HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-09-20; Planning Commission; Resolution 3810e 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
I
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3810
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION
MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR A
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, ZONE CHANGE,
LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT, LOCAL
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT, SITE
DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT
PERMIT TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 138
DWELLING UNIT APARTMENT PROJECT ON
PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE
NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE ALGA
ROAD/COBBLESTONE ROAD INTERSECTION, IN
LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN ZONE 5.
CASE NAME LAUREL TREE APARTMENTS
CASE NO: GPA 95-01/ZC 95-01jLCPA 95-02/
LFMP 87-05(B)/SDP 95-01/HDP 95-01
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 20th day of Sept
1995, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said requr
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all tes
and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the information submitted by st;
considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission considered all
relating to the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the P1
Commission as follows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the P1
Commission hereby recommends APPROVAL of the Mitigated Nt
Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program accorc
Exhibit "MND", dated July 7, 1995, and "PII", dated June 30, 1995, at
hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following findings:
Findings:
1. The initial study shows that this project could have a significant effect 1
environment, however, there will not be a significant effect in this case becal
7
2
3 2.
4
5 3.
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
” 6.
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23 2.
24
25
26
4.
5.
co
1.
-
27 3-
28
0 0
mitigation measures identified in the initial study have been added as condil
approval for this project.
The streets, as conditioned to be improved by this project, are adequate in
handle traffic generated by the proposed project.
Sensitive resources, which are located onsite or located so as to be signi.
impacted by this project, will be adequately mitigated.
The Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad has reviewed, analyz’
considered MitigatedNegative Declaration (GPA95-01/ZC95-01/LCPA95-02,
87-05(B)/SDP 95-01/HDP 95-01), the environmental impacts therein identil
this project and said comments thereon, and the Mitigation Monitoril
Reporting Program, prior to recommending approval of the project. Based
EIA Part-I1 and comments thereon, the Planning Commission finds that ther
substantial evidence the project will have a significant effect on the environmc
hereby recommends approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
The Planning Commission does hereby find that the Mitigated Negative Deck
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program have been prepared in acco
with requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, the State Guid
and the Environmental Protection Procedures of the City of Carlsbad.
The Planning Commission finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration (GI
Ol/ZC 95-01/LCPA 95-02/LFWP 87-05(B)/SDP 95-01/HDP 95-01) reflec
independent judgment of the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad.
(GPA 95-01/ZC 95-01/LCPA 95-02/LFMP 87-05(B)/SDP 95-01/HDP 95-0
‘nditions:
This project shall comply with all conditions and mitigation measures whi
required as part of the approved (Mitigated Negative Declaration and Miti
Monitoring and Reporting Program, Site Development Plan, General
Amendment, Zone Change, Local Coastal Program Amendment, Local Fat
Management Plan Amendment, and Hillside Development Permit), as contai
Planning Commission Resolution No@) 3810, 3811, 3812, 3813, 3814, 3815, :
To offset the conversion of prime agricultural land to urban land uses, p
requirements of the Mello I1 Local Coastal Program (LCP), the applicani
provide payment of an agricultural mitigation fee, the amount of which shall
less than $5,000 nor more than $10,000 for each net converted acre. The amc
the fee shall be determined prior to the issuance of grading permits and sh
consistent with the provisions of Carlsbad’s LCP.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall establish a pro<
notify, to the satisfaction of the Planning Director and City Attorney, all 01
users or tenants of this project that this area is subject to dust, pesticides and
associated with adjacent agricultural operations, and that the owners, use1
PC RES0 NO. 3810 -2-
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
I
e 0
tenants occupy this area at their own risk.
4. All project grading and site preparation shall comply with the recommendat
the Preliminary Soils and Geotechnical Investigation for the project, prepa
San Diego Soils Engineering, dated August, 1985 and any subsequent amend
on file in the Planning Department.
5. Compliance with APCD Rules 51 (The “Nuisance” Rule,), 52 (Particulate M
and 54 (Dust and Fumes) of the Air Quality Chapter will effectively mitigal
impacts associated with project grading operations. A note shall be placed
grading permit stipulating that the following measures shall be required to 2
compliance with these rules, and reduce construction-related air pollutants:
a. The watering of all surfaces being graded and haul routes shall be re’
during dry weather conditions.
b. All unpaved areas shall be revegetated according to approved landscapt
as soon as possible after grading.
C. All construction-related traffic shall be restricted to routes that are
controlled, and reduced speeds shall be maintained for all hau
construction vehicles.
d. All construction activities shall be limited during periods of high win4
e. All heavy-duty, diesel-powered construction equipment shall be op
according to manufacturers suggested operating instructions (with th(
injection timing retarded to recommended levels for NOx emission
which would not result in excessive visible smoke emissions) in OP
control pollutant emissions.
f. Construction equipment shall be subject to regularly schc
maintenancehune-ups, and be turned off when not being utilized to
excessive idling emissions.
g. The application of architectural coating and cut-back asphalt shall adh
APCD Rules 67.0 and 67.7, to effectively control other construction-r
emissions of air pollutants.
h. The Engineering Department shall monitor for compliance during all g
operations of the project.
6. The project applicant shall obtain and distribute to tenants annual informatior;
Caltrans and North County Transit regarding the availability of 1
transportation, ride-sharing , and transportation pooling services in the area
information shall also be provided in the rental office of this project.
7. Prior to approval of a grading permit, a detailed soils testing and analysis 1
PC RES0 NO. 3810 -3-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
I
I
l
e 0
shall be prepared by a registered soils engineer and submitted to the P1
Department and County Health Department for review and approval. The
shall identify a range of possible mitigation measures to remediate any pott
significant public health impacts if hazardous pesticides or other chemic;
detected at high concentrations in the soil.
8. All project runoff shall conform with the National Pollution Discharg
Elimination System Permit requirements, pursuant to San Diego Regional
Quality Control Board Order No., 90-42, adopted by City Council Resolutil
90-235. The applicant shall provide best management practices to reduce a
pollutants to an acceptable level prior to discharge to Encinas Creek and
sensitive areas. Plans for such improvements shall be approved by the City Er
prior to the issuance of grading permits. Drainage water from buildings, :
parking lots and landscaped areas shall be disposed of through storm dn
otherwise in a manner that will avoid any runoff onto agricultural areas H
planted or fallow.
9. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the project shall comply with the (
Carlsbad’s standards for solid waste management.
10. Prior to the approval of a grading permit, the developer shall provide an irrev
offer of dedication to the City of Carlsbad for a trail easement (20’ wide) fol
Segment #30, shown on the Site Development Plan.
11. .82 acres of Coastal Sage Scrub (CSS) habitat will be directly impacted 1
project. One pair of California gnatcatchers (Polioptila californica) was ob
on the property using this CSS. The impacted CSS habitat is regarded a
quality. Pursuant to the Interim Take provisions of the 4d Rule for the Cali
gnatcatchers, the project shall be required to mitigate this take of a p
California gnatcatchers and .82 acres of CSS by acquiring for preser
comparable quality habitat at a 2:l ration. The applicants proposal to mitigaj
impact by purchasing for preservation 1.64 acres of CSS habitat within thc
quality, coastal sage scrub area found in the Carlsbad Highlands mitigation
shall require the approval of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
California Department of Fish and Game, and the City of Carlsbad. Prior
issuance of grading permits, the project applicant shall be required to consul
and obtain necessary “take” permits from the USFWS, the California Depa~
of Fish and Game and the City of Carlsbad for impacts to the pair of Cali
gnatcatchers and the .82 acres of CSS.
12. Implementation of this project shall require the construction of Alga Road fro
project site to Palomar Airport road to the north. The alignment of Alga Ro
it crosses Encinas Creek, would impact 870 square feet of riparian vegel
Mitigation for this impact will require the replacement of this riparian vege
at a 3:l ratio (2,610 square feet). Prior to the issuance of grading permil
Wildlife Service regarding specific mitigation for impacts to 870 square f
riparian vegetation. The project applicant shall be required to impleme
PC RES0 NO. 3810 -4-
~ project applicant shall be required to: consult with the CDFG, and the U.S. Fia
~
0 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
biological mitigation measures imposed by the respective wildlife agencies.
13. The construction of Alga Road across Encinas Creek will require a 1603 Ste
Alteration Permit from the California Department of Fish and Game (CDP
a 404 Permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE). Developel
prior to issuance of a grading permit, provide proof satisfactory to the P1;
Director of such permits or exemption therefrom.
