HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993-06-16; Planning Commission; Resolution 3515ll m 0
II
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3515
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING
CERTIFICATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT,
PLAN AMENDMENT, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP AND
HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR THE CALAVERA
HILLS MASTER PLAN LOCATED IN THE NORTHEAST
QUADRANT OF THE CITY IN LOCAL, FACILITIES
MANAGEMENT ZONE 7.
CASE NAME: CALAVERA HILLS MASTER PLAN
EIR 90-05, FOR A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, MASTER
CASE NO: EIR 90-05
WHEREAS, a verified application for certain property to wit:
Portions of Lots D, E, and J of the Rancho Agua Hedionda in
the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California,
according to the Map thereof No. 823 on file at the Office of
the County Recorder of San Diego County.
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request as provided bq
Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 16th day of June, 1993,
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request, and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering al:
testimony and arguments, examining the Environmental Impact Report, analyzing thc
information submitted by staff, and considering any written comments received, thc
Planning Commission considered all factors relating to the Environmental Impact Report
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commissior
as follows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B) That the Environmental Impact Report EIR 90-05 will be amended tc
include the comments and documents of those testifying at the public
hearing and responses thereto hereby found to be in good faith and reasor
by incorporating a copy of the minutes of said public hearings into thf
report. 1
ll
e 0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
C) That the Planning Commission hds and determines that the Environmental
Impact Report FJR 90-05 has been completed in conformance with tht
California hvironmental Quality Act, the state guidelines implementiq
said Act, and the provisions of Title 19 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code anc
that the Planning Commission has reviewed, considered, and evaluated tht
information contained in the report.
D) That the Enviromental Impact Report FJR 90-05 as evaluated in the staf
report (June 16,1993) reflects the independent judgement of the Planniq
Commission, is recommended for acceptance and certification as the Fina
Environmental Impact Report and that the Final Environmental Impact
Report as recommended is adequate and provides reasonable idormation
on the project and all reasonable and feasible alternatives thereto, inclum
no project.
E) That each and eveq significant environmental impact identified in the
Environmental Impact Report would be mitigated, overruled or counta
balanced by changes or alteration in the project which would mitigate
against said adverse impact or through the implementation of the
requirements of the Calavera Hills Master Plan Environmental Impad
Report Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
F) Although the Environmental Impact Report concludes that development oi
the Master Plan will create cumulative impacts to Air Quality, the Planniq
Commission finds that these impacts will be mitigated to less than
significant thou& application of the 1992 State Implementation Plan as
described in the staff report.
Conditions:
1. The Calavera Hills Master Plan Environmental Impact Report Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program is attached as Exhibit "A", dated June 16,1993,
and should be referred to for all conditions, mitigation measures, and monitoring
programs applicable to development of the balance of the Calavera Hills Masta
Plan per master plan amendment MP 150(G).
....
....
....
....
....
....
PC RES0 NO. 3515 -2-
e 0
1
2 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
3
4 the following vote, to wit:
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 16th day of June, 1993, bg
5
6
AYES: Chairperson Noble, Commissioners: Schlehuber, Betz,
Welshons, Savary & Erwin.
7 NOES: None.
8 ABSENT: Commissioner Hall.
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
ABSTAIN: None.
ATTEST:
-%m rc-
BAILEY NO&E, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
Y MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLE
PLANNING DIRECTOR
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 PC RES0 NO. 3515 -3-
Q a EXHIBIT “A”
JUNE 16,1993
Calavera Hills Master Plan
Environmental Impact Report
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impacts requiring monitoring:
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
J.
K.
Land Use
Landform AlterationNisual Quality
Circulation
Noise
Agriculture
Public Facilities
Biology
Archaeology
Paleontology
Hydrology
Air Quality
...
A. Land Use
Impact. Development in Villages R, U, W, X, and Y would cause significant land use
impacts. The intensity of development in Village R does not conform with the City’s
Growth Management Ordinance and would require off-site grading and open space
encroachment. Development in Village U would encroach upon General Plan designated
open space adjacent to approved Village T, and the proposed density of Villages W, X,
and Y would exceed the Growth Management Ordinance’s growth management control
point.
