into areas of heavy traffic which are inherently hazardous to the students. The future Transportation and Circulation mitigation measures include plans to widen or modify several locations and increase the level of service throughout the City. All of these changes will have adverse effects on the pedestrian movement of students, as well as those students who are capable of driving to school. Areas such as these should be identified so that studies on busing and pedestrian safety can be undertaken, and mitigation measures proposed. The identification of the designated schools that will be attended by students generated by employees residing in the locales shall be identified. Comment: The DEIR has failed to provide the District with any information regarding this request This request is tied closely to request number 2. It is necessary for the District to be informed of where employees have the opportunity to locate. If employees are restricted by economics, distance, or housing availability, the potential for adverse· effects isolating themselves in one area can exist Only through an identification of housing locations can the District identify their effects as they relate to new students. With information such as this, the District will be able to determine the need for new facilities and the urgency for constructing the facilities, or create alternate plans, such as transferring students to alternate locations. The cost for providing these services can be made, and plans for financing can begin. Plans will include analysis of fees that will be collected from the development and the shortcomings of these fees. Plans for negotiating for full mitigation can then be made to ensure that the developer will pay their fair share of costs incurred. 8-4 •• • N-37. The analysis of schools on pages 5.9-7 through 5.9-13 of the Draft EIR identifies which districts will be affected by the proposed project. 7. N-38 8. N-39 9. N-40 The District's existing conditions relative to the location, size, quality, and condition of existing schools, administrative, and operation facilities should be discussed. Comment: The DEIR provides no information relative to the current enrollment of the District and school capacities, as well as enrollment projections and the future deficit capacities of the schools. There is no information provided regarding the potential for expansion or additional temporary units that can be added to existing sites. There is also no mention as to the condition and location of District support facilities. The DEIR fails to analyze the ability of the District's support facilities capacity to provide services for any increased student population. The District's past and present enrollment trends, present enrollment, and facility utilization should be identified. Comment: The DEIR simply disregards any effects on the District because it is not directly within the Project boundaries. And in doing so, fails to acknowledge the regional effect of the problem and ·how they will relate to surrounding Districts. No enrollment trends or forecasts ere provided, let alone how the regional effect of the Project will be handled end/or forecast. The need for identifying these facilities will aid the District In determining if the current capacities will be available for future use es the Project affects the region as a whole. Without such analysis, the complete impacts, both regional and local, of the Project cannot be determined. A complete and ·comprehensive traffic analysis shall be prepared identifying vehicular movement end volumes, and potential conflicts with s·chool pedestrian movement, school transportation end busing services, in terms of both local and regional traffic, lnduding circulation movement in and around the District's facilities. Comment: • . The DEIR fails to give an adequate analysis of how the increased traffic volumes will affect the District. The need for assessing conflicts between student pedestrians and traffic is of the utmost importance to the District. ·Traffic volumes will also have an effect on the busing of students. The District will require an estimate of the lime required to reach each site, as well as an analysis of potentially hazardous areas associated with traffic, intersections, and student 8-5 • N-38. Please refer to pages 5.9-7 through 5.9-10 of the Draft EIR for a discussion of the environmental selling of schools. No significant impact to schools has been identified. N-39. Please refer to pages 5.9-11 through 5.9-13 for a discussion of the project's indirect impacts on surrounding school districts. N-40. Please refer to Section 5.5 Traffic/Circulation which provides a detailed traffic analysis of the proposed project. The traffic analysis prepared for the project is not limited to areas in close proximity to the proposed project, rather it incorporates potential local and regional effects. The traffic analysis study area incorporates all roadways that would experience a significant increase in traffic as a result of the project. Please refer to Section 5.5 Traffic/Circulation which provides a detailed traffic analysis of the proposed project. · Additionally, please refer to pages 7-5 through 7-6 for a detailed discussion of cumulative traffic impacts. • . N-40 (cont'd.) • loading and unloading zones. The study should also include alternative routes for current sites, as well as new sites projected by the District to be completed to accommodate the students'trom the new developments. Although Section 5.5 of the DEIR and associated app!!ndices deals with Transportation and Circulation, vital information is not incorporated into the DEIR. As stated in the DEIR, traffic and congestion will only worsen as the Project progresses. While the DEIR provides significa,nt analysis for traffic and mitigation within close proximity lo the Project, the overall regional effects are not dealt with. As just mentioned, the overall traffic and congestion are thought to be significant and unavoidable impacts of the Project upon the region. Therefore, the District holds that its position for further.studies is justifiable. 