14. Prior to the issuance of building permits for this project, the project applicar
be required to submit a supplemental acoustical analysis which identifies s
mitigation measures to reduce interior noise levels to less than 45 dBA CNI
15. Prior to the occupancy of any of the dwelling units, the developer shall cons
minimum 6 foot tall noise barrier(wal1) along the top of the fill slope ala
eastern side of Alga Road, consistent with the recommendations of the Aco
Analysis Report (Ogden Environmental and Energy Services, April 14,1995)
project. The wall shall be designed with pilasters, offset with tree well
landscaped to provide visual screening of the wall as viewed from the roadw?
landscaping and design of this wall shall be included on the landscape plans
project, and shall require the review and approval of the Planning Director.
16. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the developer shall prepare and re
Notice that this property is subject to overflight, sight, and sound of aircraft opt
from Palomar Airport in a form meeting the approval of the Planning Direct
the City Attorney.
17. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the Developer shall prepare and re
notice that this property may be subject to noise impacts from the propose(
Road Transportation Corridor in a form meeting the approval of the P1:
Director and the City Attorney.
18. The project shall comply with all conditions and mitigation required by the i
Local Facilities Management Plan, approved by the City Council on August 4
incorporated herein and on file in the Planning Department and any f~
amendments to the Plan made prior to the issuance of building permits.
19. Prior to hauling dirt or construction materials to or from any constructia
within this project., the applicant shall submit to and receive approval from th
Engineer for the proposed haul route. The applicant shall comply with all cond
and requirements the City Engineer may impose with regards to the h;
operation. If the source of imported dirt is within the limits of the City of Car
a grading permit will be required for the import site.
20. Plans, specifications and supporting documents for all street and traffic I
improvements shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Prior
issuance of grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs first, the app
shall install, or agree to install and secure with appropriate security as provic
law, the following improvements:
PC RES0 NO. 3810 -5-
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
e 0
a. full width grading of Alga Road from Palomar Airport Road to Cobb
Road;
b. full width grading of “A Street along the project frontage;
c. one-half street improvements for Alga Road from the projects no
property online to the existing Sudan Interior Mission driveway, Y
appropriate transition to facilitate access to the Sudan Interior Missia
Alga Road;
d. one-half street plus 12 foot improvements for “A” Street along the
frontage;
e. future Improvement Agreement for Cobblestone Road;
f. upgrade of the existing traffic signal at the Alga RoadPalomar Airpol
intersection; and
g. two lanes plus improvements to Alga Road from Palomar Airport Roac
Street.
21. Prior to the issuance of building permit, the Developer shall submit evidencc
Planning Director that impacts to school facilities have been mitiga
conformance with the City’s Growth Management Plan to the extent permi
applicable state law. If the mitigation involves a financing scheme such as a
Roos Community Facilities District which is inconsistent with the City’s (
Management Plan including City Council Policy Statement No. 38, the De
shall disclose to future owners in the project, to the maximum extent possil
existence of the tax and that the school district is the taxing agency respons
the financing district.
22. Paleontology:
a. prior to any grading of the Project site, a paleontologist shall be reta
perform a walkover survey of the site and to review the grading p
determine if the proposed grading will impact fossil resources. A cop:
paleontologist’s report shall be provided to the Planning Director I
issuance of a grading permit;
b. a qualified paleontologist shall be retained to perform periodic inspec
the side and to salvage exposed fossils. Due to the small nature of som
fossils present in the geologic strata, it may be necessary to collect
samples for laboratory processing through fine screens. The paleon
shall make periodic reports to the Planning Director during the ;
process;
C. the paleontologist shall be allowed to divert or direct grading in the
PC RES0 NO. 3810 -6-
e 0
7
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
I shall make periodic reports to the Planning Director during the
process;
c. the paleontologist shall be allowed to divert or direct grading in thc
an exposed fossil in order to facilitate evaluation and, if necessary!
artifacts;
d. all fossils collected shall be donated to a public, non-profit institut
a research interest in the materials, such as the San Diego Natural
Museum;
e. any conflicts regarding the role of the paleontologist and the
activities of the project shall be resolved by the Planning Director 2
Engineer.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting
Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 20th
September, 1995, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Welshons, Commissioners Savary, Noble,
and Compas.
NOES: Commissioners Erwin and Monroy.
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
~ ATTEST , A
KIM ~VELSHONS, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMM
i
27
28
PC RES0 NO. 3810 -7-
a e
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: South of Palomar Airport Road at the northeast comer of the
future Alga Road and Cobblestone Road intersection.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This project consists of: (1) a Site Development Plan and Hillsidt
Development Permit to construct 138 apartment dwelling units (in 2:
two-story buildings), associated driveways and parking areas, recreatior
facilities to include a town square, day-care playground, multi-purposc
ball court, two tot lots, and a social service/leasing ofice and day can
center, (2) grading to include 12,500 cubic yards of cut and 188,965 cubic
yards of fill (including 99,150 cubic yards for Alga Road); j3) full widtl
grading for Alga Road along the project's frontage; (4) half street frontagc
improvements to Alga Road; (5) off-site construction (two lanes and full
utilities) of Alga Road from the project site to Palomar Airport Road; (6:
a General Plan Amendment from Ofice and Related Commercial (0) tc
Residential High (RH-15-23 du/ac); (7) a Zone Change from Office (0:
to Residential Density Multiple Zone with a Qualified Developmenl
Overlay (RDM-Q); (8) an amendment to the Mello I1 segment 01
Carlsbad's Local Coastal Program; and (9) an amendment to the Zone 5
Local Facilities Management Plan.
The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project pursuant tc
the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental
Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, a Mitigated Negative
Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a significant impact on the environment) is hereby
issued for the subject project. Justification for this action is on file in the Planning Department.
A copy of the Mitigated Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the Planning
Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments from the public are invited.
Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within 30 days of date of issuance. If you
have any questions, please call Chris DeCerbo in the Planning Department at (619) 438-1 161, extension
4445.
DATED: JULY 7, 1995 Ai+
CASE NO: GPA 95-01/ZC 95-O1/LCPA 95-02/ Planning Director
CASE NAVE LAUREL TREE APARTMENTS
h+ MICH J. HOLZ~~LLER
LFMP 87-05(B)/ SDP 95-0 1 /HDP 95-0 1
PUBLISH DATE: JULY 7, 1995
CDNd
2075 LasPalmas Drive - Carlsbad, California 92009-1 576 - (61 9) 438-1 161 ~ ~~ ~~
e 0
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART II
(TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
CASE NO. GPA 95-01EC 95-01LCPA 95-02LFMP 87-05BYSDP 95-01/HD1
DATE: June 30. 1995
BACKGROUND
1. CASE NAME: Laurel Tree ~Dartments
2. APPLICANT MAAC Proiect
3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT 140 West 16th Street
National City. CA 91950
(6 19) 474-2232
4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: A~ril 1 1. 1995
5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This project consists of: (1) a Site DeveloDment Plan and Hillside Dc
Permit to construct 138 aDartment dwelling units (in 23 two-story buildings). associated driveways and Dal
recreation facilities to include a town scluare, day-care dayground. multi-mrDose ball court. two tot-lots. 2
servicefleasing office and day care center at the northeast comer of the future Alga RoadKobbles
intersection, (2) gradiw to include, 12.500 cubic yards of cut and 188.965 cubic yards of fill (including 95
yards for Alga Road. (3) full width grading for Aba Road along the Droiect’s frontage (4) half strec
imDrovements to Alga Road. (5) off-site construction (two-lanes and full utilities) of Alga Road from
site to Palomar Aimrt Road. (6) a General Plan Amendment from Office and Related Commerc
Residential High (RH-15-23 dulacre). (7) a Zone Change from office (0) to Residential Density MultiDle
a Qualified DeveloDment Overlay OM-O). (8) an amendment to the Mello I1 segment of Carlsbad’s Lo
Program. and (9) an amendment to the Zone 5 Local Facilities Manapement Plan.
SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The summary of environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, inv
least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact”, or “Potentially Significant Impact Unless h
Incorporated” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
- X Land Use and Planning - Transporta tion/Circula tion - Public Services
- Population and Housing - X Biological Resources _. Utilities and Service S
- X Geological Problems - Energy and Mineral Resources - Aesthetics
- X Water - x Hazards _I cultural Resources
- X Air Quality - X Noise - Recreation
- Mandatory Findings of Significance
1 Rev. 31281%
0 e
DETERMINATION.
(To be completed by the Lead Agency).