Mitigation. Land use impacts in Villages R, U, W, X, and Y are directly related to the
design of the villages. Mitigation for these impacts can be accomplished by a redesign of
the tentative maps. The following redesign measures would mitigate land use impacts to
below a level of significance:
Village R. Eliminate one of the seven proposed residential units. Six units are
allowed for this Village under the City’s Zone 7 Local Facilities Management
Plan (LFMP).
0
Land Use 2
Village. Redesign this village to eliminate development within General Plan
. open space adjacent to approved Village T and set this area aside as designated
project open space.
s W. X. and Y. Redesign these villages to delete four proposed residential
units from these villages so that the development conforms with the number of
units allowed by the Growth Management Ordinance.
Checkpoints. 1) Submit revised tentative maps for each of the above-referenced villages.
2) Approval of the revised tentative maps.
Responsible Party. 1) City Planning and Engineering Departments. 2) City Planning
and Engineering Departments and the decision maker.
Sanctions. No approval of tentative maps that do not implement the redesign
components described above and in the Alternatives section of the EIR.
- ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~ ~ ~____
B. Landform Alteratioflisual Quality
Impact. Significant landform alteration impacts would occur with development of
Villages H, K, L-2, U, W, and X due to lack of compliance with the Hillside
Development Ordinance (HDO) and the Calavera Hills Master Plan. Villages H, K, L-2,
U, W, and X propose grading on slopes of 40 percent slope or greater which is contrary
to regulations in the HDO. Villages K and L-2 also propose manufactured slopes which
exceed the %foot slope height allowed by the HDO. The grading for Villages K, L-2,
and U would also affect several major rock outcrops and ridgelines and would fill in the
heads of several finger canyons. Development of Villages W and X would impact
existing viewpoints. The Master Plan calls for preservation of these viewpoints.
Mitigation. Significant landform alteration impacts identified for Villages H, K, L-2, R,
U, W, and X are directly related to project design. Mitigation of these impacts involves
redesign of each of these villages. This redesign would include the following measures
to reduce landform alteration impacts:
1. Undulate manufactured slopes to simulate the natural landscape.
2. Reduce heights of manufactured slopes which exceed 30 feet. Redesign project
to attempt to retain a portion of the rock outcrops and minimize the filling of the
heads of the finger canyons.
3. Eliminate intrusion into areas of 40 percent slopes.
e 0 Landform AlterationNisual Quality 3
Checkpoints. 1) Submit revised tentative maps for each of the above-referenced villages.
2) Approval of the revised tentative maps.
Responsible Party. 1) City Planning and Engineering Departments. 2) City Planning
and Engineering Departments and the decision maker.
Sanctions. No approval of tentative maps that do not implement the redesign
components described above and in the Alternatives section of the EIR.
Impact. Significant visual impacts were identified for Villages K, U, W, X, and Y and
Carlsbad Village Drive. These impacts are associated with the heights and the long
linear character of slopes adjacent to these villages and roadway and the placement of
noise walls on these slopes. Significant adverse visual impacts due to these slopes and
walls would occur to travelers on College Boulevard and Carlsbad Village Drive.
Mitigation. Significant visu.al impacts in Villages K, U, W, X, and Y and for the
proposed improvement of Carlsbad Village Drive can be mitigated by implementation of
the proposed detailed landscaping plans for each village and the slopes along Carlsbad
Village Drive.
Checkpoints. 1) Submittal of tentative maps and landscaping plans. 2) Approval of
tentative map. 3) Occupancy permit.
Responsible Party. 1) City Planning Department. 2) City Planning Department and
decision maker. 3) City Planning and Engineering Departments.
