HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-09-05; Planning Commission; Resolution 50101
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. 5010
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
CERTIFICATION OF A PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT, EIR 98-07, FOR THE VILLAGES OF LA
COSTA MASTER PLAN (MP 98-01) AND RELATED
APPLICATIONS, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS AND
THE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING
PROGRAM ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH
OF PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD, EAST OF EL CAMINO
REAL, NORTH AND EAST OF LA COSTA AVENUE, AND
STRADDLING PORTIONS OF RANCH0 SANTA FE ROAD IN
THE SOUTHEAST QUADRANT WITHIN LOCAL FACILITIES
MANAGEMENT ZONES 10 AND 11.
CASE NAME: VILLAGES OF LA COSTA
CASE NO.: EIR 98-07
WHEREAS, Morrow Development, “Developer,” has filed a verified
application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by Real Estate Collateral
Management Company, “Owner,” described as
See Exhibit “EIR-A”, attached hereto and incorporated by this
reference.
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, a Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared in
conjunction with said project; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 29th day of August 2001 and
on the 5th day of September 2001 hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to
consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, examining the Program EIR, Statement of Overriding Considerations and
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, analyzing the information submitted by staff,
and considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission considered all factors
relating to the Program EIR.
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
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission as follows:
4
B)
Cl
D)
Findings:
That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
That the Final Program Environmental Impact Report consists of the Final
Environmental Impact Report, EIR 98-07, dated July 16, 2001, appendices,
written comments and responses to comments, as amended to include the
comments and documents of those testifying at the public hearing and responses
thereto hereby found to be in good faith and reason by incorporating a copy of the
minutes of said public hearing into the report, all on file in the Planning
Department incorporated by this reference, and collectively referred to as
the “Report”.
That the Environmental Impact Report EIR 98-07, as so amended and evaluated
is recommended for acceptance and certification as the final Environmental
Impact Report and that the final Environmental Impact Report as recommended is
adequate and provides reasonable information on the project and all reasonable
and feasible alternatives thereto, including no project.
That based on the evidence presented. at the public hearing, the Planning
Commission hereby RECOMMENDS CERTIFICATION of the Program
Environmental Impact Report, EIR 98-07; RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of
the Candidate Findings of Fact (LLCEQA Findings”), attached hereto marked
Exhibit “EIR-B” and incorporated by this reference; RECOMMENDS
APPROVAL of the Statement of Overriding Considerations (“Statement”),
attached hereto marked Exhibit “EIR-B” and incorporated by this
reference; and RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of the Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program (“Program”), attached hereto marked Exhibit
“EIR-C” and incorporated by this reference; based on the following findings
and subject to the following conditions:
1. The Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad does hereby find that the Final
Program EIR 98-07, the Candidate Findings of Fact, the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program, and the Statement of Overriding Considerations have been prepared
in accordance with requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, the State
EIR Guidelines, and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Carlsbad.
2. The Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad has reviewed, analyzed and
considered Final Program EIR 98-07, the environmental impacts therein identified for
this project; the Candidate Findings of Fact (“Findings” or “CEQA Findings”) and the
Statement of Overriding Considerations attached hereto as Exhibit 6EIR-B” and the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (“Program”) attached hereto as Exhibit
“EIR-C”, prior to RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of this project.
PC RESO NO. 5010 -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
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
The Planning Commission finds that Final Program EIR 98-07 reflects the
independent judgment of the City of Carlsbad Planning Commission.
The Planning Commission does accept as its own, incorporate as if set forth in full
herein, and make each and every one of the findings contained in the CEQA Findings
(Exhibit “EIR-BY’), including feasibility of mitigation measures pursuant to Public
Resources Code 21081 and CEQA Guidelines 15091, and infeasibility of project
alternatives.
The Planning Commission hereby finds that the Program is designed to ensure that
during project implementation the Developer and any other responsible parties implement
the project components and comply with the feasible mitigation measures identified in
the CEQA Findings and the Program.
Although certain significant or potentially significant environmental effects caused by the
project will remain, even after the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures and any
feasible alternatives, there are specific economic, social and other considerations that
render the unavoidable significant adverse environmental effects acceptable, as set forth
in the Statement.
The Record of Proceedings for this project consists of The Report, CEQA Findings,
Statement and Program; all reports, applications, memoranda, maps, letters and
other planning documents prepared by the planning consultant, the project
Applicant, the environmental consultant, and the City of Carlsbad that are before
the decision makers as determined by the City Clerk; all documents submitted by
members of the public and public agencies in connection with the EIR and the
Addendum thereto on the project; minutes of all public meetings and public
hearings; and matters of common knowledge to the City of Carlsbad which they
consider including but not limited to, the Carlsbad General Plan, Carlsbad Zoning
Ordinance, and Local Facilities Management Plan which may be found at 1200
Carlsbad Village Drive in the custody of the City Clerk, and 1635 Faraday Avenue in
the custody of the Director of Planning.
Conditions:
1. The Developer shall implement the mitigation measures described in Exhibit “EIR-
C”, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, for the mitigation measures
and monitoring programs applicable to development of the Villages of La Costa
Master Plan Project.
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
PC RESO NO. 5010 -3-
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
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 5th day of September 2001, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Segall, Commissioners Baker, Compas, Heineman,
Nielsen, and Trigas
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
3
CARLSBkD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
MICHAEL J. H?kZMrLER
Planning Director
PC RESO NO. 5010 -4-
EXHIBIT “EN3-A”
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
LACOSTA-NORTHWEST The Greens
PARCEL 3 OF PARCEL, h4AP NO. 1188. IN THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORN’h FILED Dd
THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, DECEMBER 20,1972 AS FILE NO.
340334 OF OFFICL4L RECORDS TOGET’HER WITH THAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS PARCEL ‘A” IN ,
DEED TO LA COSTA LAND COMPANY, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF TKE COUNTY RECORDER OF
SAN DIEGO COUNTY, SEPTEMBER 7,1973 AS FILE NO. 73-245058 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS
TOGETHER WITH A PORTION OF PARCEL A OF PARCEL MAP NO. 13427, IN THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE
COuN?“y RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, AUGUST 16,1984 AS FILE NO. 84-031333 OF
OFFICIAL RECORDS TOGETHER WITH A PORTION OF THE SOUTH HALF OF SECTION 25,
TOWNSHIP 12 SOUTH, RANGE 4 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, IN THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO OFFICIAL PLAT
THEREOF.
mm.601
WAclkllu~~.w
LEGAL DESCRJFTION
LA COSTA-SOUTHEAST II The Oaks
THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN IS SITUATED IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNLA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO.
AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLlaOWS:
PARCEL x:
LOT 5 AND THE WEST HALF OF LOT 6 AND LOT 8 OF RANCH0 LAS ENCINITAS, IN THE CT’TY OF CARLSBAD.
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGG, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. ACCORDING To MAP THEREOF NO. 848, FILED IN THE
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUN-IY. JUNE 27.1898.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT FORTION LYING WITHIN CARLSBAD -IR4CT NO. 75-9(B) UNIT NO. 2 IN THE
CR-Y OF C-BAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNL~, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO.
9959. FLED IN THE 0mcE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, DECEMBER 31.1980 AND
THAT PORTION LYING SOWRLY AND SO UIHWESERLY OFTHE SOlXHERLY BOUNDARY THEREOF.
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT WRTION LYING WITHIN PARCEL MAP NO. 13524, IN THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO. STATE OF CALIFORNIA FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY
RJ33XDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, mOBER 25.1984 AS FILE NO. 84303293 OF OmCIAL RECORDS. AND
THAT PORTION THEREOF LYING SOUTHERLY OFTHE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY THEREOF.
ALSO IiXCEITlNG THEREFROM THAT PORTION LYING NOR- Y OF THE FOLLOWING
DESCRIBED Lm
BEGINNING AT THE MOST EASTERLY -lFRMRWS OF THE CENTERLINE OF IA COSTA AVENUE AS SHOWN
ON ~~INBEFORE MENTIONED PARCEL MAP NO. 13524; THENCE NORTH 55”oo’OO” EAST 200.89 m To
THE BEGINNING OF A 1ooO.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE NORTHWESTERLY; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY
ALONG SAID CURVE TO THE NORTHERLY LINE OF HEREINBEFORE MENTIONED LOT 5 OF RANCH0 LAS
ENCINTTAS.
AFFECTS PARCEL NOS. 223-060-15.223-06049 AND 264-222-03.
THE WEST HALF OF SECTION 32 AND THE EAST HALF OF SECnoN 31. ALL BEING IN TOWNSHIP 12 SOUTH
FuNGE 3 WEST. SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO OmCIAL PLAT THEREOF. ALL
BEING IN THE Cl-IY OF CARLSBAD. COUNl-Y,OF SAN DIEGO. STATE OF CALIFORNIA
EXCEF’TTNG THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF THE EAST HALF OF SAID SECTION 31, ALL THAT PORTION
THEREOF LYING NORTHWESTERLY OF THE SO VY BOUNDARY OF CARLSBAD TbiCT NO.
Z-20 f--LA COSTA VALE) UNIT NO. 3. IN THE CITY OF C.4.RLSBAD. COTrNN OF SAN DLEGO. STATE OF
CALIFORNIA ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 7950, FILED IN THE On-ICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER
OF SAN DIEGG COUNTY, JUNE 3.1974.
PAGE 1
ORDER NO. 1126?t24-I X
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM ALL THAT PORTION THEREOF LYfNG NOR-Y OF THE
FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LINE:
BEGLNNTNG AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID WEST ONE HALF OF SAID SECTION 32 THENCE SOUTH
89‘33’42” EAST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID WEST ONE HALF. 268953 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST
CORNER THEREOF; THENCE SOUTH OO”36’38” WEST ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID WEST ONE HALF,
3120.35 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHWESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF A 200.00 FOOT SAN DIEGO
GAS AND ELEclRlC COMPANY m IN BOOK 5208, PAGE 399 OF THE OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID
SAN DIEGO COUNTY AND BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE LEAVING SAID EAST LINE
AND ALONG SAID EASEMENT LINE. NORTH 64’13’23” WEST 7’36 43 71. FEET; THENCE SOUTH 72”08’00” WEST.
65.20 FE33 TO A POINT ON A LINE SAID LINE BEING 45.00 FEET SO UMWESIERLY. MEASURED AT RIGHT
ANGLES AND PARALLEL WITH SAID SOUTHWESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 200.00 FOOT SAN DIEGO
GAS AND EECTRIC COMPANY EASEMENT; THENCE NORTH 64”1323” WEST ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE
1583.36 m TO A FOINT ON THE SOUTHEASTERLY BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID MAP NO. 7950; THENCE
CONTINUING ALONG SAID PAR4LLEL LINE NORTH 64”13’23” WEST TO THE INTERSECTION WITH THE
NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID SECTION 31. SAID INl-ERSECnON BEING THE POINT OFTERMINUS.
ALSO EXCEITNG THEREFROM ALL THAT PORTION THEREOF LYING SO-Y OF THE
FOLLOWING LINE:
BEGINNING AT THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF SAID CARLSBAD TRACT NO. 72-20 AS SHOWN ON MAP
NO. 7950, SAID CORNER BEING A POWT ON THE ARC OF A NON-TANGENT 1230.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE.
CONCAVE SOUTHEA!XERLY. A RADlAL TO SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 51”54’08” WEST; THENCE
CONTINUING ALONG THE S0uIlSS-E R&Y BOUNDARY LINE OF CARLSBAD TRACT NO. 72-20. THE
FOLLOWING COURSES:
IWU-HERLY ALONG 7-E ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 14’34’46” A DISTANCE OF
312.99 FEET. NORTH 38”50’03” EAST, 31.80 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 1480.00 FOOT RADIUS
CURVE. CONCAVE SO UTHEASTERLY; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH
A CENI-IUL ANGLE OF 7”19’57” A DISTANCE OF 189.40 m, THENCE NORTH 46°10’OO” EAST, 1057.78 FEET
TO THE TRUE FOINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE LEbVING SAID SOUI-HEASTERLY BOUNDARY LINE SOUTH
43”50’00” EAST, 1685.42 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 53O39’32” EAST, 42.00 FEET TO A FOINT ON THE ARC OF A
NON-TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY A RADIAL LINE TO SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH
53”39’32” EAST: THENCE SOUI-HWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE TO THE INTERSECTION WITH THE
souI?IERLY LINE OF SAID SECTION 3 1. SAID INTERSECTION BEING THE POINT- OF TERMINUS.
ALSO EXCEPTING THE INTEREST CONVEYED TO THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO BY DEED RECORDED
FEBRUARY 16. 1967 AS FILE NO. 21426 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, LYING WITHIN THOSE PORTIONS
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
PARCEL 66398-k
THAT PORTION OF SECTION 31. TOWNSHJP 12 SOUTH, RANGE 3 WEST. SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND
MERIDIAN, LYING WITHIN A STRTF OF LAND 60 FEEI- WIDE, 30 FEET ON EACH SIDE OF THE FOLLOWING
DESCRIBED CEN-IERLINE:
COMMENCING AT THE POINT OF INTERSECTION OF THE CENTER LINE OF ROAD SURVEY NO. 454, A PLAT
OF WHlCH IS ON FBZ IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ENGINEER WITH THE NORTH LINE OF SAID
SOUTHEAST QUARTER BEING DISTANT ALONG SAID NORTH LINE 721.98 FEET FROM THE NORTHEAST
CORNER OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER SAID POINT BEING ENGINEERS STATION 194 PLUS 74.85, FOINT
PAGE 2
ORDER NO. lI26324-1X
ON A 1000 FOOT R%DlUS CURVE CONCAVE EASTERLY ON SAD CENER LINE; THENCE ALONG SAID
CENlER LINE As FOLLOWS:
SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID 1000 FOOT RADIUS CURVE 36.54 FEET AND TANGENT TO SAID CURVE S0Ul-H
7’9 EAST, 12.41 FDZr TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING AND THE BEGlNNTNG OF A 1200 FOOT RADIUS
CURVE, THE CENIER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 82”38’ WEST FROM SAID POINT; THENCE LEAVING SAID
CENl’ER LINE SOIJTHWESIERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTUL ANGLE OF 71”50’. A
DISTANCE OF 1504.47 FEET TO ENGINEER’S STATION 210 PLUS 87.12 POINT OF TERMINATION ON THE
-LINE OF SAID ROAD SURVEY NO. 454.
PARCEL 66398-B:
‘I-HAT PORTION OF SAID SOUlHEAST QUARTER LYING SOUiHERL Y OF PARCEL 66398-A HEREINABOVE
DESCRIBED, AND NORTHERLY OF SAID ROAD SURVEY NO. 454.
ALSO EX-G THEREFROM THAT PORTION CONVEYED TO MAG PROPER’TlES. A CAIJFORNIA
GENERAL PARTNERSHIP. BY DEED RECORDED FEBRUARY 1, 1990 AS FILE NO. 90-057460 OF OFFICIAL
RECORDS. MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
PAGE 3
ORDER NO. 1126324-11
THAT PORTION OF SECTION 31. TOWNSHIP 12 SOUTH, RANGE 3 WEST. SAN BERNARDINO
MERIDIAN. IN T’HE CITY OF CARLSBAD. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE MOST EASTERLY CORNER OF LOT 494 OF MAP NO. 7950. ON FILE IN
THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID SAN DIEGO COUNTY, SAID POINT BEING
ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LJNE OF RANCH0 SANTA FE ROAD AS SHOWN ON SAID
MAP NO. 7950; THENCE SOUI’H 31”00’00” WEST, 46.04 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 59”00’00” EAST.
71.00FlXTTOAPOINTONTHE EASTERLY BOUNDARY LLNE OF SALD MAP SAID POINT BEING
ON A NON-TANGENT 1520.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWEST@LY; THENCE
SOUI-HWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE AND SAID BOUNDARY LINE THROUGH A
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 9’19’02”, A DISTANCE OF 247.18 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING. SAID POINT BEING ON A NON-TANGENT 700.00 FOOT RADIUS REVERSING
CURVE, CONCAVE E4STERLY; A RADL4L LINE TO SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 7326’32” =;
THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID 700.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE THROUGH A
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 26°43’55”, A DISTANCE OF 326.59 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 10”1027” EAST.
474.67 FEEl- TO A POINT ON A NON-TANGENT 2400.00 FOOT RADIUS CURE CONCAVE
NORTHWESTERLY; THENCE NORTHEASIE RLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAXD CURVE THROUGH A
CENTk4L ANGLE OF 15’24’49”. A DISTANCE OF 645.64 FEET TO A POINT ON A NON-TANm
1170.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY. A RADIAL LINE TO SAID POINT
BEARS SOUTH 31”17’17” EAST; THENCE SOB y j,JJJNG THE ARC OF SAID 1170.00
CURVE THROUGH A CENTR4L ANGLE OF 6”14’41”, A DISTANCE OF 12752 FEET; THENCE
S0UI-H 25=02’36” EAST, 60.00 FEEI- TO A POINT ON A NON-TANGENT 1230.00 FOOT RADIUS
CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, A RADIAL LINE TO SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 25’0236”
-ST; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL
ANGIE OF 2?45’14”, A DISTANCE OF 488.47 FEET TO A POINT ON A NON-TANGENT 2400.00
h%DIus CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY. A RADIAL LINE TO SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH
33”56’33” EXX THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID 2400.00 FOOT RADIUS
CURVE THROUGH A CENTR4L ANGLE OF 7°35’06*. A DISTANCE OF 317.72 FEET; THENCE
s0IXl-l 41°31’39” EAST, 63.00 FEET; THENCE SOW &t4”50’32” EAST, 265.09 FEFT: THENCE
SOUI-H 28”21?7” WEST, 501.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 31”16’32” EAST 62.63 FEET TO A POINT ON
A NON-TANGENT 700.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUFHEASTERLY; THENCE
SOUI-HWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
30”22’01”. A ‘DISTANCE OF 371.00 FEET; THENCE SOm 28”21’27” WEST, 470.00 FEEI. TO THE
BEGINNTNG OF A 1000.00 FOOT R4DIUS CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY; THENCE
SOUHWESIERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF
7”59’01”. A DISTANCE OF 139.34 FEET; THENCE NORTH 53”39’32” WEST. 42.00 FEET; THENCE
bKXU”H 43”50’00” WEST, 1685.42 FEFT; THENCE NORTH 46°10’oO” EAST, 46558 FEET TO THE
BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 1520.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY:
THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE
OF 5”50’58”. A DISTANCE OF 155.18 FEET. TO THE TRUE pOIN’T OF BEGINNING.
AFFECB PARCEL NOS. 223-050-67 AND 223-050-69; 223-071-05 AND 223-071-07.
PARCEL BB:
THOSE PARCELS OF LAND SHOWN AND DELINEATED ON THE SAN DIEGO COUNTY
ASSESSOR’S MAPS BEING PARCELS 223-05051.223-050-52 X%050-53.223-05054,223-050-59,2Z&
050-65 AND 223-071-09 LYING WITHIN THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PROPERTY:
-~-H.A-I- PORTION OF THE WEST HALF OF SECTION 32; AND THE NORTH HALF OF SECTION 31;
AND THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 30, ALL BEING
PAGE 4
ORDER NO. 1126324-l 1
IN TOWNSHIP 12 SOUlH. RANGE 3 WEST; TOGElMS WITH THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF
THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 36. IN TOWNSHIP 12 SOIXH, RANGE 4 WEST, IN THE
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA ACCORDING TO THE OFFIQAL PLAT
THEREOF DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINMING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID WEST HALF THENCE S0UI-H 89”53’42”
EAST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID WEST HALF. 268953 FEEZT TO THE NORTHEAST
CORNER THEREOF; THENCE SOUTH oo”36’38” WEST ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID WEST
HALF, 3120.35 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOB Y RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF A 200.00
FOOT SAN DlEGO GAS AND ELECTRIC EASWIENT, RECORDED APRIL 19. 1954 IN BOOK 5208,
PAGE 399 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID SAN DIEGO COUNTY; THENCE LEAVING SAID EAST
LINEANDALONGSADESEMENT LINE, NORTH 64”13’23” WEST, 2226.43 FEET; THENCE
SOUTH 72”08’OO” WEST, 6520 FEET TO A POINT ON A LINE SAID LINE BEING 45.00 =
SOEHWESTERLY MEASURED AT RIGHT’ ANGLES AND PA&iUEL WnH SAID
SOUTHWESTERLY RIGHT’ OF WAY LINE OF A 200.00 FOOT SAN DIEGO GAS AND ELEtX’RIC
COMPANY EASEMENT; THENCE NORTH 64’1323” WEST ALONG SAXD PAR4LIEL LINE 1583.36
FEEI’TOAPOINTONTHESO- Y BOUNDARY LINE OF LA COSTA VALE UNIT NO. 3.
IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALLFORNLA ACCORDING TO
MAP THEREOF NO. 7950. FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO
COUNTY, JU?4E 3,1974: THENCE NORTH 31VO’OO” EAST ALONG SAID BOUNDARY LINE 45.19
FEET.TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID MA?’ NO. 7950; THENCE NORTH 64”13’93” WEJ?I-
ALONG THE NOR- Y BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID MAP NO. 7950, A DISTANCE OF
1326.91 FEFT; THENCE SOUTH 43D30’00” WEST 47759 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A NON-
TANGENT 1720.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE NOR- Y. A WLAL LINE TO
SAID POLNI’ BEARS SOUTH 43a30’00” WEST; THENCE NOR- Y ALONG SAID CURVE
THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 02°50’OO” A DISTANCE OF 85.06 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO
SAID CURVE NORTH 43O40’ WEST 445.15 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 455.00 FOOT
RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY; THENCE NOR- Y. WERERLY AND
so-!jTl%LY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTR4L ,WGE OF %050’00”’ A
DISTANCE OF 768.98 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE SOKIH 39”30’00” WEST- 15351
FEEI- TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 780.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE
SOLKHEASTERLY; THENCE SOUI-HWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL
ANGIE OF 08’59’38” A DISTANCE OF 122.44 FEET TO A POKNT ON THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY
OF CARLSBAD TRACT NO. 72-20, UNIT NO. 2, IN THE CITY OF CARI.SBAD. COUNTY OF SAN
DIEGO. STATE OF CALTFORNIA ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 7779, FBED IN THE
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, OCTOBER 26. 1973; THENCE
LEAVING SAID MAP NO. 7950 AND ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID MAP NO. 7779, NON-
TANGENT TO SAID CURVE NORTH 71”OO’OO” WEST 269.16 FEFT; THENCE NORTH 44ooo’Otl”
%‘EST 965.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 71O1323” WEST 276.62 m, THENCE SOUTH 77”46’50”
WEST 29025 FEET; THENCE NORTH 59?iO’OO” WEST 121.23 FEJ3; THENCE S0UI-H 83”40’00”
JEST 11459 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 14°40’o” WEST 230.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 28’20’30”
%‘E!R 436.00 FEFf: THENCE SOUTH 18”27’30” EAST 218.11 FEEI-; THENCE SOUTH 259328” WEST
165.00 FEFT; THENCE NORTH 64”56’32” WEST 300.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH OO”24’13” WEST
110.03 FEET’ TO THE INTERSECTIONWITHTHESO~XEFUYLINEOFTHAT CERTAIN
100.00 FOOT EASEMENT TO SAN DIEGO GAS AND ELECIRJC COMPANY, FILED IN THE OFFlCE
OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, APRIL 19,1954 IN BOOK 5208, PAGE 403
OF OmCLAL RECORDS; THENCE LEAVING SAID BOUNDARY OF SAID MAP NO. 7779 AND
ALONC THE SO-Y BOUNDARY OF SAID EASEMENT NORTH 64”5632” WEST TO
THE MOST SOUTHERL Y CORNER OF CARLSBAD mCr NO. 75-4 (LA COSTA ESTATES
NORTH), IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNh
ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 8302, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER
OF SAN DJEGO COUNTY, MAY 5. 1976; THENCE LEAVING SAID EASEMENT ALONG THE
EASTERLY BOUNDARY THEREOF NORTH 25°03ZS" E&r 100.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH
03002'10" WEST 495.00 FEET;THENCE NORTH 20"25'10" EAST 280.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH
PAGE5
ORDER NO. ll26324-11
OS”30’00” WEST 130.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 36’55’10” EAST 345.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH
52”15’00” EAST 160.00 FEET TO A POINT IN THE BOUNDARY OF PARCEL MAP NO. 10179, IN THE
CITY OF CAIUSBAD. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO. STATE OF CALIFORNIA FILED IN THE OFFICE
OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DlEGO COUNIY, JUNE 27.1980 AS FILE NO. 80-204502 OF
OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE IE4VING SAID BOUNDARY OF MAP NO. 8302 AND ALONG THE
SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEL MAP NO. 10179, SOUI-H 26”58’00” EAST 346.13 FEtT;
THENCE NORTH 89”43’11” EAST 880.46 m; THENCE SOUI’H 42”13’10” EA!?I- 281.25 =;
THENCE SOUTH 49%‘54” EAST 170.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 42”42’30” EAST 530.00 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 66??4’35” EAST 17450 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89°5820* EAX 145.00 =;
THENCE NORTH 34”29’10” EAST 30950 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 74ooO21” EAST 14550 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 4102700” EAST 11350 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 85V4’40” EAST 271.00 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 31”57’15” EAST 330.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 47?5’05” EAST 129.10 FEIX TO
THE INTERSECl-ION WITH THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID SECTION 31; THENCE ALONG THE
NORTHERLY BOUNDARY THEREOF NORTH 89’43’11” EAST 2607.74 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT
OF BEGINNING.
TOGEIHER WITH THAT PORTION OF SECTION 25 TOWNSHIP 12 SOUTH. RANGE 4 WEST, SAN
BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN DlEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
ACCORDING TO THE 0FFICLA.L PLAT THEREOF LYING SOUlHEASlERLY OF THE
SOUTHEASTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID MAP NO. 8302.
EXCEPT THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHWZiT QUARTER OF SECTION 32
TOWNSHIP 12 S0UI-I-I RANGE 3 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, DESCRIBED
AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 32;
THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QUAIt= S0lJl-H o”36’31” WE=.
950.65 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 31”28’50” WEST. 341.61 FEET; THENCE SOW-H 58”42’49” WEST.
456.37 FEET; THENCE NORTH 76”12’27” WEST 230.37 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING;
THENCE NORTH 0’36’31” EAST, 77.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89’23’29” WEST. 350.00 FEEI’;
THENCE SOUTH o”36’31” WEST. 265.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 46O28’07” EAST, 68.28 FEEI-;
THENCE SOUTH SS”28’26” EAST 34.95 FEET; THENCE SOUITl 67”1026” EAST. 76.69 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 89’2329” EAST, 110.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 78V4’47” EAST. 92.20 FEEI TO A
LINE WHICH BEARS SOUTH O”36’31” WEST FROM THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE
ALONG SAID LINE. NORTH O”363 1 1( EAST. 263.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHERLY HALF OF SECTION 32
TOWNSHIP 12 SOUI-H. RANGE 3 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN. DESCRIBED
AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTlON 32; THENCE ALONG THE
NORTH LINE THEREOF SOUTH 89”53’42” EAST 496.36 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID NORTH
LINE SOUIX 0”06’18” WEST, 210.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH
89”53’42” EAST, 23757 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A 470 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE
SOUI-HERLY; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL
ANGLE OF 36OO3’42*, A DISTANCE OF 295.82 m THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE SOUTH
53”50’00” EAST, 386.84 FEFf; THENCE SOUTH 35024’00” WEST. 30.75 FEET; THENCE SOUTH
63’42’00” EAST, 424.18 m, THENCE SOUTH 76°40’oO” EAL i, 28830 m;7; THENCE SOUTH
OOW’OO” WEST, 81.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 72’49’00” WEST, 288.60 FEET; THENCE NORTH
89”32’30” WEST, 628.00 FEET; THENCE SOUIH 87°08’00” WEST. 618.80 FEET; THENCE NORTH
47°36’00* WEST, 187.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 2”5600” EAST, 16620 FEET; THENCE NORTH
20”05’30” EAST, 530.37 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
PAGE 6
ORDER NO. 1126324-l 1
ALSOEXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF SECT-ION 31, TOWNSHIP 12 SOUTH. RANGE
3 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN. DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF PARCEL 3 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 10179 ON FILE IN
THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGQ COUNTY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
BEING THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SECl-ION 30 AS SHOWN ON SAID PARCEL MAP THENCE
SOUTH 89”43’11” WEST ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 3, A DISTANCE OF
48.19 FEEI’ TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHEXXERLY RIGHT’ OF WAY LINE OF ROAD SURVEY NO.
454. ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ENGINEER OF SAID SAN DIEGO COUNTYi
THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTHERLY LINE AND ALONG SAID RIGHT OF WAY LINE SOUTH
31”32’16” WEST 247.14 FEEI- TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, THENCE LEAVING SAID
RIGHT OF WAY LLNE NORTH 89’43’11” EAST. 145.34 FEET TO A POINT ON THE
NOR-Y RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF PROPOSED RANCH0 SANTA FE DRIVE; THENCE
ALONG SAID NOR -Y RIGKI- OF WAY LINE SOa 12??2’42” WEST. 2251 FElX TO
THE BEGINMNG OF A TANGENT 1137 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY;
THENCE SO-Y ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE
OF 7’17’27” A DISTANCE OF 144.68 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID NORTHWESTERLY RIGHT OF
WAY LINE NORTH 69”oo’CV WEST, 172.47 FEET TO A POINT ON SAID SOUTHWESTERLY RIGHT
OF WAY LINE; THENCE NORTH 31O32’16” EAST, 11550 FEET’ TO THE TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING.
AFFECTS PARCEL NOS. 223-071-09,223-050-51.223-050-52 223X)50-53.223-05Cb54, 223-05b59.723-
05065.