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATl
DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not t
significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to
project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a si@lcant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENT
IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have significant effect@) on the environment, but at least one potenti;
significant effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards,
2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION is required, but it must anal
only the effects that remain to be addressed
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT 1
significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an em
EIWTIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoidec
mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigal
measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Therefore, a Notice of Prior Compliance has been prepare
/' 1
SL . , L ha 6-9-95
Planner Signature Date
dz& @/30/q&--
Planning Director Sigiagiiature 'U Date I I
mlh
2 Rev. 3/28/95
0 0
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, Section 15063 requires that the City conduct an EnvironmeI
Assessment to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the environment. The Environmen
Assessment appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist This checklist identifies any physical, biol
human factors that might be impacted by the proposed project and provides the City with information to use as th
deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (Em), Negative Declaration, or to rely on a previoud;
EIR or Negative Declaration.
0 A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately suppo
information source cited in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately
if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one
A "No Impact" answer should be explained when there is no source document to refer to, or it is based (
specific factors as well as general standards.
0 "Less Than Significant Impact" applies where there is supporting evidence that the potential impact is no1
significant, and the impact does not exceed adopted general standards and policies.
0 "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation me
reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The deve
agree to the mitigation, and the City must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they
effect to a less than significant level.
0 "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant.
0 Based on an "EIA-Part II", if a proposed project could have a potentially significant effect on the envim
- all potentially signifcant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or Mitigated Declaration pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earl
Mitigated Negative Declaration, including revisions OK mitigation measures that are imposed upon the
project, and none of the circwnsbnces requiring a supplement to or supplemental EIR are present a
mitigation measures required by the prior environmental document have been incorporated into this projec
additional environmental document is required (Prior Compliance).
0 When "Potentially Significant Impact" is checked the project is not necessarily required to prepare an 1
significant effect has been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and the I
be mitigated, or a "Statement of Ovemding considerations" has been made pursuant to that earlier EIR
0 A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the project or
aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment.
0 If there are one or more potentially significant effects, the City may avoid preparing an EIR if there are
measures to clearly reduce impacts to less than significant, and those mitigation measures are agreed
developer prior to public review. In this case, the appropriate "Potentially Significant Impact Unless 1
Incorporated" may be checked and a Mitigated Negative Declaration may be prepared
0 An EIR must be prepared if "Potentially Significant Impact" is checked, and including but not limited to the
circumstances: (1) the potentially significant effect has not been discussed or mitigated in an Earlier EIR
to applicable standards, and the developer does not agree to mitigation measures that reduce the impact tc
3 Rev. 3/28/95
0 0
signifcant; (2) a "Statement of Ovemding considerations" for the significant impact has not been made
an earlier Em, (3) proposed mitigation measUtes do not reduce the impact to less than significant, or, (
the EM-Part II analysis it is not possible to determine the level of significance for a potentially advers
determine the effectivenes of a mitigation measure in reducing a potentially significant effect to belou
significance.
A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form under DI!
OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to discussing mitigation for im~
would otherwise be determined significant.
4 Rev. 3/28/5
0
Issues (and SuppOmng Wonnation Sources):
Potentially Significant
Impact
I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:
-a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning?
(source #(s): ) -
b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies
adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project?
( 1 -
c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity?
( ) -
d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts
to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible
land uses)? ( ) _.
e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an
established community (including a low-income or
minority community)? ( 1 -
11. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal:
a) Cumulatively exceed offkial regional or local
population projections? ( ) _.
b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or
indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area
or extension of major infrastructure)? ( 1 -
c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable
housing? ( ) -
III. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or
expose people to potential impacts involving:
a) Fault rupture? ( ) -
b) Seismic ground shaking? ( ) -
c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? ( ) -
d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? ( ) -
e) Landslides or mudflows? ( ) _.
5
0
Potentially
Significant
Unless Mitigation
incorporated
-
-
-
X -
-
-
-
-
-
-
X -
-
-
LessThan Significant
Impact
X -
-
- x
-
-
-
X -
-
- X
X -
-
-
x -
Rev. 3/28/9
0 0
hes (and Supporting Information Sources): Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless LessTbaa
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact incorporated Impact
f) Erasion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? ( ) _. - - X
g) Subsidence of the land? ( ) - - - X
h) Expansive soils? ( ) _I - X -
i) Unique geologic or physical features? ( ) - - -
IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in:
a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the
rate and amount of surface runoff? ( ) - - - X
b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards
such as flooding? ( ) - - 7
c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of
' surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved
oxygen or turbidity)? ( ) - - X _I
d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water
body? ( 1 - - - X
e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water
movements? ( ) - - - X
f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through
direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception
of an aquifer by mts or excavations or through
substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability? ( ) _. _. - X
g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? ( ) - - - X
h) Impacts to groundwater quality? ( ) - - - X
i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater
otherwise available for public water supplies? ( ) _. 7 - X
V. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an
existing or projected air quality violation? ( ) - x - _.
6 Rev. 3/28/95
0 0
Issues (and SuppQting Information Sources): Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless LRssThan Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Lncorporated Impact I
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? ( ) - - -
c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause
any change in climate? ( ) - - -
d) Create objectionable odors? ( ) - _I _.
VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal
result in:
a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? ( ) _. - X
b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g. farm equipment)? ( ) - - - X
-
c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? 0 _. - - X
d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? ( ) _I - -
e) Hazards or bamers for pedestrians or bicyclists? ( ) - - -
f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative
transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? ( ) - - -
g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? ( ) - _I -
VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in
impacts to:
a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats
(including but not limited to plants, fish, insects,
animals, and birds? ( ) - 'X - -
b) Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? ( ) _. _. -
c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest,
coastal habitat, etc.)? ( ) - - X -
d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pool)?
0 - - X -
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? ( ) - _. - X
7 Rev. 3/28/95
a e
hes (and Supporting information Sources): Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless LessThan
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact
VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the
proposal:
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? ( ) -
b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and
inefficient manner? ( ) _.
c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of future value to the region and
the residents of the State? (2 GPEIR) _.
IX. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous
substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides,
chemicals or radiation? ( ) -
b) . Possible interference with an emergency response plan
or emergency evacuation plan? ( ) . _I
c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health
hazard? ( 1 -
d) Exposure of people to existing sou~ces of potential
health hazards? ( ) -
e) Increase fm hazard in areas with flammable brush,
grass, or trees? ( 1 -
X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
a) Increases in existing noise levels? ( ) -
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ( ) -
XI. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon,
or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of
the following areas
a) Fire protection? ( 1 -
b) Police protection? ( 1 -
8
_. -
_. -
- -
- -
- -
- _.
X - -
- - X
- -
- X -
-
-
X -
X -
Rev. 3/28/95
0 0
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless LessThan
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact ~rpora~ Impact 1
c) Schools? ( )
d) Maiitenance of public facilities, including roads?
( 1
e) Other governmental services? ( 1
XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS. Would the proposal
result in a need for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to the following utilities:
a) Power or natural gas? ( )
b) Communications systems? ( )
c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution
facilities? ( )
d) Sewer or septic tanks? ( 1
e) Storm water drainage? ( )
f) Solid waste disposal? ( 1
g) Local or regional water supplies? ( )
XIII. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? ( )
b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? ( 1
c) Create light or glare? ( 1
XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a) Disturb paleontological resources? ( )
b) Disturb archaeological resources? ( 1
c) Affect historical resources? ( )
d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural values? ( )
9
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
_.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
_.
-
-
-
-
X -
X
X
-
-
X -
x -
X -
X -
X -
X -
X -
X -
- X
-
X -
-
_.
-
Rev. 3/28/95
0 0
Issues (and Supporting Mcsrmatiw S~ums)): Potentially
Significant
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact
Potentiauy Unless hTban
e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area? ( 1 _. _. -
'XV. RECREATION. Would the proposal:
a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks
or other recreational facilities? ( 1 - - -
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? ( 1 - - -
XVI. MANDATORY FQlDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wild life species, cause a f& or
wildlife population to drop below. self-sudning levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,
reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory? - X - -
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? ('Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the effects of other
current projects, and the effects of probable future
projects) - - - X
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly? - - -
XW. EARLIER ANALYSES.
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, on
effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)@
case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets:
a) Earlier analyses used Identify earlier analyses and state where they axe available for review.
b) Impacts adequately addressed Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scol
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether sui
were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis,
10 Rev. 3/28/95
0 e
c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are 'Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," dt
mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to 1
address site-specific conditions for the project.