Sanctions. No approval of tentative maps that do not include detailed landscaping plans
which implement the above requirements.
e e
Circulation 4
~~~ ~~~
C. Circulation
Impact. The only situation where impacts would exceed City standards are at the 1995
morning peak-hour traffic conditions at the El Camino ReaVTamarack Avenue
intersection level of service F.
Mitigation. At the Tamarack AvenueEl Camino Real intersection construct interim
modifications. These include providing dual left-turn lanes from southwest-bound
Tamarack Avenue to southeast-bound El Camino Real together with traffic signal
modifications. If City monitoring indicates failure of the dual left-turn lane mitigation,
then the Cannon Road link from College Boulevard to El Camino Real should be
completed with two travel lanes. Necessary intersection improvements and traffic signal
improvements would also be required. Once the Cannon Road/College Boulevard to El
Camino Real link is completed, the dual left-turn lanes at Tamarack Avenue and El
Camino Real should be removed and the traffic signal operation changed accordingly.
Checkpoints. Approval of fist tentative map to require interim modification and city
monitoring
Responsible Party. 1) City Planning and Engineering Departments. 2) City Engineering
Department.
Sanctions. 1) No approval of first tentative map. 2) Forfeiture of bond and no approval
of future tentative maps.
D. Noise
Impact. Noise levels produced by future traffic on College Boulevard and Carlsbad
Village Drive would exceed City standards in portions of each of the.proposed villages.
In addition, the differences between the pad elevations and configurations in the
proposed project and the pad elevations and configuration analyzed in the previous
reports prepared by Mestre-Greve could create significant noise impacts for Villages H,
W, X, and Y. Due to these differences, the noise barriers recommended in the
Mestre-Greve reports may not attenuate noise levels to below a level of significance.
e a Noise 5
Mitigation. Recommended mitigation pursuant to the Mestre-Greve reports for future
traffic noise levels within the boundaries of the Calavera Hills Master Plan are shown in
figures in Appendix D of the Calavera Hills ElR. The recommended barriers can be
walls, berms, or a combination wall/berm. In some areas, mechanical ventilation or
building upgrades are recommended to attenuate exterior noise levels to interior noise
levels below the City standard.
It is important to note [Rat because the pad elevations and configurations have changed in
tentative maps for Villages H, K, L-2, U, W, X, and Y, a future acoustical study which
analyzes these new configurations and recommends appropriate mitigation will be
necessary to supplement the Mestre-Greve analyses. These revised noise studies shall be
a condition of the individual tentative map approvals.
In order to ensure compliance with interior noise standards, an interior acoustical study
should be performed at the time of the building permit process. Possible mitigation
measures which could be required at the time of the building permit process include the
incorporation of mechanical ventilation and dual-glazed windows into the building plans.
Checkpoints. 1) Submittal of tentative maps with revised noise studies, as necessary. 2)
Approval of tentative map. 3) Issuance of building permits subsequent to inspection of
constructed improvements.
Responsible Party. 1) City Planning Department. 2) City Planning Department and
decision maker. 3) City Planning and Engineering Departments.
Sanctions. 1) No approval of tentative maps that do not include the necessary additional
exterior and interior noise studies. 2) No issuance of subsequent permits.
~~~
Impact. The area adjacent to future off-site College Boulevard between Cannon Road
and Carlsbad Village Drive is designated in the General Plan for residential development.
Noise levels which would be produced by traffic on this future alignment of off-site
College Boulevard could exceed City standards at future residential areas located within
450 feet of the roadway.
Mitigation. Any future development planned within 450 feet of the proposed off-site
alignment of College Boulevard between Cannon Road and the southern boundary of the
proposed project would require preparation of a more detailed acoustical analysis. The
analysis would be needed to more accurately determine the noise environment based on
the detailed grading plans and to recommend appropriate mitigation measures.
a e Noise 6
Checkpoints. 1) Submittal of future tentative maps with revised noise studies, as
necessary. 2) Approval of tentative map. 3) Issuance of building permits.
Responsible Party. 1) City Planning Department. 2) City Planning Department and
decision maker. 3) City Planning and Engineering Departments.