NOTEz THIS PARCEL IS DESCRIBED IN A MANNER NOT NORMALLY USED BY TITLE
~~~I?S. AS A CONVENTEN CE TO OUR CUSTOMERS. THEREFORE, IT’ IS IMPORTANT THAT
THIS DESCRIF’TION NOT BE INCLUDED IN ANY CONVEYANCES, AS lT IS NOT INSURABLE.
PARCEL cc:
THEWESTHALFOFTHESOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 29. TOWNSHIP 12 S0UI-H.
RANGE 3 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDLAN. IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD. COUNTY OF SAN
DIEGO. STATE OF CAIJFORNlA ACCORDING TO OFFKIAL PLAT THEREOF.
AFFECIT’S PARCEL NOS. 223-01 l-02 223-01 l-03,223-032-01 AND 223432-02.
THOSE PARCELS OF LAND SHOWN AND DELINEATED ON THE SAN DIEGO C0UNI.Y
ASSESSORS MAPS BEING PARCELS 223-0114, 223-011-S. 223-0116, 223-021-g AND 223-011-11
LYTNG WITHJN THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PROPERTY:
PARCELS 3 AND 4 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 10179, IN THE CITY OF CARISBAD. COUNTY OF SAN
DLEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN
DIEGO COUNTY, JUNE 17.1980 As FILE NO. 80-204502 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.
TOGETHER WlTH THAT FORTION DELINEATED AND DESIGNATED “NOT A PART ON SAID
PARCELMAP.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT FORTION LYING WITHIN CARLSBAD TRACT NO. 79-25(B) UNIT
NO. 1, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
PAGE 7
ORDER NO. 1X26324-11
ACCORDING TO h4AP THEREOF NO. 10243, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNIY RECORDER
OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, OCTOBER20.1981.
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THOSE KIRTIONS LYING WITHIN CARLSBAD TRACT NO. 79-
25(B) PHASE VI. IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALLFORNIA.
ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 10820, FiLED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNIY RECORDER
OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, JANUARY 13,1984. AND CARLSBAD TRACT NO. 84-23, IN THE CITY OF
CARISBAD, COUNIY OF SAN DIEGO. STATE OF CALTFORMA. ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF
NO. 11241. FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DlEGG COUNTI. MAY
22 1985.
ALSO EXCEFITNG THEREFROM THAT PORTION LYING WTIHtN RECORD OF SURVEY NO. 9182
IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNLA. FILED IN THE
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, OCTOBER 28.1982 AS FILE NO.
82-332144 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.
ALSO EXCETTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF SAID PARCEL MAP NO. 10179 LYING
NORTHEASTERLY OFTHE CENIERLWE OF THAT CERTAIN RIGHT OF WAY AS DESCRIBED IN
DEED TO THE COUNTY, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO
cow, APRIL 7.1966 AS FILE NO. 58549 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.
ALSO EXCEITING THEREFROM THAT PORTlON DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LA COSTA MEADOWS. UNTI’ NO. z
ACCORDING TO MAP NO. 6095 ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID
COUNTY, SAlD SOW-HEM CORNER BEING A POINT ON THE SO-Y RIGHT-OF-
WAY OF EL FLIER-I-E STREET AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP NO, 6905; THENCE NORTH 68’13’07”
EAST 1536.70 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 68”ol’lo” EAST 9951
FEET; THENCE SOUIH SlO54’40” EAST 141.03 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 22”5225” WEST 191.85 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 57’=13’00” WEST 73.07 FEEX; THENCE NORTH 83V6QO” WEST 185.97 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 34”25’48” WEST 144.00 FEZ; THENCE NORTH 5S034’12* EAST 100.00 FEET TO
THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 322-FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESIERLY;
THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE
OF 33’35’22” A DISTANCE OF 188.77 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
AFFECTS PARCELNOS. 223-011-04.223-011-05.223-011-06; 223-021-08.223-021-11.
NOTE: THIS PARCEL IS DESCRIBED IN A MANNER NOT NORMALLY USED BY TITLE
USURERS. AS A CONVENJEN CE TO OUR CUSTOMERS. THEREFORE IT IS IMPORTANT THAT
THIS DESCRIl’TlON NOT BE INCLUDED IN ANY CONVEYANCES. AS IT IS NOT INSURABLE.
PAGE 8
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
LA COSTA - RANCHEROS The Ridge
THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN IS SITUATED IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF
SAN DIEGO, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
THOSE PARCELS OF LAND SHOWN AND DELINEATED ON THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
ASSESSOR’S MAPS BEING 223-05043, 22345049 AND 7ZZ3-010-31 AND LYING WITHIN THE .
FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PROPERTY:
PARCEL BB:
THAT PORTION OF THE WEST HALF OF SECTION 32; AND THE NORTH HALF OF SECTION 31;
AND THE SOUT-HWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECI-ION 30. ALL BEING
IN TOWNSHIP 12 S0UI-f-L RANGE 3 WEST; TOGETHER WITH THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF
THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECi-ION 36, IN TOWNSHIP 12 SOW RANGE 4 WEST, IN THE
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA ACCORDING TO THE Omclp,L PLAT
THEREOF DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID WEST HALF; THENCE SOUR-I 89”53’42”
EAST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID WEST HALF, 268953 FEEI- TO THE NORTHEAST
CORNER THEREOF; THENCE SOUTH oo”36’38” WEST ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID WEsT
HALF, 3120.35 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHWESIERLY RIGHT OF WAY LLNE OF A 200.00
FOOT SAN DIEGO GAS AND ELECTRIC EASEMENT, RECORD APRIL 19. 1954 IN BOOK 5208.
PAGE 399 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID SAN DIEGO COUNTY; THENCE LmVING SAID EAsT
LINE AND ALONG SAID EASEMENT LINE, NORTH 64’1323” WEST, 2226.43 FEBT; THENCE
SOUI-H 72”08’00” WEST, 65.20 FEE TO A POINT ON A LINE. SAID LINE, BEING 45.00. -
SOUIHWESTERLY MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES AND PARALLIl, WITH SAID
SO-=RLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF A 200.00 FOOT SAN DIEGO GAS AND ELECTRIC
COMPANY EASEMENT; THENCE NORTH 64”13’23” WEST ALONG SAID PARALLU. LINE, 158336
FEFTTOAPOINTONTHESO~ Y BOUNDARY LINE OFLA COSTA VALE UNIT NO. 3.
IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO. STATE OF CALIFORNIA. ACCORDING TO
MAP THEREOF NO. 7950. FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO
CouNl-Y, JUNE 3. 1974: THENCE NORTH 31”oo’OO” EAST ALONG SAID BOUNDARY LB’& 45.19
FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID MAP NO. 7950; THENCE NORTH 64°1323’ ‘=
ALONG THE NOR- Y BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID MAP NO. 7950. A DISTANCE OF
1326.91 FEFT; THENCE SOUI-H 43=‘30’00” WEST 47759 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A NON-
.TANGENT 1720.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEASIERLY. A RADIAL LINE TO
SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 43”3(rOO” WEST; THENCE NORTHWESIE RLY ALoNG SAID CURVE
THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 02”SO’OO” A DISTANCE OF 85.06 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO
SAID CURVE NORTH 43’40’ WEST 445.15 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 455.00 FOGT
FUDIUS CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHERLY; THENCE NOR-Y, WESTERLY AND
SomsIzRLY ALONG SAlD CURVE THROUGH A EN’T%% ,QJGLE OF %‘50’00” A
DISTANCE OF 768.98 FER; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE SOUI-H 39”30’00” WEST 15351
FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 780.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE
SO-Y; THENCE SOUIHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL
ANGLE OF 08”59’38” A DISTANCE OF 122.44 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY
OF CARLSBAD TRACT NO. 72-20, UNIT NO. 2. IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD. COUNTY OF SAN
DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. m9, FILED IN THE
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, OCTOBER 26, 1973; THENCE
LEAVING SAID MAP NO. 7950 AND ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID MAP NO. 7779, NON-
TANGENT TO SAID CURVE NORTH 71”00’00” WEST 269.16 FEET; THENCE NORTH 44”oIT(iXJ”
WEST 965.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 71’13’23” WEST 276.62 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 7?46’s
WEST 29025 FEEr; THENCE NORTH 59”SO’OO” WEST 121.23 FDX; THENCE SOUTH 83”40’00”
WER 114.59 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 14°40’oo” WEST 230.00 FEET; ‘THENCE SOUIH 28020’30
WESl- 436.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 18O2730” EAST 218.11 FEFT; THENCE SOUTH 2500328” WEST
165.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 64”56’32” WEST 300.00 m, THENCE SOUTH 00?24’13” WEST
110.03 FEET TO THE INTERSECTION WITH THE SOUIHWESlERLY LINE OF THAT CERTAIN
100.00 FOOT EXEMENT TO SAN DIEGO GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY, FILED JN THE OFFICE
OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGG COUNTY, APRIL 19.1954 IN BOOK 5208, PAGE 403
OF OFFICLAL RECORDS; THENCE LEAVING SAID ‘BOUNDARY OF SATD MAP NO. 7779 AND
ALONG THE SO BY BOUNDARY OF SAID EASEMENT NORTH 64°56’32” WEST TO
THE MOST SO UIHERLY CORNER OF CARLSBAD TRACT’ NO. 754 (LA COSTA ESTATES
NORTHJ IN THE Cl-IY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO. STATE OF GUFCRNIA
ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 8302, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER
OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, MAY 5. 1976; THENCE LEAVING SAID EASEMENT~ALONG THE
EASTERLY BOUNDARY THEREOF NORTH 25OO3’28” EAST 100.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH
03”02’10” WEST 495.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 20%‘10” EAST 280.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH
05”30’00” WEST 130.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 36”55’10” EAST 345.00 FEFT; THENCE NORTH
52”lS’OO” EAST 160.00 FEET TO A POINT IN THE,BOUNDARY OF PARCEL MAP NO. 10179, IN THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. FBED IN THE OFFICE
OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, JUNE 27.1980 AS FBE NO. 8@204502 OF
OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE LEAVING SAID BOUNDARY OF MAP NO. 8302 AND ALONG THE
SOUI-HERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEL MAP NO. 10179, SOUTH 26”58’00” EAST 346.13 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 89O43’11” EAST 880.46 FEFT; THENCE SOUTH 42”13’10” EAST 281.25 FEET-i
THENCE SOUTH 49”46’54” EAST 170.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 42’4230” EAS 530.00 FEEC
THENCE NORTH 66”24’35” EAST 174.50 FEFT; THENCE NORTH 89’5820” EAST 145.00 FEETi
THENCE NORTH 34029’10” EAST 30950 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 74ooO21” EAST 14550 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 41V’OO” EAST 113.50 FEFT; THENCE SOUI’H 85’44’40” EAST 271.00 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 31”5715” EAST 330.00 FEFT; THENCE NORTH 47”25’05” EAST 129.10 FEBT TO
THE INTERSECI-ION WITH THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID SECTION 31; THENCE ALONG THE
NORTHERLY BOUNDARY THEREOF NORTH 89”43’11” EAST 2607.74 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT
OF BEGINNING.
TOGETHER WFI-H THAT PORTION OF SECTION 25 TOWNSHIP 12 SOUTH. RANGE 4 WEST, SAN
BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO. STATE OF CAUK)RNk
ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF LYING SOUTHEASTERLY OF THE
SO-Y BOUNDARY OF SAID MAP NO. 8302.
EXCEFITNG THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 32
TOWNSHIP 12 SOUTH. RANGE 3 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF.
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 32;
THENCEALONGTHE EASIERLY LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER. SOm 0036’31” WEST,
950.65 FEET THENCE SOUI’H 31”28’50” WEST, 341.61 m; THENCE SOUTH 58’42’49” WEST.
456.37 m; THENCE NORTH 76’12’27” WEST 23037 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING
THENCE NORTH 0’36’31” EAST. 77.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 897329” WEST, 350.00 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH o”36’31” WEST. 265.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 46’28’07” EAST, 68.28 FEFT;
THENCE S0tX-H SS”28’26” EAST 34.95 FEET; THENCE SOUI’H 67’1026” EAST, 76.69 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 89”2329” EAST, 110.00 m; THENCE NORTH 78%4’47” EAST, 92.20 FEET TO A
LINE WHICH BEARS SOUTH 0%‘31” WEST FROM THE TRUE &NT OF BEGINNING; THENCE
ALONG SAID LINE. NORTH 003631” EAST, 263.00 FEET’ TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
ALSO EXCEF7lNG THEREFROM THAT PORTTON OF THE NORTHERLY HALF OF SECTION 32
TOWNSHIP 12 SOUTHq RANGE 3 WEST. SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN. DESCRIBED
AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 32: THENCE ALONG THE
NORTH LINE THEREOF SOUTH 89”53’42” EAST 4%.36 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID NORTH
LINE SOUI-H o”O6’18” WEST, 210.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH
89”53’42” EAST. 237.57 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A 470 FOOT RtDIUS CURVE CONCAVE
SOurHERLY; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL
ANGLE OF 36”03’42”. A DISTANCE OF 295.82 FEFT; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE SOUTH
53°50’OO” EAST, 386.84 FEER THENCE SOUTH 35”24’00” WEST. 30.75 FEEL THENCE S0Ul-H
63”42’00” EAST, 424.18 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 76”40’00” EAST, 288.30 FEFT; THENCE SOUTH
0090’00” WEST, 81.00 FEf5T; THENCE SOIXH 72°49’OO” WEST, 288.60 FEET; THENCE NORTH
89”32’30” WEST, 628.00 FEEL THENCE SOUlH 87”08’00” WEST, 618.80 FEET; THENCE NORTH
47°36’OO” WEST, 187.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 2°56’OO” EAST, 16620 FEET; THENCE NORTH
20°05’30” EAST, 530.37 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
ALSO EXCEF’TlNG THE-OM THAT PORTION OF SECllON 31. TOWNSHIP 12 SOUTH. RANGE
3 WEST. SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD. COUNTY OF
SAN DIEGG. STATE OF CALIK)RNIA DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF PARCEL 3 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 10179 ON FILE
IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, STATE OF CALB=ORN&
BEING THE SOUIHEXT CORNER OF SECTION 30 AS SHOWN ON SAID PARCEL MAP, THENCE
SOUTH 89”43’11” WEST ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 3. A DISTANCE OF
48.19 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHEASIERLY RJGHT OF WAY LINE OF ROAD SURVEY NO.
454, ON RLE IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ENGINEER OF SAID SAN DIEGO COUNTYi
THENCE LEAVING SAID SO UTHERLY LINE AND ALONG SAID RIGHT OF WAY LINE SOUTH
31”32’16” WEST 247.14 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE LEAVING SAID
RIGHT OF WAY LINE NORTH 89°43’11” EAST, 145.34 FEET TO A POINT ON THE
NORTHWESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF PRGPOSED RANCH0 SANTA FE DRIVE; THENCE
ALONG SAID NOR -RlWSEIUY RIGHT OF WAY LINE SOUTH 12?Z2’42” WEST, 22.51 FEBI- TO
THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 1137 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE NOR-Y;
THENCE SO-Y ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENlR4L ANGLE
OF 7”17’27” A DISTANCE OF 144.68 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID NORTHWESTERLY RIGHT OF
WAY LINE NORTH 69”OO’OO” WEST, 172.47 FEET’ TO A POINT ON SAID SOUTHWE!?lERLY RIGHT
OF WAY LINE; THENCE NORTH 31”32’16” EAST, 115.50 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING.
AFFECTS PARCEL NOS. 223-05043.223-05049.223-010.31.
NOTE THIS PARCEL IS DESCRIBED IN A MANNER NOT NORMALLY USED BY TITLE
RWJRERS. AS A CONVENTEN CE TO OUR CUSTOMERS. THEREFORE, IT IS IMPORTANT -IHAT
THIS DESCRIFVON NOT BE INCLUDED IN ANY CONVEYANCES, AS IT 1S NOT INSURABLE.
PARCEL DD:
THOSE PARCELS OF LANl SHOWN AND DELlNEATED ON THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
ASSE!SSOR’S MAPS BEING 223-010-12 223-010-18. 223-010-19, 223-010-27. 223-010-28, 223-010-29.
223-010-32 223-01~33.223-010-34,223-010-35.223-010-37,223-021-9.223-021-10. 223-021-z 223-021-
15, 223-021-16, 222-470-23 AND 22247025 AND LYING WITH THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED
PROPERTY:
PARCELS 3 AND 4 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 10179, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN
DIEGG, STATE OF CALIFORNIAa FILED IN THE OFFJCE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN
DIEGO COUNTY, JUNE 17,198O AS FILE NO. 8@204502 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.
TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION DELINEATED AND DESIGNATED “NOT A PART” ON SAID
PARCELMAP.
EXCIfSTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION LYING WlTHIN CARLSBAD TRACT’ NO. 79-25(B) UNTT
NO. 1. IN THE Cl-I-Y OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO. STATE OF CALEORNIA
ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 10243, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER
OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, OCTOBER 20,1981.
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THOSE PORTIONS LYING WITHIN CARLSBAD TRACT NO. 79-
25(B) PHASE VI. IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNIY OF SAN DIEGQ. STATE OF CALIFORNIA
ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 10820, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER
OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY. JANUARY 13.1984. AND CARLSBAD TRACT NO. 84-23. IN THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF
NO. 11241, FILED IN THE OFFJCE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, MAY
22,198s.
EXCEFTlNG THEREFROM THAT PORTION LYING WITHIN RECORD OF SURVEY NO. 9182 IN
THE CITY OF CARLSBAD. COUNlY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA FILED IN THE
OFFICE OF THE COUNI-Y RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CKTOBER 28,1982 AS FlLE NO.
82-332144 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF SAID PARCEL MAP NO. 10179 LYING
NORTHEASTERLY OF THE CZNTERUNE OF THAT CERTAIN RIGHT OF WAY AS DESCRIBED IN
DEED TO THE COUNTY, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO
COUNTY. APRIL. 7,1966 AS FILE NO. 58549 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE SOUIHEAST CORNER OF LA COSTA MEADOWS. L&BT NO. 2
ACCORDING TO MAP NO. 6095 ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID
COUNTY. SAJD SOUl-HEAST CORNER BEING A POINT ON THE SOuTHEAslE RLY RIGHT-GF-
WAY OF EL FUER-IE STREET AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP NO. 6905; THENCE NORTH 68”13’07”
EAST 1536.70 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 68”01’10” EAST 99.51
FEET; THENCE SOUTH 51”,54’4O” EAST 141.03 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 22”52’25” WEST 191.85 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 57D13’OO” WEST 73.07 FEET; THENCE NORTH 83=46’00” WEST 185.97 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 34%‘48” WEST 144.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH SS”34’12”‘EAST 100.00 = TO
THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 322-FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY;
THENCE NOR- Y ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE
OF 33’35’22” A DISTANCE OF 188.77 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
ARFCTS PARCEL NOS. 223-010-12.223-010-18.223-010-19.223-01~27,223-010-28, 223-01~29,223-
010-32 223-010-33,223-OlO-34,223-OlCb35,223-OlCb37; 223-021-09.223-021-10.223-021-12 223-021-15
AND 223-021-16; 222-470-25 AND 22247023.
NOTEz THIS PARCEL IS DESCRIBED IN A MANNER NOT NORMALLY USED BY Tl’ld
NXJRERS. AS A CONVENIEN CE TO OUR CUSTOMERS. THEREFORE, l-T IS IMPORTANT THAT
THIS DESCRIPnON NOT BE INCLUDED IN ANY CONVEYANCES, AS lT IS NOT INSURABIE.
PARCELEE:
PARCEL 2 OF PARCEL h4AP NO. 13900. IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNIT OF SAN DLEGO,
!TATE OF CALIFORNIA FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO
COUNTY, AUGUST 6.1985 AS FILE NO. 85-281626 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.
AFFECTS PARCEL NO. 222-15 l-80.
EXHIBIT “EIR-B”
CITY OF CARLSBAD RESOLUTION
NO.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
FINDINGS OF FACT
and
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
for the
FINAL PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR 98-07)
VILLAGES OF LA COSTA MASTER PLAN (2000) MP 98-01
(SCH No. 1999011023)
1. INTRODUCTION
The Final Program Environmental Impact Report (hereafter “Final Program EIR” or
“FPEIR”) has been prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act to address the
potential environmental effects of the Villages of La Costa Master Plan (2000) and associated
actions (hereafter “Proposed Project”) and considered by the City in connection with its public
consideration of requested approvals for the Proposed Project. While the full scope of the
Proposed Project and associated approvals are more detailed in Section 1.3 below, the Proposed Project generally consists of development of not more than 2,390 residential units and a 7.9 acre
business park on approximately lJ366.4 gross acres in the Southeast Quadrant of the City,
together with appurtenant public facilities, streets, parks, species/habitat natural preserve areas,
other open space and reservation of a elementary school site. The Final Program EIR also
analyzed the environmental effects of a range of project alternatives as well. The Final Program
EIR and its separately bound technical appendices are incorporated herein by reference as though
fully set forth.
1.1 Purpose and Legal Authorities. The California Environmental Quality Act
(hereafter “CEQA”) was adopted in 1970 and is codified in California Public Resources Code
$8 21000 et.seq. (hereafter “PRC $ - “). CEQA is an important environmental law applicable
to most public agency decisions to carry out, authorize or approve projects that could have
adverse effects on the environment. CEQA does not directly regulate project implementation or
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations 1652724 v3 [Word] Exhibit “EIR-B” 1 8/14/2001
approvals through substantive standards or prohibitions, but rather CEQA generally requires only
that agencies inform themselves about the potential environmental effects of a proposed project,
carefully consider all pertinent environmental information before they act, provide the public an
opportunity to review and comment on any environmental issues, and include conditions or other
requirements to avoid or reduce potential significant adverse effects of the project or action when
feasible.
The City has codified environmental protection procedures implementing CEQA and the
state administrative guidelines issued pursuant to CEQA in Carlsbad Municipal Code,
Chapter 19.04. Chapter 19.04 provides for the protection and enhancement of the environment
by establishing principles, objectives, criteria, definitions and procedures for evaluation of both
public and private projects, implementing CEQA and the state guidelines and providing for the
preparation and evaluation of environmental documents in accordance therewith. The City’s
consideration of Findings of Fact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations are key steps in
the process of considering the approval of the Proposed Project while concurrently protecting
and enhancing the environment. The applicable standards and scope of the City’s responsibilities
are detailed in the following excerpts from the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of
Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, $3 15000 et. seq.; hereafter “Guidelines $ I’).
Guidelines 915040. Authority Provided by CEQA.
(4 CEQA is intended to be used in conjunction with discretionary powers
granted to public agencies by other laws.
OJ) CEQA does not grant an agency new powers independent of the powers
granted to the agency by other laws.
w Where another law grants an agency discretionary powers, CEQA
supplements those discretionary powers by authorizing the agency to use the
discretionary powers to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment when it
is feasible to do so with respect to projects subject to the powers of the agency. Prior to
January 1, 1983, CEQA provided implied authority for an agency to use its discretionary
powers to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment. Effective January 1,
1983, CEQA provides express authority to do so.
(d) The exercise of the discretionary powers may take forms that had not been
expected before the enactment of CEQA, but the exercise must be within the scope of the
power.
Cd The exercise of discretionary powers for environmental protection shall be
consistent with express or implied limitations provided by other laws.
Guidelines 515041. Authority to Mitigate.
Within the limitations described in Section 15040,
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “E&B”
1652724 v3 [Word] 2 8/14/2001
(a) A lead agency for a project has authority to require feasible changes in any
or all activities involved in the project in order to substantially lessen or avoid significant
effects on the environment, consistent with applicable constitutional requirements such as
the “nexus” and “rough proportionality” standards established by case law (Nollan v.
California Coastal Commission (1987) 483 U.S. 825; Dolan v. City of Tigard, (1994) 512
U.S. 374; Ehrlich v. City of Culver City, (1996) 12 Cal. 4th 854.).
00 When a public agency acts as a responsible agency for a project, the
agency shall have more limited authority than a lead agency. The responsible agency may require changes in a project to lessen or avoid only the effects, either direct or
indirect, of that part of the project which the agency will be called on to carry out or
approve.
(c) With respect to a project which includes housing development, a lead or
responsible agency shall not reduce the proposed number of housing units as a mitigation
measure or alternative to lessen a particular significant effect on the environment if that
agency determines that there is another feasible, specific mitigation measure or
alternative that would provide a comparable lessening of the significant effect.
Guidelines 515042. Authority to Disapprove Projects.
A public agency may disapprove a project if necessary in order to avoid one or
more significant effects on the environment that would occur if the project were approved
as proposed. A lead agency has broader authority to disapprove a project than does a
responsible agency. A responsible agency may refuse to approve a project in order to
avoid direct or indirect environmental effects of that part of the project that the
responsible agency would be called on to carry out or approve. For example, an air
quality management district acting as a responsible agency would not have authority to disapprove a project for water pollution effects that were unrelated to the air quality
aspects of the project regulated by the district.
Guidelines 915043. Authority to Approve Projects Despite Significant Effects.
A public agency may approve a project even though the project would cause a
significant effect on the environment if the agency makes a fully informed and publicly
disclosed decision that:
(4 There is no feasible way to lessen or avoid the significant effect (see
Section 15091); and
09 Specifically identified expected benefits from the project outweigh the
policy of reducing or avoiding significant environmental impacts of the project. (See
Section 15093.)
Guidelines gl5090. Certification of the Final EIR.
(a) Prior to approving a project the lead agency shall certify that:
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B” 1652724 v3 [Word] 3 8/14/2001
(1) The final EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA;
(2) The final EIR was presented to the decision-making body of the lead
agency and that the decision-making body reviewed and considered the information
contained in the final EIR prior to approving the project; and
(3) analysis.
The final EIR reflects the lead agency’s independent judgment and
(b) When an EIR is certified by a non-elected decision-making body within a
local lead agency, that certification may be appealed to the local lead agency’s elected
decision-making body, if one exists. For example, certification of an EIR for a tentative
subdivision map by a city’s planning commission may be appealed to the city council.
Each local lead agency shall provide for such appeals.
Guidelines 515091. Findings.
(4 No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR
has been certified which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the
project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each of those
significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding.
The possible findings are:
(1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as
identified in the final EIR.
(2) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of
another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been
adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency.
(3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations,
including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make
infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR.
(b) The findings required by subsection (a) shall be supported by substantial
evidence in the record.
(4 The finding in subsection (a)(2) shall not be made if the agency making
the finding has concurrent jurisdiction with another agency to deal with identified
feasible mitigation measures or alternatives. The finding in subsection (a)(3) shall
describe the specific reasons for rejecting identified mitigation measures and project
alternatives.
(d) When making the findings required in subsection (a)(l), the agency shall
also adopt a program for reporting on or monitoring the changes, which it has either
required in the project or made a condition of approval to avoid or substantially lessen
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations
1652724 v3 [Word]
Exhibit “EIR-B”
4 8/14/2001
significant environmental effects. These measures must be fully enforceable through
permit conditions, agreements, or other measures.
(4 The public agency shall specify the location and custodian of the
documents or other materials which constitute the record of the proceedings upon which
its decision is based.
(0 A statement made pursuant to Section 15093 does not substitute for the
findings required by this section.
Guidelines 815092. Approval.
(4 After considering the final EIR and in conjunction with making findings
under Section 15091, the lead agency may decide whether or how to approve or carry out
the project.
(b) A public agency shall not decide to approve or carry out a project for
which an EIR was prepared unless either:
(1) The project as approved will not have a significant effect on the
environment, or
(2) The agency has:
(A) Eliminated or substantially lessened all significant effects on the environment where feasible as shown in findings under Section 15091, and
(B) Determined that any remaining significant effects on the environment
found to be unavoidable under Section 15091 are acceptable due to overriding concerns
as described in Section 15093.
(cl With respect to a project which includes housing development, the public
agency shall not reduce the proposed number of housing units as a mitigation measure if
it determines that there is another feasible specific mitigation measure available that will
provide a comparable level of mitigation.
1.2 Program Environmental Impact Report Process. In accordance with CEQA,
the Guidelines and Chapter 19.04, the City considered an Initial Study. Based on the Initial
Study, the City concluded that the Proposed Project could have a significant impact on the
environment and that preparation of an environmental impact report was necessary and issued its
Notice of Preparation (“NOP”) on December 23, 1998, distributing it to all Responsible and
Trustee Agencies, as well as other agencies and members of the public. A number of written
responses were received and the city scheduled two separate public scoping sessions in order to
increase opportunities for public input. The two scoping sessions took place June 30, 1999 and
July 14, 1999 at the City’s Public Safety Center. At the scoping sessions, the public was invited
to comment on the scope and content of the EIR. Approximately 155 people signed in at the
scoping sessions and comments were received and considered in both verbal and written form.
After consideration of all of the foregoing the City developed a detailed “EIR 98-07 - Villages of
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations
1652724 v3 [Word]
Exhibit “EIR-B”
5 8/14/2001
La Costa Master Plan Program EIR Scope of Work Letter” dated September 23, 1999
establishing the details of the Program EIR requirements. A copy of the Initial Study, NOP, the
written comments received in response to the NOP and public scoping sessions and the detailed
“Scope of Work” letter are included in Volume I of the Appendices to the Final Program EIR.
The September 23, 1999 City “Scope of Work” letter, after consideration of the Initial
Study, Scoping session comments and other comments in response to the NOP, identified the
need and instructed that the Draft Program EIR to analyze the potential for environmental
impacts associated with the following fourteen substantive potential impact areas in the
Environmental Analysis section:
- Land Use and Community Character
- Landform Alteration
- Visual Quality
- Biological Resources
- Archaeological Resources
- Paleontological Resources
- Transportation
- Noise
- Air Quality
- Geology/Soils
- Hydrology, Water Quality and Drainage
- Public Facilities and Services
- Human Health and Safety Hazards
- Population and Housing
Additionally, the Draft EIR was directed to include other CEQA substantive sections including
Executive Summary, Project Description, Cumulative Effects, Effects Found Not to Be
Significant, Growth Inducing Effects and Alternatives. Because of the scope of the Proposed
Project, a Program EIR was determined to be the most useful and appropriate form of EIR.