10. A complete and comprehensive noise analysis should be prepared identifying any noise sources and volumes which may affect the District's school facilities, classrooms, and outdoor school areas. Comment: The DEIR's noise level study neglects to provide noise increases as they relate to school sites. The most evident producer of noise is traffic generated by the Project. Traffic will be increased throughout the region as a result of the Project But seeing as the DEIR failed to identify traffic concerns as they relate to the District and its sights, there is no conceivable way that an accompanying analysis of noise level inaeases can be done. For reference, State standards specify N-41 that noise levels for school sites should be no greater than 55 dBa inside the building-and 65 dBa at the school property line. The DEIR projects that as the Project nears buildout, noise levels are only expected to Increase. The DEIR finds that noise will become a significant and unavoidable impact. Therefore, the District feels justified in expressing its ·concerns. Although the District .cannot produce accurate noise levels for each school site, the admission of the DEIR produces great poncem from the District. The District feels a more comprehensive study, encompassing all school sit!3s within the Project boundaries, is required. The District suggests that these sections of the DEIR are seriously flawed and do not contain information requested by the District. B-6 • • N-41. Please refer to Section 5.8 Noise for a detailed analysis of-· the project's impacts related to noise. Table 5• 18 identifies the vehicular noise from the project and cumulative traffic buildout for the year 20iO. No sensitive land uses are located adjacent to the roadways that will experience a significant increase in noise. There are no school sites located within the project boundaries. N-42 N-43 11. A complete and comprehensive air quality analysis should be prepared identifying any air quality deterioration that would result from the transportation and busing of students to various schools within and outside the District as a result overcrowded conditions and the necessity to mitigate capital facility deficiencies. Comment: The DEIR sets forth in Section 5.2 an analysis of the air quality impact of the Project. The District notes existence of the air quality data in this section and assumes that it represents the entirety of lhe air quality analysis prepared on the Project. There is no infonnation in Section 5.2 of the DEIR which provides any analysis with regards 1o potential air quality deterioration that would result from the transportation and busing of students to various schools within and outside the District as a result of overcrowded conditions and the necessity to mitigate capital facility deficiencies. Because the traffic analysis does not identify the requirements for District transportation and student busing, the air quality analysis does not consider these potential sources of air quality deterioration. This additional deterioration would occur at the point of pick up and delivery (home and school), as well as along the busing routes from these two points. 12. The Project's utilization Impact on the District, Including projected enrollments, student generation factors, projected space requirements, projected busing requirements, projected teacher/staffing requirements, and traffic and noise impacts should be Identified, specifically resulting from the increased enrollments required by housing employees within the jurisdiction of the District. Comment: • The DEIR fails to provide such infonnation as the DEIR maintains that the District will remain unaffected because It is not directly in the Project area. But, as he District has shown, the regional effects warrant consideration of the District as being impacted by the Project. Therefore, the District requests the lnfonnation be provided in all respects to its request. The DEIR provides no analysis as to the impacts caused by the regional effect of the Project in tenns of projected space requirements, projected teacher/staffing requirements, projected required interim facility requiremenls, and projected support facilities requirements resulting from the students generated from the Project. B-7 • N-42. Please refer to Section 5.5 Traffic/Circulation which provides a detailed traffic analysis of the proposed project. The air quality analysis was prepared based on the information provided in the traffic analysis. N-43. Please refer to response N-17. The Draft EIR concludes that no significant impact will occur to school districts within or surrounding the City of Carlsbad. • N-43 l (cont'd.) In addition, various disrussions of noise and traffic as set forth in the DEIR have not been identified. N-44 N-45 13. The Project's fiscal impact on the District, including projected cost of land acquisition, school construction, and other facilities, shall be identified; present and projected capital facility, operations, maintenance, and personnel financing and funding souri::es shall be analyzed; and personnel, operational, and maintenance costs should be identified, specifically resulting from the increased enrollments required by housing employees within the jurisdiction of the District. Comment: The DEIR provides no data, information, and/or analysis of the fiscal cost to the District, including projected cost of land acquisition, school construction, and other facilities. In addition, the DEIR presents no data, Information, and/or analysis as to the present and projected capital facility operations, maintenance, and personnel financing and funding sources of the District, or the personnel, operational, and maintenance costs which the District will incur as a result of the