Sanctions. No approval of tentative maps that do not include the noise studies.
E. Agriculture
Impact. The off-site construction of College Boulevard would make access to utilized
prime agricultural soils more difficult.
Mitigation. The tentative map for Villages W, X, and Y shall be conditioned to ensure
that access be provided to off-site College Boulevard from the agricultural operations to
the north.
Checkpoints. 1) Submittal of tentative maps. 2) Approval of tentative maps.
Responsible Party. 1) City Planning and Engineering Departments. 2) City Planning
and Engineering Departments.
Sanctions. No approval of tentative maps that do not provide access to agricultural
operations.
F. Public Facilities
Impact. The existing sewer system serving the watersheds which contain Villages H, K,
and L-2 and portions of Villages U and Y would not be adequate to support the additional
development planned within the area. If new sewer facilities are not constructed to
service these villages, adverse impacts would occur.
The watershed containing Villages W and X and portions of Village U and Y have no
existing sewer facilities because there is no existing development in this area. New
facilities would be required to service these areas.
a. a Public Facilities 7
Mifigation. The LFMP requires that any development occurring subsequent to 1989
must provide for certain upgraded and new sewer facilities prior to issuance of building
or grading permits. In addition, a financing mechanism is required to be provided which
would guarantee funding to upgrade sewer line North Agua Hedionda Trunk 1B prior to
issuance of the 509 building permit in the zone. Villages Q and T are planned to be
constructed prior to the proposed project and will use up the remaining capacity in the
line. All other conditions stated in the LFMP should also be fulfilled.
There are no facilities which currently exist to service villages Watershed C, which
contains the proposed Villages U, W, X, and Y. Prior to issuance of building permits for
development of these villages, the South Agua Hedionda Trunk system shown in Figure
33 of the Final EIR will be required to be constructed so that sewer systems will be
available to serve this part of the project.
Checkpoints. 1) Approval of tentative map. 2) Approval of grading and improvement
plans. 3) Inspection of constructed improvements.
Responsible Party. 1) City Planning and Engineering Departments. 2) City Engineering
Department and Carlsbad Municipal Water District. 3) City Engineering Department and
Carlsbad Municipal Water District.
Sanctions. 1) No approval of tentative' map without required improvements. 2) No
issuance of subsequent permits.
~ ~~~~
Impact. There are no transmission lines currently located to serve the undeveloped areas
of the Calavera Hills Master Plan area. Adequate water distribution facilities would need
!.- be provided to the new developments prior to their occupancy.
Existing water transmission lines lie beneath the proposed alignments for College
Boulevard and Carlsbad Village Drive near their intersection. There are also water
transmission lines underneath Villages K and L-2 which originate from the reservoir.
Grading and construction in the areas over these major pipelines could cause adverse
impacts to water service in the area.
Mitigation. The LFMP requires that any development occurring subsequent to 1989
must provide for certain upgraded and new water facilities prior to issuance of building
or grading permits. A water distribution system to deliver water to the new residences
shall be in place prior to issuance of occupancy permits. Also, the applicant shall obtain
approval of construction and grading plans with the Carlsbad Municipal Water District
' prior to issuance of a grading permit.
..
a 0 Public Facilities X
Checkpoints. 1) Approval of tentative map. 2) Approval of grading and improvement
plans. 3) Inspection of constructed improvements.
Responsible Party. 1) City Planning and Engineering Departments. 2) City Engineering
Department and Carlsbad Municipal Water District. 3) City Engineering Department.
Sanctions. 1) No approval of tentative map without required improvements. 2) No
issuance of subsequent permits.
G. Biology
~~~ ~~ ~
General Note. To ensure the implementation of all mitigation for potential impacts to
biological resources, the applicant shall, upon submittal of grading permits, show
evidence to the City Planning Department that a qualified consulting biologist has been
retained to monitor all relevant mitigation, assure compliance with mitigation
requirements, supervise implementation of mitigation, and file a report on mitigation
compliance with the Planning Director upon completion of major components of biology
mitigation requirements.