Guidelines 9 15 168 establishes the benefits of a Program ElR as follows:
Guidelines gl5168. Program EIR
Go General. A program EIR is an ElR which may be prepared on a series of
actions that can be characterized as one large project and are related either:
(1) Geographically,
(2) As logical parts in the chain of contemplated actions,
(3) In connection with issuance of rules, regulations, plans, or other general
criteria to govern the conduct of a continuing program, or
(4) As individual activities carried out under the same authorizing statutory or
regulatory authority and having generally similar environmental effects which can be mitigated in similar ways.
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B”
1652724 v3 [Word] 6 8/14/2001
03 Advantages. Use of a program EIR can provide the following advantages.
The program EIR can:
(1) Provide an occasion for a more exhaustive consideration of effects and
alternatives than would be practical in an EIR on an individual action,
(2) Ensure consideration of cumulative impacts that might be slighted in a
case-by-case analysis,
(3) Avoid duplicative reconsideration of basic policy considerations,
(4) Allow the lead agency to consider broad policy alternatives and program
wide mitigation measures at an early time when the agency has greater flexibility to deal
with basic problems or cumulative impacts,
(5) Allow reduction in paperwork.
(c) Use With Later Activities. Subsequent activities in the program must be
examined in the light of the program ElR to determine whether an additional
environmental document must be prepared.
(1) If a later activity would have effects that were not examined in the
program EIR, a new initial study would need to be prepared leading to either an ElR or a
negative declaration.
(2) If the agency finds that pursuant to Section 15162, no new effects could
occur or no new mitigation measures would be required, the agency can approve the
activity as being within the scope of the project covered by the program EIR, and no new
environmental document would be required.
(3) An agency shall incorporate feasible mitigation measures and alternatives
developed in the program EIR into subsequent actions in the program.
(4) Where the subsequent activities involve site-specific operations, the
agency should use a written checklist or similar device to document the evaluation of the
site and the activity to determine whether the environmental effects of the operation were
covered in the program EIR.
(5) A program EIR will be most helpful in dealing with subsequent activities
if it deals with the effects of the program as specifically and comprehensively as possible.
With a good and detailed analysis of the program, many subsequent activities could be
found to be within the scope of the project described in the program EIR, and no further
environmental documents would be required.
(a Use With Subsequent EIR’s and Negative Declarations. A program EIR
can be used to simplify the task of preparing environmental documents on later parts of
the program. The program EIR can:
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B”
1652724 v3 [word] 7 8/14/2001
(1) Provide the basis in an initial study for determining whether the later
activity may have any significant effects.
(2) Be incorporated by reference to deal with regional influences, secondary
effects, cumulative impacts, broad alternatives, and other factors that apply to the program as a whole.
(3) Focus an EIR on a subsequent project to permit discussion solely of new
effects which had not been considered before.
(e) Notice With Later Activities. When a law other than CEQA requires
public notice when the agency later proposes to carry out or approve an activity within
the program and to rely on the program EIR for CEQA compliance, the notice for the
activity shall include a statement that:
(1) This activity is within the scope of the program approved earlier, and
(2) CEQA.
The program EIR adequately describes the activity for the purposes of
On January 25, 2001, the Draft Program EIR was published and the City duly notified
interested Responsible and Trustee Agencies, as well a other interested agencies and sent out
over 2,985 “Notice(s) of Completion of a Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Villages of
La Costa Project” to all members of the public who had signed on the interested party list at the
scoping sessions or otherwise requested notification, as well as to all property owners within 600
feet of the Proposed Project area based on the most recent tax assessor’s rolls. The “Notice of
Completion” commenced an initial 45 day public review and comment period initially expiring
March 12, 2001. On February 8, 2001, at the request of a member of the public, the City
extended public review and comment period to a total of 60 days, expiring March 26, 2001 in
order to give the public additional opportunity to review and comment in writing. The “Notice
of Completion” advised that the Draft Program EIR was available, and it was in fact available,
for review at four locations: the City of Carlsbad Planning Department (1635 Faraday Avenue,
Carlsbad, CA 92008); the City Clerk’s Office (1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92008); the Carlsbad Main Public Library (1775 Dove Lane, Carlsbad, CA 92009) and
Carlsbad’s Georgina Cole Public Library (1250 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92008).
Complete copies were also available for purchase, with or without the Appendices, through the
Planning Department. The City established the cost of purchased copies at less than the actual
reproduction cost.
Following expiration of the public review and comment period to the Draft Program EIR,
every written comment letter was reviewed and written responses prepared. The written public
comments and the written responses thereto are contained in the Final Program EIR.
on the City Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to
consider, among other things, Certification of the Final Program EJR in accordance with CEQA,
the Guidelines and Chapter 19.04. By Planning Commission Resolution No. de
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B”
1652724 v3 [word] 8 8/14/2001
Planning commission certified the Final Program EIR as complete.
No. is incorporated herein by reference as though fully set forth.
Resolution
1.3 Description of Proposed Project. The Proposed Project overall 1,866.4 acres is
geographically divided into three distinct development program areas, called “villages” and
named “La Costa Greens”, “La Costa Ridge” and “La Costa Oaks.”
1.3.1 La Costa Greens. La Costa Greens consists of 660.7 gross acres and
proposes not more than (a) 1,038 residential units on 350.8 gross acres, (b) a business park on
7.9 gross acres, (c) a 7.2 gross acre elementary school site, (d) an adjacent public community
park on 27.2 gross acres, (e) a community facilities area on 7.9 gross acres, (t) HCP Open Space
on 212.6 gross acres, (g) Non-HCP Open Space on 33.4 gross acres and (h) a major road
(Poinsettia Lane) on the remaining 13.7 gross acres. See generally FPEIR pgs. 3-6,3-7,3-8 and
3-12 for La Costa Greens location and additional planning area development detail.
1.3.2 La Costa Ridge. La Costa ridge consists of 493.1 gross acres and
proposes not more than (a) 320 residential units on 157.9 gross acres, (b) HCP Open Space on
324.3 gross acres and (c) Non-HCP Open space on the remaining 10.9 gross acres. See generally
FPEIR pgs. 3-7, 3-14 and 3-15 for La Costa Ridge location and additional planning area
development detail.
1.3.3 La Costa Oaks. La Costa Oaks consists of 712.6 gross acres and
proposes not more than (a) 1,032 residential units on 357.5 gross acres, (b) community facilities
on 6.6 gross acres, (c) HCP Open Space on 298.0 gross acres, (d) Non-HCP Open Space on
24.1 gross acres and (e) the right of way for a major road (Ranch0 Santa Fe Road) on the remaining 26.4 gross acres. See generally FPEIR pgs. 3-7, 3-17, 3-18 and 3-19 for La Costa
Oaks location and additional planning area development detail.
1.3.4 Offsite Poinsettia Lane. Poinsettia Lane is classified as a Major Arterial
in the City’s Circulation Element and is intended to provide the primary east/west street bisecting
La Costa Greens. If development of La Costa Greens precedes development of the Bressi Ranch
property to the east, then the Proposed Project would be responsible to construct offsite
Poinsettia Lane easterly from the La Costa Greens boundary to connect to the existing portion of
Poinsettia Lane at El Fuerte Street. See generally FPEIR pgs. 3-12 and 3-21 for additional detail.
1.4 Discretionary Actions. The necessary discretionary actions considered and to be
acted on by the City, other than certification of the Final Program EIR, include the following discretionary actions on the Proposed Project:
1.4.1 General Plan Amendment (GPA 98-01). The General Plan is a
comprehensive plan and program for the physical development of the City, consisting of text and maps, setting forth standards, goals, polices and objectives for the development and use of land
in the City. The Proposed Project seeks the following amendments: (a) amend the open space
boundary on the General Plan’s Open Space and Conservation Element conforming to the
proposed HCP Open Space and Non-HCP Open Space areas and implementing the HCP/OMSP;
(b) remove the Secondary Arterial designation for La Costa Avenue easterly of Camino de 10s
Caches on the General Plan Circulation Element Map; and (c)move the allowable residential
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B” 1652724 v3 [Word] 9 8/14/2001
dwelling units designated for the HCP/OMSP’s “Conserved Habitat Area” into “Impact Areas” of
the HCP/OMSP designated for development.
1.4.2 Adoption of New Villages of La Costa Master Plan (2000). The City
General Plan designates the Proposed Project Area as “Planned Community.” Chapter 21.38 of
the Municipal code requires a Master Plan before development may occur to establish the uses,
intensities, character, design and comprehensive development standards and conditions to
regulate and control all future development.
1.4.3 Amendment to Existing Master Plan 149(O). Delete the Proposed
Project from the old La Costa Master Plan 149(O) area’ which plan was last amended in 1990.
1.4.4 Implementation of the HCP/OMSP. Pursuant to the June 7, 1995
Implementation Agreement for the HCP/OMSP, establishing “Conserved Habitat” areas of at
least 702.5 acres in the locations provided within La Costa Greens, La Costa Ridge and La Costa
Oaks was to occur through any subsequent approval process for the Proposed Project and to
designate the permissible “Impact Areas”. The Proposed Project actually identifies an additional
132.4 acres of Conserved Habitat Area, designated HCP Open Space, for a total of 834.9 acres of
Conserved Habitat Area.
1.4.5 Local Facilities Management Plans for Zones 10 and 11. The City’s Growth Management Program divided the City into 25 zones and requires, among other things,
that a Local Facilities Management Plan (LFMP) be approved prior to any new development
within a zone. An LFMP is a public facilities and infkastructure planning program to assure that
needed public facilities, services and infk&ructure are provided for concurrent with need created
by new development, including any phasing of installation and financing options. La Costa
Greens is within Zone 10 and a LFMP Zone 10 must be approved. La Costa Ridge and Oaks are
within Zone 11, which has an existing LFMP, needing amendment to reflect the Proposed
Project.
1.4.6 Master Tentative Subdivision Maps. Two separate Master Tentative
Subdivision Maps (“Master TM”) are proposed; one for La Costa Greens and one for La Costa Oaks and Ridge combined. Each Master TM proposes subdivision into separate development
planning area parcels pursuant to the California Subdivision Map Act and Chapter 20.04 et seq.
of the Municipal Code. Neither Master TM provides for the final mapping of individual
residential lots, but represents an interim development condition, with the exception of La Costa
Oaks Neighborhoods 3.8 and 3.9 which are mapped at the individual lot level. However, the
Final Program EIR analyzes the Proposed Project in both the interim Master TM condition as
well as the anticipated overall individual lot configurations.
1.4.7 Street Right of Way Vacations. Four existing street right of way
reservations or facilities would be vacated and relocated as part of the Proposed Project. In
La Costa Greens, the current proposed alignment for Poinsettia Lane would be vacated and
realigned approximately 100 feet northerly. In La Costa Ridge and Oaks, vacations and
realignments would occur for the Ranch0 Santa Fe/Melrose intersection, Ranch0 Santa
FeKadencia and the Ranch0 Santa Fe/Questhaven intersections, and the existing Ranch0 Santa
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B”
1652724 v3 [Word] 10 8/14/2001
Fe Road truck bypass would be vacated upon construction of the new realigned Ranch0 Santa Fe
Road which is being undertaken by the City as separate project approved by the City in 1992.
1.4.8 Hillside Development Permits. Under the City’s Hillside Development
Ordinance (Chapter 21.95 of the Municipal Code), a separate permit is required when a project
proposes disturbing natural slopes with gradients of 15 percent or greater and elevation
differentials exceeding 15 feet in order to assure conformity with the special policies and
standards contained in the Hillside Development Ordinance.
1.4.9 Scenic Corridor Special Use Permit. El Camino Real is one of the
City’s scenic corridors for which Scenic Corridor Guidelines have been developed by the City to
improve or protect scenic viewscapes, traffic safety and similar special treatments. As La Costa
Greens abuts El Camino Real along its westerly edge, a Scenic Corridor Special Use Permit is
required to assure project consistency with the adopted guidelines.
1.4.10 Floodplain Special Use Permits. Under Chapter 21.110 of the Municipal
Code, a Floodplain Special Use Permit is required whenever grading or development would
occur within certain designated flood hazard areas, including floodplain areas as mapped by the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). La Costa Greens and La Costa Oaks include
such grading and are required to obtain the permits to assure compliance with applicable
standards and policies.
1.4.11 Planned Development Permit. Under Chapter 21.45 of the Municipal
Code, a Planned Development Permit is being processed concurrently with the Master TM for
Neighborhood 3.9 of La Costa Oaks.
Additionally, other discretionary permits may be necessary from Responsible or Trustee
Agencies in the course of the development of the Proposed Project as more particularly described
in the FPEIR at pgs. l-6 and l-7. Those permits and approvals are outside the jurisdiction of the
City, but the environmental effects are analyzed in the Final Program EIR.
Environmental Setting. The Proposed Project is located in the southeast
Quadrar?of the City, in the largely residential and retail/commercial area known as La Costa.
La Costa Greens is located northerly of the La Costa Resort and Spa and surrounds nine holes of
golf. La Costa Oaks and Ridge are located generally easterly near the southeastern border of the
City. The City of Carlsbad encompasses approximately 40 square miles, currently has a
population of approximately 78,247 persons and 33,798 residential units. The current General
Plan and Growth Management Ordinance anticipate that the citywide population will be in the
135,000 range at buildout with approximately 54,599 residential units and strives to balance jobs,
housing diversity, open space, habitat/species protection and recreational opportunities for its
inhabitants.
The City has a full compliment of public facilities including the Palomar Airport General
Aviation Facility, the Encina Electrical Power Generating Station, the Encina Wastewater
Treatment Facility and two NCTD Coaster Stations and Interstate 5 to name a few. Additionally,
a major employment center is located in the Palomar Airport area that employs approximately
3 1,000 people daily. A number of significant retail, resort and commercial facilities are also
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B”
1652724 v3 [Word] 11 8/14/2001
located in the City, including Legoland theme park, Aviara Four Seasons Resort and Golf
Course, La Costa Resort and Spa, Westfield Plaza Camino Real regional shopping center,
Carlsbad Company Stores specialty shopping center, 20 automobile dealerships in the Carlsbad
Car Country area and the unique downtown mixed use village area near the City’s beaches.
Incorporated in 1953, the City is a vibrant, balanced residential and commercial metropolitan
area blessed by its beaches and three coastal lagoons.
The Proposed Project area is largely undeveloped (one ranch house and associated out
buildings on 1,866.4 acres), generally consists of moderately sloping hillside terrain with several
north-south draining alluvial valleys and canyons. One of the prominent natural features is the
San Marcos Creek and canyon area that separates the La Costa Ridge and La Costa Oaks villages
and which will be left in its natural undeveloped state and incorporated into the HCP Open Space
preserve system for permanent preservation. Preservation of this natural area, including locally
prominent Box Canyon waterfall area, as part of a total 834.9 acre HCP Open Space Preserve
area is a key element of the Proposed Project for wildlife and habitat/species protection.
Several public facilities are located on the property including two potable water tank
reservoirs, an open reclaimed water reservoir, several large electricity transmission lines, water
and sewer lines traverse the property, as do several service access roads. La Costa Greens is bordered by El Camino Real on the west and Alga Road on the south, La Costa Ridge is
primarily serviced by existing El Fuerte Avenue on the western edge and La Costa Oaks is
bisected by Ranch0 Santa Fe Road and La Costa Avenue.
More detailed descriptions of the property area and its environs is set forth in the Final
Program EIR at pgs. 2-l through 2-21 and incorporated herein by this reference.
1.6 Purpose of CEQA Findings; Terminology. CEQA Findings play an important
role in the consideration of projects for which an EIR is prepared. Under PRC 9 21081 and
Guidelines Q 15091 above, where a final EIR identifies one or more significant environmental
effects, a project may not be approved until the public agency makes written findings supported
by substantial evidence in the administrative record as each of the significant effects. In turn, the
three possible findings specified in Guidelines 9 15091(a) are:
(1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project
which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the final
EIR.
(2) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of
another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted
by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency.
(3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation
measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR.
III turn, Guidelines 0 15092(b) provides that no agency shall approve a project for which
an EIR was prepared unless either:
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B”
1652724 v3 [Word] 12 8/14/2001
(1) The project as approved will not have a significant effect on the environment, or
(2) The agency has:
(A) Eliminated or substantially lessened all significant effects where
feasible as shown in the findings under Section 15091, and
(B) Determined that any remaining significant effects on the environment
found to be unavoidable under Section 15091 are acceptable due to
overriding concerns as described in Section 15093.
Based on the foregoing, the Guidelines do not provide a bright distinction between the meaning
of “avoid” or “substantially lessen”. The applicable Guidelines are based on PRC $2108 1, which uses the phrase “mitigate or avoid”, and hence it is generally considered that to “avoid” is
to include changes or alterations that result in the significant effect being reduced to below a
level of significance. In contrast, the phrase “substantially lessen” is used to describe changes or
alterations that materially reduce the significant effect, but not below a level of significance,
thus, while mitigated, the effect remains significant. These Findings will distinguish, for the
purposes of clarity, between effects that have been “avoided” (thereby reduced below a level of
significance) and those that have been “substantially lessened” (and thus remain significant).
In combination with the mitigation and monitoring program discussed immediately
below, the following Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations are binding
obligations of the project to implement all required mitigation measures.
1.7 Mitigation Monitoring Program. Pursuant to PRC $21081.6, the City has also
adopted a detailed mitigation and monitoring program prepared by the EIR consultant under the
direction of the City. The program is designed to assure that all mitigation measures as hereafter
required are in fact implemented on a timely basis as the Proposed Project progresses through its
development and construction phases. Compliance with the “Villages of La Costa Master Plan
(2000) Mitigation and Monitoring Program” (a copy of which is attached to this Resolution as
“Attachment B”) is a condition of any City approvals and incorporated herein by this reference.
1.8 Record of Proceedings. For all purposes of CEQA compliance, including these
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations, the administrative record of all
City proceedings and decisions regarding the environmental analysis of the Proposed Project
shall include the following:
-The Draft and Final Program EIR for the Proposed Project, together with all
appendices and technical reports referred to therein, whether separately bound or
not;
-All reports, letters, applications, memoranda, maps or other planning and
engineering documents prepared by the City, planning consultant, environmental
consultant, project applicant or others presented to or before the decision-makers
as determined by the City Clerk;
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B” 1652724 v3 [Word] 13 8/14/2001
-All letters, reports or other documents submitted to the City by members of the
public or public agencies in connection with the City’s environmental analysis on
the Proposed Project;
-All minutes of any public workshops, meetings or hearings, including the scoping sessions, and any recorded or verbatim transcripts/videotapes thereof;
-Any letters, reports or other documents or other evidence submitted into the
record at any public workshops, meetings or hearings; and
-Matters of common general knowledge to the City which they may consider, including applicable state or local laws, ordinances and policies, the General Plan
and all applicable planning programs and policies of the City.
The custodian of the full administrative record shall be the City Clerk’s Offrce, 1200 Carlsbad
Village Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92008.
2. FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS, REQUIRED MITIGATION
MEASURES AND SUPPORTING FACTS.
2.1 Land Use and Community Character.
2.1.1 General Plan Land Use Designation Consistency.
Impact. The Proposed Project is inconsistent with the existing General
Plan as the existing General Plan Land Use Element provides for development of areas intended
to be preserve areas consistent with the previously approved HCP/OMSP and the existing
General Plan Open Space and Conservation Element does not provide as much open space as the
Proposed Project and HCP/OMSP anticipate, nor in the most advantageous locations.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.1-1. The existing General Plan Land Use Element
and the Open space and Conservation Element are to be modified as part of the project approvals
to conform the location and amount of open space to the approved HCP/OMSP and the Proposed
Project open space and development boundaries.
Factual Support and Rationale. In each of the Villages, the amount of
open space being set aside and preserved is substantially increased beyond that shown in the
existing General Plan elements. In La Costa Greens, the total amount of open space being permanently preserved and set aside increases from approximately 170 acres to a total of
246 acres, which represents an increase of more than 35%. In La Costa Ridge/Oaks combined,
the total amount of open space being permanently preserved and set aside increases from
approximately 242 acres to a total of 657.3 acres, which represents an increase of more than
171%. Combined for the entire Proposed Project, the total amount of open space being set aside
and permanently preserved increases from approximately 412 acres to a total of 903.3 acres,
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations 1652724 v3 [Word] Exhibit “EIR-B” 14 8/14/2001
representing an overall increase of more than 119%, more than doubling the existing area. Of
the total open space acreage, 834.9 acres would be included within the HCP/OMSP habitat
preserve area and a conservation easement to the California Department of Fish and Game
(“CDFG”) and then conveyed to an approved wildlife conservation entity together with a permanent endowment for perpetual maintenance of its biological significance in an amount
approved by the CDFG and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (“USFWS”). Overall,
the Proposed Project site would set aside over 48% of the entire property site in permanent open
space. Further, the location of open space in the Proposed Project conforms to the designated
biologically significant Preserve Areas for habitat and endangered species protection purposes
and is designed and configured to link up with adjoining protected and future habitat preserve
areas and corridor migration linkages to improve the protection and recovery of endangered and
threatened species and their habitat. (For a more detailed explanation, see FPEIR at pgs. 4.1-15
through 4. l-l 8; and FPEIR Section 4.4 dealing with the Biological Resources).
2.1.2 Consistency with Other General Plan Goals.
Impact. In addition to the specific General Plan elements discussed in
Section 2.1 .l above, a number of other City General Plan goals set forth in the following
elements could be significantly affected by the Proposed Project if mitigation measures are not
required: Land Use Element; Circulation Element; Noise Element; Housing Element; Open
Space and Conservation Element; Public Safety Element; and Parks and Recreation Element. In
order to avoid repetition, each of the goals in the individual elements will be referenced in the
Factual Support and Rationale subsection below.
Finding. With the incorporation of the mitigation measures set forth in
detail in Sections 4.2 through 4.14 of the Final Program EIR (as detailed in Sections 2.2 through
2.14 below), the identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below
a level of significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.1-2. The detailed Mitigation Measures are set
forth in their entirety in Sections 2.2 through 2.14 of these Findings and in Sections 4.2 through
4.14 of the Final Program EIR and are included by reference here to avoid repetition.
Factual Support and Rationale. The affected goals are as follows.
Overall Land Use Pattern Goal A. 1. “A City which preserves and enhances the
environment and image of itself as a desirable residential, beach and open space oriented
community.” The Proposed Project satisfies this goal by preserving 903.3 acres (over 48% of its
area) in permanent open space (834.9 acres of HCP Open Space; 168.4 acres of non-HCP Open
Space), while providing a mixture of residential densities, a 7.9 acre business park, 14.5 acres of
community facilities (RV storage, churches, day care, etc.), an elementary school site, a
27.2 acre community park, hiking and bike trails and significant transportation improvements.
Overall Land Use Pattern Goal A.2. “A City which provides for an orderly balance of
both public and private land uses within convenient and compatible locations throughout the community ensures that all such uses, type, amount, design and arrangement serve to protect and
enhance the environment, character and image of the City.” In addition to the variety of
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations
1652724 v3 [Word]
Exhibit “EIR-B”
15 g/14/2001
residential housing types throughout the Proposed Project, the 27.2 acre community park and
elementary school site have been located conveniently to circulation element roads providing
access from the larger surrounding community, the 7.9 acre business park is adjacent to El
Camino Real and other business/commercial centers and will not abut existing or future
residential uses, the community facilities uses are also conveniently located along circulation
element roads and generally separated from residential uses, the hiking and biking trails inter-
connect with and significantly expand the citywide trail system and the 359 units of Affordable
Inclusionary Workforce Housing is integrated into the Proposed Project onsite in two separate
locations near public transportation routes. The Proposed Project has located its range of uses
and housing types so as locate similar sized lots and single family detached homes adjacent to all
existing single family developments on the Proposed Project boundaries.
Growth Management and Public Facilities Goals A. 1 and A.2. “A City which ensures the
timely provision of adequate facilities and services to preserve the quality of life of residents.
(A. 1)” “A City which maintains a system of public facilities adequate for the projected
population. (A.2)” As part of the City’s Growth Management Program, the city developed a
comprehensive Citywide Public Facilities Management Plan establishing performance and
adequacy standards for all public facilities necessary to serve and enhance the quality of life of
its citizenry. The Proposed Project includes the amendment or preparation of two Local
Facilities Management Plans which set forth the phasing and financing for each of the eleven
public facilities covered in the Citywide Plan and assures the performance and adequacy
standards will be provided for at all times by the Proposed Project as it develops. If not met,
then development is required to stop until the standards are satisfied.
Growth Manapement and Public Facilities Goal A.3. “A City that reasonably deals with
the disposal of solid and liquid waste.” The Proposed Project will generate wastewater flows
that can be treated at either the Encina Water Pollution Control Facility or the Meadowlark
Reclamation Plant, both located in the city. Existing capacity exists, but a standard condition
requires the City Engineer certify at all times that adequate capacity exists prior to issuance of
building permits. Solid waste would be collected by the city’s franchise hauler and the Proposed
Project will participate in the City’s curbside recycling program to minimize landfill impacts.
The City is satisfied that adequate landfill capacity exists in its current program to accommodate
the waste generated by the Proposed Project.
Residential Goal A. “A City which provides for a variety of housing types and density
ranges...while maintaining the present predominance of single family residences.” The Proposed
Project intends to develop 2,390 residential units. In La Costa Greens, 718 detached single
family units are planned in neighborhoods with minimum lot sizes ranging from 3,500 sq.ft. to
11,000 sqft. in various neighborhoods and an additional 320 multi-family attached residential
units. The La Costa Ridge/Oaks combined plans 1,078 single family detached units in
neighborhoods with minimum lot sizes ranging from 3,500 sq.A. to 10,000 sq.ft. and up to an
additional 274 multi-family attached units. Minimum lot sizes and residential types will be
compatible with adjacent existing residential developments and the average lot size for each
neighborhood will be larger than the minimum size.
Industrial Goal A. “A City which develops an industrial base of light, pollution-free
industries of such magnitude as will provide a reasonable tax base and a balance of opportunities
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations 1652724 v3 [word] Exhibit “EIR-B” 16 8/14/2001
for employment of local residences.” While only 7.9 acres of the Proposed Project is intended
for a business park use, it is located in the Northwest portion of La Costa Greens adjacent to the
existing primary office and industrial employment area of the city and represents a modest, but
consistent expansion of the City’s employment opportunities for balanced jobs/housing. All city
businesses are required to comply with stringent local, state and federal stationary source
emission and hazardous materials handling and use restrictions.
Aariculture Goal A. “A City which prevents the premature elimination of agricultural
land and preserves said lands wherever possible.” The Proposed Project area is not presently
used for agricultural purposes nor has it been used for such purposes for over many years. As
discussed in Final Program EIR Section 4.10, approximately 95% of the soils on the site are not
suitable for cultivation of crops, and any such cultivation would be inconsistent with preservation
of the 834.9 acres of biologically significant habitat.
Environmental Goal A. “A City which protects and conserves natural resources, fragile
ecological areas, unique natural assets and historically significant features of the community.” In
addition to the 834.9 acres of fully managed habitat preserve area, which amount is in excess of
the 702 acres required by the HCP/OMSP, the onsite habitat preserve area is located to connect
to other habitat preservation and endangered species areas inside and outside the city through a
combination of large adjacent preserve areas and biologically significant corridors and linkages
to facilitate the movement and bio-diversity of the affected species. A significant natural feature,
the San Marcos Creek Canyon and locally known Box Canyon waterfall and pool will be
included in the managed open space habitat areas and all development is pulled back from the
canyon. Significant archaeological and paleontological resources are being protected through a
combination of preservation, site disturbance monitoring and implementation of data recovery
programs where warranted.
Suecial Planning Considerations - Airport Goal A. “A city which maintains land use
compatibility between McClellan-Palomar Airport and surrounding land uses.” The
northwestern portion of La Costa Greens is located within the designated Airport Influence Area
as established by the McClellan-Palomar Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan. All
development within this area is a permitted use under the Comprehensive Plan and written
disclosures, and where appropriate, avigation easements will be obtained prior to the sale or
development of any affected land consistent with City ordinances and policies. Additionally, the
7.9 acre business park and the adjacent public facilities area is also within the Flight Activities
Zone for the Airport and special restrictions on uses and assembly of people will be imposed
consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan for the airport. No residential uses are
impacted by the designated Flight Activity Zone area.
Streets and Traffic Control Goals A.l.. A.2. and A.3. “A city with an integrated
transportation network serving local and regional needs which accommodates a balance of
different travel modes based on safety, convenience, attractiveness, costs, environmental and
social impacts. (A.1 .)” ” A city with an adequate circulation infrastructure to serve the projected
population. (A.2.) “ “A City with a comprehensive network of roads which provides appropriate
access to all land uses. (A.3.)” The Proposed Project is designed to assure the comprehensive
city wide circulation plan and Circulation Element of the General Plan can be accommodated
onsite by providing approximately 40.1 acres for circulation element roadways, in addition to the
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations
1652724 v3 [word]
Exhibit “EIR-B”
17 8/14/2001
local residential streets, bikeways, trials, sidewalks and bike lanes serving the Proposed Project
and the entire community. The La Costa Greens circulation plan provides improvements to Alga
Road, Poinsettia Lane, El Camino Real, Alicante road as well as internal streets. The La Costa
Ridge/Oaks plan contemplates additional improvements to Alga Road, El Fuerte Street, Melrose
Drive, Ranch0 Santa Fe Road, and construction of internal streets. The designation of a portion
of La Costa Avenue easterly of Camino de Los Caches would no longer be designated a Secondary Arterial on the circulation element as a result of the other traffic improvements.