11 Rev. 3/28/95
e e
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
me 12.2 acre site js located at the northeast comer of the future Alga Road and Cobblestone Road intersection, app
700 feet south of Palomar Airport Road Topographically, the site consists of a south to north trending canyon, wk
(intermittent stream) into Canyon de las Encinas, to the immediate north of the site. Elevations on the site rang
feet to 183 feet above mean sea level. The primary soil type on the subject property is alluvium. The alluvium t
moist/clayey sands. The site is presently undeveloped and was previously cultivated The property has been part
with farming refuse, dump fill and material stripped from adjacent slopes A 150' wide SDG&E transmission
extends along the eastern property boundary. The majority of the project site (8.21 acres) contains disturbed rude
which is composed mostly of non-native grasses and herb species. High quality coastal sage scrub (.82 acres) ex
the western quarter of the propem and off-site on the hillside located to the west of the property. No wet
communities exist on the project site. However, the development of the proposed project shall require the off-site cc
of Alga Road from the project site, northerly across Encinas Creek to Palomar Airport Road Vegetation types loca
this road alignment include .02 acres of riparian habitat.
I. Land Use and Planning
a) On December 22, 1987, the Carkbad City Council approved a General Plan Amendment (GPA 87-04) for tl
property from Residential Low Medium (RLM 0-4 du/ac) to Office and Related Commercial (0). A Gel
Amendment and Zone Change is beiig processed concurrent with this application to redesignate the subjec
back to a residential land use -. Residential High (RH 15-23 du/ac) with RDM-Q zoning, thereby ent
development of 138 apartment units on ate. Although this proposal will alter the planned land use for the prc
significant land use impacts are anticipated. Specifically:
c) 1. This residential proposal will be compatible with surrounding lower density residential projects and
designations to the south (MariandTl" 85-39), east (Cobblestone Sea Village) and west (Sudan Interior
in that the proposed project is located within the base of a canyon which is topographically separated (lx
and 120+ vertical feet) from the developable portions of surrounding residential properties The prov
will also be buffered from surtounding residential uses by undevelopable steep slopes located east and w
project site and Alga Road and Cobblestone Road which are located immediately to the west and south.
The property to the north is undeveloped and designated as an Unplanned Area and the property to the I
is designated as an Unplanned Area and is developed with an agricultural packing operation. Potential
compatibility impacts (noise, hazardous materials, and visual quality) associated with locating a higl
residential land use adjacent to an existing agricultural packing operation are mitigated by a landscape b
intervening roadway CA" Street) located between the two uses and the considerable setback between thc
shed and the nearest proposed residence (minimum 325 foot separation). Additional mitigation will
notification to future residents that this area is subject to dust, pesticide and odors associated with
agricultural operations.
The development of a high density residential land use adjacent to an Unplanned Area, which is likely b
its proximity to Mcclellan Palomar Airport, to transition to a non-residential land use (office, planned in
creates the potential for future land use compatibility impacts. In order to mitigate future potential
compatibility impacts, any future use approved upon this adjacent area shall be required to be &
incorporate adequate building separation, landscaping, and operational safeguards (to control noise, odors, 6
heat, glare, air emissions, on-site storage and industrial waste) to ensure compatibility with surrounding r[ Uses.
c) 2. Due to the project's proximity to Palomar Airport Road, it's location adjacent to Alga Road and the pro'
a non-loaded collector street ("A" Street) leading from the project entry to Alga Road, project traffic w
12 Rev. 3/28/95
0 e
impact surrounding properties The anticipated ADT for this 138 unit apartment project (1 104 AI
considerably less than the number of daily trips which would be generated from an office use on the
ADT).
c) 3. No public facilities impacts are anticipated to occur because the project's proposed 138 residential UI
withdrawn from the City's Excess Unit Bank The public facilities required for all Excess Dwelling
already been accounted for in the City's Local Facilities Management Plans. The net effect of converti
use on the project site from Office and Related Commercial (0) to Residential High (RH 15-23 du
elimination of 12.2 acres df Office and Related commercial development within the City at buildout.
b) There are no existing environmental plans or policies adopted by other agencies which address the subjec
Therefore, the project does not conflict with any applicable environmental plans or policies.
d) The project site contains prime agricultural w I1 soil. The on-site soils consist of SbC (Class IIe-1) and c
We-8). Currently, the site is not under agricultural cultivation, nor has the site been cultivated in the recent
project site is located in the Coastal Agricdtural Overlay Zone (Site II) of the Mello 11 Segment of Carlsb
Coastal Program. To offset the conversion of this prime agricultural land to urban uses, per the requiremc
Mello I1 Local Coastal Program (LCP), the applicant shall implement one of the following three mitigation or
to the issuance of grading permits:
(1) Preserve prime agricultural property within the Coastal Zone consistent with the provisions of the Carl
or
(2) Illustrate that continued or renewed agricultural use is not feasible per the guidelines of Mitigation Optic
Local Coastal Program; or
(3) Provide payment of an agricultural mitigation fee, the amount of which shall not be less than $5,000 nor
$lO,OOO per net converted acre. ?he amount of the fee shall be determined by the City Council an
consistent with the provisions of Carlsbad's LCP.
e) The project site is located within an area of the City which is relatively undeveloped, with the exception of l
Interior Mission (residential project) which is located to the west. The proposed project will continue to prov
to the Sudan Interior Mission and will otherwise not impact the Mission. Accordingly, this proposed 138 unit i
housing project will not disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community.
II. PoDulation and Housing
a) The City of Carlsbad's Growth Management Program (November, 1986), established performance standards
facilities, a population limit of approximately 135,000 persons and a housing limit of approximately 54,a
units at buildout of the City. The proposed project will convert the planned land use on the subject property i
acres of office use to 138 dwelling units. Citpvide Growth Management dwelling unit and population buil(
will however not be exceeded due to the fact that the 138 residential units for this project would be availa
withdrawn from the City's Bank of Excess Dwelling Units (those dwelling units which were anticipated under
Growth Management Program but were not utilized by developers in approved projects).
Although this 138 unit project will increase the density of the population within the immediate area, this F
increase is not regarded as significant in view of the fact that there are adequate dwelling units within the Cio
Unit Bank to allocate to this project without exceeding the dwelling unit cap of the southwest quadrant a
facilities and services are available to meet the anticipated demand.
b) The extension of Alga Road from Palomar Airport Road to the project site may enable the development of
properties. However, this growth inducing impact is not regarded as significant in that the development of
13 Rev. 3/28/95
e
properties has already been planned for through the Zone 20 Specific Plan and Zone 20 Local Facilities Ma
Plan to the south and the Zone 5 Local Facilities Management Plan to the north.
c) In that the project site is currently undeveloped, no existing residents will be dqlaced. This project will
provide 138 units of affordable rental housing.
III. Geologic Problems
The Preliminary Soil and Geotechnical Investigation for the project, prepared by San Diego Soils Engineering, date.
1985 states that "the proposed development is feasible from a geotechnid standpoint provided that the recomm
of this report are followed." With respect to geologic problems, the above noted report includes the following co1
a) Fault Rupture - "Faulting has been mapped by others in areas adjacent and through the site. This faulting is c
inactive and does not pose a sigmfkant hazard to the proposed development. The closest active fault is tht
Fault Zone located 24 miles to the northeast. There are no active faults on or adjacent to the site. Breakj
ground due to faulting is not a problem on the site due to the absence of any active faults. Cracking due to sha
distant events is not considered a significant hazard"
b) Seismic ground shaking - "Seismic risk is considered low to moderate. Design of structues should comply
requirements of the governing jurisdictions and standard practices of the Association of Structural hg
California."
c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction - %e earth materials underlying the site consist of firm sec
bedrock which should not be subject to seismically induced settlement. Topsoil and colluvium will be removl
grading. Remedial treatment of alluvial soils should mitigate seismically induced settlement. The bedrock
underlying the site have a very low to nonexistent potential for liquefaction. With partial or total removal of th
soils, and the proposed surcharge, liquefaction potential in the alluvial soils is considered very low."
d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard - Because there are no volcanos located within the City of Carlsbad and be
project site is not located proximate to a bay, lake or ocean, no impacts involving seiches, tsunamis or volcani
are anticipated.
e> Landslides or mudflows - With the implementation of recommended mitigation measures no landslide impact w
f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading or fill - With implemer
recommended mitigation measures, no significant erosion impacts or unstable soil conditions will occur.
g) Subsidence of the land - In those areas where alluvium and colluvium are removed to bedrock, subsidem
equipment passage is expected to be negligible. In other areas subsidence is expected to be on the order of
To provide for unforeseen variation in actual quantities, provisions should be made for export or import.
h) Expansive soils - The removal of expansive alluvial soils will adequately mitigate potential impacts from soil e:
i) Unique geologic or physical features - There are no unique geologic or physical features which exist on th
Property.