In order to implement the following mitigation measures, the Planning Department shall
require that the revisions are included as conditions of the tentative map approvals. The
necessary mitigation must then be included in the General Notes for the project's
improvement plans which are let out to bid. The consulting biologist hired for the project
shall attend at least one pregrading conference to become acquainted with the grading
and construction schedule and familiarize construction contractors with the required
biological mitigation measures. The consulting biologist shall also monitor construction
in the field in areas of biological sensitivity. He or she shall be empowered to
temporarily halt, divert, or redirect construction activity to ensure that impacts to
biological resources are minimized. Prior to construction in areas of biological
sensitivity such as riparian areas, the consulting biologist shall stake and flag, or
otherwise mark, the sensitive areas as out-of-bounds for construction work, restrict access
to such areas by the use of temporary snow fencing, inform construction workers about
the out-of-bounds area, and monitor the work as it proceeds. Periodic reports
documenting the results of the monitoring shall also be prepared and submitted to the
Planning Department.
e e Biology 9
Impact. Throughout the master plan, 7.2 acres of sensitive Diegan coastal sage scrub,
0.1 acre of riparian scrub/wetland, and an undetermined quantity of at least 0.3 acre of
native grassland containing needlegrass and thread-leaved brodiaea would be impacted.
Coastal sage scrub impacts would occur at Village H (0.7 acre), Village K (3.8 acres),
and Village L-2 (2.7 acres). The 0.7 acre of coastal sage scrub impacts for Village H
would result from the full widening of Carlsbad Village Drive. Sensitive plant impacts
would include 0.3 acre of thread-leaved brodiaea habitat, 4.7 acres of California adolphia
habitat, and 5.7 acres of western dichondra habitat. One breeding pair of California
gnatcatchers and at'least two San Diego homed lizards and two orange-throated whiptails
would be directly impacted by project development. In addition, one California
gnatcatcher pair and two northern harriers would be indirectly impacted by construction
in Villages H and K, respectively.
Mitigation. Mitigation can be categorized for impacts attributable to all the villages and
impacts associated with the separate villages. As described below, mitigation for these
impacts can be accomplished through redesigning the respective tentative maps.
All Villages. Mitigation for significant impacts to thread-leaved brodiaea will be
accomplished with the City's acceptance of an interim 34-foot-wide roadway with
no parking permitted on either side. Such a roadway is being proposed by the
City to be added to the master plan requirements for Calavera Hills and would be
made a condition of the tentative map approval for Village H. Full widening to
secondary arterial standards would be constructed by the City if monitoring
showed it to be necessary at a future date. All traffic projections indicate that the
two-lane roadway would not fall below performance standards at build-out
conditions. If full widening is required in the future, additional environmental
work would be required to identify specific mitigation measures. A stand of
eucalyptus trees would be preserved in the finger that extends east into the center
of Village H. The reduction of impacts into Village H from the road widening
would also increase the size of usable open space area for observed species,
including the California gnatcatcher pair.
Required ultimate or interim improvements shall be designed and guaranteed for
construction prior to recordation of the first final map or issuance of a building or
grading permit for projects identified as necessitating the improvements.
Construction and City acceptance of the improvements shall occur prior to
occupancy of the first affected unit.
m a - Biology 10
Yillage. A spring survey will be required as a condition of approval of the
Village H tentative map to determine the presence or absence of thread-leaved
brodiaea along the proposed trail alignment. If thread-leaved brodiaea is found,
the trail will need to be realigned to avoid impacts. To reduce the open space
impacts caused by trail construction, trail grading shall be minimized and the trail
shall be realigned to follow the natural contours of the topography. The reduction
of open space impacts resulting from the above measures would also benefit the
California gnatcatcher pair that was observed using the village area. Remaining
undeveloped areas should be placed in dedicated natural open space under the
jurisdiction of the city of Carlsbad.