Additionally, the collection of traffic impact fees, bridge and thoroughfare fees and installation
of traffic control devices would facilitate the implementation of the City’s master traffic and road
system, including improvements to major regional facilities including Ranch0 Santa Fe Road, El
Camino Real, Poinsettia Lane, Melrose Drive and Alga Road.
Streets and Traffic Control Goal A.4. “A City with properly maintained, smooth
functioning and safe traffic control systems.” The right of way widths, lane geometries and
roadway classifications are designed to assure that the traffic control systems to be installed as
part of the Proposed Project will provide for safe and effective operations for vehicles, bicycles
and pedestrians. In La Costa Greens, traffic signals will be installed at: El Camino Real’s
intersections with Poinsettia Lane and entry to Neighborhood 1.2; Poinsettia Lane’s intersection
with Alicante Road; and at Alga Road’s intersection with Alicante Road. In La Costa
Ridge/Oaks, traffic signals will be installed at: Ranch0 Santa Fe’s intersection with realigned
Questhaven Road (San Elijo Road); La Costa Oaks Street C; and La Costa Oaks Street E.
Additionally, on the internal streets of the Proposed Project, stop signs will be installed where
determined necessary by applicable traffic warrants.
Alternative Modes of Transportation Goal A. “A City which promotes, encourages and
accommodates a variety of transportation modes as alternatives to the automobile.” In addition
to the vehicular traffic capabilities and improvements, the Proposed Project includes Class II
bicycle lanes on all arterial roads (Alga, Alicante, El Camino Real, Melrose, Poinsettia, Ranch0
Santa Fe and Street C) as well as off street hiking and biking trail system to interconnect with the
citywide system of trails as well as a local trail network. Sidewalks and mass transit are
accommodated throughout the Proposed Project area.
Public Utilitv and Storm DrainaPe Facilities Goal A.l. “A City with a comprehensive
network of utilities and storm drainage facilities which provide appropriate public utility and
flood control services to all land uses.” A full range of public utility services are engineered for
the Proposed Project. A small area of development is designed for the existing FEMA mapped
100 year flood plain, but the reconfiguration of the flood plain area and approval from FEMA
will assure that no structures are subject to inundation or located in the revised 100 year flood plain. The Proposed Project on-site storm water runoff retention system is designed to meet the
newest Regional Water Quality Control Board numeric sizing and NPDES discharge permit
requirements, one of the first master planned communities to do so on a comprehensive basis.
Scenic Roadways Goal A. “A City which preserves and enhances the visual,
environmental and historical characteristics of the local community through sensitive planning
and design of transportation and utility corridors.” The City has designated a number of scenic
corridors throughout the city, including El Camino Real, Poinsettia Lane and Ranch0 Santa Fe
Road. To date, detailed standards have been established only for El Camino Real and the
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations 1652724 v3 [Word] Exhibit “EIR-B”
18 8/14/2001
Proposed Project will be required to comply with those standards through issuance of the Scenic
Corridor Special Use Permit process and will minimize landscaping where vistas exist, conform
landscape programs to the common theme and incorporate special setbacks, median treatments
and similar provisions. As part of the Villages of La Costa Master Plan (2000), design standards
will be developed for the other two scenic corridors and implemented. The roadway system
design and locations have been approved by the various environmental agencies and are located
to coincide with the HCP/OMSP habitat preserve area to avoid conflicts wherever feasible.
Land Use Goals A.1 and A.3. “A City where land uses are not significantly impacted by
noise. (A. 1 .)‘I “A City which controls mobile sources of noise to help assure that mobile sources
do not significantly contribute to the noise environment. (A.3.)” With one exception, a 3%
cumulative impact to an existing road noise/residential interface problem along the south side of
Alga Road between El Camino Real and Alicante Road, the Proposed Project’s road and street
system avoids adverse noise impacts to existing uses and includes noise attenuation features as
walls, slopes, berming and landscaping to assure that noise levels will not exceed applicable city
standards.
Land Use Goal A.2. “A City with industrial and commercial uses which do not produce
significantly adverse noise impacts.” The non-residential uses in the Proposed Project are a
7.9 acre business park and two community facilities areas. In La Costa Greens, the 7.9 acre
business park and adjacent public facilities usage area are located in the northwest comer along
El Camino Real, a major regional transportation corridor and adjacent to the other office and
industrial job center surrounding the Palomar Airport area. These uses are isolated from the
nearest residential areas by significant open space, other office industrial areas and public use
facilities. In La Costa Oaks, the community use facilities area is located adjacent to Ranch0
Santa Fe Road, but will be screened from future residential uses to the east by landscaping and
topography. All areas are required to meet citywide noise standards of 65 Ldn at the property
line so as not to significantly impact adjoining uses.
Circulation Goal A. “To provide a roadway system that does not subject surrounding
land uses to significantly adverse noise levels.” As noted above, the Proposed Project is
designed to comply with this standard, with the one exception of the existing residences fronting
the south side of Alga Road easterly of El Camino Real, which are already experiencing road
noise problems without the Proposed Project. The City has previously evaluated mitigation
measures, but sound walls would block views and require numerous driveway openings for the
homes, reducing its effectiveness. A sound wall would not block noise to second floor living
areas. In the La Costa Oaks area, Ranch0 Santa Fe Road through the Proposed Project area will
be realigned to the east away from existing homes as part of the City’s Ranch0 Santa Fe Road
project. The Proposed Project brings no roads closer to existing residences than already exists.
Airnort Goal A. “A City that achieves long term compatibility between the airport and
surrounding land uses.” As previously discussed, only the northwesterly portion of the La Costa
Greens is located in the Airport Influence Area and only limited non-residential uses within the
Flight Activity Zone, which uses will be limited in accordance with height and occupant load
restrictions to assure compatibility. A comprehensive program of disclosures and where the
Comprehensive Land Use Plan for the Airport requires, an avigation easement will be required
over the Proposed Project affected area as determined by the Planning Director based on the
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations 1652724 v3 [Word] Exhibit “EIR-B” 19 8/14/2001
airport operations noise contour mappings. Further, all residents within the roughly 3 mile Noise
Impact Notification Area would be advised prior to purchase through disclosures and covenants,
conditions and restrictions that the property may be exposed to periodic single event aircraft
noise occurrences.
Quantity and Diversitv of Housing Stock Goal 2. “New housing developed with a
diversity of types, prices, tenures, densities and locations and in significant quantity to meet the
demand of anticipated City and regional growth.” The City has established a comprehensive
Growth Management Program and established build out caps for residential units within each
quadrant of the city. The Proposed Project would provide up to 2,390 units in the Southeast
Quadrant, which is within the build out cap and below the Growth Management control point for
density within the project area, which is the primary device to assure that population and housing
starts are limited to the growth standards. Additionally, the San Diego Association of
Governments (SANDAG) projects significant population growth for Carlsbad and the entire
San Diego region over the next twenty years and allocates to each jurisdiction a allocable share
of regional housing stock growth. The Proposed Project will contribute to meeting the City’s
goals but not exceed the local Growth Management build out caps or applicable density control
point.
Groups with Special Needs Goal 3. “Sufficient new, tiordable housing opportunities in
all quadrants of the City to meet the needs of groups, with special requirements, and, in
particular the needs of current lower and moderate income households and a fair share proportion
of future lower and moderate income households.” In order to meet this goal, the City has
established a comprehensive Inclusionary Housing Chdinance requiring new development
construct at least 15% of the total number of units as affordable to low and moderate income
households based on SANDAG area median income figures. The Proposed Project anticipates a
total of 2,390 units, of which, 359 (15% of 2,390) must be workforce housing meeting City
affordability requirements. The Proposed Project will provide up to 180 units in La Costa
Greens at a site near transportation corridors and up to 179 units in La Costa Oaks, also located
near transportation corridors. The on-site provision of affordable workforce housing fully meets
the Inclusionary Housing requirement and policies and will be assured through a City Affordable
Housing Agreement.
Housing. Jobs, Work Force Balance Goal 4. “Maintenance of a high quality of life and a
strong local economy through the balance of residential and non-residential development, in
particular, a balance of the skills desired and wages offered by local employers; the skills and
education possessed and wages earned by the local work force; and the cost of local housing.”
The Villages of La Costa Master Plan (2000) provides for a range of housing from up to 359
units of affordable workforce housing opportunities and up to 2,031 market rate multi-family
attached and detached residences on a range of minimum lot sizes in the various neighborhoods
from 3,500 sq.f?. to 11,000 sq. ft., plus a 7.9 acre business park and 14.5 acres of community facilities uses. The Proposed Project is predominantly single family detached in character with
the surrounding neighborhoods in the La Costa area, but the product and lot size selection will
provide a range of housing opportunities in close proximity to the Palomar Airport job centers
and employment opportunities as well as near regional transportation access to nearby job
opportunities.
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B”
1652724 v3 [Word] 20 8/14/2001
Resource Conservation Goal 5. “New and developed housing which conserves natural
resources, in particular, energy and water.” A range of energy/resource conservation techniques
and elements are part of the Villages of La Costa Master Plan (2000) development standards.
Water is conserved as over 45% of the entire area being preserved in natural habitat and open
space, and the rest of Non-HCP open space is being vegetated with selected low water
vegetation, including street medians, rights of way, adjacent slopes and parks where appropriate.
Where feasible and available, reclaimed water dual piping will be installed for use of reclaimed
water in these areas. Individual homes and businesses will all be equipped with low flow
devices and common area watering will be automatically monitored and controlled. Structures
will meet all required energy efficiency standards including dual paned windows, roof and wall
insulation, pipe and water heater insulation, and energy efficient heating/cooling systems and
appliances.
Onen Snace Planning and Protection Goal A. 1. and ObtaininP Onen snace Goal A.2. “An
open space system of aesthetic value that maintains community identity, achieves a sense of
natural spaciousness, and provides visual relief in the city scape. (A.1 .)‘I “A City where new
developments provide for the open space needs of the residents. (A.2.)” Over 903 acres (48% of
the Proposed Project Area) would be protected as permanent open space of which 834.9 acres is
within the HCP Open Space permanently managed habitat and biological preserves, including
the San Marcos Creek Canyon and Box Canyon falls/pool area. Additionally, La Costa Greens
wraps around nine northernmost holes of the La Costa Resort’s North course and also sets aside a
27.2 acre community park area. Residents are able to enjoy the open space visually and actively
through an integrated system of citywide and local hiking/biking trails and preservation of view
sheds from both major roads and the existing residential developments surrounding the Project
Area. As previously mentioned, the open space system is biologically linked with the overall
citywide habitat management program in connecting large preserve areas and corridors linking to
County habitat areas and linkages to the east and south. Even where slopes or other open space
areas will be initially disturbed, landscape controls and standards call for natural vegetation
wherever appropriate to give even manufactured and contoured slopes a natural appearance to
compliment the 834.9 acres of undisturbed natural habitat area. Further, the Proposed Project
provides a permanent, funded endowment for the ongoing operation and maintenance of the
habitat preserve and linkage areas.
Snecial Resource Protection Goal A. 1, “Activity that protects environmentally sensitive
land and buffer areas.” The HCP/OMSP required a minimum of 702 acres of natural open space
areas be preserved and maintained in perpetuity. The Proposed Project increases this HCP Open
Space to 834.9 acres and incorporates landscaping, vegetation, setback and brush management
requirements to reduce edge effects between developed areas and the habitat areas. All brush
management areas are outside the HCP preserve area and arterial roads are located and designed
to further minimize the edge effects.
TraiVGreenwav System Goal A.2. “A City with a Carlsbad Trail system.” The Proposed
Project contains several interconnected trails as part of the citywide system and additional local
trails. The network connects to offsite trail areas and significantly expands the City’s trail
system.
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B” 1652724 v3 [Word] 21 8/14/2001
Fire Risk Management Goal A. “A City in which fire risk presented by native wildland
open space is mitigated in a manner that provides a reasonable level of fire protection with
sensitivity toward the preservation of natural resources.” The 1996 Harmony Grove wildfire has
had a pronounced affect on the awareness and necessity to incorporate wildfire mitigation
measures in the Proposed Project. It is a balancing process to preserve natural open space areas
while protecting against wildfires. The City Fire Department has established rigorous fuel
modification and landscape buffer requirements to minimize the spread of wildfires to developed
areas and the city has outlawed wood shingle or other combustible roof materials. The Proposed
Project is required to meet these standards as well as providing ample fire protection water
pressure commensurate with applicable standards. The design standards incorporated into the
Villages of La Costa Master Plan (2000) further provide for fire retardant materials. The City,
through its Fire Department, annually requires specific weed abatement and similar brush
management practices to reduce wildfire risks, and where appropriate, may require certain homes
be sprinklered.
Air Quality Protection Goal A. “A city with clean air.” Regrettably, the entire San Diego
Air Basin is a federal non-attainment area for certain pollutants several times a year,
predominantly in Santa Ana atmospheric conditions when pollutants originated in the
Los Angeles and Grange county areas combine with locally generated pollutants. As a result,
further development of any kind in San Diego Region will contribute to a cumulative,
unavoidable significant impact as discussed below in the Cumulative Impacts section. On a
project level, a number of mitigation measures will be required to minimize air pollution during
the construction phase and thereafter. During construction, a construction worker ride-sharing
program is proposed to minimize vehicle trips and associated dust and other emissions. Frequent
watering while grading to reduce fugitive dust emissions, prompt landscaping requirements for
slopes or other disturbed areas and the provision for sidewalks, bicycle lanes and off-street
hiking and biking trail systems to promote non-vehicular transportation modes, all help to reduce
impacts. The street and road system improvements will assist in moving local and regional
traffic through the area thereby reducing emissions from traffic congestion.
Water Quality Protection Goal A. “A City with a high quality of water resources.” This
goal addresses the storm water and surface runoff issue, rather than purity of potable water which
is the responsibility of various water agencies. As previously mentioned, the Proposed Project is
designed and will be required to meet the new RWQCB storm water discharge NPDES numeric
sizing criteria to capture onsite and treat, if necessary, to remove various urban pollutants before
they enter the storm water system and eventually flow into Batiquitos Lagoon and the Pacific
Ocean. These new standards are the most aggressive in the state and apply both to the
construction and subsequent development phases and require funding assurances be in place to
permanently maintain these improvements.
Historical and Cultural Preservation Goal A.1. “A City in which its existing and
continuing heritage is being protected, preserved, recognized and enhanced.” Some forty
archaeological sites have been identified as within or immediately adjacent to the Proposed
Project, including one site within the off-site alignment of Poinsettia Lane, through extensive
field survey and reported finds. Only three sites would be significantly impacted, one in La
Costa Greens, one in the La Costa Ridge/Oaks and the third in the off-site Poinsettia Lane
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B” 1652724 v3 [word] 22 8/14/2001
alignment. These sites will be monitored during the construction process by archaeologists with
authority to halt construction until any significant resources can be documented and recovered, in
order to mitigate any adverse impacts.
General Goal A. “A City which minimizes injury, loss of life and damage to property
resulting from fire, flood, crime, hazardous material, or seismic disaster occurrence.” Many City
ordinances and standards require compliance with health and safety standards. The Proposed
Project will have a Fire Protection Plan and incorporate the requirements into the fuel
modification zone and landscaping activities and periodic weed abatement program. The
Villages of La Costa Master Plan (2000) requires use of fire retardant building and roofing
materials, increased building setbacks in proximity to natural areas, and the requirement for
residential sprinklers in certain homes as supplemental protection. All structures will incorporate
the latest building codes and standards for fire and seismic safety and no structures will be
located within the revised FEMA 100 year flood plain area following grading. The Local
Facilities Management Plans establish standards for police, fire and other life safety services and
those performance standards must be consistently met.
Park Development Goal A.l. “A City that provides a diversified, comprehensive park
system utilizing contemporary concepts and planning strategies.” The Proposed project
incorporates a 27.2 acre community park location in the northwest portion of La Costa Greens.
If the elementary school site is located elsewhere in La Costa Greens, the community park could
be expanded to approximately 32.9 acres, as an option. Based on SANDAG occupancy
numbers, the 2,390 units at 2.48 persons per household would generate approximately 5,930
residents. Using the City’s Quimby Act standard of 3 park acres per 1,000 population, the
Proposed Project would need approximately 17.79 acres (5,930 divided by 1,000 times 3 acres),
which is more than satisfied by either the 27.2 acre or 32.9 acre public community park.
Additionally, within individual neighborhoods, active and passive recreational facilities and
opportunities will be provided, including additional neighborhood private parks. Residents and
community members will also enjoy the off-street trail and biking system connecting to the
citywide trail network, and benefit from the 834.9 acres of HCP C&en Space and 168.4 acres of Non-HCP Open Space.
2.1.3 Consistency with City of Carlsbad Zoning Ordinances.
2.1.3.1 Special Flood Hazard Overlay Zone.
Impact. The proposed development plan would place a small
portion of the development area within the existing FEMA 100 year flood plain.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation
measure, the identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.13. Prior to issuance of any building
permit for structures within the existing FEMA 100 year flood plain, the applicant shall process
and obtain a Flood Plain Special Use Permit from the city and obtain a Conditional Letter of
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B” 1652724 v3 [word] 23 8/14/2001
Map Revision from FEMA establishing the new 100 year flood plain boundaries in an area
where no structures are to be constructed.
Factual Support and Rationale. In La Costa Greens, an
approximately 3.07 acre portion of the development area encroaches into the existing FEMA 100
year flood plain (See FPElR fig. 4.1 l-4). As the 100 year flood plain exposes property to the
potential for flooding in a 100 year storm (a 1% probability in any year), the Flood Plain Special
Use Permit requires steps be taken to protect the improvements fkom the flooding potential and
not aggravate surrounding flood conditions. The encroachment area is near the intersection of
future Poinsettia Lane and Alicante Road in La Costa Greens and Ranch0 Santa Fe Road and San
Marcos Creek in La Costa Ridge/Oaks, all Circulation Element roads. As part of the
development of the roads, the flood plain boundary will be modified such that the roads become
the flood plain boundary and structures will be adequately protected from risks of flooding as
well as the roads. This modification will actually reduce likely flooding in the adjacent golf
course area. Additionally, the width of Poinsettia Lane was reduced to minimize flood plain
impacts. In La Costa Ridge/Oaks, residential development would not encroach into the flood
plain area.
2.1.3.2 Hillside Development Regulations.
Impact. Development of the Proposed Project will involve
disturbance of slopes with greater than 15% gradient and an elevation differential of greater than
15 feet and therefore create the potential for adverse impacts requiring application of the
standards set forth in City Municipal code Chapter 21.95, the Hillside Development Ordinance.
Finding. With incorporation of the following mitigation measures
requiring issuance and compliance with the Hillside Development Ordinance, the identified
direct significant impact can be avoided and therefore reduced below a level of significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.1-4. Prior to the issuance of any grading
permit creating manufactured slopes in excess of forty feet in height, the applicant shall process
and obtain a Hillside Development Permit and qualify for an exclusion or modification for such
slopes, incorporating contour grading landscaping and similar ordinance requirements.
Mitigation Measure 4.1-5. Prior to the issuance of any grading
permits to grade property having greater than a 15% slope and height of 15 feet, the applicant
shall process and obtain a Hillside Development Permit from the City.
Factual Support and Rationale. Chapter 21.95 of the Municipal
Code sets forth the detailed standards and policies of the City regarding hillside development.
The purposes of the Hillside Development Permit include: (a) implementing the goals and
objectives of the land use and open space/conservation elements of the General Plan, (b) assure
hillside conditions are properly incorporated into the planning process, (c) preserve or enhance
aesthetic qualities of natural hillsides and manufactured slope areas by designing projects which
relate to the slope of the land, minimize amount of project grading, incorporating contour
grading into manufactured slopes which are in highly visible public locations, and (d) assure that
alteration of natural hillsides will be done in an environmentally sensitive manner whereby
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations 1652724 v3 [Word] Exhibit “EIR-B” 24 8/14/2001
lagoons and riparian ecosystems will be protected and no substantial impacts to natural resource
areas, wildlife habitats or native vegetation areas will occur. In order to effectuate the foregoing,
the Proposed Project grading was evaluated with regard to Chapter 21.95 and the following
standards.
1. “Development of natural slopes over 40 percent gradient,
having the following characteristics, is not permitted: a) an elevation differential greater than 15 feet; b) a minimum area of 10,000 square feet; and c) the slope comprises a prominent land form
feature.” La Costa Greens consists of 660.7 acres, of which approximately 45.2 acres exceed
40% gradient. The Proposed Project would grade 17.3 acres on La Costa Greens with slope
gradients exceeding 40%, but none of the affected areas represent prominent land form features.
La Costa Ridge/Oaks consists of 1205.7 acres, of which approximately 187.4 acres exceed 40%
slope gradients. The Proposed Project would grade 10.1 acres on La Costa Ridge/Oaks with
slope gradients exceeding 40%, but none of the affected areas represent prominent land features.
With over 45% of the total project area being reserved for natural
open space and species protection, the location of the open space areas was driven by biological,
preserve area and corridor linkage factors rather than preserving only the steeper portions. As a
result, development areas were forced into some steeper sections for efficient project design.
The overall project impacts only 27.4 acres of the 232.6 acres over 40% without adversely
impacting prominent land forms.
2. “The volume of grading shall be minimized. O-7,999 cubic
yards per graded acre (cy/ac) is acceptable, 8,000-10,000 cy/ac is potentially acceptable, and
greater than 10,000 cy/ac is not acceptable.” In La Costa Greens, 9,960 cy/ac would occur and in
La Costa Ridge/Oaks, 8,950 cy/ac would occur; both within the conditionally acceptable
category requiring justification. Several factors make these volumes acceptable under the
circumstances. First, the 834.9 acres of biologically significant located natural open space for
large preserve areas and corridor linkages occupied some of the flatter terrain and forced
development into steeper areas resulting in more grading. Second, alignments and grades for
major circulation element roads, including Poinsettia Lane, Alicante Road and Ranch0 Santa Fe
Road are generally fixed, thus constraining available development areas, dictating internal street
elevations and alignments and thereby constraining developable areas. (It should be noted that
the actual grading volumes for circulation element roads is not counted, but the alignment and
grades nonetheless dictate adjacent development elevations and locations.) Third, two very large public uses must be sheet graded substantially flat, the 27.2 acre public park and the 7.2 acre
school site, which grading totals are included in the overall numbers. Fourth, every effort has
been made to avoid blocking views from the existing contiguous residential developments and
has contributed to the volume of grading by attempting to further reduce overall building pad
elevations on site.
3. “Manufactured slopes shall not be greater than 40 feet in
height unless an exclusion is provided pursuant to Municipal code Section 21.95.130.” In the
final configuration, thirteen manufactured slopes in La Costa Greens and eleven manufactured
slopes in La Costa Ridge/Oaks will exceed 40 feet in height. Exclusions are authorized and
appropriate for these slopes because they each meet one or more criteria outlined in
Section 21.95.130, namely that the alignment of circulation element roads dictate the resulting
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations 1652724 v3 word]
Exhibit “EIR-B”
25 8/14/2001
slopes, the roads are in environmentally preferred alignments, or hillside areas have unusual
geotechnical or soil conditions that warrant additional corrective grading. Each of the affected
slopes are identified in the Final Program EIR at pgs. 42.-l 1,4.2-12,4.2-16 and 4.2-17.
4. “All manufactured slopes shall be landscaped consistent
with the city’s landscape manual.” As part of the Hillside Development Permit process, the City
requires compliance with the citywide landscape manual for the purposes of assuring the
stability, attractiveness and aesthetic enhancement of the particular graded slopes and areas. The
final pallette of vegetation is selected to harmonize with the surrounding patterns. Where a slope
is adjacent to natural vegetation, the slope is planted to compliment the natural area. Where
located adjacent to development or roads, then a different pallette may be used. Whatever the
vegetation, assurances are made that the slopes will be appropriately irrigated and maintained.
5 and 6. “Hillside and hilltop structures shall be consistent with
the architectural guidelines included in the City’s Hillside Development Guidelines.” “Slope
edge building setbacks shall be sufficient to eliminate or significantly reduce views of vertical
building form which would be visually incompatible with hillside land forms.” Significant
architectural guidelines conforming to the City’s Hillside Development and Design Guidelines
have been incorporated into the project through the Villages of La Costa Master Plan (2000) that
meet these criteria. As individual areas develop, they will have to demonstrate that all guidelines
have been satisfied and the location, setbacks, form and bulk will need to satisfy the Hillside
Development Guidelines.
7. “Hillside roadway design shall be compatible with the
City’s Hillside Development Guidelines Manual.” Alignments and geometries for Poinsettia
Lane, Alicante Road and Ranch0 Santa Fe Road are generally established by the City’s
circulation element and traverse the Proposed Project. The location of these roads and their
conformity with the Hillside Development Design Regulations is required. As the Proposed
Project does not yet establish final design for the internal residential roads, subsequent
implementing actions such as subdivision tract maps, planned development permits and
associated use permits may require further compliance with the Hillside Development Permit
Ordinance.
8. “Hillside drainage shall be consistent with the City’s
Hillside Development Guidelines Manual.” Conceptual drainage plans are included as part of
the Master Tentative Map applications and the Villages of La Costa Master Plan (2000). The proposed facilities include detention basins, control structures, underground and above ground
components, street curbs and gutters, all designed to divert and control surface runoff and the
quantity and velocity of waters leaving the site. The slopes incorporate benches, brow ditches
and drains, along with contour grading techniques to fully satisfy the Hillside Development
Design Guidelines requirements.
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B” 1652724 v3 [Word] 26 8/14/2001
2.1.4 Consistency with the McClellan-Palomar Airport Comprehensive
Land Use Plan (CLUP).
Impact. In La Costa Greens, Neighborhoods 1.1 (Business Park) and 1.2
(Community Facilities), are located within the designated Flight Activity Zone (FAZ) for
McClellan-Palomar Airport and if unregulated, could pose a potential conflict with the CLUP.
Finding. With adoption of the following mitigation measure, the
identified direct significant effect would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.1-6: The following restriction shall be included as
a condition of all building permits, conditional use permits, and certificates of occupancy for
uses and structures located in Neighborhoods 1.1 and 1.2 of La Costa Greens: “NO use shall be
permitted inside the McClellan-Palomar airport flight Activity Zone which is designed or
intended to educate, entertain, accommodate, serve, congregate and/or employ a total of 100 or
more persons at one time.”
Factual Support and Rationale. As part of the CLUP for McClellan-
Palomar Airport, various operational constraints were identified within the larger Airport
Influence Area based on aeronautical usage and safety factors. One operational area is known as
the Flight Activity Zone, which is generally the ground footprint and airspace for the approach
and take-off activity areas on either end of the runway. As this area is subject to higher risks of
flight hazard and crashes, the CLUP recommends that uses in the FAZ not assemble more than
100 persons at any one time in order to mitigate collateral personal injury or death should an
aircraft accident occur during landing approach or following take-off, generally considered the
times when an airport related accident is most likely to occur. By limiting occupancy consistent
with the CLUP criteria, risks of injury or death are reduced.
2.1.5 Consistency with Scenic Corridor Guidelines.
Impact. Portions of La Costa Greens border El Camino Real, a City
designated Scenic Corridor, and development inconsistent with the Scenic Corridor Guidelines
could pose a significant adverse impact.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measure, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.1-7: Development of Neighborhoods 1.1, 1.2 and
1.3 of La Costa Greens shall comply with the City’s El Camino Real Scenic Corridor
Development Standards. Prior to the approval of grading permits, the applicant shall process and
receive approval of a Scenic Corridor Special Use Permit.
Mitigation Measure 4.1-8A: A 50-foot landscaped area shall be
provided with a berm between Neighborhood 1.2 of La Costa Greens and the El Camino Real right-of-way.
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B” 1652724 v3 [Word] 27 8/14/2001
Mitigation Measure 4.1-8B: Where open space occurs adjacent to El
Camino Real, fewer trees shall be planted to allow views to the open space landscape.
Factual Support and Rationale. In order to provide positive visual and
aesthetic experiences on El Camino Real, a major north south travelway through the city,
detailed design, landscape and visual standards were developed, including special setbacks, view
preservation requirements and other harmonizing components. By requiring compliance with the
standards and issuance of a Scenic Corridor Special Use Permit, the Proposed Project will
implement the common El Camino Real visual theme, include the special setbacks and view
opportunities and the vegetation and median plantings will be harmonized along El Camino Real.
2.1.6 Land Use Compatibility at Project Boundaries.
Impact. Compliance with the guidelines contained in the Villages of La
Costa Master Plan (2000) would ensure land use compatibility at project boundaries. In
Neighborhood Area 3.2 of La Costa Oaks, community facilities uses located adjacent to off-site
residential uses would create potentially significant aesthetic and lighting impacts..
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measure, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.1-9: Prior to the issuance of building permits in
Neighborhood Area 3.2, a Detailed Landscaping Plan and Lighting Plan for Neighborhood 3.2
shall be approved by the City. The Detailed Landscaping Plan shall comply with the City’s
Landscape Manual and shall include details for landscaping on all sides of the Neighborhood
Area to ensure that the light and aesthetic impacts on surrounding off-site properties are reduced
to the maximum extent feasible.
Factual Support and Rationale. As evidenced by Figures 4.1.4 and
4.1.5 (pgs 4.1-38 and 4.1-42), the Villages of La Costa Master Plan (2000) has assigned
individual neighborhood lot sizes, densities and project types to be comparable to the any
existing neighborhoods so as to maximize compatibility at Project boundaries. Higher densities
are intemalized within the Project in an effort to minimize any land use compatibility issues at
the boundaries. Non residential uses do not conflict with any existing neighborhoods and are
located in areas with similar land use patterns and accessibility. In La Costa Oaks/Ridge
Neighborhood 3.2, there is a potential that this Public Facilities use designation may abut future
off-site residential development in the City of San Marcos (University Commons) and to
mitigate any adverse impact, the detailed lighting and landscaping plan shall include sufficient
screening and light shall be directed away from the adjoining future residential area consistent
with the standards required by the Planning Department. The interface is a relatively small area
of approximately .850 linear feet and the interface area on Neighborhood 3.2 will be landscaped
to further screen and reduce impacts below a level of signit’icance.