IV. Water
a/c/d) Development of the project would create impervious surfaces which reduce absorption rates and increase surfat
and runoff velocities. In addition, drainage from the project's roofs, driveways, parking lots, dopes and 01
would constitute a potentially significant impact to water quality due to potential pollutants in the "non-pin
14 Rev. 3/28/95
0 0
urban runoff. Prior to the approval of a grading permit for this project the applicant shall be required to u
the requirements of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. Proposed de-pollt
(complying with NPDES requirements) have been incorporated into the on-site runoff and storm drain systen
surface pollutants to an acceptable level prior to discharge into Encinas Creek. The proposed de-pollutar
concert with other erosion control mitigations (landscaping, adequate drainage facilities and proper mfi camp;
reduce water quality impacts to below a level of significance. Grading permit standards and the Zone 5 Loca
Management Plan require adequate drainage facilities to service the site. These items are all required by the E
Department prior to approval of the grading pennit.
Hydrology standards of the Mello 11 Segment of Carlsbad’s Local Coastal Program require that post developm
runoff, from a lO-year16 hour storm event, must not carry any increased velocity at the property line. Tc
standard depollutant basins have been incorporated into the projects design.
b) The project site is not located within a floodplain or within an area which is subject to flooding. Therefore 1
of the property or future project residents would be exposed to flood hazards.
f-i) There exist no potable ground water basins within the City. Due to the project sites relatively deep ground1
(33.5 feet below existing grade), no significant impacts to groundwater quality, quantity, or rate or direction (
anticipated.
e) A south/notth trending natural drainageway (itemittent stream) does traverse the property, emptying into Enci
which is located between 120 and 330 feet north of the property. Implementation of the proposed project
fill in the existing natural drainageway and divert runoff into proposed storm drains and 2) require the c
Encinas Creek with Alga Road. Although the project would require the crossing of Encinas Creek, a 16’x 8’ a1
will be incorporated into the project design to ensure that the project will not substantially change the cow
of water in Encinas Creek
Air Ouality
a) The implementation of subsequent projects that are consistent with and included in the updated 1994 General
result in increased gas and electric power consumption and vehicle miles traveled. These subsequently result ir
in the emission of carbon monoxide, reactive organic gases, oxides of nitrogen and sulfur, and suspended pa
These aerosols are the major contributors to air pollution in the City as well as in the San Diego Air Basin.
San Diego Air Basin is a %on-attainment basin”, any additional air emissions are considered cumulatively si
therefore, continued development to buildout as proposed in the updated General Plan will have cumulative s
impacts on the air quality uf the region.
To lessen or minimize the impact on air quality associated with General Plan buildout, a variety of mitigation
are recommended in the Fd Master EIR. These include: 1) provisions for roadway and intersection imp1
prior to or concurrent with development; 2) measures to reduce vehicle trips through the implementation of C
and Transportation Demand Management; 2) provisions to encourage alternative modes of transportation inch
transit services; 4) conditions to promote energy efficient building and site design; and 5) participation in region
management strategies when adopted. The applicable and appropriate General Plan air quality mitigation meas
either been incorporated into the design of the project or are included as conditions of project approval.
In that the 138 dwelling units proposed with this project will be available and withdrawn from the City’s Ex
Bank, the air quality impacts of this project have already been considered in the Master EIR for the Upd;
Carlsbad General Plan. Consequently, with respect to air quality impacts, this project is regarded as a subseque
which is consistent with the analysis and findings of the Master EIR for the updated 1994 Carlsbad General PI
project is nevertheless implementing various air quality mitigation measures including: locating higher density n
uses along major transportation comdors and increasing residential densities adjacent to the industrial corrido1
improving the jobs/housing balance. In that this residential project will be located in close proximity to a major
15 Rev. 3/28/95
0 0
(Alga Road) and employment opportunities, roadway congestion may be reduced, vehicle trip lengths reduced a
cold starts reduced in that residents are more likely to bike or walk to work
Operation-related emisdons are considered cumulatively significant because the project is located wi~
attainment basin", therefore, the "Initial Study" checklist is marked "Potentially Significant Impact". This
consistent with the General Plan, therefore, the preparation of an EIR is not required because the certificatic
Master EIR 93-01, by the City Council Resolution No. 94-246, included a 'Statement Of Overriding Consi
for air quality impacts. This "Statement Of Overriding Considerations" applies to all subsequent projects c
the General Plan's Final Master EIR, including this project, therefore, no further environmental review of
impacts is required This document is available at the Planning Department,
Construction activities associated with the project would result in potential short-term air quality impacts.
pollutants from these activities include fugitive dust panicles due to grading and transportation of constructio~
and, to a lesser degree, emissions from construction vehicles The Grading Ordinance contains provisions tc
the release of construction related pollutantq therefore, air quality impacts resulting from future proje
construction activities would not be considered significant in that the project shall be conditioned to compl
Grading Ordinance.
b) Other than the project air emissions associated with gas and electric power consumption and vehicle mile
(discussed above), this 138 unit residential project will not generate any other air pollutants. There exist nc
receptors (schools or hospitals) within several miles of the project site, therefore potential exposure of sensitive
to project air emissions is not considered a significant impact,
c-d) Otherwise, because of the projects relatively small size (138 dwelling units over 12.2 acres) and it's locatior
relatively undeveloped area, no significant impacts to air movement, moisture, temperature, or climate are ar
This residential project is not anticipated to create objectionable odors.
VI. Transportation/Circulation
a) The proposed project would generate approximately 1104 ADT. In comparison the development of the pro]
Office and Related Commercial uses would generate approximately 2940 ADT. The project shall be cond
implement a number of major circulation improvements including: (1) full width grading along the projects "
and Alga Road frontages, (2) half street frontage improvements to Alga Road and (3) off-site construction 6
and full utilities) of Alga Road from the project site to Palomar Airport Road With the implementation
circulation improvements, all corridors and intersections in the project vicinity would operate at acceptable
service and there would be no significant circulation or traffic impacts
Implementation of the proposed project will require the import of 176,465 cubic yards of fill material, whici
transported from off-site. To reduce traffic hazard impacts to motor vehicles and bicyclists the applicant is R
obtain a Haul Route Permit from the Engineering Department. This permit will ensure that truck traffic
adversely impact residential streets that are not designed to handle heavy truck traffic.
bc) All project on-site and off-site circulation improvements shall be required to comply with minimum engineerir
and safety standards. Adequate emergency access from the project site to Cobblestone Road shall be provided
project. This project shall also provide adequate access to existing adjacent uses (i.e.; the Sudan Interior Mis
a temporary intersection with Alga Road.
d) Required project parking (i.e.: 265 resident spaces, and 37 guest spaces) shall be provided on-site. Eight o
total required spaces shall be handicapped accessible.
e) This project shall also provide a 20' wide easement for the future construction of City Trail Segment #30.
easement shall be located within the 150' wide SDG&E easement located along the eastern side of the subject :
16 Rev. 3/28/95
e 0
Dedication of this trail easement will enhance pedestrian access within the project vicinity. Bicycle access T
project vicinity will also be enhanced in that project improvements to Alga Road will also include a bicycle
9 The project as proposed complies with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation. Specifically, i
project will be located in proximity to a major roadway (Alga Road) and en$opent ~~~~fi~ 7
surrounding businessparks, alternative transportation opportunities exist including bus transit, and bicycle or 1
access.
g) The project is not located in close proximity to a railroad or navigable waterway, therefore, no rail or waterborr
are anticipated. The project is also consistent with the McClellan Palomar Airport Comprehensive Land
Therefore, no air trafflc impacts are anticipated.
VII. Biolopical Resources
a-e) The Biological Survey of the subject property (Anita Hayworth, March 1999, concludes that the project wou
a total of .82 acres of Coastal Sage Scrub (CSS) habitat. Of this total, .74 acres is located within the right4
fill slope areas of Alga Road (a City Ciation Element Road). The remaining .07 acres of CSS is located 1
specific project limits. One pair of California gnatcatchers (Polioptila caliiornica californica) was observt
property, using the on-site CSS and the CSS located on the slopes to the west of the subject property. In th;
Sage Scrub has protected status and the Califomia gnatcatcher is federally listed, this impact is regarded as si
Appropriate mitigation, pursuant to the Interim Take provisions of the 4d Rule for the California gnatcatchel
required. Because the on-site CSS habitat is regarded as “high quality” (because of the presence of the pair of (
gnatcatchers), the project shall be-conditioned to mitigate this take of a pair of gnatcatchers and .82 acres a,
acquiring for preservation comparable quality habitat at a ratio of 2: 1. The applicant is proposing to mitigate th
by purchasing for preservation 1.64 acres of coastal Sage Scrub habitat within the high quality, coastal sage s
found in the Carlsbad Highlands mitigation bgnk (subject to the approval of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Se1
California Department of Fish and Game and the City of carlsbad). In that the construction of Alga Road (u
ultimately be constructed even in the ahsence of the project) would result in the take of the identified C
gnatcatcher pair, due to both loss and fragmentation of CSS habitat, it is quite likely that the City will auth(
project to draw from the City’s 167.5 acre 5% CSS take allowance. The project shall also be conditioned to 1
grading during periods of mating and nesting activity (as confirmed by field observation) for the &den
Gnatcatcher‘s.