The EIR identified 0.7 acre of coastal sage scrub impacts resulting from the
development of Village H but did not require any mitigation since the impact was
not determined to be significant. In addition, the 0.7 acre of impact was
associated with the full widening of Carlsbad Village Drive. The proposed
construction of a 34-foot-wide interim roadway to mitigate thread-leaved
brodiaea impacts would also reduce the impacts to coastal sage scrub. However,
since the gnatcatcher is now listed as a threatened species, the 0.7 acre of coastal
sage scrub impact requires the applicant to have the Village H tentative map
reviewed as necessary by any applicable resource agencies. A condition will be
placed on the tentative map requiring review and/or approval by appropriate
resource agencies.
Villaye K. The California gnatcatcher was listed as a federal threatened species
by the Department of the Interior on March 25, 1993. Because of the listing of
the species, the project must be reviewed and approved by the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, California Department of Fish and Game, andor other
applicable resource agencies to obtain the appropriate permits for the 3.8 acres of
impacts to coastal sage scrub. The remaining undeveloped lands within the
village shall be dedicated to the City of Carlsbad as natural open space.
The City of Carlsbad is currently preparing a multi-species conservation plan
which will recommend areas of habitat to be acquired for the California
gnatcatcher. Although the plan is still conceptual, approval of the Village K
tentative map, along with each of the other maps affecting gnatcatcher habitat,
may provide funding for the study. The necessary contribution shall be
determined by the Planning Director and shall be provided prior to the issuance of
any grading permit.
Alternatively, should an actual conservation plan be adopted prior to the
commencement of any grading for the tentative maps, the project applicant will
be required to adhere to the measures (e.g., habitat acquisition) recommended in
the plan for the California gnatcatcher.
e e - Biology 11
These above measures shall be a condition of approval of the tentative map.
m J.-3.. Mitigation for significant Diegan coastal sage scrub impacts
(2.7 acres) would be similar to those for Village K. This mitigation measure shall
be a condition of approval of the tentative map. Remaining undeveloped land
shall be dedicated as natural open space.
Villaye U. To mitigate for the significant biological impacts, the undeveloped 37
acres shall be dedicated as a natural open space easement. This would also
protect 0.6 acre of Palmer's grappling hook, 1.0 acre of California adolphia, and
the areas where Greene's ground cherry was observed in 1977.
pes W. X. and X. Remaining undeveloped land (52 acres) should be
dedicated as open space to the city of Carlsbad. This preservation would also
preserve 6.1 acres of western dichondra and 6.5 acres of California adolphia.
Checkpoints. 1) Submittal of revised tentative maps. 2!) Approval of the revised
tentative maps. 3) Prior to grading permits. 4) Prior to construction causing impacts.
Responsible Party. 1) City Planning Department. 2) City Planning and Engineering
Departments and decision maker. 3) City Planning and Engineering Departments. 4)
City Planning Department and consulting biologist.
Sanctions. 1) No approval of any tentative map without proper mitigation conditions.
2) No issuance of building or occupancy permits until consulting biologist's reports are
submitted to the Planning Department.
Impact. The College Boulevard extension would impact high-quality riparian woodlands
(0.7 acre of sycamore alluvial woodland).
Mitigation. Create wetlands at a 3:l ratio within the proposed flood control channel
south of the project site. Any habitat creation shall ble accomplished under the
supervision of a consulting biologist. Any impacts to the sycamore alluvial woodland
will require agreement with the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) under
Section 1601 of the Fish and Game Code and will require notification of the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. These agencies may
require mitigation subsequent to approval of the project by the local agency. Grading
plans for the project must stipulate that any permits or agreements from state or federal
resource protection agencies must be secured before any co:nstruction activity begins in
the affected areas of the project.
a e Biology 12
Checkpoints. Approval of the first tentative map or any grading permit affecting
wetlands,
Responsible Pam. City Planning and Engineering Departments, California Department
of Fish and Game, and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Sanctions. No approval of any tentative map.