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B” 1652724 v3 [Word] 28 8/14/2001
2.2 Landform Alteration.
2.2.1 Creation of Manufactured Slopes.
Impact. Implementation of the La Costa Greens and La Costa
Ridge/Oaks Master Tentative Maps will result in the creation of manufactured slopes over 40
feet in height. In its final graded condition, La Costa Greens would contain 11 manufactured
slopes over 40 feet in height and La Costa Ridge/Oaks would contain 13 manufactured slopes
over 40 feet in height.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measure, the
identified direct significant impact would be significantly lessened, but not avoided and thereby
reduced below a level of significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.2-l: Prior to the issuance of grading permits, a
Hillside Development Permit shall be approved by the City.
Mitigation Measure 4.2-2: Prior to the issuance of a grading permit for
permanent manufactured slopes, the Proposed Project shall apply for an exclusion or obtain a
modification pursuant to Carlsbad Municipal Code $21.95130 and 921.95140, respectively, for
manufactured slopes over 40 feet in height.
Mitigation Measure 4.2-3: The Proposed Project shall comply with the
City’s Excavation and Grading Ordinance (8 15.06, Carlsbad Municipal Code).
Mitigation Measure 4.2-4: Grading information shall be submitted for
review by the City with each tentative subdivision map.
Mitigation Measure 4.2-5: Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the
City shall verify that proposed grading complies with the grading standards and manufactured
slope revegetation within the boundaries defined by the Villages of La Costa Master Plan (2000).
Compliance will minimize and reduce impacts, but not below a level of significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.2-6: The Proposed Project shall comply with the Master Plan Landscape Sections and the City of Carlsbad Landscape Manual.
Factual Support and Rationale. The Planning and Engineering staff
have worked extensively with the applicant to reduce the number, height and length of
manufactured slopes over 40 feet tall, as that has been adopted as the City standard for
determining significance. Given the controlling features of the topography and the fact that the
HCP/OMSP set aside considerable portions of the flatter property for habitat preservation and
protection, all slopes in excess of 40 feet have not been eliminated entirely. The adopted
mitigation measures will not fully mitigate the impacts, but will substantially lessen them by
requiring contour grading, special planting palettes depending on the proximity to native habitat,
additional benching and surface drainage structures and additional features intended to minimize
the appearance of these higher slopes. A number of the slopes are required in order to construct
circulation element roads, where grade and width are factors. The slopes in question are
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations
1652724 v3 [word]
Exhibit “EIR-B”
29 8/14/2001
identified in the FEIR at Table 4.2-6 (Greens) and Table 4.2-9 (Ridge/Oaks) and the
accompanying figures.
2.3 Visual Quality and Aesthetics.
2.3.1 Appearance of Manufactured Slopes from Public Viewing Areas.
Impact. Several manufactured slopes would be created that would be
more than 20 feet in height and 200 feet in length that would be located adjacent to or would be
substantially visible from a circulation element road, collector street, or usable public open
space.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.3-l: Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a
Detailed Landscaping Plan for the respective village shall be approved by the City. The Detailed
Landscaping Plan shall comply with the City’s Landscape Manual and shall include details for
manufactured slope treatment that provide visual softening of slope areas.
Mitigation Measure 4.3-2: Prior to the issuance of grading permits, a
Hillside Development Permit shall be approved by the City.
Factual Support and Rationale. All manufactured slopes will receive
special landscaping and contouring, with the final selection of planting palettes based on
proximity to natural open space and other surrounding uses. As all slope areas will be fully
vegetated and receive natural contour grading, they will be substantially softened in appearance
such that their isolated existence throughout the Project will not be significantly noticeable, nor
be overly prominent in bulk and scale compared to the vicinity as a whole. Similar treatment has
occurred in other areas in the City for the manufactured slopes and the techniques and end results
have proved satisfactory and not obtrusive or overwhelming.
2.3.2 View Blockage of Significant Public Resources and Change in Overall
Scenic Quality.
Impact. Implementation of the Proposed Project would not block public
views to significant public resources, with the exception of views from the future alignment of
Ranch0 Santa Fe Road with La Costa Ridge/Oaks, where views to the west would be partially
blocked by landscaped slopes. The essentially natural view of the Proposed Project site would
change to a largely man-made appearance for approximately one-half of the overall project site
which, combined with other development projects in the site vicinity, is regarded as cumulatively
significant.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, the
identified direct significant impact would be substantially lessened and reduced, but not thereby
reduced below a level of significance.
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B”
1652724 v3 [Word] 30 8/14/2001
Mitigation Measure 4.3-3: At least twenty percent (20%) of the
residential units along a ridgeline/hilltop, which are visible from a circulation element roadway,
shall be single-story. This standard shall apply to Neighborhood Areas 1.6, 1.7 and 1.12 of
La Costa Greens, Neighborhood Areas 2.1, 2.2 and 2.5 of La Costa Ridge and Neighborhood
Areas 3.1,3.4,3.5 and 3.14 of La Costa Oaks, as shown in the Villages of La Costa Master Plan
(2000). The City’s Planning Department shall verify the incorporation of the required one-story
structures during the review of Planned Development Permits and Site Development Plans as
well as prior to the issuance of building permits.
Mitigation Measure 4.3-4: Homes adjacent to and visible from
Circulation Element Roads [El Camino Real, Alga Road, Alicante Road, Poinsettia Lane, El
Fuerte Street, Ranch0 Santa Fe Road, Questhaven Road (off-site) and Melrose Drive (off-site)].
shall receive special attention to detailing on the elevation fronting the roads as required by the
Villages of La Costa Master Plan (2000) and the required detailing shall be noted on
architectural plans.
Mitigation Measure 4.3-5: The City shall verify that proposed structures
comply with the architectural and site planning standards contained in the Village of La Costa
Master Plan (2000).
Mitigation Measure 4.3-6: Walls and fences located 15 feet or less from
a public street shall provide recesses for landscaping and variations in materials such that relief
shall occur at elevational and directional changes. Long, straight walls and fences without visual
relief shall be avoided. Wall and fence locations and respective design details shall be noted on
all applicable building plans, and shall be approved by the City Planning Department.
Factual Support and Rationale. The Proposed Project represents a large
infill project in the already substantially developed La Costa portion of the City. While 834.9
acres of the Project is permanently preserved in natural HCP Open Space, and another 168.4 acres preserved in additional open space, the Proposed Project will convert approximately 5 1%
of the total site to suburban development, including housing, businesses, roads, parks, and
community facilities areas. Overall, the aesthetic impact resulting from the conversion of
undeveloped areas in and around the Proposed Project from natural or undeveloped lands to
suburban uses, will result in an overall and cumulatively significant aesthetic impact as our City
and the surrounding region continues to develop and provide housing, jobs and public facilities
for current and future citizens.
2.3.3 Compliance with the City’s Scenic Corridor Guidelines.
Impact. El Camino Real, which borders La Costa Greens to the west is
designated as a scenic corridor. Development proposed adjacent to El Camino Real could potentially impact the scenic corridor.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B”
1652724 v3 [Word] 31 8/14/2001
Mitigation Measure 4.3-7: Development of Neighborhoods 1.1, 1.2 and
1.3 of La Costa Greens shall comply with the City’s El Camino Real Scenic Corridor
Development Standards. Prior to the approval of grading permits for Neighborhoods 1.1, 1.2 or
1.3 of La Costa Greens, a Scenic Corridor Special Use Permit for El Camino Real shall be
approved by the City.
Mitigation Measure 4.3-8: Prior to the issuance of building permits for
Neighborhood 1.2 of La Costa Greens, a 50-foot landscaped berm shall be provided or assured
between development and the El Camino Real right-of-way, as detailed in the Villages of La
Costa Master Plan (2000). Where open space occurs to adjacent to El Camino Real, fewer trees
shall be planted to allow views to the natural habitat.
Factual Support and Rationale. The City has adopted Scenic Corridor
Guidelines for development along El Camino Real, the primary north/south transportation
corridor traversing the entire length of the City. The goals of the guidelines is to establish a pleasing and consistent visual and aesthetic scheme by requiring adjacent development to
preserve significant existing view corridors, set development back further from El Camino Real
than elsewhere, have harmonious and consistent median improvements, create a more grand
spacious experience for the driver and pedestrians, and avoid incompatible architectural styles
and the “hedge podge” appearance that so many main arteries take on in cities where a major
thoroughfare transverses multiple land uses and areas in a city. These goals are accomplished
through the requirement and standards of the Scenic Corridor Permit which requires compliance
with the adopted Scenic Corridor Guidelines.
2.3.4 Visual Impacts from Circulation Element Roadways.
Impact. Visual impacts could occur along other Circulation Element
Roadways unless adequate landscape setbacks are provided.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.3-9: Prior to the issuance of building permits for
Neighborhood 1.3, 1.14 or 1.15 of La Costa Greens, a 30-foot average landscape setback shall be
provided or assured along the property’s frontage of Alga Road where the roadway would abut
residential development.
Mitigation Measure 4.3-10: Prior to the issuance of building permits in
Neighborhoods 1.7, 1.17 of La Costa Greens, a 30-foot average landscape setback shall be provided or assured along the property’s frontage of Poinsettia Lane where the roadway would
abut residential development.
Mitigation Measure 4.3-11: Prior to the issuance of building permits in
Neighborhoods 3.1,3.4,3.5,3.8,3.9,3.10 or 3.11 of La Costa Oaks, a 50-foot average landscape
setback shall be provided or assured along the property’s frontage of Ranch0 Santa Fe Road
where the roadway would abut residential development.
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B”
1652724 v3 [Word] 32 8/14/2001
Factual Support and Rationale. In addition to the El Camino Real
Scenic Corridor Guidelines, the City has also required special setbacks from other arterial roads
throughout the project, including Alga, Poinsettia and Ranch0 Santa Fe Road. By requiring
special landscaped setbacks, the future homes are further removed t?om the noise and light
impacts of roads and importantly, the motorist is also provided a more pleasant and open driving
experience. These special setback requirements contribute to the visual and quality of living as
well as driving experiences, while also increasing the amount of landscaping and vegetation in
our community.
2.3.5 Light and Glare.
Impact. Implementation of the Proposed Project would result in the
introduction of new sources of lighting.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.3-12: All street and other lighting shall conform to
City of Carlsbad standards, or an approved theme lighting program shall be approved by the City
Engineer prior to the issuance of building permits.
Mitigation Measure 4.3-13: Lighting for community facilities and
recreation areas shall be considered an element of Conditional Use Permit (CUP) or Site
Development Plan (SDP) Review. Any such lighting that will illuminate a residential area past
the hour of 10:OOPM shall be clearly identified on the site plan and shall be approved by the City
of Carlsbad prior to CUP or SDP approval.
Factual Support and Rationale. The City has established policies with
respect to lighting impacts, both within the future development areas and intended to minimize
the energy and “dark sky” impacts of development with the neighborhood and driving safety
element to be considered. Street lighting is kept to an appropriate level and special concern is
required where urbanized uses will interface with HCP Open Space preserve areas. By
rigorously controlling the location, intensity and design of new lighting sources through the
neighborhood site development design and the other areas conditional use permit process, the
City prevents uncontrolled lighting sources from being a significant impact to the community.
2.4 Biological Resources.
2.4.1 Upland Vegetation Impacts - La Costa Greens.
Impact. Significant direct impacts to vegetation communities include the
loss of Diegan coastal sage scrub (89.8 acres), southern maritime chaparral (31.2 acres), southern
mixed chaparral (1.5 acres), non-native grassland and native grassland (2 19.1 acres), combined
riparian habitats (5.7 acres), and flood plain scrub (46.9 acres).
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B”
1652724 v3 [word] 33 8/14/2001
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.4-l: Significant direct impacts to Diegan costal
sage scrub within La Costa Greens shall be mitigated by a combination of on- and off-site
preservation. Approximately 33.2 acres (27 percent) of the on-site coastal sage scrub shall be
preserved within the HCP/OMSP open space. Prior to the issuance of the first grading permit in
La Costa Greens, approximately 33.2 acres of on-site Diegan coastal sage scrub shall be
dedicated to a third party and encumbered with a conservation easement in favor of the CDFG.
In addition, prior to site disturbance in La Costa Greens, the project owner/permittee shall
contribute $1,000,000.00 towards the preservation of two off-site open space parcels.
Conservation easement locations and habitat management and maintenance funds shall be
approved in conformity with the approved HCP/OMSP.
Mitigation Measure 4.4-2: Significant direct impacts to southern
maritime chaparral within La Costa Greens shall be mitigated by the preservation of 88.8 acres
(74 percent) of southern maritime chaparral habitat in the northwest portion of the site. Prior to
the issuance of the first grading permit in La Costa Greens, the 88.8 acres of on-site southern
maritime chaparral shall be dedicated to a third party and encumbered with a conservation
easement in favor of the CDFG. Conservation easement locations and habitat management and
maintenance funds shall be approved in conformity with the approved HCP/OMSP.
Mitigation Measure 4.4-3: Significant direct impacts to southern mixed
and grassland within La Costa Greens shall be mitigated by the preservation of 4.5 acres of
southern mixed chaparral habitat and 33.9 acres of grasslands on the site. Prior to the issuance of
the first grading permit in La Costa Greens, the 88.8 acres of on-site southern maritime chaparral
shall be dedicated to a third party and encumbered with a conservation easement in favor of the
CDFG. Conservation easement locations and habitat management and maintenance funds shall
be approved in conformity with the approved HCP/OMSP.
Factual Support and Rationale. The City was an active participant and
signatory to the 1995 HCPIOMSP, a multi-species habitat conservation program and Natural Community Conservation Program, in which local jurisdictions and the United States Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS), California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and the property
owner, with the participation of many environmental and conservation groups, over several years
forged a biologically sound program and palette of mitigation and conservation measures to
assure the preservation of 62 identified sensitive, threatened or listed species consistent with the
State and Federal Endangered Species Acts. While working on the HCP/OMSP, the City was concurrently working on its own Habitat Management Program @IMP) subarea plan as an
enrollee in the regional Multiple Habitat Management Program (MHCP) being spearheaded by
SANDAG for regional North County, as all the cities are enrolled. The HMP and MHCP
programs are still proceeding and include USFWS, CDFG and any number of other stakeholders
and environmental groups as active participants. The HCP/OMSP is a completed subcomponent
of the City HMP, which in turn is to be a sub-area plan of the larger MHCP. As such, overall
standards and biological principles have been developed and applied to all these multi-species
programs.
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B” 1652724 v3 [Word] 34 8/14/2001
With respect to La Costa Greens in particular, the HCP/OMSP required 18 1.09 acres of
selected habitat be set aside permanently, a conservation easement be granted to the CDFG and
the preserve area conveyed to an entity acceptable to the City, USFWS and CDFG to be
maintained in perpetuity with the property owner providing an endowment perpetually assuring
adequate maintenance and preservation funds. Additionally, an advisory committee consisting
of the wildlife agencies, City and others will monitor and direct the maintenance and
conservation efforts. Further, the property owner is to contribute $1 ,OOO,OOO to the acquisition of
additional offsite gnatcatcher coastal sage habitat, which has been identified and purchased by
the applicant to satisfy its obligation under the HCP/OMSP as well as assist the City in meeting
its core area preservation requirements for its HMP as mandated by USFWS and CDFG as
condition of approval and biological certification.
In fact, the total Proposed Project would exceed the approved HCP/OMSP preservation
onsite of quality upland habitat of 702 acres, plus off-site acquisition by permanently preserving
a total of 834.9 acres, in addition to off-site acquisition. The permanent preservation of the
onsite HCP Open Space, combined with the conservation easement and permanent operation and
maintenance endowment and offsite gnatcatcher habitat contribution of additional core area,
mitigates the impact to species of concern below a level of significance through the onsite and
offsite selected habitat preservation and maintenance. The HCP/OMSP findings are incorporated
herein by reference as further factual support and rationale.
2.4.2 Wetland Impacts - La Costa Greens.
Impact. Significant direct impacts to wetlands regulated by the ACOE
include the loss of 5.32 acres of wetlands and 1.03 acres of non-vegetated Waters of the United
States regulated by the ACOE. Significant direct impacts to wetlands regulated by the CDFG
include the loss of 5.61 acres of wetlands and 1.03 acres of non-vegetated Waters of the United
States. (ACOE and CDFG acreages differ due to differences in their wetland definitions.)
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.4-4: Prior to issuance of grading permits in La
Costa Greens, documentation shall be submitted to the City of Carlsbad verifying that necessary
permits pursuant to $404 of the federal Clean Water Act from the ACOE, a 9401 waiver or
certification from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, and a $1603 Streambed
Alteration Agreement from the CDFG have been obtained incorporating actual mitigation
measures.
Mitigation Measure 4.4-5: Impacts to wetlands within La Costa Greens,
including all riparian habitats (5.61 acres using CDFG criteria), shall be mitigated at a 2:l ratio
for a total of 11.22 acres. Impacts to non-vegetated waters (1.03 acres) shall be mitigated at a
1 :l ratio. A detailed wetland restoration plan shall be prepared by a qualified biologist that
includes information regarding enhancement/restoration, maintenance and success criteria. This
restoration shall take place on La Costa Greens south of the future alignment of Poinsettia Lane.
If mitigation is initiated prior to project impacts, mitigation ratios may be reduced but would not
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations
1652724 v3 [Word]
Exhibit “EIR-B”
35 8/14/2001
fall below 1: 1 for wetlands and 0.5: 1 for non-vegetated waters as permitted by ACOE and CDFG
in accordance with applicable standards.
Factual Support and Rationale. Of the total of 19.13 acres of wetlands
(as used herein, wetlands shall be inclusive of both ACOE and CDFG wetland areas), 12.78
acres or 66.8% are fully avoided by the Proposed Project through design modifications,
including the realignment of Poinsettia Road through the site further to the north and reduction in
road and shoulder width to avoid wetland impacts and other design/grading modifications. Of
the total of 6.64 acres of wetlands impacted, a portion of which is degraded or have significant
invasive vegetation adversely affecting their function. The required mitigation, in addition to
obtaining the necessary Clean Water Act 404 and 401 permits and certifications from the ACOE
and Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and the 1603 permit from the CDFG, will
require onsite creation and restoration of 11.22 acres of wetlands and an additional 1.03 acres of
non-vegetated waters, thereby assuring no net loss to wetlands in terms of acreage or habitat
value. The mitigation will proceed as directed by the City and permitting agencies
(ACOE/USFWS, RWQCB and CDFG) and if approved by them, the mitigation ratios of 2:l for
the 11.22 acres could be reduced if mitigation is in place and fully functioning before disturbance
of existing wetland areas on site. Based on the evaluation of the quality of impacted wetland
habitat, the limited impact to existing lower quality wetland onsite compared with the restoration
and creation of additional higher quality wetland will result in an overall biological improvement
to the wetland ecosystem on the La Costa Greens as a whole, by improving the quality and total
acreage, eliminating invasive vegetation and improving the overall functionality of the wetland
resource.
2.4.3 Sensitive Plant Species Impacts - La Costa Greens.
Impact. Significant direct impacts to sensitive plant species include the
loss of De1 Mar manzanita, thread-leaved brodiaea, summer holly, and Nuttall’s scrub oak due to
these species’ high sensitivity.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.4-6: Significant direct impacts to the De1 Mar
manzanita, summer holly, and Nuttall’s scrub oak within La Costa Greens shall be mitigated by
the preservation of 88.8 acres of southern maritime chaparral on-site. This includes
approximately 854 De1 Mar manzanita (83 percent), 1,085 summer holly (99 percent), and 640
Nuttall’s scrub oak (47 percent). Prior to the issuance of the first grading permit in La Costa
Greens, 88.8 acres of on-site southern maritime chaparral shall be dedicated to a third party and
encumbered with a conservation easement in favor of the CDFG. Conservation easement
locations and habitat management and maintenance funds shall be approved in conformity with
the approved HCP/OMSP.
Mitigation Measure 4.4-7: Significant direct impacts to the thread-
leaved brodiaea shall be mitigated by preserving approximately 5,800 individuals (83 percent)
within the HCP/OMSP open space on site. Prior to the issuance of the first grading permit in La
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations 1652724 v3 [Word] Exhibit “E&B”
36 8/14/2001
Costa Greens, approximately 212.6 acres of La Costa Greens shall be designated as HCPIOMSP
land and shall be dedicated to a third party and encumbered with a conservation easement in
favor of the CDFG. Conservation easement locations and habitat management and maintenance
funds shall be approved in conformity with the approved HCP/OMSP.
Factual Support and Rationale. The selected 212.6 acres of onsite
preservation will preserve 83 percent of the thread leaved brodiaea, 83 percent of the De1 Mar
manzanita, 99 percent of the summer holly and 47 percent of the Nuttall’s scrub oak. While none
of the 10 individual Orcutt’s brodiaea are preserved on site, a large amount, approximately 92
acres of the onsite preserved habitat is well suited for the Orcutt’s brodiaea, which is not a listed
threatened or endangered species, but is regarded as a sensitive species of local concern. In
addition, the contribution to offsite core area preservation further supplements the onsite
preservation of these identified species. As the City has learned throughout its HCP/OMSP,
HMP and MHCP efforts, the multi-habitat and multi-species programs must look at the wider
biological significance of overall preserve design and cannot, in every instance, preserve every
individual plant or animal. The HCP/OMSP targets 62 different threatened, endangered and
sensitive species, endeavoring to protect the best examples and habitat for the protection and
recovery as a whole.
2.4.4 Sensitive Animal Species Impacts - La Costa Greens.
Impact. Significant direct impacts to sensitive animal species include the
loss of coastal California gnatcatcher habitat and potential nesting/foraging habitat for raptor
species.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.4-8: Significant direct impacts to loss of coastal
California gnatcatcher habitat shall be mitigated through the Diegan coastal sage scrub
mitigation program cited above as Mitigation Measure 4.4-l.
Mitigation Measure 4.4-9: Significant direct and cumulative impacts to
potential nesting areas for the northern harrier, loggerhead shrike, burrowing owl, and Coopers
hawk shall be mitigated by preserving HCP/OMSP open space on site. Prior to the issuance of
the first grading permit in La Costa Greens, approximately 212.6 acres of La Costa Greens shall
be designated as HCP/OMSP land and shall be dedicated to a third party and encumbered with a
conservation easement in favor of the CDFG. Conservation easement locations and habitat
management and maintenance funds shall be approved in conformity with the approved
HCPIOMSP.
Factual Support and Rationale. As with the preceding sections, the
variety of sensitive, endangered or threatened animal species onsite were evaluated carefully as
part of the overall HCP/OMSP preserve design. The Proposed Project actually will exceed the
required on site preservation of 18 1.09 acres required by the HCP/OMSP, and will permanently
protect, conserve and maintain and manage 212.6 acres in La Costa Greens, consisting of
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations
1652724 v3 [Word]
Exhibit “EIR-B”
37 8/14/2001
approximately 33.2 acres of Diegan Coastal sage scrub, 88.8 acres of southern maritime
chaparral, 33.9 acres of grasslands and 4.5 acres of southern mixed chaparral. These onsite
habitats, together with the offsite contribution for core area gnatcatcher habitat, are supportive of
the nesting and foraging areas for the California gnatcatcher, loggerhead shrike, northern harrier,
Coopers hawk and burrowing owl, onsite. Again, the principles of effective and biologically
sound multi-habitat and multi-species preserve areas seeks to configure and link the core areas
such that the 62 identified species may survive and recover overall and provide adequate genetic
diversity and mixing to improve recovery attributes.
2.4.5 Upland Vegetation Impacts - La Costa Ridge/Oaks.
Impact. Significant direct impacts to vegetation communities include the loss of Diegan coastal sage scrub (306.2 acres), riparian (0.38 acre), southern mixed chaparral
(106.9 acres), non-native and native grassland (45.1 acres), and vernal pool habitat (4 pools; 0.05
acre). Within the Ranch0 Santa Fe Road realignment (which could be undertaken by the City
under a previously certified EIR), significant direct impacts to vegetation communities include
the loss of Diegan coastal sage scrub (20.9 acres), riparian (1.13 acres), southern mixed chaparral
(10.5 acres), and non-native and native grassland (3.5 acres).
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.4-10: Significant direct impacts to Diegan coastal
sage scrub within La Costa Ridge/Oaks shall be mitigated by a combination of on- and off-site
preservation. Approximately 482 acres (59 percent) of the on-site coastal sage scrub shall be
preserved within the HCP/OMSP open space. Prior to the issuance of the first grading permit in
La Costa Ridge/Oaks, the 482 acres of on-site Diegan coastal sage scrub shall be offered for
dedication to a third party and encumbered with a conservation easement in favor of the CDFG.
Conservation easement locations and habitat management and maintenance funds shall be
approved in conformity with the approved HCP/OMSP.
Mitigation Measure 4.4-11: Significant direct impacts to southern mixed
chaparral and grassland within La Costa Ridge/Oaks shall be mitigated by the preservation of
55.2 acres of southern mixed chaparral habitat and 28.6 acres of grasslands on the site. Prior to
the issuance of the first grading permit in La Costa Ridge/Oaks, the 55.2 acres of southern mixed
chaparral and 28.6 acres of grasslands shall be offered for dedication to a third party and
encumbered with a conservation easement in favor of the CDFG. Conservation easement
locations and habitat management and maintenance funds shall be approved in conformity with
the approved HCP/OMSP.
Factual Support and Rationale. The Ridge and Oaks have a combined,
contiguous on-site HCP/OMSP Opens Space preserve area of 622.3 acres, which exceeds the
preserve area required by the HCPIOMSP by 100.8 acres. As with all HCP/OMSP preserve areas, it will be burdened by a conservation easement in favor the CDFG and will be conveyed to
a third party conservation entity to be maintained and managed in perpetuity for wildlife
purposes under the direction of an advisory agency consisting of the City, USFWS and CDFG.
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations
1652724 v3 [Word]
Exhibit “EIR-B”
38 8/14/2001
The property owner will endow the maintenance and management funds as well. Of the 622.3
acres, it will consist of approximately 482 acres of coastal sage scrub, 55.2 acres of southern
mixed chaparral and 28.6 acres of grasslands. The preserved habitats are in the biologically
preferred locations and connect with the proposed core areas and linkages to the east, consistent
with the design of the city HMP and regional MHCP programs, providing for travel and genetic
integration generally. While not tied to either the Greens or Ridge/Oaks directly, the
HCP/OMSP also requires the applicant to fund $150,000 to the City for its HMP program
completion and an additional $50,000 for gnatcatcher research. The City has elected to, and the
USFWS and CDFG have approved use of the $150,000 for additional core area acquisition of
coastal sage scrub gnatcatcher habitat needed for the City HMP program. The result of these
mitigation efforts is to preserve onsite and assist with offsite acquisition of substantial habitat
preserves, to be perpetually managed and maintained for multi-species and multi-habitat
conservation program purposes. The importance of these preserve areas and configurations are
reflected in the HCP/OMSP Findings.
2.4.6 Wetland Impacts - La Costa Ridge/Oaks.
Impact. Significant direct impacts to wetlands regulated by the ACOE
and CDFG include the loss of 0.38-acre of wetlands and 0.69-acre of non-vegetated Waters of
the United States. In addition, the loss of 1,960 sq. ft. of vernal pool habitat (0.05-acre) is a
significant direct wetland impact.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.4-12: Significant direct impacts to 0.045-acre of
vernal pool within La Costa Oaks shall be mitigated through preservation and creation or
enhancement in the City of San Marcos at the Bent Avenue property. The mitigation parcel
would entail the preservation of a minimum of 0.045-acre of existing vernal pool surface area
and creation of new pools and/or enhancement of existing pools within the approximately 4.5-
acre parcel. A detailed vernal pool mitigation plan shall be prepared by a qualified biologist that
includes information regarding enhancement/restoration, maintenance and monitoring, and
success criteria. Prior to issuance of the first grading permit in La Costa Oaks, the detailed
mitigation plan shall be approved by the USFWS.
Mitigation Measure 4.4-13: Prior to issuance of grading pennits in La
Costa Ridge/Oaks, documentation shall be submitted to the City of Carlsbad verifying that
necessary permits pursuant to $404 of the federal Clean Water Act from the ACOE, a $401 water
or certification from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, and a $1603
Streambed Alteration Agreement from the CDFG have been obtained.
Mitigation Measure 4.4-14: Impacts to wetlands within La Costa Oaks,
including all riparian habitats (0.38 acre), shall be mitigated at a 2:l ratio for a total of 0.76-acre.
Impacts to non-vegetated waters (0.49 acres) shall be mitigated at a 1:l ratio. Mitigation shall
occur in the south-central portion of La Costa Oaks within a restored creek channel immediately
upstream of the conserved oak woodland. A detailed wetland restoration plan shall be prepared
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations 1652724 v3 [Word] Exhibit “EIR-B” 39 8/14/2001
by a qualified biologist that includes information regarding enhancement/restoration,
maintenance and monitoring, and success criteria. The restoration plan shall be approved by the
USFWS prior to the issuance of grading permits in La Costa Oaks. If mitigation is initiated prior
to project impacts, the mitigation ratio may be reduced but would not fall below 0.5:1. The
wetland habitat restoration shall be initiated no later than the first planting season following
issuance of the first grading permit in La Costa Oaks and after receipt of necessary state and
federal agency approvals.
Mitigation Measure 4.4-15. Impacts to non-vegetated waters (0. lo-acre)
within La Costa Ridge shall be mitigated at a 1:l ratio. Mitigation shall occur in the south-
central portion of La Costa Oaks within a restored creek channel immediately upstream of the
conserved oak woodland. A detailed wetland restoration plan shall be prepared by a qualified
biologist that includes information regarding enhancement/restoration, maintenance and
monitoring, and success criteria. The restoration plan shall be approved by the USFWS prior to the issuance of grading permits in La Costa Oaks. If mitigation is initiated prior to project
impacts, the mitigation ratio may be reduced but would not fall below 0.5: 1. The wetland habitat
restoration shall be initiated no later than the first planting season following issuance of the first
grading permit in La Costa Ridge and after receipt of necessary state and federal agency
approvals.