The take of .82 acres of Coastal sage Scrub habitat from the project site will not will not impair the ability of
to implement it’s draft Habitat Management Plan (subregional NCCP). prior to completion of a su€
NCCP/Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan (H”), interim approval must be secured for losses of coastal sa
habitat. A procedure has been established which allows the local jurisdiction to benefit from the 4(d) ni
procedure includes: establish the base number of acres of coastal sage scrub habitat in the subregion, calculat
the interim habitat loss, and keep a cumulative record of all interim habitat losses The City of Carlsbad has c
that 5% of the base acreage of coastal sage scrub is 165.70 acres. As of March, 1995,3.96 acres have been tal
loss of coastal sage scrub due to the Laurel Tree project and Alga Road (0.84 acres) would result in a cumulativl
loss of 4.8 acres for the HMP area me all the approved loses have been taken. This loss does not exceed
guideline of 165.70 acres. The .82 acre take area is located within Preserve Planning Area 4 (PPA4). The ha1
will not preclude connectivity between axeas of high habitat values since Preserve Planning Area (PPA) 4 is not
as a part of a Linkage Planning Area. (LPA) The HMP notes that the PPA 4 core areas contain only limited lx
target birds, mammals and herptofauna and only makes a limited contribution to the overall preserve system. ’
area’ patches of habitat may provide some value as stepping stones facilitating dispersal and movement of
between core areas in adjacent PPA’s In conclusion, the project will not inhibit connectivity from north to sout
to west in that the core CSS covered 40% slope areas located to the east of the project and encinas creek, 1
located to the north of the project, will be preserved in open space.
17 Rev. 3/28/95
e 0
The habitat loss will not preclude or prevent the preparation of the Carlsbad HMP in that the area is not ~
Linkage Planning Area, makes a limited contfibution to the overall preserve system and will not significat
the use of habitat patches as arhipelago or stepping stones to surrounding PPAs
The habitat loss has been reduced or mitigated by the design of the project, in that the majority (90%) of the
results directly from the construction of Alga Road Mitigation for the loss of the 0.82 acres of Diegan sage
be in the form of the acquisition of habitat credits as discussed above.
The loss of habitat on the Lad Tree property will not appreciably reduce the likelihood of the survival an
of the gnatcatcher for three reasons. Fa the habitat loss is located within the right-of-way and along the
major circulation element road. However, as noted above, large blocks of habitat will not be lost and fragmer
not occur. Second, the Laurel Tree property is at the periphery of a subpopulation of the gnatcatcher, it is
center where the loss of habitat would be more important. Finally, it is not certain that the pair of gnatcatch
disturt>ed to the point of abandoning the site. Enough habitat will be preserved in the immediate area that
pair may be able to continue occupying the area. The 1- of the western pair, if it occurs, would result in
less than 1 percent (0.0067) of the City of Carlsbad HMP estimated subpopulation.
The habitat loss is incidental to otherwise lawful activities. The development of the Laurel Tree propem
development and all required permits will be obtained. Mitigation for impam to the Diegan sage scrub hab
accomplished in the form of purchase of equal or better habitat credits at an off-site location. This mitigatic
been identified as the Carlsbad Highlands Mitigation Bank site which has previously been accepted by the
Department of Fish and Game and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service.
d) A riparian resources survey was conducted on the Laurel Tree Property. Since no Willows were found to e:
property, no mitigation is necessary. Development of the proposed project would however require the cons Alga Road from the property to Palomu Airport Road to the north. The alignment for Alga Road was
approved by the City of Carlsbad and the California Chstal Commission with the amendment to the Cobblc
Village tentative map (CT 84-32(A)). The alignment of Alga Road as it crosses Encinas Creek WOL
approximately 870 square feet of riparian vegetation (including 2 medium sized Arroyo Willow trees and 3
Willow saplings). Adequate mitigation for this impact will require replacement of this riparian vegetation at i
The crossing of Fincinas Creek (construction of a modified culvert within the Encinas creekbed) will require
404 permits from respective State and Federal wildlife agencies The mitigation proposed for the impacts to I
feet of riparian vegetation from the crossing of Encinas Creek with Alga Road will consist of the restoratio
square feet of willow riparian area in coordination with the California Department of Fwh and Game and the
and Wildlife Service.
A routine wetland determination was conducted on the project site (Federal Interagency Committee fo,
Delineation, 1989). Since none of the 3 wetland criteria are met on the project site, the area is not COI
jurisdictional wetland and no mitigation is necessary.
WI. Energy and Mineral Resources
a) Consistent with Title 24 regulations of the State Building Code, the project will be designed to incorpor;
conservation measures where feasible. Otherwise, the project does not conflict with any adopted energy co
plans.
b) Implementation of the proposed project would result in the conversion of prime agricul6ural soil (Class II) tc use. The impact to this prime agricultural land shall require mitigation, as discussed above under Land
Planning.
c) The subject property does not contain any known mineral resources (natural gas, oil, coal or gravel) that w(
future value to the region and the residents of the State.
18 Rev. 3128/92
0 0
M. Hazards
a-b) Aside from the short-term air quality impacts associated with the emissions from construction vehicles and,
of dust during project construction activities, the proposed residential project would not present a significant
explosion or the release of hazardous substances The project will not interfere with an emergency respon
emergency evacuation plan. In fact, because the project will be conditioned tt~ construct Alga Road fi~g
Airport Road to the project site, emergency respnse/evacuation opportunities within the project vicinit
enhanced.
c) This 138 unit residential project will not create any health hazard
d) Since the project site has been previously under agricultural use, the potential exists for soil contamination due
pesticide use. Prior to approval of a grading permit for the project, the soil must be tested for pesticide rl
significant levels of pesticide residue are present in the soil, the appropriate mitigation measures shall be ret.
may include a health risk assessment study, removal of the soil and proper disposal, or other recommendatic
soils report.
e) This project is surrounded by native vegetation, which is subject to fire hazard Pursuant to the City's I
Manual, this project shall be conditioned to implement a Fire Suppression Plan to mitigate future potential fin
X. Noise
a) Implementation of the proposed 138 unit project will incrementally increase existing noise levels in the pro&
However, the increased noise asc;ociated with 138 residential units (and 1104 additional average daily auto tril
not result in a significant increase in noise levels within the project vicinity.
b) Based on the Acoustical Analysis Report (Ogden Environmental and Energy Services Co., April 14, 199f
project, there would not be a significant impact to the project created by traffic noise from Alga Road provide
study's recommended mitigation measures are adhered to. A minimum 6 foot tall sound wall constructed alor
of the Alga Road fill slope shall be required to mitigate exterior traffic noise to 60 &(A) CNEL.
Prior to the issuance of building permits for this project, the project applicant shall be conditioned to submit an a
analysis to the City which analyzes and recommends mitigation measures to limit interior noise levels to less than
CNEL. As identified in the acoustical analysis, all units with exterior noise levels between 62 and 69 dBA Cb
require at a minimum mechanical ventilation to provide for a closed window condition. Special landscaping and wi
criteria shall be required to mitigate potential visual impacts the walls may create along Alga Road
The project site is located between the 60 and 65 &(A) CNEL noise contour for McClellan-Palomar Airport Tht
northeast comer of the property is located within the 65 &(A) CNEL noise contour. However, no project units ar
within this noise contour. According to McClellan-Palomar Comprehensive Land Use Plan, this proposed residenti
is a conditionally compatible use provided that interior noise levels are mitigated to 45 dBA CNEL and a notice is
and recorded that this property is subject to overflight, sight, and sound of aircraft operating from Palomar Airpc
project will be accordingly conditioned
XI. Public Services
a-e) An amendment to the Zone 5 Local Facilities Management Plan (LFMP) shall be processed concurrent 1
development application. Converting the planned land use on the subject property from 12.2 acres of Office an(
Commercial to 138 dwelling units could effect the provision and availability of public facilities (i.e.; fire pi'
police protection, schools, libraries, governmental services and roads). However, because the project shall k
to all the conditions and facility service level requirements within the amended LFMP for Zone 5, no significar
service impacts will occur. Consistent with the City's Growth Management Plan and applicable state law, tht
19 Rev. 3/28/95
0 e
applicant shall be required to submit evidence to the City that project impacts to school facilities have been a
mitigated prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit
XU. Utilities and Services Systems
a-g) An amendment to the Zone 5 Local Facilities Management Plan (LFMP) shall be pm;essed wnmcn\
development application. In that this project shall be subject to the utility and service system require1
conditions within the amended LFMP for Zone 5, no sipficant utilities and service system impacts (i.e.; imp
and electricity, telephone, sewer, water, drainage and solid waste disposal facilities) will occur. The proja-
conditioned to either tie into existing facilities or construct new facilities as required.