H. Archaeology
Impact. Archaeology site SDI-5416/SDM-W-1292 contains eight bedrock milling
features and a disturbed shell midden deposit. Because no testing has been accomplished
at site SDI-5416, it is not known if the site represents a significant resource as defined by
CEQA. While all of these features lie outside of the project property, there is a potential
for impacts due to the proximity of grading proposed for thle current project associated
with College Boulevard.
Mitigation. Impacts to this site can be avoided by identifyiqg the site during the grading
operations. Protection in the form of staking and fllagging during grading is
recommended to achieve mitigation of potential impacts. This mitigation measure will
be implemented and adhered to as part of the College Boulevard grading permit.
Checkpoints. 1) Submittal of College Boulevard grading permit. 2) Approval of College
Boulevard grading permit. 3) Inspection prior to grading operations.
Responsible Party. 1) City Engineering Department. 2) City Planning and Engineering
Departments and decision maker. 3) City Planning and Engineering Departments.
Sanctions. No approval of grading and improvement plans for off-site College
Boulevard without proper mitigation conditions.
I. Paleontology
Impact. Project grading in Villages H and W and the southern one-half of the proposed
alignment for off-site College Boulevard could result in thle destruction of significant
fossils on the project site.
e 0 - Paleontology 13
Mitigation. The following mitigation measures would reduce the adverse
paleontological impacts of grading in Villages H and W and the southern one-half of the
alignment of off-site College Boulevard to below a level of significance. These
mitigation measures shall be carried out in conformance with the City's adopted
paleontological mitigation program and shall be conditions of approval of Villages H and
W and the College Boulevard grading permit.
1. A qualified paleontologist shall be retained to perform periodic inspections of
excavations and, if necessary, salvage exposed fossils. The frequency of
inspections will depend on the rate of excavations, the materials being excavated,
and the abundance of fossils.
2. The paleontologist shall be allowed to divert or direct grading in the area of an
exposed fossil to facilitate evaluation and, if necessary, salvage.
3. Because of the small nature of some fossils present in these rock units, matrix
samples should be collected for processing through fine mesh screens.
4. Provisions for preparation and curation shall be made before the fossils are
donated to their final repository.
5. All fossils collected should be donated to a museum with a systematic
paleontological collection, such as the San Diego Natural History Museum.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall provide verification that a
qualified paleontologist has been retained to implement the monitoring program. This
verification shall be presented in a letter from the paleontologist to Planning Department
and, the City Engineer.
Checkpoints. 1) Submittal of applicable tentative map. 2) Approval of- applicable
tentative map. 3) Report by consulting paleontologist submitted to the City Planning
Department.
Responsible Party. 1) City Planning Department. 2) City Planning and Engineering
Departments and decision maker. 3) City Planning and Engineering Departments and
consulting paleontologist.
Sanctions. 1) No approval of applicable tentative maps without mitigation plan. 2) No
building permits to be issued until mitigation report by consulting paleontologist is
submitted to City Planning Department.
0 a - Hydrology 14
J. Hydrology
~ ~ ~~
Impact. Basin IV would experience a substantial 9.9 percent increase in runoff, which
could be an adverse impact.
Mitigation. The increase in runoff in Basin IV would be mitigated by any of the
proposed alternatives in the Cannon Road EIR, which all include a detention and
Villages Q and T in Calavera Hills are currently obtaining financing for construction of
these basins. Mitigation of the increased discharge from Basin IV can also be
accomplished by construction of an on-site floodwater detention basin.
Checkpoints. 1) Submittal of applicable tentative maps. 2) Approval of applicable
tentative maps. 3) Inspection of constructed facilities.
desilting basin at the future Cannon RoadlCollege Bou1ev:ud intersection. Approved
Responsible Party. 1) City Planning and Engineering Departments. 2) City Planning
and Engineering Departments. 3) City Engineering Department.
Sanctions. 1) No approval of applicable tentative map without appropriate runoff control
measures. 2) No issuance of future permits without verification of constructed detention
facilities.