projected impacts on the District. It is important to note that the financial and fiscal implications of the District are a representation of the magnitude of the physical impacts on the District. Therefore, any physical impacts caused to the District and stated in the DEIR were requested by the District to be translated · into financial and fiscal implications. The DEIR presents no such analysis. · · 14. The ability of the existing District facilities to accommodate any projected increase in demand should be analyzed in terms of the capacity of the existing infrastructure serving the District's facilities (i.e., water lines, sewer lines, roads, etc.), specifically resulting from the increased enrollments required by housing employees within the jurisdiction of the District. Comment: .The DEIR has not provided any Information as it pertains to this request. · The DEIR does not provide an analysis of any existing conditions within the District. The request to analyze the ability of the District to provide for its infrastructure needs directly relates to any · ina-ease in student enrollment. The District feels that the Project will cause some Increase in students as a result of the Project. The District would like to be able to provide .a fair and accurate assessment of Impacts as· they relate to negotiations for Impact mitigation. The District feels ii is [mportant to understand not only the B-8 • • N-44. The Draft EIR addresses the environmental impacts of the proposed project, not the fiscal impacts. Please refer to response N-I. N-45. Please refer to response N-1. N-45 l (cont'd.) importance of the Infrastructure as it directly relates to the expansion or construction of school. sites, but as to the availability of · infrastructure as a result of diversion of resources to construct those required by the Project. N-46 15. Appropriate and legal development utilization and fiscal impact mitigation measures shall be identified, including a complete discussion and analysis of the mitigation measure set forth in Section 65996 of the Government Code, as follows: a. Chapter 22 (commencing with Section 17700) of Part 10 of the Education Code. · b. Chapter 25 (commencing with Section 17875) of Part 10 of the Education Code. c. Chapter 28 (commencing with Section 17870) of Part 10 of the Education Code. d. Article 2.5 (commencing with Section 39327) of Chapter 3 of Part 23 of the Education Code. e. Section 53080 of the Government Code. f. Chapter 2.5 (commencing with Section 53311) of Division 2 of Title 5 of the Government Code. g. . Chapter 4. 7 (commencing with Section 65970 of Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code. Additionally, the decisions of Mira, tiJ!IJ., and Murrieta shall be discussed as vehicles for impact mitigation consideration. Comment: The District requested that the DEIR Identify, analyze, and discuss the appropriate and legal development utilization and fiscal impact mitigation measures set forth in Section 65996 of the Government Code and the decisions of Mira, l::!.fil1. and Murrieta as vehicles for Impact mitigation consideration. The DEIR provides no identification, analysis and/or discussion of these mitigation measures or legal cases. 8-9 • N-46. No significant impacts to schools have been identified; therefore, no mitigation measure~ are required. Please refer to response N-26. • N-46 (cont'd.) N-47 N-48 • Seeing as the DEIR does not identify the current levels of development impad fees but assumes they are capable of mitigating development, the Distrid requests the documentation that supports the conclusions. The District further finds ii necessary that the DEIR mention other alternatives. It should also be noted that in Attachment • A' of this document, the discussion on MkE_, tifil1. and Murrieta can and should be identified as a means to mitigate effects of a project as it relates to regional impacts and questions of jurisdiction. 16. Cumulative impacts on the District addressing lt~m No.'s 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14 should be addressed. Other·projects which directly or indirectly have the potential of causing impacts to the District and which are within the geographical area of the Project, the District, and included in the cumulative analysis should be identified by the development name, unit size, phasing and location. -Comment: The DEIR fails to provide any infonnation relative to cumulative effects as they relate to the Project. One can only assume this is commensurate with the conclusion that even though the Project is or regional significance, the District will remain unaffected because there is no residential construction and the District does not have direct jurisdiction over the Project. The DEIR also rails to address the cumulative impact or other items directly or indirectly affecting the District, such as the cumulative effects of noise, traffic, and air quality. Each of these subjects will no doubt adversely affect the District. The DEIR should have addressed these issues as they relate separately to the District, as well as any joint effects. · · 17. Unavoidable development utilization and fiscal impacts on the District should be addressed, particularly as they relate to the quality, quantity, and future condition of the District's enrollments, space utilization, curriculum, financial and fiscal condition, transportatidn, operational and maintenance activities, and administrative activities. Comment: The DEIR fails to .identify unavoidable impacts as they result from developments occurring either directly or indirectly as a result of the Project. The DEIR does not provide .an analysis or -mitigation procedures for locating and providing future facility space as a result B-10 • N-47. Please refer to Section 7.0 of the Draft EIR which provides an analysis of the long- term effects of the proposed project including cumulative impacts. N-48. · No unavoidable significant impacts to