Factual Support and Rationale. With respect to the non-vernal pool
wetlands, the Proposed Project has incorporated design modifications and changes to avoid
impacts to 24.85 of the total of 25.865 acres of the combined ACOE and CDFG wetland habitats
on site through project design features. Consequently, La Costa Ridge/Oaks development
impacts only 1.02 acres of wetlands and non-vegetated wetlands in addition to the 0.05 acres of
isolated and man made vernal pools discussed below. The modest wetland impacts will be fully
mitigated through obtaining the required ACOE 404 permit, RWQCB 401 certification and
CDFG 1603 permit in compliance with the applicable standards for those authorizations.
Additionally, the city is requiring that the .38 acre wetland impact be mitigated onsite with 0.76
acres of wetland creation (2: 1 ratio) and the 0.49 acre nonvegetated wetlands be reestablished on
site with a like amount (1: 1 ratio). The restoration plans shall be approved by the City and
USFWS and monitored by each.
With respect to the 0.05 acre on site vernal pool area, the biological reports establish that
the vernal pool area in question is not natural, but the remnants of prior grading activity and of
low quality, not supporting the SanDiego fairy shrimp or other threatened or endangered
species. The City and applicant attempted to locate other nearby vernal pool habitat for offsite
mitigation purposes, as suitable onsite habitat does not exist, but none was found. The best
vernal pool habitat nearby is the Bent Avenue area in San Marcos and this area has high quality
vernal pools with identified fairy shrimp populations and the pot mounding terrain associated
with high quality areas. The Bent Avenue site is high on the USFWS protection list and the
interests of species mitigation seems best served by requiring acquisition and permanent
protection of at least a 0.045 surface acre vernal pool in the Bent Avenue reserve and creation of
new pools and/or enhancement of existing pools within the 4.5 acre parcel.
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B”
1652724 v3 [Word] 40 8/14/2001
2.4.7 Sensitive Plant Species Impacts - La Costa Ridge/Oaks.
Impact. Significant direct impacts to sensitive plant species include the
loss of Orcutt’s brodiaea. Within the Ranch0 Santa Fe Road alignment (which could be
undertaken by the City under a previously certified EIR), significant direct impacts to sensitive
plant species include the loss of San Diego golden star.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.4-16: 4.4-16: Significant direct impacts to Orcutt’s
brodiaea and San Diego goldenstar shall be mitigated by preserving approximately 622.3 acres of
La Costa Ridge/Oaks as HCP /OMSP open space on site. Prior to the issuance of the first grading
permit in La Costa Ridge/Oaks, approximately 622.3 acres shall be designated as HCP/OMSP
land and shall be dedicated to a third party and encumbered with a conservation easement in
favor of the CDFG. Conservation easement locations and habitat management and maintenance
funds shall be approved in conformity with the approved HCP/OMSP.
Factual Support and Rationale. The disturbance or impact to sensitive
plant species on La Costa Ridge/Oaks is limited to10 individuals (plants) of Or&t’s brodiaea for
the Proposed Project; it is also noted that the City’s Ranch0 Santa Fe Road realignment project
will impact some 1,500 out of 1,900 San Diego goldenstar sensitive plant species. The extent of
other sensitive plant species impacted are not considered significant because of the low
sensitivity or small numbers impacted compared to the species onsite. The Orcutt’s brodiaea
impacts and the San Diego goldenstar impacts are mitigated below a level of significance
through the onsite preservation of 622.3 acres of perpetually maintained and managed HCP Open
Space, which provide additional suitable habitat for the impacted plant species such that there
survival and recovery are reasonably assured as these were part of the 62 species protected under
the HCP/OMSP program and associated Findings.
2.4.8 Sensitive Animal Species Impacts - La Costa Ridge/Oaks.
Impact. Significant direct impacts to sensitive animal species include the
loss of habitat for the coastal California gnatcatcher, Cooper’s hawk and burrowing owl. In addition, although the San Diego fairy shrimp was not detected on-site, it is assumed that the
vernal pools on-site provide adequate potential habitat for this sensitive species. Therefore,
impacts to the vernal pool habitat would result in significant direct impact to the San Diego fairy
shrimp, due to its potential presence of 0.045-acre of vernal pool habitat.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.4-17: Significant direct impacts to coastal
California gnatcatcher habitat shall be mitigated through the Diegan coastal sage scrub
mitigation program cited above as Mitigation Measure 4.4-10.
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B” 1652724 v3 [Word] 41 8/14/2001
Mitigation Measure 4.4-18: Significant direct impacts to the San Diego
fairy shrimp shall be mitigated through vernal pool mitigation program cited above as Mitigation
Measure 4.4-12.
Mitigation Measure 4.4-19: Significant direct and cumulative impacts to
potential foraging and nesting areas for the burrowing owl and Coopers hawk shall be mitigated
by preserving HCP/ OMSP open space on site. Prior to the issuance of the first grading permit in
La Costa Ridge/Oaks, approximately 622.3 acres shall be designated as HCP/OMSP land and
shall be dedicated to a third party and encumbered with a conservation easement in favor of the
CDFG. Conservation easement locations and habitat management and maintenance funds shall
be approved in conformity with the approved HCP/OMSP.
Factual Support and Rationale. Impacts to the coastal California
gnatcatcher, Cooper’s hawk and burrowing owl are considered significant and have been
mitigated through the onsite preservation of 622.3 acres of perpetually managed and maintained
habitats suitable for these species. The Findings supporting the approved HCP/OMSP confirm
that the USFWS and CDFG, as well as the City, has required sufficient onsite mitigation and
habitat to reduce the impacts below a level of significance. Other species noted, such as the
San Diego homed lizard, coastal whiptail lizard, San Diego black-tailed jackrabbit and desert
woodrat will also be affected, but because of low sensitivity and the fact that the 622.3 acres are
preserved onsite, these impacts would not be significant. It is additionally noted that some raptor
foraging habitat would be lost and loggerhead breeding and foraging habitat would also be
impacted, but again, the conclusions of the biologists, USFWS and CDFG under the HCP/OMSP
Findings conclude that the low sensitivity of these species result in these impacts being less than
significant. The 622.3 acres of native habitat preserved onsite will provide linkage with the
offsite core areas acquired to the east as part of the HCP/OMSP.
2.4.9 Direct Impacts - Off-Site Poinsettia Lane Alignment.
Impact. Significant direct impacts to vegetation communities include the
loss of 1.6 acres of coastal sage scrub and 0.2-acre of non-native grassland. No significant
wetland, sensitive plant, or sensitive animal species impacts would occur.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.4-20: If La Costa Greens is required to conduct
grading for the off-site segment of Poinsettia Lane fkom the eastern Proposed Project boundary
to El Fuerte Street, significant direct off-site impacts to 1.6 acres of Diegan coastal sage scrub
and 0.2-acre of non-native grassland shall be mitigated in conjunction with the draft Carlsbad
HMP. The project proponent shall provide for off-site acquisition at a ratio of between 1:l and
2:1, or shall pay a fee consistent with the draft Carlsbad I-IMP. The location of the off-site
acquisition shall be determined in consultation with the USFWS. Mitigation requirements shall
be satisfied prior to issuance of a grading permit for the off-site grading of Poinsettia Lane.
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B”
1652724 v3 [Word] 42 8/14/2001
Factual Support and Rationale. Poinsettia Lane is an important link in
the overall circulation road network for the City and will need to be completed concurrent with
development. Its extension would impact 1.6 acres of coastal sage scrub and 0.2 acres of
grasslands, which would be mitigated by the preservation of equivalent habitat at 1: 1 or 2:1
ratios as determined by the City in combination with the wildlife agencies applying the
mitigation ratios utilized in the area. If the City HMP is finalized prior to the disturbance, it is
possible that the impact could be mitigated through the anticipated fee program contained therein for impacts associated with circulation element roads as the City HMP sets aside large,
interconnected habitat preserve areas. Alternatively, it will be mitigated as part of the Bressi
Ranch habitat mitigation program.
2.4.10 Indirect Impacts.
Impact. Potential construction-related noise impacts to the coastal
California gnatcatcher would be considered a significant indirect impact in areas where
gnatcatcher nests would be exposed to construction noise levels of 60 dbA CNEL or higher, during the nesting season. Urban edge effect impacts, including direct crushing of vegetation,
plant collection, release of unwanted species, potential predation, fixed lighting and exotic
species invasion could occur and would be considered significant where located adjacent to any
of the preserved sensitive plant populations, sensitive animals (coastal California gnatcatcher and
nesting raptors), or Diegan coastal sage scrub and riparian habitats.
Long-term indirect development impacts include weed invasion, fire
management, access control, anthropogenic disturbances and domestic pet predation could occur
and would be considered significant where adjacent to sensitive vegetation communities, plant
species, and animal species.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.4-21: Prior to and during construction activities,
access barriers shall be established at key entry points to the site as determined by the Proposed
Project’s construction manager and the City of Carlsbad to limit potential construction vehicle
impacts.
Mitigation Measure 4.4-22: Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the
HCP/OMSP open space limits shall be marked in the field by the construction manager and the
project biologist, who will ensure the installation of City Engineering Department Environmental
Fence which will help to prevent disturbance during construction and to mark the open space
limits. These limits shall be identified on the grading plan. Where disturbance to conserved
habitat areas is unavoidable, the disturbance must be authorized by the City of Carlsbad and
additional mitigation measures, if warranted, shall be approved by the City of Carlsbad prior to
initiation of the disturbance. The project biologist shall monitor construction activities to ensure
that conserved habitat areas do not receive excessive amounts of dust or other disturbances.
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-Et”
1652724 v3 [Word] 43 8/14/2001
Mitigation Measure 4.4-23: Construction storage and staging areas shall
be located as far from HCP/OMSP areas as possible. The construction manager shall assure that
these areas are kept free from trash and other waste that may attract scavengers.
Mitigation Measure 4.4-24 A/B: Prior to the issuance of a grading
permit, a qualified biologist shall determine the presence or absence of occupied raptor nests on
the affected area. Grading and construction which creates adverse effects to active raptor nests,
including noise levels which would be above 60 dE3(A) at the nesting site, shall be restricted to
200 feet from any active raptor nest. This restriction shall be noted on all grading and
construction plans. No grading or construction activities shall be permitted within 200 feet of the
active nest(s) until the young have fledged.
Mitigation Measure 4.4-25: If clearing or grading occurs during the
gnatcatcher breeding season (February 15 to July 31), and noise levels exceed 60 dE3A hourly
LEQ at the edge of the HCP/OMSP, measures to minimize noise impacts will be required,
consisting of temporary six-foot high noise berms or other appropriate noise reduction methods.
Mitigation Measure 4.4-26: During grading and construction near
nesting sites noise levels will be monitored on a regular basis by a qualified biologist to ensure
that noise levels are maintained at or below 60 dB(A).
Mitigation Measure 4.4-27: Lighting shall be directed away from
conserved habitat areas and shielded. Residential lighting shall be designed to not shine on
conserved habitat areas. The lighting design shall be noted and graphically shown on
construction building and landscape plans and shall be approved by the City of Carlsbad prior to
the issuance of occupancy permits. Outdoor lighting restrictions for private residential lots
located adjacent to the HCP/OMSP shall be noted in the Proposed Project’s CC&Rs.
Mitigation Measure 4.4-28: Prior to the issuance of building permits,
fuel management zones adjacent to the HCP/OMSP shall be installed in accordance with the
Villages of La Costa Master Plan (2000) and shall be designed to minimize impacts to native
vegetation.
Mitigation Measure 4.4-29: Invasive plant species shall not be used in
landscaping adjacent to conserved habitat areas. The landscape design shall be indicated on
construction building and landscape plans and shall be approved by the City of Carlsbad. A list
of such species shall be provided in the CC&Rs of the homeowners association.
Mitigation Measure 4.4-30: Educational materials regarding the
sensitivity of the HCP/OMSP shall be given to Proposed Project residents as part of the Project’s
CC&F&. The materials shall state the importance of the conserved habitat areas and ways to
avoid impacts to them.
Mitigation Measure 4.4-31: An open space management advisory
committee shall be established, composed of the Proposed Project master developer and
representatives of the City of Carlsbad and resource agencies. The advisory committee shall
identify an entity to prepare annual habitat management plans for the Proposed Project’s
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations 1652724 v3 [Word] Exhibit “EIR-B” 44 8/14/2001
HCP/OMSP. On-going habitat management shall consist of monitoring, habitat restoration and
enhancement, cowbird trapping, weed control, access control and maintenance, and public
education. Conservation easement locations and habitat management and maintenance funds
shall be approved in conformity with the approved HCP/OMSP.
Factual Support and Rationale. The foregoing list of mitigation
measures for indirect impacts to habitat and protected species have been developed over the
years in the field, with the input of biologists, the USFWS and CDFG, and have proven
successful in substantially limiting the collateral impacts. The access and grading/equipment
barriers keep the construction equipment in the disturbance areas, rather than risking damage to
the preserved habitat areas. Siting the staging, storage and materials areas some distance from
the preserve habitat assists in reducing impacts as does the noise and lighting restrictions should
there be nesting or adjacency impacts. The requirement that a qualified biologist approved by
the City survey the area to assure that active raptor nests are not disturbed during the grading
operation and the further requirement of noise level restrictions at the HCP Open space edges,
including temporary 6 foot high noise barriers where warranted. Subsequent to construction,
there is carefully designed and monitored fuel modification buffer areas to separate the
developed areas from the HCP Open space, the types of plants and landscaping will also be
controlled as will lighting programs. The residents and HOA’s will be provided educational
information regarding interface with the habitat preserve areas to further mitigate edge effects.
The HCP Open Space perpetual management and maintenance will be fully funded by the applicant pursuant to the HCP/OMSP and an advisory committee will be formed to oversee the
management program and will consist of the City, the resource agencies (USFWS and CDFG)
and others. This active oversight will assure that the HCP Open Space is effectively managed
for the habitat and species protection purposes and will include weed control, cowbird trapping,
access control and limitations, together with public education, all as needed, to effectively
manage and maintain the total 834.9 acres of HCP Open Space preserved onsite throughout the
Proposed Project.
2.5 Archaeological Resources.
2.5.1 Archaeological Resources Impacts -La Costa Greens
Impact. Site CA-SDI-4846B is located in the southwestern portion of La
Costa Greens and is designated for residential development. Because the site is potentially
important under CEQA and the City’s CRG guidelines, impacts are regarded as significant.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.5-l: Prior to the issuance of grading permits in
Neighborhoods 1.10 and 1.11 of La Costa Greens, the following measures shall be implemented.
(a) The applicant shall provide verification that a qualified archeologist
and/or archeological monitor has been retained to implement the archaeological construction
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B” 1652724 v3 [Word] 45 8/14/2001
monitoring program. This verification shall be documented by a letter from the applicant and the
archeologist and/or the archeological monitor to the City.
(b) A Treatment Plan/Research Design program shall be prepared by the
applicant’s archaeological monitor and approved by the City prior to the issuance of a grading
permit which identifies the research focus and sampling methods needed to acquire necessary
site data.
(c) An additional field investigation shall be conducted by the project’s
archaeological monitor to test hypotheses that would place the resource within a cultural context.
This shall include an excavation of up to 15 sample units and detailed mapping of the site
components to record spatial data, and the submittal of at least one radiocarbon sample per site to
establish some chronological association. If additional sampling of these sites demonstrates
pervasive subsurface disturbance from historic land use practices, no additional excavation is
required.
(d) In the event that the site investigation provides indications that CA-
SDI-4846B contains intact deposits with sufficient quantity, quality, and variety of artifacts
applicable to important research, the sampling efforts should be expanded to explore these sites.
Special studies such as ceramic analysis, obsidian sourcing and hydration, and flaked stone
analysis should be included in the scope of work if indicated.
(e) If warranted, a data recovery program shall be implemented that
includes archival research to develop a context within which the physical attributes of the
resource can be evaluated.
Mitigation Measure 4.52A: A qualified archaeological monitor shall be
on-site during initial grubbing and excavation grading of CA-SDI-4846B in Neighborhoods 1.10
and 1.11 of La Costa Greens to ensure the protection and proper identification of meaningful
archaeological deposits or remains. This requirement shall be noted on the grading plan.
Mitigation Measure 4.5-2B: In the event that significant cultural
resources are discovered in Neighborhoods 1.10 and 1.11 of La Costa Greens, the archaeologist
shall direct the project engineer to divert or temporarily halt ground disturbance operations in the
area of discovery to allow evaluation of potentially important resources.
Factual Support and Rationale. Field archaeological surveys and
examination of the extensive prior studies and investigations were undertaken as part of the ElR
preparation and located five sites on La Costa Greens which are located in proposed disturbance
or development areas. The field work confirmed that four of the sites were so disturbed or the
record and evidence of the materials were unremarkable and not of important or unique
archaeological significance. The one remaining Site #CA-SDE4846B will undergo further
testing and recovery prior to the grading or disturbance and therefore, will fully protect and
record the significance of the site and any artifacts or materials. Applying professional standards
and procedures of an approved and licensed archaeologist, the investigation/recovery program
may be expanded based on the significance of the findings. Further, during initial grading or
clearing, an approved archaeological monitor will be onsite, with authority to halt further grading
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations
1652724 v3 [Word]
Exhibit “E&B”
46 8/14/2001
and recover artifacts, or undertake additional testing, should initial work identify significant
additional resources or locations. These mitigation procedures are consistent with standards
developed by the City and other jurisdictions and have proven effective.
2.5.2 Archaeological Resources Impacts - La Costa RidgdOaks.
Impact. Site CA-SDI-4498 Locus A, retains a sufficient amount of
integrity to meet CEQA and CRG guidelines for importance. Because CA-SDI-4498 is located in
an area proposed to be preserved in its natural state as HCP open space, the site would be
undisturbed and direct impacts would not occur. Indirect impacts to this site may occur,
however, due to the potential for increased use of this area by human population. A resource site
discovered during the 1999 field study (LCRidge-1) is assumed to be important under CEQA and City CRG criteria. Impacts to this site would be considered significant and mitigation would be
required.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.5-3: Site SDI-4498 shall be preserved. Prior to the
issuance of occupancy permits in La Costa Ridge, areas surrounding the site shall be landscaped
with native plant species with deterrent qualities to discourage casual foot traffic resulting from
increased public usage of the area. The landscape plan shall be developed by a consultant with
experience in landscape design that incorporates native species for the purpose of resource
conservation and protection. The native plant Species selected by the landscape architect shall be
compatible and in conformance with the HCP and, the landscape plan shall be approved by the
City.
Mitigation Measure 4.5-4: Prior to the issuance of grading permits in La
Costa Ridge, a qualified archeologist shall conduct an archival search to determine the nature of
site features, their age and association. Documentation of these features shall be completed with
the goal of recording elements of their construction and appearance. Documentation should
include the completion of high quality photographs and measured drawings which demonstrate
the nature of construction and accurately reflect the appearance of these wall remnants.
Factual Support and Rationale. Through the field investigations and
surveys, four known sites were identified that might meet the criteria of significance or
importance, and a new site (LCRidge-1) were identified. Of the four, only one site, CA-SD1
4498A demonstrated sufficient integrity or importance for further analysis and study. As it is actually located in a non-disturbance area, but near future development, indirect impacts might
occur. Special native landscaping/vegetation is required around the site that has deterrent effects
to discourage casual foot traffic. This passive approach is generally regarded as a sound
approach, rather than fencing or signage, as the latter tends to attract, rather than discourage
intrusion. The area will be managed as part of the HCP Open Space as well. As to LCRidge-1,
an archival search shall be undertaken by an approved qualified biologist prior to any grading or
disturbance and fully document the site with photographs, measured drawings and narrative to
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B” 1652724 v3 [Word] 47 8/14/2001
fully record and preserve the character of the wall remnants, including data regarding age and
association.
2.5.3 Archaeological Resources Impacts - OfiSite Poinsettia Lane
Alignment.
Impact. CA-SDI-9846 is located on a small west-trending knoll near the
southern boundary of the Bressi Ranch project area and within the alignment of the off-site
Poinsettia Lane right-of-way, which is evaluated as a potential off- site improvement of La Costa
Greens.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measures 4.5-5 A/B: An archaeological monitor shall be on-
site during initial grubbing and excavation grading of CA-SDI-9,846 to ensure the protection and
proper identification of meaningful archaeological deposits or remains, if any. The requirement
for on-site archeological monitoring during grading shall be noted on the grading plan. In the
event that cultural resources are discovered, the archaeologist shall direct the project engineer to
divert or temporarily halt ground disturbance operation in the area of discovery to allow
evaluation of potentially important cultural resources. The City shall be notified of any such
finding. The importance of any discovered resources shall be determined by the archaeologist, in
consultation with the City. The City shall respond to the evaluation within 48 hours and City
concurrence shall be obtained before ground disturbing activities will be allowed to resume in
the affected area. For important historical resources, a Research Design and Data Recovery
Program shall be prepared.
Factual Support and Rationale. One potentially significant site (CA-
SDI-9846) was located within the proposed right of way. Prior to the initial grading or
disturbance of the site, an approved and qualified monitor will be on site to halt grading and
undertake appropriate evaluation and recovery, if warranted, such that the site is documented and
if appropriate, significant artifacts recovered and protected, after which grading may resume.
The city shall determine the significance of any items in consultation with the monitoring
archaeologist and if deemed necessary, a Research Design and Data Recovery Program shall be
implemented to fully catalogue the site before further disturbance.
2.6 Paleontological Resources.
2.6.1 Paleontological Resources Impacts.
Impact. Implementation of the Proposed Project would have the potential
for significant impacts to paleontological resources in all areas proposed for grading in the
Terrace deposits, Torrey sandstone and Dehnar formation areas.
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B” 1652724 v3 [Word] 48 8/14/2001
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.6-l: Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the
applicant shall provide verification that a qualified paleontologist and/or paleontological monitor
has been retained to implement the monitoring program. A qualified paleontologist is an
individual with adequate knowledge and experience with fossilized remains who will be present
during grading to identify them in the field and is adequately experienced to remove the
resources for further study. Verification shall be by letter from the applicant and paleontologist
and/or paleontological monitor to the City and approved by the City’s Planning Director.
Mitigation Measure 4.6-2: The qualified paleontologist or
paleontological monitor shall attend any preconstruction meeting to discuss grading plans with
the grading and excavation contractor. The requirement for on-site paleontological monitoring
shall be noted on the construction drawings.
Mitigation Measure 4.6-3: The paleontological monitor shall be on site
full-time during the initial cutting of previously undisturbed sensitive areas to inspect for well-
preserved fossils. Monitoring may be increased or decreased at the discretion of the qualified
monitor, in consultation with the City, and will depend on the rate of excavation, the fossil
materials excavated and their abundance.
Mitigation Measure 4.6-4: If well-preserved fossils are found, initial
grading activities in the area of discovery shall be diverted, redirected or temporarily halted to
allow evaluation and recovery of exposed fossils. The City shall be immediately notified and
shall respond to the finding within 48 hours and shall approve salvaging procedures to be
performed before initial grading activities are allowed to resume in the affected area.
Mitigation Measure 4.6-5: Significant fossil remains shall be cleaned,
sorted, catalogued, and then donated to a scientific institution that houses Paleontological
collections.
Mitigation Measure 4.6-6: A monitoring results report summarizing the
results, analysis and conclusions of the above program, even if negative, shall be submitted to the City within three months following the termination of the paleontological monitoring program.
Factual Support and Rationale. The geologic nature of the site creates
the potential for paleontological resources being uncovered during grading operations. The
mitigation measures require a monitoring program and approved qualified paleontological
monitor be present during initial grading, and pregrading meetings, with authority to halt grading
if resources are uncovered or evident during the grading process to look for well-preserved fossil
remains or other significant items. If identified, then the City and the paleontologist will
coordinate a salvage program before grading may resume in the fossil area. Through this
process, and the cleaning, storage and contribution of any fossil remains to a museum or other
depository, will protect any resources. These procedures, combined with a final report from the
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B”
1652724 v3 [Word] 49 8/14/2001
monitor, have proven to be an effective program for preservation and recovery, where
appropriate.
2.7 Transportation.
2.7.1 Traffic in Year 2005.
Impact. The addition of Proposed Project traffic and the construction of
Proposed Project improvements in 2005 would result in a potential significant impact to the
intersection of Melrose Drive/Rancho Santa Fe Road.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.7-l: If the planned reconstruction of the Melrose
Drive/Rancho Santa Fe Road intersection is not completed with the widening of Ranch0 Santa
Fe Road, the applicant shall improve or provide for the improvement of the Melrose
Drive/Rancho Santa Fe Road (AM) (no. 18) intersection with an additional eastbound left-turn
lane, prior to issuance of building permits or as determined by the City Engineer based on Year
2005 traffic model assumptions
Mitigation Measure 4.7-2: Prior issuance of building permits for
La Costa Greens, the applicant shall construct or provide for the construction of Poinsettia Lane
from El Camino Real to the eastern project boundary.
Mitigation Measure 4.7-3: Prior to the issuance of building permits for
Neighborhoods 1.8 through and including 1.14 of La Costa Greens, the applicant shall construct
or provide for the construction of Alicante Road from Poinsettia Lane to Alga Road.
Mitigation Measure 4.7-4: Prior to the issuance of building permits for
Neighborhoods 1.4 through and including 1.7 of La Costa Greens, the applicant shall construct
or provide for the construction of Alicante Road from the northern project boundary to Poinsettia
Lane.
Mitigation Measure 4.7-5: Prior to the issuance of building permits for
La Costa Ridge or La Costa Oaks or as determined by the City Engineer based on Year 2005
traffic model assumptions, the applicant shall construct or provide for the
construction/realignment of Ranch0 Santa Fe Road from Mehose Drive to La Costa Avenue, if
Ranch0 Santa Fe has not been previously constructed/realigned.
Mitigation Measure 4.7-6: Prior to issuance of building permits for La
Costa Greens or as determined by the City Engineer based on Year 2005 traffic model
assumptions, the applicant shall provide a fair-share contribution of Carlsbad Traffic Impact Fees
for impacts to the El Camino ReaVCamino Vida Roble (no. 6) intersection. The fees will pay for
the construction of a dual right turn lane.
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B”
1652724 v3 [Word] 50 8/14/2001
Mitigation Measure 4.7-7: The applicant shall construct or provide for
construction of a southbound right turn lane at the intersection of El Camino Real/La Costa
Avenue (unless previously completed by others). This improvement shall occur within the
existing right-of-way and can be achieved through restriping.
Factual Support and Rationale. [NOTE: The following preliminary
comments regarding City standards, methodology and involvement in the traffic studies and
analysis are equally applicable to the subsequent discussion of factual support and rationale for
the succeeding findings on traffic and transportation impacts, but in the interest of brevity, will not be repeated each time.]
In 1986, the City established a comprehensive Growth Management Program and
ordinances to address the buildout of the City. Not only were land uses and densities of use
evaluated and significantly reduced, but a critical part of the Program was establishment of
citywide performance standards for public facilities, including traffic and transportation. By
setting performance standards, then adequacy of facilities could be measured, and if performance
standards were not being met, then projects significantly affecting those underperforming
facilities could be conditioned, or phased, to require the facilities performance levels be assured
before development could proceed. These performance evaluations are assured through the
requirement that Local Facilities Management Plans be approved before development may
proceed in the various development zones throughout the City. Underlying the performance
standards is the principle that facilities must be provided for concurrent with the need generated
by the subsequent development.
As the Proposed Project is one of the few remaining larger infill areas in the La Costa
portion of the City and represents the bulk of the land left for development in that area, special
analysis was applied by City staff, planning and engineering, to confirm that the traffic
assumptions and citywide traffic modeling program used for the analysis was the most current
and complete. In that regard, the generally used SANDAG traffic models and assumptions were
reviewed and updated for the Carlsbad and surrounding areas before the Proposed Project traffic
modeling was run, such that the City would be confident of the resulting analysis and
conclusions, and importantly, that the analysis was calibrated to reflect the currently anticipated
City buildout under the Growth Management Program and General Plan. Among other things, it
was required that the Proposed Project evaluate impacts to arterial or major intersections
whenever the modeling demonstrated the Proposed Project would contribute 50 or more trips
during either AM or PM peak hours as a consistently applied standard of impact, and in turn, the
Citywide intersection performance standard of LOS D is applied consistently for all intersections
within the Proposed Project’s influence area. The assumptions, methodology and rules for the
study was established by the City before the study was undertaken so that reliable and consistent
conclusions could be achieved. Additionally, over 300 pending and potential future projects were evaluated prior to undertaking the selected Year 2005,201O and 2020 impact scenarios and
to determine what additions to existing traffic flows were likely or anticipated. In this effort, the
study went far beyond the Carlsbad City limits and evaluated projects and conditions over a significant regional area. As Carlsbad is located along Interstate 5 and also includes many
regionally significant and impacted major corridors such as Palomar Airport Road, Ranch0 Santa
Fe Road and El Camino Real to name a few, the traffic loads and current and future background
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B”
1652724 v3 [Word] 51 8/14/2001
levels were calculated without regard to origin, whether it was local or regional traffic, In this
way, the methodology and assumptions were targeted to provide the most accurate projections of
impacts and areas of concern. The findings and results of all studies and reports were carefully
reviewed by City Staff for accuracy and consistency.