~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~~
Impact. The proposed residential developments would a.dversely impact all of the
drainages by increasing the amount of urban pollutants flowing into the water.
Mitigation. Grass swales and filter strips are recommended in the drainage channels to
control the influx of residential pollutants into the water. These shall be shown on the
landscape plans.
Checkpoints. 1) Submittal of tentative maps with landscape plans. 2) Approval of
tentative maps with landscape plans. 3) Inspection of the constructed facilities.
Responsible Party. 1) City Planning and Engineering Departments. 2) City Planning
and Engineering Departments. 3) City Engineering Department.
Sanctions. 1) No approval of applicable tentative map without appropriate pollution
control measures. 2) No issuance of future permits without verification of constructed
facilities.
0 0
Hydrology 15
Impact. The time of greatest erosion and sedimentation impa.ct is during the construction
stage. Without mitigation, these impacts would be considered significant.
Mitigation. Mitigation for increased erosion and sedimentation impacts during the
construction phase would include the design and construction of temporary desilting
basins at the site. These basins will be shown on the grading plans to the satisfaction of
the Engineering Department prior to issuance of grading permits.
Checkpoints. 1) Submittal of grading plan for remaining areas to be developed in the
master plan or individual tentative maps. 2) Approval of grading plan or individual
tentative maps 3) Inspection of the constructed temporary facilities.
ResponsibEe Party. 1) City Planning and Engineering Departments. 2) City Planning
and Engineering Departments. 3) City Engineering Department.
Sanctions. 1) No approval of a grading plan or applicable tentative map without
appropriate erosion control measures. 2) No issuance of future permits or tentative map
approvals without verification of constructed facilities. 3) Inspection of the site during
construction.
~~ ~~
Impact. A previous study has determined that downstream Agua Hedionda Creek is
inadequate for the 100-year flood. This section of the creek flows south of and parallel to
Cannon Road. Basins 11, lII, and IV, which include Villages H, R, U, W, X, and Y, drain
directly or indirectly into this creek. Development of these villages would be impacted
by the inadequate carrying capacity of Agua Hedionda Creek.,
Mitigation. Development is restricted in the Calavjera Creek drainage until
improvements can be made to the section of the creek cl~annel located immediately
downstream of the future College BoulevardKannon Road intersection. Basins 11, HI,
and IV in the project are part of this drainage and include Villages H (southern portion),
R, U, W, X, and Y. The City of Carlsbad LFMP for Zone 7 requires that prior to
recordation of the first final map or issuance of a grading or building permit,
developments within Basins 11, III, and IV shall contribute a proportional share for
construction of facilities listed in the LFMP.
Checkpoints. 1) Submittal of applicable tentative maps. 2) Approval of applicable
tentative maps. 3) Inspection of constructed facilities.
Responsible Party. 1) City Planning and Engineering Departments. 2) City Planning
and Engineering Departments. 3) City Engineering Department.
. e e Hydrology 16
Sanctions. 1) No approval of applicable tentative map without contribution to LFMP
facilities. 2) No issuance of future permits without verification of constructed drainage
facilities.
~~
K. Air Quality
Impact. Project development .would result in long-term air pollutant emissions of carbon
monoxide, sulfur oxides, nitrogen oxides, hydrocarbons (or reactive organic gases), and
particulate matter. When considered with other new residelntial development in the air
basin, the cumulative effects of project development would be to contribute to
nonattainment of clean air standards.
Mitigation. Application of tactics contained in the 1992 State Implementation Plan. The
project includes provisions for pedestrian circulation, mass transit, and bicycle lanes.
Checkpoints. 1) Submittal of applicable tentative maps. 2) Approval of applicable
tentative maps.
Responsible Party. 1) City Planning and Engineering Departments. 2) City Planning
and Engineering Departments.
Sanctions. 1) No approval of applicable tentative maps without tactics shown on the
maps. 2) No issuance of future permits without improvements in place.