schools have been identified. .N-48l (cont'd,) 8•::.: of regional cumulative impacts. The DEIR also fails to Identify any impacts on the District's curriculum caused by overcrowding, fiscal shortcomings, or lack of space. The DEIR also fails to provide an analysis of operational and maintenance issues faced by the District as an unavoidable result of the regional impacts of the Project. N-49 N-50 18. Appropriate alternative projects should be considered and evaluated, and the items and issues set forth herein as No.'s 1 through 17 should be determined. Comment: The DEIR considers four (4) alternatives for the area, one being the proposed changes to the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. The alternatives include no project, existing specific plan, and alternate locations. As with the DEIR for the proposed changes to the current specific plan area, none:discuss the effects as they relate to school districts. No alternatives were produced that would modify the intensity of the proposed Project. It would be useful to identify the change in effects as they relate to region. For example, the current plan does not include the Legoland theme park. No discussion was made as to how the inclusion of this use does or does not affect the area as a region. This is one of the main areas on contention throughout the Project and DEIR. Failure to acknowledge the regional effects of the Project is a serious pitfall of the DEIR. 19. If a statement of overriding consideration is intended to be used relative to the District's development utilization and fiscal impacts for unavoidable or unmitigated impacts, the text of the statement, along with the quantitative and qualitative substantiation, shall be identified and made available for public inspection. The substantiation shall also provide a comparison to the mitigation of other public services and facilities with schools. Comment: • The DEIR does not address several key issues that directly and/or indirectly adversely impact the District. The DEIR fails to analyze the financial and fiscal impacts to the District, the impacts of traffic, air quality, noise, and others identified here within are also over1ooked. It is therefore suggested that all possible Impacts are not fully recognized or mitigated by the DEIR. The DEIR should therefore provide either new mitigation measures or a statement of overriding consideration to the unavoidable or unmitigated impacts on the District. 8-11 • N-49. The Existing Specific Plan alternative would modify the intensity of the proposed project. The Draft EIR analyzes the regional effects of the proposed project. Please refer to response N-17. N-50. The Draft EIR docs not provide an analysis of fiscal impacts as this is not required by CEQA statute or g~idelines. The Draft EIR provides a detailed analysis of traffic, air quality, noise and the other issues identified in the comment leller and a Statement of Overriding Considerations must be adopted if the City Council approves the project. Please refer to response N-7. However, no significant impact to schools has been identified. • N-51 N-52 • 20. The DEIR should provide a complete and comprehensive discussion as to how the Project and the mitigation measures confonn and comply with the General Plan, particularly as it relates to public service and facility demands. Comment: . The DEIR mentions LFMZ 13 and 5, throughout the report, as significant planning areas which cany with them certain regulations. The DEIR does not provide a substantial discussion of the regulations or concerns associated with modifying legislation or implementing the Project as they relate to these areas. The DEIR also provides discussion on the early. termination of the Williamson Act as lo the actual provisions of the act and the consequences-of terminating this act. The DEIR provides a discussion, on page 5.1-12, as to how the Project will benefit from the cancellation.· The discussion states that 181.2 acres within the Project will be adversely affected. No further analysis is provided. This leaves the District with questions as to what other detrimental effects will include. · The failure of the DEIR to disclose complete discussion as to the Project's conformance to the General Plan and other regulatory legislation leads the District to question the conformance of the Project and Its mitigation measures to Local and State regulation. 21'. The availability of adequate Infrastructure (water, sewer, streets; etc.) at existing District schools to accommodate any expected increases of students. Comment: The DEIR identifies·an acute shortage of space within the districts serving the Project area. it is evident that the initial steps in dealing with new students will be to increase loading throughout the districts. However, before this is done, the DEIR must identify each site's condition and restraints. The age and condition of a school will impair or _support its ability to accommodate new students. The analysis should also look at the ability of the maintenance and support facilities for each respective site. -If the support facilities are incapable of supporting the increased upkeep of the site, increased capacities may have to be postponed or abandoned.· This analysis is part of many that will identify the District's capacity to provide services and/or expand to provide services. 8-12 • N-51. The Draft EIR provides a detailed analysis of the public facilities requirements for LFMP Zone 5 and 13. Please refer to pages 5.9-9, 5.9-10 and 5.9-12 of the Draft EIR which describes Local Facility Management Plan requirements for school facilities in Zone 13. Facilities requirements for all public services as a result of development in Zone 13 are discussed in Section 5.9 of the Draft EJR . Please refer to Section 5.7 of the Draft EIR for a detailed analysis of the project's consistency with the General Plan and other land use regulations applicable to the site. N-52. Please refer to response N-1. N-53 Fal_lur,t,<!f the DEIR to Adequately Describe the Existing Conditions of the District ·;,'., ... '_l:•.:·."',. f};.,:·.