XIII. Aesthetics
a,b) Potential project visual impacts to the Palomar Airport Road scenic corridor will be adequately mitigated
perimeter project landscaping, building heights being resbicted to an average of less than 30 feet and a maxin
feet (only 1 building), the use of earthtone colors on building exterios, and the project's horizontal separation (
of 830 feet) from Palomar Airport Road The perimeter landscaping, building height restriction, and use of
colors will mitigate potential negative aesthetic impacts of the project
The development of the site would require 176,465 cubic yards of grading to create building pads, parking lot:
drainage structures and private and public streets (including Alga Road). The proposed grading confofms to
Hillside Development Ordinance as manufactured slopes would be screened with buildings and/or landscapin
exceed 30 feet in height. Additionally the proposed development will be terraced from south to north withir
of the canyon thereby preserving the topographic integrity of the canyon landform. Therefore the alterati
topography would not create a significant aesthetic impact. The provision of a screen wall (noise wall), landsc
a 4 to 36 foot grade differential along Alga Road would adequately screen the project's structures and parking a
Alga Road.
c) The project would not create significant light and glare impacts on surrounding properties because the develc
the site would be buffered from surrounding properties by a combination of major or collector roadways (A
to the west, Cobblestone Road to the south and 'A" Street to the north), utility easements (SDG&E to the east)
setbacks, topography and large quantities of landscaping. The project would have tile roofs and stucco exk
would not reflect excessive amounts of natural light. In addition, the project shall be conditioned so that L
lighting be designed to reflect downward to avoid impacts to surrounding properties
XN. Cultural Resources
a-e) The cultural resource survey of the subject property (EUXON, June 21,1988) concludes that no cultural resou
found on the property and that no additional measures related to cultural resources are necessary. Although I
a record of a single site (SDi 6752/W 1857) located approximately 1,OOO feet south of the subject property, D
the site was found during two separate field surveys The potential exists for paleontological resouTces to t:
on the property. Accordingly, the project shall be Conditioned to:
1. retain a paleontologist to survey the site prior to grading;
2. perform periodic inspections of the site and salvage exposed fossils during grading;
3. make periodic reports to the Planning Director during the grading process; and
4. be allowed to divert or direct grading in the area of an exposed fossil in order to facilitate evaluation ant
if necessary.
20 Rev. 3/28/95
0 0
XV. Recreation
a-b) A variety of on-site recreational amenities (playground, ball court and tot-lots) will be provided for project
In addition, future Poinsettia Community Park (42 acres) is located within one-half mile (southwest) of th
Accordingly, project impacts to recreational amenities are not regarded as significant
XVI. Mandatory FindinPs of Simificance
a) AS drscussed in the Biological Resources section of this EM, the project will impact .82 acres of coastal Si
habitat, 870 square feet of riparian vegetation and result in the take of a pair of California gnatcatchers. Ho
mitigation measUtes proposed will adequately mitigate impacts to biological resources.
b) All project related impacts must be considered to be cumulatively considerable when viewed in connection
effects of continued growth and development within the City, Northern San Diego County and San Diego (
general. However, with the exception of significant and unmitigable regional air quality impacts identified r;
Master EIR for the City's Updated 1994 General Plan, (for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations
adopted by the Carlsbad City Council), this project will implement project specific mitigation measures to reduc
specific impacts to a level of insignificance. The implementation of these project mitigation measures will incre
reduce cumulative considerable impacts to a level of insignificance.
c) As previously discussed within this document, this 138 unit affordable housing project will not create envin
effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly.
Alternatives:
Project alternatives are required when there is evidence that the projwt will have a significant adverse impac
environment and an alternative would lessen or mitigate those adverse impacts Public Resources Code Section 2100:
the approval of projects with significant adverse impacts when feasible alternatives or mitigation measure's can sub!
lessen such impacts. A 'significant effect" is defined as one which has a substantial adverse impact Given the
mitigation conditions, this project has 'NO" significant physical environmental impacts, therefore, there is no su
adverse impact and no justification for requiring a discussion of alternatives, (an alternative would not lessen an i
there is no substantial adverse impact).
21 Rev. 3/28j95
0 0
LIST MITIGATING MEASURES W APPLICABLE1
ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE)
1. To offset the conversion of prime agricultural land to urban land uses, per the requirements of the Mello I1 Loc
Program (LCP), the applicant shall implement one of the following three mitigation options prior to the iss~
grading permit:
(1) Preserve prime agricultural property within the Coastal Zone consistent with the provisions of the Carh
or
(2) Illustrate that continued or renewed agricultural use is not feasible per the guidelines of Mitigation Optio
Local Coastal Program; or
(3) Provide payment of an agricultural mitigation fee, the amount of which shall not be less than $5,0o0 nor
$lO,OOO for each net converted acre. The amount of the fee shall be determined prior to the issuance t
permits and shall be consistent with the provisions of Carlsbad's LCP.
2. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall establish a process to notify, to the satisfactil
Planning Director and City Attorney, all owners, users or tenants of this project that this area is subject to dust,
and odors associated with adjacentagridtural operations, and that the owners, users and tenants occupy this ar
Own risk.
3. All project grading and site preparation shall comply with the recommendations of the Preliminary
Geotechnical Investigation for the project, prepared by San Diego Soils Engineering, &ted August, 1985
subsequent amendments, on file in the Planning Department.
4. Compliance with APCD Rules 51 (The "Nuisance" Rule), 52 (Particulate Matter), and 54 (Dust and Fumes) (
Quality Chapter would effectively mitigate dust impacts associated with project grading operations A no&
placed on the grading permit stipulating that the following measures shall be required to achieve compliance F
rules, and reduce construction-related air pollutants:
a. The watering of all surfaces being graded and haul routes shall be required during dry weather conditioi
b. All unpaved areas &all be revegetated according to approved landscape plans as soon as possible after 1
c. All construction-related traffic shall be restricted to routes that are dustantrolled, and reduced speeds
maintained for all had and construction vehicles.
d. All construction activities shall be limited during periods of high winds,
e. All heavy-duty, diesel-powered construction equipment shall be operated according to manufacturers s
operating instructions (with the fuel-injection timing retarded to recommended levels for NOx emissions, b
would not result in excessive visible smoke emissions) in order to control pollutant emissions.
f. Construction equipment shall be subject to regularly scheduled maintenance/tune-ups, and be turned off 1
being utilized to avoid excessive idling emisdons
g. The application of architectml coating and cut-back asphalt shall adhere to APCD Rules 67.0 and
effectively control other construction-related emissions of air pollutants
22 Rev. 3/28/95
0 0
h. The Engineering Department shall monitor for compliance during all grading operations of the project
5. The project applicant shall obtain and distribute to tenants annual information from Caltrans and North Corn
regarding the availability of public transportation, ride-sharing, and transportation pooling services in the a
information shall also be provided in the rental office of this project.
6. Prior to approval of a grading permit, a detailed soils testing and analysis report shall be prepared by a regisr
engineer and submitted to the Planning Department and County Health Department for review and approval. ’
shall identify a range of possible mitigation measures to remediate any potentially significant public health
hazardous pesticides or other chemicals are detected at high concentrations in the soil.
7. All project runoff shall conform with the National .Pollution Discharge and Elimination System Permit reqt
pursuant to San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board Order No. 90-42, adopted by City Council Rem1
90-235. The applicant shall provide best management practices to reduce surface pollutants to an acceptable 1
to discharge to Encinas Creek and other sensitive areas Plans for such improvements shall be approved b!
Engineer prior to the issuance of grading permits Drainage water from buildings, streets, parking lots and Is
areas shall be disposed of through stormdrains or otherwise in a manner that will avoid any runoff onto agriculo
whether planted or fallow.
8. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the project shall comply with the City of Carlsbad’s standards for sc
management.