As part of the City Growth Management Program, the City enacted several traffic impact
and improvement funding programs intended to generate funds to be used for area or citywide
facilities. Those programs include the City CFD No. 1 Communities Facilities District, which
includes all the Proposed Project. As new development occurs, it is required to pay special taxes
to the City who then uses the taxes, or leverages future taxes to sell bonds, to finance a range of
city facilities, including major roads. Additionally, the City has certain Traffic Impact Fee
programs, that raise additional funding. The Traffic Impact Fee programs are coordinated with
CFD No. 1 where applicable. For streets that largely serve only a particular development, the
developer is required to construct and finance them outside the citywide fee programs. Finally,
in certain circumstances such as the City’s Ranch0 Santa Fe Road realignment project, special
funding programs may be established, or combinations of funding sources utilized. The La
Costa Ridge/Oaks are included in the Ranch0 Santa Fe Road funding program that requires a
$10,250 per single family residential unit (adjusted for multi-family and nonresidential) payment
at final map in addition to the other citywide traffic fee programs.
Year 2005 Traffic-La Costa Greens. Poinsettia Lane extension east of El Camino Real is
needed to serve La Costa Greens, including the proposed park and school site. Therefore, its
construction is required concurrent with development of La Costa Greens from El Camino Real
to the eastern project boundary. Neighborhoods 1.8 through 1.14 take access off Alicante Road
and its construction needs to be provided before building permits may be issued for those
affected neighborhoods. Similarly, north of Poinsettia Lane, the construction of Alicante Road
from Poinsettia northerly to the Project boundary is required before building permits are issued
for Neighborhoods 1.4 through 1.7. The Camino Vida Roble intersection with El Camino Real
will also be impacted by Proposed Project traffic and regional traffic and may need to be
improved prior to 2005, based on the determination of the City Engineer. The Proposed Project
will be required to contribute its fair share of impact fees to be used for the construction of dual
right turn southbound lanes. Similarly, the intersection of El Camino Real and La Costa Avenue
will be monitored by the City Engineer and when warranted, the Proposed Project will be
required to provide, through restriping, an additional southbound right turn lane within the
existing right of way if not already improved by others.
Year 2005 Traffic-La Costa Ridge/Oaks. The main area of concern here is the City
Ranch0 Santa Fe Road realignment project improvements and the intersection with Questhaven
Road. It is anticipated that the City will commence construction of the Ranch0 Santa Fe Road
realignment in Fall, 2001. However, if it is not underway or delayed, then the applicant will be
required to cause the road to be constructed prior to the issuance of building permits for the
Ridge/Oaks as determined by the City Engineer. The same requirement is mandated for the
Ranch0 Santa Fe Road/Questhaven Road intersection, if that has not already been improved, to
provide for an additional eastbound left turn lane as intersection performance warrants. These
improvement requirements will be monitored by the City Engineer in accordance with the
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B” 1652724 v3 [Word] 52 8/14/2001
citywide intersection performance standards and improvements will be triggered when
warranted.
Intersection Outside Citv Jurisdiction. The detailed traffic study and modeling, however,
shows that one intersection, Ranch0 Santa Fe Road and Linda Vista Drive in the City of San
Marcos, will be cumulatively impacted by the Proposed Project traffic and other traffic and fail
to meet the LOS D performance criteria applied by Carlsbad, unless improvements are made.
Under CEQA Guidelines 15091, such mitigation measures are within the jurisdiction and
responsibility of San Marcos, just as intersections within our city fall under our jurisdiction. The
intersection should be improved by the City of San Marcos, as it appears it will not meet
performance standards regardless of the Proposed Project’s direct impacts. It is the
understanding of Carlsbad that future improvement of Ranch0 Santa Fe Road from Carlsbad to
Highway 78 freeway is anticipated, and improvement plans have been prepared for several of the
segments.
2.7.2 Traffic in Year 2010.
Impact. The addition of Proposed Project traffic and the construction of
Proposed Project improvements in 2010 would result in a significant direct impact to the first
unsignalized access east of El Camino Real on Alga Road (Estrella de Mar).
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measure, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.7-8: The City shall monitor the first unsignalized
access on Alga Road east of El Camino Real (Estrella de Mar) to determine whether major street
volumes materialize or if side-street vehicles incur difficulties. If warranted, and as determined by the City Engineer, the applicant shall close the median break at the first unsignalized access
on Alga Road east of El Camino Real (Estrella de Mar).
Factual Support and Rationale. The traffic studies and modeling
indicate that the projected future traffic along Alga Road, including Proposed Project traffic, may
result in difficult or dangerous left turn movements tiom existing unsignalized Estrella de Mar
to Alga Road westbound. As the distance between this intersection and El Camino Real does not
permit an additional signalized intersection because of spacing and safety standards, the
performance will be modified and the Alga Road median closed by the applicant, if the City
Engineer determines that traffic requires limiting Estrella de Mar movements to right turns only.
This would then require those wishing to head west on Alga Road or trying to get to El Camino
Real, make a U-turn at the signalized Alga Road/Alicante road intersection, or travel southerly
on Estrella de Mar a southerly existing signalized intersection with El Camino Real.
2.7.3 Traffic in Year 2020.
Impact. The addition of Proposed Project traffic and the construction of
Proposed Project improvements in 2020 would result in a significant impact to the intersection
of El Camino ReaVPalomar Airport Road. Cumulative impacts would occur at several other
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B” 1652724 v3 [Word] 53 8/14/2001
intersections within the City where the Proposed Project would contribute greater than 20% of
the projected traffic (the intersections are identified in the mitigation measures below) and to two
intersections outside the City of Carlsbad.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance for all intersections within the City of Carlsbad, but not the intersections impacted
outside the City limits, and there will remain a cumulative significant impact unless those
intersections are improved by others.
Mitigation Measure 4.7-9: Prior to issuance of building permits for land
uses assumed to Occur between 2010 and 2020 by the traffic model and as determined by the
City Engineer, the applicant shall provide a fair-share contribution of Carlsbad Traffic Impact
Fees for impacts to the El Camino ReaUPa1oma.r Airport Road (PM) (no. 4) intersection. The
fees will pay for the construction of dual northbound and westbound right turn lanes at this
intersection.
Mitigation Measure 4.7-10: Prior to issuance of building permits for
land uses assumed to occur between 2010 and 2020 by the traffic model and as determined by
the City Engineer, the applicant shall provide a fair-share contribution of Carlsbad Traffic Impact
Fees for impacts to the El Camino Real/Faraday Avenue (PM) (no. 3) intersection. The fees will
pay for the construction of an additional westbound right-turn lane at this intersection.
Mitigation Measure 4.7-l 1: Prior to issuance of building permits for
land uses assumed to occur between 2010 and 2020 by the traffic model and as determined by
the City Engineer, the applicant shall provide a fair-share contribution of Carlsbad Traffk Impact
Fees for impacts to the El Camino Real/Palomar Airport Road (AM) (no. 4) intersection. The
fees will pay for the construction of a right-turn overlap lane (RTOL) on the northbound and
westbound legs at this intersection.
Mitigation Measure 4.7-12: Prior to issuance of building permits for
land uses assumed to occur between 2010 and 2020 by the traffic model and as determined by
the City Engineer, the applicant shall provide a fair-share contribution of Carlsbad Traffic Impact
Fees for impacts to the Melrose Drive/Alga Road (PM) (no. 17) intersection. The fees will pay
for the construction of an RTOL on the eastbound right-turn lane at this intersection.
Mitigation Measure 4.7-13: Prior to issuance of building permits for
La Costa Greens for land uses assumed to occur between 2010 and 2020 by the traffic model and
as determined by the City Engineer, the applicant shall provide a fair-share contribution of
Carlsbad Traffic Impact Fees for impacts to the Ranch0 Santa Fe RoadIQuesthaven Road (AM)
(no. 23) intersection. The fees will pay for the construction of an additional northbound thru lane
and additional southbound left, thru, and right-turn lane at this intersection.
Mitigation Measure 4.7-14: Prior to issuance of building permits for La Costa Ridge/Oaks for land uses assumed to occur between 2010 and 2020 by the traffic model
and as determined by the City Engineer, and as a part of the Proposed Project (unless previously
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B”
1652724 v3 [Word] 54 8/14/2001
completed by others), the applicant shall improve or provide for the improvement of the
El Camino Real/Alga Road (PM) (no. 8) intersection with a RTOL on the eastbound leg.
Mitigation Measure 4.7-15: Prior to issuance of building permits and as
a part of the Proposed Project (unless previously completed by others), the applicant shall
improve or provide for the improvement of the Ranch0 Santa Fe/Mehose Drive (PM) (no. 18)
intersection with an additional right-turn lane and a RTOL on the eastbound leg, which may
require additional right-of-way.
Mitigation Measure 4.7-16: Mitigation for the potentially significant
traffic impact to La Costa Greens at the intersection of Alga Road and the first entrance east of
El Camino Real (Estrella de Mar) for the Year 2020 shall be mitigated by Year 2010 mitigation
measure 4.7-8 above.
Factual Support and Rationale. A particularly busy and important
intersection in the city for both local and regional traffic uses is the intersection of El Camino
Real and Palomar Airport Road. It is projected that two additional improvements may be called
for in the 2010-20 horizon, or as earlier determined by the City Engineer, and the Proposed
Project is conditioned to contribute its fair share to these improvements, namely construction of
dual northbound and westbound right turn lanes and a right turn overlap on the northbound and
westbound movements. These improvements and the funding will be triggered when the City
Engineer determines them to be necessary, but are expected in the designated time horizon.
Similarly, as determined necessary by the City Engineer, the Proposed Project is required to contribute its fair share funding to the construction of an additional westbound right turn lane at
the intersection of El Camino Real/Faraday Avenue. The identified improvements and payment
of the Proposed Project’s fair share to intersection performance for Melrose Drive/Alga Road,
further improvements to Ranch0 Santa Fe Road/Questhaven Road, El Camino Real/Alga Road,
and Ranch0 Santa Fe/Mehose Drive, will also assure the performance of these intersections will
meet the performance standards. Because the time horizon of 2010-20 is somewhat speculative,
the intersections will be monitored by the City Engineer in the intervening time and will be able
to trigger the fair share contribution when necessary.
As to the two intersections outside the city, namely, Ranch0 Santa Fe Road intersections
with Linda Vista and Grand Avenue, both in the City of San Marcos, the City of Carlsbad does
not have jurisdiction and under CEQA Guidelines 15091, the responsibilities are those of the
City of San Marcos, and should be undertaken by them. Carlsbad understands that the City of
San Marcos does have future improvement plans for Ranch0 Santa Fe Road from Carlsbad to
Highway 78, including the subject intersections.
2.8 Noise.
2.8.1 On-Site Vehicular Noise.
Impact. Vehicular noise on El Camino Real, Poinsettia Lane, Alga Road,
Alicante Road, El Fuerte Street, Mehose Avenue and Ranch0 Santa Fe Road has the potential to
significantly impact proposed residential uses located adjacent to these roadways.
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIFGB” 1652724 v3 [Word] 55 8/14/2001
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measure, the identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.8-l: Prior to determining that a discretionary review application is complete, an acoustical analysis shall be provided to the Planning
Department for all residential and non-residential projects for neighborhoods located directly
adjacent to El Camino Real, Poinsettia Lane, Alga Road, Alicante Road, El Fuerte Street,
Melrose Avenue, or Ranch0 Santa Fe Road. The subsequent acoustical analysis shall be prepared
by a qualified acoustician, and shall identify all necessary noise control requirements on building
and site plans necessary to meet the City of Carlsbad interior residential standard of 45 dB CNEL
and exterior standard of 60 CNEL, or, as applicable, City of Carlsbad non-residential interior and
exterior noise standards for sensitive receptors as identified by the City of Carlsbad Noise
Guidelines Manual. The consulting qualified acoustical analyst/acoustician shall provide
verification in writing on the project plans that these requirements are met. Building permits for
development adjacent to these roadways shall not be issued until the subsequent noise report
acoustical analysis is accepted by the City of Carlsbad Planning Department.
If architectural features are needed to achieve the interior noise standard, such features
shall be noted on the building plans. A statement certifying that the required architectural
features have been incorporated into the building plans, signed by the acoustical
analyst/acoustician shall be located on the building plans. The architect shall also include his
registration stamp in addition to the required signature. All noise level reduction architectural
components shall be shown on the architectural building plans, and shall be approved by the
City’s Planning and Building Departments prior to the issuance of building permits.
Factual Support and Rationale. For new development, the City requires
that exterior and interior noise levels be addressed through a combination of architectural, design
and landscaping features that reduce the noise levels to the indicated levels. This approach,
based on acoustical studies and modeling, has proved an effective way to address noise impact
concerns for new development neighborhoods. The reliance on acoustical studies and
incorporation of measures prior to the issuance of building permits for the affected homes have
proved successful.
2.8.2 Off-Site Vehicular Noise.
Impact. The Proposed Project’s three dB contribution to the existing
vehicular noise south of La Costa Greens where existing single-family homes have direct street
frontage on Alga Road is considered cumulatively significant.
Finding. No feasible measures are available to mitigate this cumulative
impact and the cumulative impact remains cumulatively significant and unmitigable.
Factual Support and Rationale. The existing noise levels along the
south side of Alga Road and the resulting impact on multi-family and single family residences is
a diffkult problem. Individual single family yards and driveways exit directly onto Alga Road
between El Camino Real and Alicante Road, and two story condominium units have close
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statememts of Overriding Considerations
1652724 v3 [Word]
Exhibit “EIR-B”
56 8/14/2001
proximity to travel lanes. The existing road noise exceeds the 45 dB CNEL interior and 60 dB
CNEL exterior standards at various times during the day fi-om traffic. The City General Plan
Noise Element Policy C.8 states:
“Recognize the mitigation of existing or future noise impacts from Circulation Element
roadways, AT&SF railroad or McClellan-Palomar Airport for existing or future development
within the City, shall not be funded by the City. However, the City shall assist applicants with
processing of necessary permits for mitigating noise on private property, which permits may
include right-of-way permits, encroachment permits, retaining wall permits and zoning
variances. The City shall also assist property owners in the establishment of assessment districts,
to fund noise mitigation improvements, in accordance with established City policies and
procedures.”
The number of exiting driveway cuts and the fact that two story condominium homes
front Alga Road preclude use of sound walls as the “driveway breaks” and height do not
substantially block the road noise based on the acoustical studies and analysis, resulting in no
effective means of significantly lessening the existing noise levels. Further, the incremental
contribution of the Proposed Project, less the 3 dB ( which is undetectable to the human ear) does
not justify the imposition of mitigation on the Proposed Project directly, as to do so would be disproportionate to its impacts and is tmauthorized. Regrettably, this is a condition for which no
effective mitigation presently exists. However, pursuant to Policy C.8 noted above, should the
affected property owners wish to independently pursue a resolution, then the city would facilitate
as indicated. In the past, there has not been a uniform or generally accepted remedy presented by
the affected properties. Elimination of impacted homes and condominiums is not a feasible
alternative.
2.8.3 Aircraft Noise.
Impact. Residences located within the McClellan-Palomar Airport
Influence Area could be subject to significant aircraft noise.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.8-2: New residents within the McClellan-Palomar
Noise Impact Notification Area as defined by the CLUP shall be notified as part of the sales
disclosure package and through CC&&s that the project area is outside the 65 db(A) CNEL
airport noise impact area, but still subject to intermittent single-event noise impacts, sight and
sound of aircraft operating from McClellan-Palomar Airport.
Mitigation Measure 4.8-3: The following condition of approval shall be
placed on all projects within the McClellan-Palomar Airport Noise Impact Notification Area:
“Prior to the recordation of the first final (tract/parcel) map, or the issuance of the
building permits, whichever occurs first, the Developer shall prepare and record a
notice that the property is subject to overflight, sight and sound of aircraft
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B”
1652724 v3 [Word] 57 8/14/2001
operating from McClellan-Palomar Airport, in a form meeting the approval of the
Planning Director and the City Attorney. (See Noise Form #2, on file in the
Planning Department)”
Factual Support and Rationale. Some of the future residents in La
Costa Greens will be within the “McClellan-Palomar Noise Impact Notification” area as defined
in the Airport Land Use Plan. Consequently, prospective home purchasers will be notified in
writing that the home is subject to intermittent single event noise impacts from airport operations
through the use of sales materials, written disclosure programs and through the CC&R’s in
accordance with the City’s policy and standards. Additionally, prior to any final tract map in an
affected area, the developer must record against the property a notice to the effect that the
property is subject to overflight, sight and sound impacts from the airport operations. By
imposing these requirements, future homebuyers are notified in advance of their purchase as to
the airport proximity and related noise and overflight potential so they can make an informed
determination whether to proceed with the purchase.
2.9 Air Quality.
2.9.1 Construction-Related Equipment.
Impact. Significant construction related equipment and mobile source
emissions would occur for the specific pollutants Carbon Monoxide (CO) and Nitrogen Oxides
(NW
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.9-l: Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the
applicant shall prepare and submit for approval a trip reduction plan to the Planning Department
which is designed to achieve a 1.5 AVR (average vehicle ratio) for construction employees. Such
plan may include a construction employee shuttle service.
Mitigation Measure 4.9-2: Grading and building contractors shall
indicate on all grading and building plans the source of electricity to be used during construction.
Prior to issuance of grading and building permits, electricity sources shall be reviewed and
approved by the Planning Department. When available as a viable option during construction, as
determined by the Engineering Department, electricity shall be used from power poles whenever
feasible rather than temporary gasoline or diesel power generators. See also Mitigation Measure
4.9-3 below requiring the use of methanol, natural gas, propane or butane powered onsite mobile
equipment when feasible, instead of diesel or gasoline powered.
Factual Support and Rationale. In addition to standard equipment and
vehicle pollution equipment requirements, the City will require a trip reduction plan to reduce
construction related vehicle trips. By reducing the number of vehicle trips by increasing the
occupancy to a 1.5 AVR, the construction related vehicular trips will be reduced resulting in
effective mobile source reductions. The requirement that gasoline or diesel powered electrical
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B” 1652724 v3 [Word] 58 8/14/2001
generators be avoided will further reduce diesel and gasoline emissions from grading or
construction operations. The requirement that the type of equipment be submitted for prior
Planning Department approval will further reduce gasoline and diesel emissions where
alternative, less polluting fuels and equipment can be substituted.
2.9.2 Construction-Related Fugitive Dust Impacts.
Impact. Significant short-term fugitive dust impacts (PM,lO) would
occur during grading of the Proposed Project site.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.9-3: Prior to issuance of grading permits, the
grading contractor shall submit an inventory of the on-site mobile construction equipment to the
Planning Department. The inventory shall indicate the number and type of vehicles, including
the type of fuel used in each vehicle. Methanol, natural gas, propane or butane-powered on-site mobile equipment shall be used when feasible, rather than diesel or gasoline.
Mitigation Measure 4.9-4: Prior to approval of grading permits, an
accelerated construction dust abatement management program shall be prepared and submitted to
the City of Carlsbad for approval. The dust abatement program shall be made a condition of the
grading permit and shall be monitored by the City Public Works Inspector through periodic
inspection during grading. Dust abatement should consist of, but not be limited to, the following
measures.
a. In disturbed areas and on manufactured slopes, groundcover shall
be replaced within 30 days following the completion of grading activities.
b. Areas graded flatter than 6:l and not scheduled for improvement
within 6 months of completion of rough grading shall be planted with a cover crop or covered
with jute mesh in conformance with Section E.3-1.2-2.1 of the City Landscape Manual.
C. Exposed stockpiles (i.e., gravel, sand, and dirt) with 5% or greater
silt content shall be enclosed, covered, watered twice daily, or applied with non-toxic soil
binders according to manufactures’ specification.
d. Areas being actively graded shall be watered twice daily
e. All excavating and grading operations shall be suspended when
wind speeds exceed 25 mph as measured at the Oceanside Station of the National Weather
Service. It shall be the responsibility of the grading contractor to ascertain and record daily wind
speeds during the grading process. These records shall be available for inspection by the Public Works Inspector.
f. All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials are to be
covered or shall maintain at least two feet of freeboard (i.e., minimum vertical distance between
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations
1652724 v3 [Word]
Exhibit “EIR-B” 59 8/14/2001
top of the load and the top of the trailer) in accordance with the requirements of California
Vehicle Code Section 23 114.
g- Paved streets shall be swept at the end of each working day if
visible soil material is carried onto adjacent public paved roads (recommended water sweepers
with reclaimed water)
h. Unpaved roads, parking areas and staging areas shall be watered
three times daily or non-toxic soil stabilizers shall be applied to these areas according to
manufactures’ specification.
i. Posted traffic speeds on all unpaved roads shall be 15 mph or less.
i Construction roads that have a traffic volume of more than 50 daily
trips by construction equipment or 150 total daily trips for all vehicles shall be paved. Paving
may include gravel.
k. Construction access roads shall be paved or graveled at least 100
feet onto the project site from the main road.
Factual Support and Rationale. The foregoing fugitive dust and dirt
remedies will be effective in reducing air born dust and particulate emissions from grading
operations. The combination of onsite watering, sweeping of pavement, load requirement
limitations, surfacing onsite construction roads with controlled trip frequencies and suspension of
grading activities when winds exceed 25mph have proven to be effective in mitigating
construction dust and particulate emissions.
2.9.3 Mobile Source Emissions.
Impact. The proposed Project would generate 36,620 ADT. Mobile
emissions would be below significance thresholds, with the exception of CO and NOx.
Finding. No feasible measures are available to mitigate this cumulative
impact and the cumulative impact remains cumulatively significant and unmitigated.
Factual Support and Rationale. The reliance on the automobile for the
future household primary mode of transportation , given the entire San Diego air basin’s non-
attainment status, makes the incremental contribution from the Proposed Project to be
cumulatively significant. While the air quality in the region has been improving, the overall
resolution will need to wait cleaner burning, or less polluting, modes of personal transportation,
and shifting the travel patterns from single occupancy vehicles to carpooling, bus, bicycle and
walking modes. This represents as much a cultural as well as facility shift, but cannot
realistically be fully implemented with this Proposed Project. The Proposed Project does
incorporate bike lanes, bus stops and a range of hiking and walking trails in addition to
sidewalks. Its proximity to employment centers and recreation opportunities will also serve to
reduce overall driving distances as will the location of the multi-family housing near the
transportation and employment centers.
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B”
1652724 v3 [Word] 60 8/14/2001
2.9.4 Residential Fixed Emission Impact Potential.
Impact. The burning of wood in fireplaces could exceed allowable PM10
generation thresholds. This could result in a potentially significant cumulative impact.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measure, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.9-5: Gas-burning fireplaces shall be offered to
homebuyers as a home-buying option as an alternative to wood-burning fireplaces.
Factual Support and Rationale. Requiring natural gas burning
fireplaces as an option to wood burning will reduce the particulate emission potential from the
project by substitution a cleaner burning fuel alternative.
2.9.5 Emission Levels from Architectural Coatings and Treatments.
Impact. The use of paint products and coating compounds are known
contributors of VOC’s and their use considered a potentially significant impact.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measure, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.9-6: The building contractor shall indicate on the
building plans the type(s) of paint to be used. Prior to issuance of building permits, paint types
shall be reviewed and approved by the Building Department. When available as a viable option
as determined by the Building Department, water based paints shall be utilized rather than
conventional solvent based solutions. When available as a viable option as determined by the
Building Department, powder coatings (where applicable) and zero-emission paints shall be
utilized.
Factual Support and Rationale. Controlling the volatile organic
compound emission from paints through regulation of paint types at the building permit stage
will result in lower emission levels.
2.10 Geology/Soils.
2.10.1 Seismic Earth Shaking and Surface Rupture.
Impact. Although no active faults are located within the Proposed Project
site, a major earthquake on the nearby Elsinore or Rose Canyon Faults could cause moderate to
severe shaking at the site. Based upon the underlying geology of the site, lurching or cracking of
the surface due to distant seismic events is not considered a significant hazard, but is a possibility
at the site. The seismic risk for the Proposed Project area is not considered to be significantly
different from that of other similar properties in the Southern California area, and the subsurface
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B”
1652724 v3 [word] 61 8/14/2001
investigations conducted for the sites concluded that from a geologic standpoint, the property is suitable for development as proposed.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measure, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.10-l: Prior to issuance of building permits, the
City shall review and approve all construction documents to ensure adherence to the applicable
foundation recommendations contained in the geotechnical report (the geotechnical report to be
used shall be the most current report on-file with the City at the time of building permit
application).
Factual Support and Rationale. Extensive soils testing and geologic
investigation is required and as part of the building permit approvals, the structural and
foundation requirements and recommendations shall be satisfied. This requirement is in addition
to Uniform building Code and other structural and earthquake requirements contained in state or
local regulations.
2.10.2 Landslide Potential.
Impact. Several landslide features are located within the Proposed
Project area. Areas of the Project where grading is proposed, in the vicinity of landslide debris
and/or the relatively weak clay stones of the Dehnar Formation, proposed cut slopes may be
unstable. This is regarded as a potentially adverse and significant impact.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measure, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.10-2: Prior to the commencement of grading in
areas containing landslides, a new geotechnical study shall be performed to investigate the depth
and extent of on-site landslides. The study shall determine the geometric limits of the landslides
and the appropriate technique for stabilization of the slides. In addition, the geotechnical
investigation should address such items as the numerical factor-of-safety of existing and
proposed slopes, proposed slope stabilization recommendations, removal and recompaction of
existing fills, foundation recommendations, bridge structure foundation, and a slope maintenance
program. The geotechnical studies shall be submitted to and approved by the City prior to the
issuance of grading permits. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the City Engineer shall
review and approve all grading plans and require that grading will be performed in accordance
with the geotechnical investigation.
Factual Support and Rationale. The requirement that further focused
studies be undertaken in areas where the existing soils and geologic investigations suggest
landslide potential will reduce the adverse risk by requiring specific engineering measures and
precautions to avoid problems, or to assure that any problem area is fully remedied. The city
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “E&B” 1652724 v3 [Word] 62 8/14/2001
Engineer will assure that all grading plans address the areas of concern and conform to the
geotechnical studies.
2.10.3 Soils.
Impact. The Proposed Project site would be subject to potentially
significant project-related erosion impacts. Isolated areas of the site contain landslide debris,
alluvium, fill, topsoils and slopewash which are not considered suitable for direct support of
structural loads in their present condition, resulting in a potentially significant stability impact.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.10-3: Prior to the placement of structural fill or
fill loads, all compressible soils, topsoil, slopewash, alluvium mantle and landslide debris shall
be removed and/or recompacted to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and in accordance with
uniform engineering standards. Drained buttress and stability fills shall be required to stabilize
slopes underlain by potentially unstable geologic features.
Mitigation Measure 4.10-4: All potentially compressible topsoils and
alluvium in areas of proposed development not removed by planned grading shall be removed to
firm natural ground and/or properly compacted prior to placing additional fill. Prior to the
issuance of grading permits, the City shall review and approve all grading plans to ensure
adherence to this requirement.
Factual Support and Rationale. The standards for grading, based on the
geotechnical investigations and soils reports, as approved by the City engineer will assure that
sound engineering and grading techniques are applied in the field to assure that grading will be
properly compacted, placed and slide debris corrected. Regular inspections by the City and
professional geotechnical onsite supervision has proven effective in avoiding grading problems.
2.10.4 Erosion.
Impact. Development of the Proposed Project would include grading activities which would remove vegetative cover, thereby exposing soils to increased runoff and
leading to greater erosive potential. Erosion potential is considered substantial when more than
20 acres of soils, having high erosion characteristics, are left bare after clearing and/or grading.
Therefore, erosion is a potentially significant impact.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.10-5: The following erosion control features shall
be implemented as part of the La Costa Greens Master Tentative Map:
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B”
1652724 v3 [Word] 63 8/14/2001
a. The Master Tentative Map (Master TM) for La Costa Greens shall use a
minimum of three temporary desiltation basins during site grading and construction. Each of the
basins shall be designed to accommodate projected sediment influx from associated drainage
areas. These basins shall be installed prior to site grading to trap sediment eroded during and after construction, thereby preventing sedimentation of the on-site tributary to San Marcos Creek
and downstream areas.
b. The temporary desiltation basins shall be removed after completion of
construction, and erosion-control landscaping shall be established to the point that downstream
erosion and sediment transport meets regulatory standards.
Mitigation Measure 4.10-6: The following erosion control features shall
be implemented as part of the La Costa Ridge/Oaks Master Tentative Map:
a. The Master Tentative Map (Master TM) for La Costa Ridge and La
Costa Oaks shall use a minimum of 38 (21 La Costa Oaks, 17 La Costa Ridge) temporary
desiltation basins during site grading and construction. Each of the basins shall be designed to
accommodate projected sediment influx from associated drainage areas. These basins shall be
installed prior to the commencement of grading to trap sediment eroded during and after
construction, thereby preventing sedimentation of San Marcos Creek, Encinitas Creek and
downstream areas.
b. The temporary desiltation basins shall be removed after completion of
construction, and erosion-control landscaping shall be established to the point that downstream
erosion and sediment transport meets regulatory concerns.
C. In addition to the temporary desiltation basins, the La Costa
Ridge/Oaks shall include four permanent detention basins located along key drainage areas
between the site and San Marcos Creek and/or the unnamed tributary of Encinitas Creek. These
basins shall range in capacity from approximately two acre-feet to 45-acre-feet. While primarily
intended to control flow volumes, these basins will settle out eroded material from runoff leaving
the site.
Mitigation Measure 4.10-7: Before beginning any construction activities
that would modify the drainage pattern on the property, all applicable federal, state, and local
permits shall be obtained. Such permits include the National Pollution Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permit from the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB).
Mitigation Measure 4.10-k The following Best Management Practices
(BMPs) shall be implemented to mitigate pollution from construction activities to the receiving
streams:
a. Practice Good Housekeeping - perform activities in a manner that
keeps potential pollutants from leaving the site by managing pollutant sources and modifying
construction activities.
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “E&B”
1652724 v3 [Word] 64 8/14/2001
b. Contain Waste - dispose of all construction waste in designated areas
and keep storm water from entering or leaving these areas.
c. Stabilize Disturbed Areas -provide temporary stabilization of disturbed
soils whenever construction is not occurring on that portion of the site. Provide permanent
stabilization after fine grading operations and landscape the site.
d. Control Site Perimeter- runoff from the project site should be free from
excessive sediment and other pollutants.
e. Control Internal Erosion - detain waters that contain sediment and other
pollutants from the disturbed areas of the site.