~,.:'•;ti_.,_-~,:;:;:3t_:-:1,:·•· :·-~•• . .'h::_~· ·. The bt;lR\m,vsI include·a description of tho environment in the vicinity of the project, as it exists before commencement of the project, both from a local and a regional perspective. The description shall be no longer than is necessary to an understanding of the significant effects of the propos_ed project and its alternatives." (CEQA Guidelines Section 15125.) The DEIR provides a very general overview of the District's condition. The DEIR fails to adequately describe the physical conditions of the sites. There is no mention as to the age, condition, compliance with current building and safety codes, and/or maintenance procedures within the District. To adequately understand the condition of the District and its ability to continue providing services, this aspect must be analyzed as well. The DEIR also omits a complete discussion as to the financial and fiscal condition of the District and possible direct and indirect impacts as a result of the Project. The ability of the District to collect fees and truces to support growth is not fully explored in the DEIR. The actual amount of fees collected or collectable versus the cost of providing services is overlooked. It should also be noted that the mitigation measures as suggested by the proposed Project and DEIR, assumed for the current District financial conditions, assumes several things. First of all, ii is assumed that the current levels of Impact fees will be adequate to cover the costs imposed by development under the Project. And secondly, that the State and Federal funds for education will be available to the District in sufficient quantities. In actuality, impact fees do no provide sufficient funds to cover the costs incurred by the District. Therefore, mitigation monitoring policies must be ·created to ensure full mitigation negotiations occur, as well as provide other means to mitigate the adverse fiscal burdens faced by the District. State and Federal funding is also an inadequate means of mitigation. State funds for new facility construction and expansion are already allocated for the next several years. The current trend of shrinking government subsidies is expected to continue, and therefore, these are no longer viable mitigation measure. The DEIR fails to correlate the District's current planning efforts and development impact fee documentation as they relate to the Project's Impacts. The correlation of these documents will provide a deeper understanding as to whether the District Is capable of absorbing the Project's direct or indirect impacts, and to what degree the impacts must be mitigated. Additionally, as stated herein, the traffic, noise, and air quality discussion in the existing DEIR Is incomplete. Of particular interest is how each study directly relates to and impacts the District as to each school site, support facility, student population, and faculty and administrative staffing. It should be noted that there is no mention in or of these sections as to how the current conditions affect the District. B-13 • • N-53. Section 4.0 of the Draft EIR provides a description of the regional selling of the project. Section 5.9 provides a description of the existing conditions of school districts within and surrounding the City of Carlsbad. The analysis of financial and fiscal effects is not required by CEQA statute or guidelines. No significant impacts to schools have been identified; therefore, no mitigation measures are proposed, and no discussion of mitigation measures is warranted. CEQA requires a discussion of the existing setting of the proposed project, not the existing selling of the District. The Draft EIR docs not state that there will be no effects on the District because it does not have jurisdiction over the project area. The Draft EIR states that impacts will be insignificant due to the fact that any increase in enrollment generated from the proposed project from the employment will be absorbed by several school districts in the area. • N-53 (confd.) • Without a complete understanding of the District's current situation, it is unclear as to how the proposed Project can suggest that there will be no effects on the District because it does not have jurisdiction in the area. The District suggests that the DEIR should be revised to include a more accurate description of the existing conditions within the District in respect to the Project's direct and indirect impacts as to employees in the locale. The District is prepared to assist the City in preparing a more appropriate existing conditions description, and will make available to the City, documentation and information which would be appropriately incorporated in the DEIR. Failure of the DEIR to Adequately Identify the Significant Impacts of the Project on the District The DEIR suggests that the impacts to the District are not significant and are of little concern because the District does not have jurisdiction within the Project boundaries. The District would suggest that the present and future overcrowding of the District's facilities, as a result of direct and indirect impacts from the Project, will have adverse effects on the health and safety of the students of the District, including those students generated from the employees of the Project living in the locales. The DEIR does not N-54 include or address such potential issues of heallh and safety impact upon the District. N-55 Overcrowded condilions generate social and psychological problems among the users of such facilities, and results in over utilization of areas which are not designated for such use. These conditions create heallh and safety issues which must be addressed by the District. These areas of concern include, but are not limited to, restrooms, food