9. Prior lo the approval of a grading permit, the developer shall provide an irrevocable offer of dedication to th
Carlsbad for a trail easement (20’ wide) for Trail Segment #30, shown on the Site Development Plan.
10. .82 acres of Coastal Sage Scrub (CSS) habitat will be directly impacted by this project. One pair of C
gnatcatchers (Polioptila caliiomica califomica) was observed on the property using this CSS. The impacted CS
is regarded as high quality. Pursuant to the Interim Take provisions of the 4d Rule for the California gnatcal
project shall be required to mitigate this take of a pair of California gnatcatchers and .82 acres of CSS by acq1
preservation comparable quality habitat at a 21 ratio. The applicants proposal to mitigate this impact by purch
preservation 1.64 acres of CSS habitat within the high quality, coastal sage scrub area found in the Carlsbad H
mitigation bank shall require the approval of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife SeMce (USFWS), the California De:
of Fi and Game, and the City of Carlsbad Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project applicant
required to consult with and obtain necessary ’take” permits from the USFWS, the California Department of
Game and the City of Carlsbad for impacts to the pair of California gnatcatchers and the .82 acres of CSS.
11. Implementation of this project shall require the cons&uction of Alga Road from the project site to Palomar Airpc
to the north. The alignment of Alga Road, as it crosses Encinas Creek, would impact 870 square feet of
vegetation. Mitigation for this impact will require the replacement of this riparian vegetation at a 3:l ratio (2,611
feet). Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project applicant shall be required to: consult with the CD
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service regarding specific mitigation for impacts to 870 square feet of riparian vel
12. The construction of Alga Road acfoss Encinas Creek will require a 1603 Streambed Alteration Permit from the C
Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and a 404 Permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE).
the issuance of grading permits, the project applicant shall be required to obtain a 1603 Permit from the CDF(
404 Permit from the ACOE.
13. Prior to the issuance of building permits for this project, the project applicant shall be required to submit an ac
analysis which identifies specific mitigation measures to reduce interior noise levels to less than 45 dl3A
According to the Acoustical Analysis Report (Ogden Environmental and Energy Services Co., April 14,1995)
23 Rev. 3/28/95
0 e
project, all units with exterior noise levels between 62 and 69 dBA CNEL shall require at a minimum n:
ventilation to provide for a closed window condition.
14. Prior to the occupancy of any of the dwelling units, the project applicant shall be required to construct a m
foot tall noise barrier (wall) along the top of the fill slope along the eastern side of Alga Road, consistent
recommendations of the Acoustical Analysis Report (Ogden Environmental and Energy Services, April 14,
the project. The wall shall be designed with pilasters, offset with tree wells, and landscaped to provide visual
of the wall as viewed from the roadway,
15. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the developer shall prepare and record a Notice that this property
to overflight, sight, and sound of aircraft operating from Palomar Airport in a form meeting the approval of the
Director and the City Attorney. (See Noise Form #2 on file in the Planning Department).
16, hior t~ the hwmce of building permits, the Developer shall prepare and record a notice that this propeq
subject to noise impacts from the proposed Alga Road Transportation Comdor in a form meeting the appro
Planning Director and the City Attorney (see Noise Form #1 on file in the Planning Department).
17. The project shall comply with all conditions and mitigation required by the Zone 5 Local Facilities Managen
approved by the City Council on August 4, 1987, incorporated herein and on file in the Planning Departmen
future amendments to the Plan ma& prior to the issuance of building permits.
18. Prior to hauling dirt or construction materials to or from any construction site within this project, the applic
submit to and receive approval from the City Engineer for the proposed haul route. The applicant shall con
all conditions and requirements the City Engineer may impose with regards to the hauling operation. If the I
imported dirt is within the limits of the City of Carlsbad, a grading permit will be required for the import sit
19. Plans, specifications, and supporting documents for all street and traffic signal improvements shall be prepar
satisfaction of the City Engineer. Prior to the issuance of grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs
applicant shall install, or agree to install and SeCuTe with appropriate security as provided by law, the t:
improvements:
a. Full width grading of Alga Road from Palomar Airport Road to Cobblestone Road;
b. Full width grading of "A" Street dong the project frontage;
c. One-half street improvements for Alga Road from the projects northerly property line to the existing Sudar
Mission driveway, with an appropriate transition to facilitate access to the Sudan Interior Mission from A11
d. One-half street plus 12 foot improvements for "A" Street along the project frontage;
e. Future Improvement Agreement for Cobblestone Road;
f. Upgrade of the existing traffic signal at the Alga Road/Palomar Airport Road intersection;
g. Two lanes plus improvements to Alga Road from Palomar Airport Road to "A" Street.
20. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Developer shall submit evidence to the Planning Director that in
school facilities have been mitigated in conformance with the City's Growth Management Plan to the extent p
by applicable state law.
24 Rev. 3t28P5
0 *
2 1. Paleontology:
a. Prior to any grading of the Project site, a paleontologist shall be retained to perform a walkover survey
and to review the grading plans to determine if the proposed grading will impact fossil resources. A cc
paleontologist's report shall be provided to the Planning Director prior to issuance of a grading permit;
b. A qualified paleontologist shall be retained to perform periodic inspections of the site and to salvage expos
Due to the small nature of some of the fossils present in the geologic strata, it may be necessary to coll'
samples for laboratory processing through fine screens. The paleontologist shall make periodic rep<
Planning Director during the grading process;
c. The paleontologist shall be allowed to divert or direct grading in the area of an exposed fossil in order tc
evaluation and, if necessary, salvage artifacts;
d. All fossils collected shall be donated to a public, non-profit institution with a research interest in the mate
as the San Diego Natural History Museum;
e. Any conflicts regarding the role of the paleontologist and the grading activities of the project shall be re
the Planning Director and City Engineer.
25 Rev. 3/28/95
0 0
APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATION MEASURES
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASURES
AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT.
n
Date "m!q 5, \yg
\A \I
26 Rev. 3/28/95
E c
0 crl &
0 z
crl
W crl
z c
E$
E
8
n
g e z
z 0 E
2: 0 i: 5 g
rl 0
o\ dl
& n
rl z ut
L R rn
E9 -
B
L%
v)
9
f.4 z
2
z
a
u
rl
ut
V * 2
o\ d c3
fx W
..
E/)
2 3 z
E 3
E
2
m c.
E b crl
c
W w crl E-(
9 W X 3 3
2 2
u t..
0
n d
E
g ..
n g z : 0 E a
8 z
e? 0
W 5
b irj
a! n
Ll
0 d
a!
9
&
- ZNVI 8 ." g3
3 E EYL
S8
23
%5A s33 3.35 +@; -2 E" $
& 3 Q
2 p) .$ mu ~
*; 3 8 %El $ a
sf3
.E+ e '3
90 d
-gzi p! =5 .,o
s4.4
3 .fi g
bh &g3
$Ex
;?as E .s .% 3 3 .a 4
us5 2i:& 93 2
222 3 *= 4 2
Z83
'em
QGZ
gj 9
gz 2
g2 fj !j g -g 2Q
'3 84h ago
2 *z z
6) .E+z !z 3 w
.d 2% 3 $3g 00: 8
gs2 3 2 .$
i5.s 5
3 8 .g -2 .3 1 amg 8- & 35M
"% :g 33 m -
.s E
6) aa
ENVIRO&TAL MITIGATION MONITORl&ECKLIST Page 2 of
M j: o\
E c
0
c3
s
E
E p:
M w
z c
c3 z
2
n
2
2 e
g
3
z 0 i= g
8
z rl
a
PC
r/3
cp
M
n -
9 !2 i! z
2
o\ 2 u
o\ u e
rl z
2 o\
c3 .. 2 9 5 z
W 4 E:
m b z !2 k p:
c 2
w W p: E E 5 s
g 2 6 8
a p:
a 3 a s
llj+s - 3 3
a
!y
- %.Oh -93
E s3 g-= d '3 Q) *g .s
-3 .- 8 g *a .5
%*SZ$ Qgg& cu
.E 0 E m
.zZ gz,
EOSSE &Z$S 2 c: **a
2 g-3
ad (d M g .z E" .s
u qgg $a*& MO
&< >&4s3 g:5 - 2:3 GS
3 2 -8 ,I g
.s Q) .c g8 2 %p-s: g3 II gcuo
=32 $2
'3 M E 3 *s e.= oms %
.-( 0.- gi;: =
dl Ch>& SQa) @
m-, (d M .s
I=: m Q)
a2 G
0 *s o!
MQ Q) 8
- .- Q)
- aocucu
2 Q 2.8
E 7cw Q)-z@ 2
rA G%S 1 gnz-,<
t: cull
119 O&
ag 0 c & 4