services, cafeterias, outdoor play and recreational areas, and administration and staff lounges and rest areas. The District suggests that the cumulative impacts are required to be discussed with the same level of detail as short-and long-tenn direct and indirect impacts generated by the Project. The DEIR sets forth no qualitative or quantitative discussion as ii relates to these issues and their cumulative effects. The District suggests that increases in student enrollments is not the only significant impact. Failure of the DEIR to Adequately Identify the Cumulative Impacts of the Project on the District The DEIR does not identify direct or indirect effects upon the District such as, but not limited to: 1) increased busing services, increased time due to increases in traffic congestion, and related costs; 2) increased air pollution generated from busing services, as well as external pollutants. from increased traffic and industry which will adversely affect school sites, including facilities, staff and students; 3) increased noise pollution which will aff~ lt)~:grb_u,ri~~-an.r;:I IJ?lerior of the school,sites, as well as support services; and 4) the· increased 'danger to the health arJd safety of the students a11d staff due to overcroY,'.ding . ot~~fiHlleiiqp!l (;\:.,·; , .... v,1<J• ··:·.,F•ix ,;• .. ·1.q;.,1 . ; ... , . •;,n·. .. ,. . . . •,•. . B-14 • N-54. Please refer to response N-1. N-55. Please refer lo response to comments N-50. The District has not provided any information related to this comment in the commer:it._leller .. ,.· N-55 li J\1~, ~i~!c:!~.~!~ ~n.~w,a,ge ~: Cify ~9 i~_Ejl,n:lify:~h~se f:!nd: other facto~s :iA the _Cl.iiniJl~tive dl • ·eff~c;ts ,s~,¢,~on 9f:,IJ:!!l;~l_ij., ;Th~,.OJs.,nct 1s:'V1lhng _lo,, help by provIdIng--any pertinent· (cont'. · 'inforr.nation,_.as_ well as 10,help,idenlify; other prime concerns. · · ·:• :-·: .. ·i:. ·,i~/u~:····,_-; -, -1~ :·• -•,.:;,.: ._r ;,:,. • · N-56 Failure of the. OEIR to Adequately-Identify Measures Necessary and Avallable to Mitigate the, i~pacts on the Dlstr:lct Public Resour~s .. Code.se_<:!ion 21~02 requires agencies to adopt feasible mitigation measures {or feasible environmentally superior alternatives) in order to substantially lessen or avoid otherwise significant adverse environmental impacts. {Pub. Resources Code, Sections 21002, 21081, subd. {a); CEQA Guidelines, Sections 15002, subd. {a){3), 15021, subd. {A){2), 15091, subd. {A)(1 ).) To effectuate this requirement, El Rs must set forth mitigation measures that decision-makers can adopt at the findings stage of the process. {Pub. Resources Code, Section 21100, subd. {a)(5); CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126, subd. {C).) Failure of the DEIR to Identify the Impacts on the District as Unavoidable Adverse Impacts for Which Feasible Mitigation Measures are Either Unavailable or Insufficient A draft EIR must describe those significant adverse environmental impacts for which either no mitigation or only partial mitigation is feasible. If the only means of avoiding such impacts would be to impose an alternative design on a proposed project, but the lead agency,· nevertheless, decides not to require such design change, then the EIR must . describe the implications of impacts involved and the agency's reasons for choosing lo tolerate them rather than requiring the alternative design. (Pub. Resources Code, Section 21100, subd. (A){2); CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126, subd. {b).) As discussed earlier in this document, the District believes there are several key issues N-57 the DEIR fails to address, namely the indirect Impacts of such a regional Project. Such a failure leads the District to question the adequacy of the DEIR in identifying possible impacts, as well as the adequacy of any proposed mitigation measures. Items which fall Into this category, either direct or indirect, can Include, but are not limited to the following: 1) health and safely of students affected by overcrowding; 2) insufficient analysis of the fiscal and financial situation of the District, both present and future; 3) impacts caused by increased traffic within District boundaries; 4) Increased and potentially hazardous noise levels; and 5) the effects of ir1'creased air pollution caused by busing students, as well as other sources of increased air pollution and ils effects upon District sites. II is under this contention that the District suggests the DEIR is inadequate and does not fully mitigate or provide reason for tolerating adverse impacts of Iha Project. The District suggests that the City modify the DEIR to address these concerns and provide adequate analysis and complementary mitigation measures. The DEIR will also need lo produce adequate discussion if no mitigation or partial mitigation is proposed and the Project opts to tolerate adverse effects. B-15 • • N-56. No significant impact has been identified; therefore, no mitigation measures arc proposed, and no discussion of mWgation measures is warranted. N-57. Please refer to response N-1. • N-58 N-59 Failure of the DEIR to Discuss Economic and Social Effects of the Project As previously identified here within, the DEIR fails to discuss direct or indirect economic and social Impacts resulting from the Project. The DEIR provides no information as to the current fiscal and financial standing of the District. Moreover, the DEIR fails to provide a quantitative analysis of the impacts associated with the new employees residing in a locale and accompanying inaeased student enrollments and associated costs of providing more facilities. The DEIR also fails to provide adequate discussion as to the potential development impact fees collected. The DEIR does not discuss the social impacts of the Project as they relate to the District. As indicated herein, the District expects the students to experience social and psychological problems associated with the overcrowding of the schools. The DEIR provides no analysis or mitigation measures for such an occurrence. The District suggests the DEIR be modified to include discussion and mitigation measures to address this problem. Failure of the DEIR to Accurately Describe the Authority of the District with Regards ~o thl!_.Statutory Development Fees · The DEIR provides no analysis of Statutory Development Fees. As such, the District would like to acknowledge that the developer fees are inadequate to cover costs incurred. The DEIR has not provided figures as to the actual effects and possible deficits incurred by the District as a result of employees residing in the locale.• The DEIR also fails to identify viable alternate funding sources to provide the difference in costs. The DEIR does not provide discussion on the changes expected to occur in the amounts of Statutory Developer Fees to be collected in the future. The DEIR avoids discussion 'as to the possibility and necessity of full mitigation negotiation as per the Mm,., l:ffilt and Murrieta decisions. The District feels that the discussion of developer fees as they apply to any and all districts, regardless of jurisdiction, Is inadequate and should be expanded to encompass these and any other pertinent infonnation. Failure of tti~ DEIR to Adeq~ately Evaluate thf! Impacts of Traffic Section_,5.S·of l!')e:DEJ~ _S§tS, forti:, .an. analysis of transportation and circulation. The study N-60 takes in!o 8C99,1,mt, a rnultjtl!q~ .. of, YJ!Qj:!l;>lti~ ~,:,~ pr9jections; :The study, however, does not · . discuss how the increase iri traffic and congestion will affect the District. The study looks ~t. ~.ot oply, pe~~, ~_yt ,9,ff, g~ak,tr,~,lfichJfl)~Hiea of <:oncem for the District is the AM peak •· · ;::,,r' · l'.l~µ,_~1 ,'f!1~s,~ .. ~~-~5i1cgi~~c1~ wi!/:);1!1,,tr~nsP9rtation o_Lstydents to the school sites. , There I ;--: ; ) ! i~ M p;f ~pJ~9J1;;i~~ !ic~~ifu.i~:.c;opgtf,llo~ -:y.i~ a,f!ect tb_e}i.me10.( tran_sporta~ion. The ,District • ;t;C, • ' '), ,-• B-16 • • N-58. CEQA statute and guidelines do not require the discussion or economic or social effects. No significant impacts to schools-have been identified. N-59. Please rerer to response N-26. N-60. Please rerer to response N-50. 1 J ' •, ,,: ;~: :•.'.: ,• ''•:j.1:;:q, '\ N-60 (cont'd.) N-61 N-62 d~~ np,! ~v,e lhe.te<:bnlcal expertise to make such calculations and will require the DEIR to:provide,suc:h information. The DEIR also fails to correlate the increase of traffic to the safety of the students as it relate)! t~,stu~_e!')t,pedestri~.i;-1~,,and bused students. It is likely that more incidences of accideoiit~~tween auto traffic and student pedestrians will increase, as well as the potential.between accidents with school buses and autos. ........ {•-:.-·;,;'1;~, ..... .:::.·~•,\\.~•~·-. The traffic analysis also omits the lo6ati~~ of projected housing units to be occupied by employees is various locales. The.District requests that such information be included in section 5.9, as well as induding said information in all pertinent sections as they relate to lhe above meniioned items arid comments herein. i .. _. . ' :-. . . . ,. ~--. Failure of the DEIR to Adequately Evaluate Impacts on Air Quality Section 5.2 of the DEIR sets forth an analysis of lhe air qualify impacts and mitigation measures relating to the Project. The District does not intend to conduct a thorough evaluation of the text of the DEIR with regards to air quality impacts. The District does not have specific air quality engineering capabilities, and does not feel it appropriate to retain an air quality engineer to conduct an analysis of the air quality discussion. The District does feel, however, that there are several key areas of ooncem that have been overlooked by the study. First, would be the increase of pollution caused by the transportation of stu_dents to alleviate the overcrowded conditions within the Project as a result of ir;iterdistrict transfers and any other District arrangements. Pollution will occur at t~e· pick-up and drop-off zones, as well as along the bus route. ·•:"! The-District would also request a more site specific study to determine the effects of de'teiiorated air quality in the vicinity of school and support facilities, as well as along the student pedestrian and bicyde routes. A special area of concern should be the sites near heavily traveled highways and any sites or pedestrian/bicycle routes near intersections expected to contain high ambient carbon monoxide levels. Failure of the DEIR to Adequately Evaluate the Impacts of Noise Section 5.8 of the DEIR sets forth an analysis and mitigation measures as they relate to the Increased noise levels generated by the Project. School sites have been locations which traditionally require low surrounding noise levels. As a general rule, the State requires that the interior dB a levels be no greater than 55 dBa, and the exterior levels at the property line be no greater than 65 dBa. And as such, increases in ambient noise levels as a result of increased traffic to, from, and in the Project may surpass the State levels. The effects of noise level Increases are identified as significant and unavoidable. Such a classification requires that the DEIR revisit the possible impacts to District properties and provide the necessary mitigation measures. 10/IMlS encusdlt 183o'lego.b B-17 N-61. Please refer to response N-50. N-62. Please refer to response N-50. • 0-1 ... • PETE WILSON.~- GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF PLANNING ANO RESEARCH t◄OO TENTH STAEf. T SACRA"4ENIO. (;A 9SSU OON Nl!U Cil'Y OF CARLSBAD 2075 U.S PAUillS DR, CA!tLSBAO, CA 9200, OCtober 12, 1995 ~S?S "'""4:1{1 subject: CARLSBAD RANCH SPKCIFIC PLAN AMe!IDHDIT~LECClt,A!ID SCH I 1 950Sl001 Dear DOil mru, Tho State clceringhow,e h4a aubm.lttcd cbe above named draft Envir011111ental Ia,pact Report (SIRJ to selected state agencies for ravlev. The review period ia nov clooed and the comoenta from the responding aguu,y(ieeJ ialarcJ enclosed. on tba enclosed Notico of Coa,pletio11_fort11 you vlll note that tho ClearinghoWle hae chocked the agencies that· havo coanented. Please review the Notice of Couq;,letion to enoure that :ybur com:nent package ia comple~•-It th• aOf'l'Qent package. io not tn order, please ,not~.fy the State Clearingho,u,■ im>edl.ataly, ae...,..1,er to refer to the project' a eightadJ.gJ.t State Clearinghouse number ao that"" 1n11y respond promptly. I i· ·. ~-. :/·::-: .)1\'; . Ple~ae·notc that Section 2110& of the California Public Reoourcea Code required that, ·•a reaponaJ.ble ageTtcy or otber public agency ehall only tnalce aub■tantive cOffl!M!nts regarding tboae aotJ.vitiea involved in a project· which ar• vl.thin an area of expertise of th• agency or Wicb are require~ to be car~i•d out or approved by the agency.• C°""""ntl.ng agencl.ee ere aloo re11111re4 by thin aectlon to aupport thair co....,nto with apecific documantatiod. These COffllll&nte are forvarded for your use in preparing your tin.al EIR. Should you· need more infonaation or elarificatlOA, ve rec:oaacnd that you contact the coneanting agency ( iea J • :,. : ;i,r1:;: i; ~ ,::• !i::;,,.:_;., . !•• \•~-: ".";4..,:· .. :1 ·, \ ~; .-1tw~~ ·i· i!!1..· 0-1. Comment noted. .. ·.• ... '---------------------------------- ""•IMl D-..crl9UH The ·pcopoeed proJOC't Ja the Carlsl>ad Ranch Sp•etric: Pl•n bend•ont •nd z .. 5/Cannoa 11.aaCI Joter~hange improve11.ent1. Tht •peettte plan vlu .iuov the d•votopment or otf1c•. reaoarch and d•v•lop11ea.t, roUt•d 1l9ht 11anut1cturln9, c-om11erch1. hotel. do■tlnnilon casorc ~t c.our•e• •artcultur •• • voc:attonal achool ca■pue, and LECOLAlfD Su1,~Bc-pa: "'-OINl!d"'> ('9hS)44S-06U L-..U...!£ .,,..__,.Aicn<>_ .1£..,L A""'7 a.. to ICM .L.!!.,-.!!!_ SCH C0MPI.W<CI! /<> . I). .,__, .... &al ....... , -.,,. C-t!IC:«I 'IS-OS° /t>O/ Nt-. ........ late tOalDtQU 61nc.lf)' t. Che t..e4A&NC1 AQMn/APCD...l..Z Cb»,,oa..~ ... /_LJ ProJttt Star to 1lh (oUowUlt State AlfO(Jc. BtatdC'oaa-cr Swt _°'->1_ Col/EPA --~ __ CAW-MpBd -SWR.CI: Om,u _SWIIQ:Ddla _SWRCll:WIJOa,llly ISWRCB:·....,-4....~'J/- Y..,MkC..-. c.-.lou . .... _c-- -~c-__ NAXC: __ ,oc _s.oua..Moii It ~l.-4cr- • Reviewing Agencies Checklist __ Resourcaa Agency Boatin& &. W&1C1Wa r• =2'cewu1 Comll\ission __ Couul Con~y Colondo R.•cr Board ~Consct\<&tioo · ish & Oame __ Fo,csay Zorn cc or lfi1l0rlc Prcsuvation __ Patb & Rccrucion __ Rcclamatlon __ S.F. Dor Conservation & l>cvclopmcn, Comml1Si011 __ W11a Ruow,:ea (DWR) euslnut, Transponallon & Housing __ Aeronaulit:, __ California Hith"'.aY l'auol V"c:ALTRANS Dul11c11_1_1_ · : ··Dcpanm<nl ofTranspon.alion Plannlng (he.1dquancn) ::. : ·Housing & Communi1y Devclopmetu -rti· . ..i..i)f:oOd .& Aorleullure J .?Jffi!:::ar• ... -,;·.' --. ----------- ,,,_ \!·' 'i ~ 1 1· 11111tt·&'~nsunier:_&ervlces l, ·:; .: ~Gcn~.:ai~1c.:.· . Q-1 '. _·_OLA (SclloOIS) . • kEY a m Documcnl seru by lead a gene y X • Documcni ...,, by SCH ✓ • Suggcsltd disll'lbudon Envlronmenul Affair• __ Air Resources Board .X::::-APCD/AQMD __ Calilomia Wa<1e Man,ge,nen1 Boasd __ SWRCB: Clean Waw 0'11111J SWRCB: Delta Unit _0WRCP: W11cr Quallry . SWRCB: Walet Righu ...l.::::'.:Reg!onalWQCBIJ_ {San Diego Youth & Adult correcuona __ Com:cdons Independent Co~mlsslons & Olfleu ___Energy Commiulon __ Native American Hcrltagc CommiSSion __ Public Ulllllia CGmffllsslon __ Santa Moalca Mounlllns Conservancy __ swe Landt comaiwlotl _. _Tahoe Regional Pbnnlng A&cncy __ Ow, ___ _,_ _________ _ (conl'd.) .:.. --------------------------------------- · Publlc Rovlew Pertoa (lo be rnlcd In by lead agency) I •' ' S141\Ulg Dale·------'---------- Si,nai..to --------------,--- .Endingl>alo ------------- ~~ ---------------------------~--,.------------------ 0-1 ATTACHMENT.A I , T~c: lollowlng Dlscrcllonary··Ac1ions' arc ·associ:itcd with the ·prnpo~ed project: . . ) ~ Gciicrnl r1~n and J;ocal Co:ist:il Pl:in. /\mcodmcnl (Mello II Segment and Agua 1-lcdionil:1' sc·gmcn1) Zone Change . C:irlsbad Ranch Specific Pi:in•A.;,cndmcnt SDG&e Specific Pl:in /\mcndmen1 Local F:icililics Management Plan /\mendmc·n1 (Zone 13) Cancellation of a L:ind Consctvalion Con1r:ic1 (Williamson Act) on portinn5 of the property and an amendment· to 1hc Preserve Ooundorles Masicr Tenttllive Map,:• . Non-Rosidcnlinl Plonn~d Unit Devclopmcnl Permit liillsidc Development Permit Development /\grccmenl Street V:ic:illon for :i portion of Armada Drive associated with proposed alignment ch:mg~s to this roadway (cxint'cS,) Oevelopmtnt Type/Project Description The Carlsbad Ronch Specific Pinn portion of the project consists of 447.40 acres consisting or vocalion:il school (Gemological' lns1i1u1e of America) on 2!1.93 net acres (SS0,000 sq. fL of building); research and developmcn1/of(ice on 40.01 net acres (800,000 sq. ft. total building): community hotel nnd retail on I0.4K net :icres (280 rooms, 20,000 sq. ft. retail); LEGOI.AND C:irlsh:id on 1211.32 net acres (42S,7~0 sq. rt. building area); resort on 52.8 net acres (700 suites); specially retail on 26.65 nct :icres (300.~lO) square feet; flower fields 53.42 acres; golf course on 72.07 net acres; and natural open space on JO net acres, Appro~im:11ely 24.2 acres outside the spec:ilic plan will be developed with golf course and pedestrian :ic:c:ess. /\ component of the proposed project c:onsi515 or improvements 10 the 1-S/Cllnnon Rood lmerc:hange, · Pr-cunt Land Use/Zoning/General Pion Use The project site is currently vocont wi1h portions being u1ill1.cd for agrlc:ullural ac1lvl1y. Portions or the site arc also being graded assuc:iotcd with a previous she pl:in approval within the site. The site is currently zoned·omcc, planned industrial, commerci:il-lourisl, public utilllies, general commerci:il, open spnce, nnd exclusive agriculture, Existing Oenernl Piao bnd uses consist of open ·space, office/planned industrial, travel recreation c:ommerc:ial, community commercial and unplanned orens. •