Mitigation Measure 4.10-g: Erosion control measures shall be provided
to the satisfaction of the City Engineer in accordance with the City’s grading and erosion control requirements (Municipal Code $15.16. et. seq.). The locations of all erosion control devices shall
be noted on the grading plans.
Mitigation Measure 4.10-10: All grading permits issued authorizing
grading during the rainy season (November 16th of any year to April 14th of the following year),
shall require the installation of all erosion and sedimentation control protective measures in
accordance with city standards. Erosion and runoff control measures shall be designed and
bonded prior to approval of grading permits by the City.
Mitigation Measure 4.10-11: All slopes shall be planted with erosion
control vegetation, drained and properly maintained to reduce erosion within 30 days of
completion of grading. Erosion control and drainage devices shall be installed in compliance
with the requirements of the City as approved by the City Engineer.
Mitigation Measure 4.10-12: All erosion and sedimentation control
protective measures shall be maintained in good working order throughout the duration of the
rainy season unless it can be demonstrated to the City Engineer that their removal at an earlier
date will not result in any unnecessary erosion of or sedimentation on public or private
properties.
Mitigation Measure 4.10-13: Subdrains shall be placed under all fills
located in drainage courses and at identified or suspected potential seepage areas observed
during grading. Subdrain locations shall be noted on the grading plans.
Factual Support and Rationale. Extensive engineering analysis has
gone into the preparation of grading plans and programs to prevent siltation from entering natural
drainage areas, including San Marcos Creek, Encinitas Creek and of course, Batiquitos Lagoon
into which both creeks ultimately flow. The Proposed Project has incorporated the newest point
source stormwater pollution and sedimentation prevention standards recently enacted by the
Regional Water Quality Control Board and will fully comply with those standards as well as
those of the City. Combinations of facilities will be employed throughout the course of
construction to prevent siltation and other unacceptable runoff, and permanent sedimentation
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B”
1652724 v3 [Word] 65 8/14/2001
basins and water quality control basins will be constructed and permanently maintained through
the respective homeowner associations such that the facilities will continue to capture the first
approximately .6 inches of surface runoff, settle and clean the “first flush” through mechanical or
natural means in the sedimentation basins or water quality basins such that siltation and urban
pollutant loads, such as tire residue, fertilizers, oil, gasoline and insecticides concentrations are
reduced below the Clean Water Act water quality standards form point source stormwater
pollution as established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. In the city, the Proposed
Project is one of the first to come forward and include in their Project design the new stormwater
discharge standards. These standards are among the toughest in the State and are enforceable by
the City and the RWQCB as well. Compliance is assured through onsite inspections, particularly
in the grading and construction phases when sedimentation runoff risks are the greatest. The
City requires sedimentation control plans as part of the grading permit approval process and
these sedimentation plans are supported by qualified surety performance bonds or otherwise
secured such that financial assurances are in place to guarantee the control plans will be
effective.
2.10.5 Groundwater.
Impact. Numerous water seeps are located along the northern and eastern
boundary of La Costa Greens. A permanent groundwater table was observed within alluvium
and alluvium/terrace deposits in the San Marcos Creek drainage in La Costa Ridge/Oaks, and a
tributary to Encinitas Creek within La Costa Oaks. Grading and construction in these areas
poses a potentially significant impact to groundwater.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measure, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.10-14: Periodic observations shall be made by the
soil engineer or engineering geologist during grading and/or construction for the presence of
groundwater. Removal of colluvial, alluvial and undocumented fills and the placement of a
“canyon” subdrain within the bottom of the removal areas shall be undertaken to reduce the
potential for groundwater build-up within the canyon fills. Prior to the issuance of building
permits for the project, the soil engineer or engineering geologist shall submit in writing to the
City Engineer verification that the Proposed Project has complied with the requirement to
conduct periodic groundwater observations and any necessary remedial measures per the
project’s geotechnical report.
Factual Support and Rationale. Part of the grading and improvement
plans and City inspection programs, include protection of any ground water resources
encountered, or likely to be encountered , on the site. Special subdrains, lateral drains and other
drainage facilities are incorporated into the final grading to protect any groundwater resources.
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B”
1652724 v3 [Word] 66 8/14/2001
2.11 Hydrology, Water Quality & Drainage.
2.11.1 Drainage Patterns.
Impact. The proposed Project would not create uncontrolled runoff or
substantially modify existing drainage patterns. The development of natural areas will cause an increase in the amount of runoff as a direct result of creating impervious surfaces which may
create a potentially significant impact.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.11-1: In conjunction with the implementation of
any tentative subdivision map, the project engineer will install or cause to be installed, detention
facilities, an underground drainage system network and curbs and gutters that capture and direct
storm water flows. Such improvements shall be developed in substantial conformance with the
Conceptual Drainage Plan provided within the Villages of La Costa Master Plan (2000) and shall
be designed by a registered civil engineer and meet all regulatory standards.
Mitigation Measure 4.11-2: Prior to the recordation of any final map,
issuance of a grading permit or building permit, for any specific subdrainage area within the
Proposed Project, the drainage area fee established in the current Drainage Master Plan shall be
paid or assured through an agreement.
Mitigation Measure 4.11-3: Prior to the recordation of any final map,
issuance of a grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs first, the construction of storm
drain facilities in substantial conformance with those provided for within the proposed Zone 10
LFMP shall be paid or assured through a financial guarantee for that development phase within
La Costa Greens in which the improvement is necessary.
Factual Support and Rationale. The City assures that drainage patterns
will not be significantly changed and adversely impacted through a series of measures. First,
drainage area fees are assessed at final map stage to assure the financing source for city wide
stormdrain facilities that are located offsite of the project. These public stormdrain systems are
maintained by city. Additionally, through the Engineering Department, onsite stormdrain
systems and other improvements elsewhere are reviewed as part of the subdivision improvement
engineering plans and specifications to assure adequate drainage facilities will be incorporated into the Project. With the addition of the detention basins and water quality basins designed into
the Project, and careful review of the grading and improvement plans, surface water and drainage
patterns are protected.
2.11.2 Groundwater.
Impact. Grading and construction of the Proposed Project would have the
potential to impede the natural flow of underground water. Any substantial decrease in
subsurface flow would be considered a significant impact.
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B”
1652724 v3 [Word] 67 8/14/2001
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, the identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.11-4: In conjunction with the implementation of
any tentative subdivision map, sub drains or other engineering solutions that relieve the potential
for buildup of hydrostatic pressure and directs water flow to suitable outlets shall be installed.
Such subdrains or other engineering solutions shall be provided in conformance with the City’s
Grading Ordinance and shall be designed by a registered civil engineer and meet all regulatory
standards.
Mitigation Measure 4.11-5: In conjunction with the implementation of
any tentative or final subdivision map for Neighborhoods 2.1,2.2, or 2.5 of La Costa Ridge, the
City’s Engineering Department shall verify that the improvement plans call for appropriate Best
Management Practices (BMPs) and facilities to minimize any adverse impacts to down gradient
property owners as recommended by a professional registered civil engineer and geologist. Such
facilities include a combination of storm drain systems, brow ditch systems on graded slopes,
cutoff drains, backdrains, and subdrains, consistent with the City’s Grading Ordinance.
Factual Support and Rationale. Two elements are involved here. As a
general proposition, grading and drainage plans are reviewed by the City Engineering
Department to avoid hydrostatic buildup in order to permit subsurface drainage to continue to
percolate in controlled areas to add to existing groundwater resources, coordinated with the
surface water control mechanisms and structures. However, a preexisting subsurface seepage
condition exists in some of the homes down gradient to the northeast from future Neighborhoods
2.1,2.2 and 2.5. This condition is being addressed in two ways by the Proposed Project so as not
to exacerbate the condition. First, the natural drainage area, or watershed acreage, that drains
toward the existing homes will be reduced as a result of the grading and surface drainage design
and program. Second, the Engineering Department will verify the grading and drainage plans
and improvements employ best management practices, and where appropriate, include
stormdrains, brow ditch systems, cutoff drains and subdrains as appropriate based on
professional engineering and geology recommendations.
2.11.3 Sedimentation and Erosion (Surface Water Quality).
Impact. The Proposed Project would have a cumulative short-term water
quality impact to San Marcos Creek and Batiquitos Lagoon. Sediment carried by runoff from the
project site to the above waterways would be considered a potentially significant impact.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.11-6 A/B/C: Development conducted under the
auspices of the Proposed Project shall comply with all requirements of State Water Resource
Control Board (SWRCB) Order No. 90-42 (NPDES Permit No. CO108758) and the most current
order. In accordance with such permits, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations 1652724 v3 [Word] Exhibit “EIR-B” 68 8/14/2001
a Monitoring Program Plan shall be developed prior to the issuance of grading permits, and a
complete and accurate Notice of Intent (NOI) shall be filed with the SWRCB meeting all
regulatory standards.
A copy of the acknowledgment from the SWRCB that an NOI has been
received for the Proposed Project shall be filed with the City when received. A copy of the
completed NO1 from the SWRCB showing the construction permit number for the Proposed
Project also shall be filed with the City when received.
Best Management Practices shall be included in the SWPPP and shall be
designed in accordance with standards for SWPPPs, as outlined in the general permit. The
Proposed Project’s SWPPP also shall include control measures for chemical and waste
management to minimize impacts from chemicals and wastes used or generated during
construction.
Mitigation Measure 4.11-7: The applicant shall submit an erosion
control plan to the City Engineering Department for review and approval. The erosion control
plan shall identify seeding and planting guidelines, dust control measures, stabilized construction
entrances, silt fences, straw bale barriers, sand bag barriers, storm drain inlet protection, and
sediment basins. Erosion control measures shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer in accordance with the City’s grading and erosion control requirements (Municipal
Code $15.16. et.seq.). The locations of all erosion control devices shall be noted on the grading
plans.
Note: Mitigation Measures 4.1 O-5 through 4. IO-I 3 will also apply.
Factual Support and Rationale. During the period the Draft EIR was
out for public review (January 25, 2001 to March 26,2001), the Regional Water Quality control
Board finalized the new point source storm water discharge regulations and standards as part of the new San Diego Municipal Storm Water Permit (Order No. 2001-l) pursuant to the Clean
Water Act, which now becomes part of the NPDES Permit CA 0108758. As such, the storm
water discharge standards and requirements for new development have been significantly
increased. The Proposed Project has anticipated those new regulations and included detention
basins and water quality basins in order to capture the first 0.6 inches (approximately) of rainfall
onsite, so that sediment and urban pollutants can be eliminated or removed prior to the storm
water entering the watercourses, lagoons and ultimately the ocean. The water quality will be
improved through a combination of natural and mechanical filtration or sedimentation traps,
thereby substantially improving the water quality of storm water discharge in new development
areas such as the Proposed Project. These efforts will require, among other steps, a Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification from the RWQCB, as well as meeting all the new
storm water discharge requirements through a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan and
associated NPDES permit and authorization. These new, higher standards are intended to
improve the overall municipal storm water quality before it discharges through the public storm
drain systems into Batiquitos Lagoon. Under Order No. 2001-1, the City, as a co-permitted, will
have the primary responsibility for enforcement of the permits and authorizations. The detention
basins and water quality basins will be maintained by the applicable homeowner associations as
part of the common area.
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B” 1652724 v3 [Word] 69 8/14/2001
2.11.4 Urban Pollutants (Surface Water Quality).
Impact. Development of the Proposed Project site would result in an
increase in the cumulative amounts of urban pollutants entering San Marcos Creek and
Batiquitos Lagoon. Although the cumulative contribution to urban runoff would be minimal and
would not result in water pollution and/or contamination that would significantly impact human
health and safety or biological communities, impacts are regarded as significant.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance, but the Proposal Project’s cumulative contribution to cumulative impacts would
remain significant and unmitigable.
Mitigation Measure 4.11-8: The Proposed Project shall design and
incorporate the current Best Management Practices and Best Available Technologies (BMPs and
BATS) available at that time for pollution control and erosion/siltation control, as referenced in
the “California Storm Water Best Management Practices Handbook” and meeting all regulatory
standards. Examples of BMPs and BATS include but are not limited to:
(4 energy dissipation structures and rip-rap at stormwater discharge
points to stabilize flow and reduce velocities;
@I desilting basins for pollutant and siltation control during
construction, resource based if possible;
(cl mulching cleared or freshly seeded areas for erosion/sedimentation
control;
(d) geotextiles and mats for erosion control during construction;
@I storm drain inlet/outlet protection for siltation control;
03 slope drains for erosion control;
(!a silt fences/sand bag barriers for siltation control during
construction;
the use of low-water requirement vegetation for landscaping;
(0 selection of slope planting species with low fertilization
requirements;
0’) requiring permanent (or temporary per City direction) irrigation
systems to be inspected on a regular basis and properly maintained. Design and implementation of these measures shall be to the satisfaction
of the City Engineer.
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B” 1652724 v3 [Word] 70 g/14/2001
Mitigation Measure 4.11-9: In conjunction with the sale, rental or lease
of a residence or business property, all prospective owners and tenants shall be notified in
writing that they shall:
(4 Establish or work with established disposal programs for the removal and proper disposal of toxic and hazardous waste products;
0) Not discharge or cause to be discharged any toxic chemicals or
hydrocarbon compounds, such as gasoline, motor oil, antifreeze, solvents,
paints, paint thinners, wood preservatives and other such fluids, into any
public or private street or into any storm drain or storm-drain conveyance;
(4 Use and/or dispose of all pesticides, fungicide, herbicides,
insecticides, fertilizers and other such chemical treatments in accordance
with Federal, State, County and City requirements as prescribed on their
respective containers;
(4 Employ BMP to eliminate or reduce surface pollutants when planning any changes to the landscaping and/or surface improvements.
Mitigation Measure 4.11-10: Applicable standards of the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for the San Diego County area shall be
met.
Factual Support and Rationale. The previous discussion about the new
storm water point source discharge requirements apply to urban pollutant elimination as well. In
addition, the Proposed Project will be required to educate occupants as to the need to eliminate
or reduce general residential pollution entering the storm drain systems, and the resources
available, one of the largest source of urban pollutants, household chemicals, insecticides,
automobile residue from tires, oil and gasoline and pet waste that routinely enter the storm dram
systems. Regulating the source, plus onsite detention and filtering, all consistent with the
RWQCB order No. 2001-1, will further reduce urban pollutants from entering the lagoon and
ocean.
2.11.5 On-Site Flooding.
Impact. Grading of the Proposed Project would eliminate a small portion
of existing loo-year floodplain and allow development to occur at these locations. Because
development would occur in the existing FEMA mapped loo-year floodplain, potential flooding
impacts are regarded as significant.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.11-11: Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a
Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLMR) shall be obtained from FEMA.
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B”
1652724 v3 [Word] 71 8/14/2001
Mitigation Measure 4.11-12: The applicant shall comply with 921.110
of the City of Carlsbad Municipal Code and shall apply for a Floodplain Special Use Permit for
areas within the existing loo-year floodplain at the time of Tentative Map application.
Factual Support and Rationale. The Engineering Department has
approved the reconfiguration of the existing flood plain area along the Poinsettia Lane/Alicante
Road alignments as part of the construction of circulation element roads. In order to assure that
the reconfiguration meets all requirements of the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA), the applicant must obtain appropriate conditional and final letters of delineation.
Additionally, the City requires issuance of a Floodplain Special Use Permit for work in the flood
plain for the purpose of assuring that the work will not adversely affect any property or impact
downstream areas as a result of the improvements. Current engineering standards and practices
are applied.
2.12 Public Facilities and Services.
2.12.1 Police Service.
Impact. The need for 4.6 additional officers would be considered a
significant impact so as not to exceed the City’s service standard of 0.77 officers per 1,000
population.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.12-1: Development of the Proposed Project would
result in the generation of an increase in taxes and fees that would be paid to the City’s General
Fund and made available to fund the hiring of additional police personnel. Use by the City of a
portion of these increased revenues generated by the Proposed Project to retain enough police
personnel to meet the City’s adopted standard of 0.77 officers per 1,000 population would reduce
the identified impact to below a level of significance.
Factual Support and Rationale. The city funds police and fire through
the general fund. General fund sources include the City’s share of property taxes, sales taxes,
transient occupancy taxes and other revenue sources. Capital improvements are funded in part
through the Capital Improvement Fee Program requiring all new development to pay a fee
equivalent to 3.5% of building permit valuation. The Proposed Project is required to pay all
applicable fees and will generate adequate tax and other revenues to continue police staffing
levels at the existing per capita levels as evidenced by the approved fiscal impact analysis
prepared for the Proposed Project.
2.12.2 School Service.
Impact. The Proposed Project would add students to the Carlsbad Unified
School District, the San Marcos Unified School District, the Encinitas Union Elementary School
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B”
1652724 v3 [Word] 72 8/14/2001
District, and the San Dieguito Union High School District and is regarded as a potentially
significant impact.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.12-2: Prior to the issuance of each residential
building permit(s), school fees shall be paid in accordance with the requirements of the State of
California (Senate Bill 50), or the applicant shall enter into a mitigation agreement with the
Carlsbad Unified School District, the San Marcos Unified School District, the Encinitas Union
Elementary School District, and the San Dieguito Union High School District.
Mitigation Measure 4.12-3: Prior to the development of Neighborhood
1.7 and within 12 months of approval of the General Plan Amendment for the Villages of La
Costa Master Plan (2000), the CUSD shall determine if a school site is needed as reserved in
Neighborhood 1.7. If needed, the site shall be offered for sale to the CUSD.
Factual Support and Rationale. While the City remains vitally
concerned about school facilities and needs, the City no longer has the legal ability to set school
facilities impact requirements, as those are established by State Law. However, the Proposed
Project is conditioned on paying the fees, or otherwise entering into a mitigation agreement with
each of the school districts that serve the Project. The City is aware that the applicant has
entered into a mitigation agreement with the Encinitas Union School District, participates in the
San Dieguito Union School district Mello Roos program as mitigation in that school district, and
as part of the mitigation program, has petitioned for annexation into the Carlsbad Unified School
District Mello Roos program and is in discussions with the San Marcos Unified School District.
Further, the Proposed Project has set aside an elementary school site in La Costa Greens for a
Carlsbad Unified school. The determination of the acceptability of the site and any decision to
build the school is within the control of the School District.
2.12.3 Water Service.
Impact. Although the average potable water demand generated by the
proposed La Costa Greens and La Costa Ridge/Oaks development is below the demand
anticipated for the existing and proposed facilities outlined by the proposed LFMP for Zone 10
and LFMP for Zone 11, respectively, at build out, the Proposed Project would have a significant
water supply and storage impact because it would increase water demand.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.12-4: In conjunction with the purchase of each
domestic water meter, La Costa Greens shall pay a major facilities fee based on water meter size
to the Carlsbad Municipal Water District and any capacity charge levied by the San Diego
County Water Authority.
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B”
1652724 v3 [Word] 73 S/14/2001
Mitigation Measure 4.12-5: At the time the on-site segment of
Pointsettia Lane is constructed, La Costa Greens shall construct or cause to be constructed a 16-
inch potable water line within the Pointsettia Lane right-of-way from El Camino Real eastward
to the east boundary of Zone 10, with reimbursement for oversizing.
Mitigation Measure 4.12-6: In conjunction with the purchase of each
domestic water meter, La Costa Ridge/Oaks shall pay the appropriate water fees established by
the Vallecitos Water District or the Olivenhain Municipal Water District.
Mitigation Measure 4.12-7: A new water line from the existing 12-inch
stub in Corintia Street to El Fuerte Street shall be installed, with reimbursement for oversizing, in
conjunction with the development of La Costa Oaks as required by VWD.
Mitigation Measure 4.12-8: All water system improvements shall be sized at the final engineering stage of development. All appliances such as showerheads,
lavatory faucets and sink faucets shall comply with effkiency standards set forth in Title 20,
California Administrative Code Section 1604(f). Title 24 of the California Administrative Code
Section 1606(b) prohibits the installation of fixtures unless the manufacturer has certified to the
California Energy Conservation compliance with the flow rate standards. Low flush toilets shall
be installed as specified in California Sate Health and Safety Code Section 17921.3.
Mitigation Measure 4.12-9: Irrigation shall be properly designed,
installed, operated and maintained to prevent the waste of water. Water application techniques
which conserve water, such as but not limited to, soil moisture sensors, drip irrigation, and
automatic irrigation systems shall be incorporated in publicly owned or homeowner associated
owned landscape areas. Irrigation system design shall be identified on the project’s Landscape
Plans and shall be approved by the City of Carlsbad.
Mitigation Measure 4.12-10: Plants of similar water use shall be
grouped to reduce over-irrigation of low-water-using plants. Plant groupings shall be identified
on the project’s Landscape Plans and shall be approved by the City of Carlsbad.
Mitigation Measure 4.12-11: La Costa Greens and La Costa Oaks shall
be required, subject to the terms and conditions of the governing Water Districts, to install dual
piping for irrigation systems to use reclaimed water. (Reclaimed water lines are not required for
La Costa Ridge because the demand for reclaimed water in this Village will be low.)
Factual Support and Rationale. Portions of the Proposed Project are within three separate water service districts, the Carlsbad Municipal Water District, Vallecitos
Water District and Olivenhain Municipal Water District. The applicant and the districts have
identified the major water service facilities that will be needed, and in addition, all connection
and capacity fees and charges will be paid as a precondition to water service. The Proposed
Project is within the service territories and the applicable master plans of the respective districts.
In order to further reduce potable water consumption, the Proposed Project is conditioned to
install water efficient plumbing and fixtures and in common landscaped areas, water
conservation techniques are required for irrigation and reclaimed water usage and dual piping
will further conserve potable water resources consistent with the City’s policies and regulations.
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations
1652724 v3 word]
Exhibit “EIR-B”
74 S/14/2001
2.13 Human Health and Safety Hazards.
2.13.1 Aircraft Accident Potential.
Impact. The potential exists for the assembly of 100 persons or more in
proposed Neighborhoods 1.1 and 1.2 of La Costa Greens. These areas are located in the FAZ of
McClellan-Palomar Airport, in which assembly is limited to under 100 persons by the CLUP.
This is regarded as a potentially significant impact.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.13-1: The following restriction shall be included
as a condition of all building permits, Conditional Use Permits, and certificates of occupancy for
uses and structures located in Neighborhood Areas 1.1 and 1.2 of La Costa Greens. “No use
shall be permitted inside the McClellan-Palomar Airport Flight Activity Zone which is designed
or intended to educate, entertain, accommodate, serve, congregate and/or employ a total of 100
or more persons at one time.”
Mitigation Measure 4.13-2: All owners/lessees in Neighborhood Areas
1.1 and 1.2 of La Costa Greens shall be notified through ownership disclosure statements and/or
lease agreements that the area is located in the Flight Activity Zone of the McClellan-Palomar
AilpOrt.
Factual Support and Rationale. While all intended uses throughout the
Proposed Project are fully consistent with the McClellan-Palomar Airport Comprehensive Land
Use Plan (CLUP), the non-residential uses in Neighborhoods 1.1 and 1.2 of La Costa Greens are
partially located within the designated Flight Activity Zone (FAZ) for the airport. In order to
reduce the risk of injury to persons as a result of an aircraft incident, no uses shall be allowed
which congregate more than 100 people at a time within the FAZ. This limitation will be
assured through prior review of any conditional use permits, site development plans or building
permits as applicable.
2.13.2 Hazardous Materials.
Impact. An existing above-ground diesel fuel tank is located on La Costa
Greens, and its presence is regarded as a potentially significant impact. Business park
development proposed in Neighborhood Area 1 .l of La Costa Greens and existing adjacent off-
site industrial development may include uses that use and store materials considered to be
hazardous under state and local regulations. This also is regarded as a potentially significant
impact.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, the identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B” 1652724 v3 [word] 75 S/14/2001
Mitigation Measure 4.13-3: Prior to the issuance of building permits in
La Costa Greens, the existing above-ground diesel storage tank shall be removed in accordance
with all applicable regulations, requirements and practices.
Mitigation Measure 4.13-4: All businesses in Neighborhood Area 1.1 of
La Costa Greens, shall comply with standard requirements of the State Department of Health
Services, San Diego County Health Department and the City of Carlsbad regarding the use and
storage of hazardous materials.
Factual Support and Rationale. The old, existing above ground fuel
storage tank in La Costa Greens will be removed pursuant to the applicable state and local
regulations for tank removals and a suitable closure report filed. Any required mitigation will be
implemented. Further, as with any business areas, any future business uses within the Proposed
Project will be required to meet all applicable health and safety regulations regarding the use and
storage of hazardous materials. Compliance details depend on the nature of the materials and
could range corn simple posting of notices to the preparation of detailed hazardous materials
handling, storage and reporting requirements.
2.13.3 Wildfire Hazards.
Impact. The Proposed Project would place residential homes and other
uses adjacent to high fire hazard areas, which is regarded as a significant impact.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.13-5: Prior to Final Map approval for a residential
neighborhood, a Fire Suppression Plan shall be approved by the City of Carlsbad Fire
Department for any areas designated as a Fire Protection Zone on the Proposed Project’s
Landscape Concept Plans, and for structures located either adjacent to any natural open space
area or adjacent to a manufactured slope that transitions to natural open space.
Mitigation Measure 4.13-6: Prior to the issuance of building permits for
structures either adjacent to natural open space or landscaped manufactured slopes that transition to natural open space, the City of Carlsbad Fire Department shall insure that the applicant has
complied with the following Fire Protection Plan for fuel modification:
1. Condition A - Manufactured Slope Fire Protection.
a. Section A-l : Area measured horizontally 20 feet outward from the
outlying edge of structure(s) shall be planted with low growing shrub
species (less than 3 feet in height) known to have fire retardant qualities.
No trees or shrubs shall be allowed. This area shall be irrigated.
b. Section A-2: Area measured horizontally 20 feet outward from the
outlying edge of Section A-l shall be planted with low water use
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B”
1652724 v3 [Word] 76 S/14/2001
naturalizing plant species known to have low fuel characteristics. No trees
shall be allowed. This area shall be irrigated.
C. Section A-3: Area measured outward from the outlying edge of
Section A-2 to include the remainder of the areas between Section A-2 and
high risk fire areas. The horizontal distance from the structure(s) to
untreated high risk areas shall not be less than 60 feet. Section A-3 shall
be planted with low water use naturalizing plant species known to have
low fuel characteristics. Trees are allowed, but shall not be planted closer
than 20 feet apart. This area shall be irrigated.
2. Condition B - Native Slopes - Wildland Fire Suppression.
a. Section B-l : Area measured horizontally 20 feet outward from the
outlying edge of structure(s) toward the environmentally restricted area as
defined by the City. In this area, high fuel and moderate hazard species
shall be removed. Planting shall consist of groundcover or low growing
shrub species (less than 3 feet in height) known to have fire retardant
qualifies or as otherwise required by the City. No trees or shrubs shall be
allowed. This area shall be irrigated.
b. Section B-2: Area measured horizontally 20 feet outward from the
outlying edge of Section B-l. In this area, high fuel species shall be
removed. Moderate fuel species shall be removed through selective
pruning of up to 60 percent of the volume. Replanting shall occur with
naturalizing low me1 plant species. Trees and large tree form shrubs
which are being retained shall be pruned to provide clearance equal to
three times the height of the understory plant material or 6 feet, whichever
is higher; dead and excessively twiggy growth also shall be removed.
This area shall be temporarily irrigated.
C. Section B-3: Area measured horizontally 20 feet outward from the
outlying edge of Section B-2. The outer edge of Section B-3 shall extend
horizontally to a point at least 60 feet from structures. In this area, high
fuel species shall be removed. Moderate fuel species shall be removed.
Moderate fuel species shall be removed through selective pruning of up to
40 percent of the volume. Trees and large tree form shrubs which are
being retained shall be pruned to provide clearance equal to three times the
height of the understory plant material or 6 feet, whichever is higher; dead and excessively twiggy growth also shall be removed. This area shall not
be irrigated.
Mitigation Measure 4.13-7: Prior to the issuance of building permits for
structures in La Costa Ridge/Oaks identified by the Fire Chief as having additional risk from
wildfire, special architectural features such as indoor sprinklers and roof eve treatments shall be
implemented as required by the Fire Chief.
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B” 1652724 v3 [Word] 77 S/14/2001
Factual Support and Rationale. The City is cognizant of the danger of
wildfires and the need to establish brush management and landscaping restrictions. The precise
techniques and limitations are established by the City Fire Department relying on the current
professional and scientific data and facts available. The brush management zones and
landscaping restrictions and control are augmented by the City’s annual weed abatement
programs. The City has established joint response arrangements with other fire departments and
in recent years have increased the training and equipment, including communications
improvements, to address wildfire risks. Additionally, the City prohibits wood shake or other
combustible roofing materials on new construction. The city Fire Chief is also charged with
determining whether any of the homes in the Ridge/Oaks present unique wildfire risks, and if so,
special residential treatments such as roof eve modifications or indoor sprinklers may be required
prior to the issuance of any building permits.
2.13.4 Dam Failure Flooding.
Impact. The Proposed Project would place residences of La Costa Oaks
within an area which could be subject to dam inundation in the event of the failure of the Stanley
A. Mahr Reservoir Dam. The Proposed Project grading and engineering design would reduce
the velocity and extent of flood waters resulting from dam failure inundation to non-significant
levels for human life hazards. Loss of property due to flooding caused by dam failure could
occur, and is considered a potentially significant impact.
Finding. With the incorporation of the following mitigation measures, the
identified direct significant impact would be avoided and thereby reduced below a level of
significance.
Mitigation Measure 4.13-8: New residents located with the Dam
Inundation Area of the existing Stanley A. Mahr Reservoir shall be notified as part of the
standard ownership disclosure package and CC&Rs that their property is inside the Stanley A.
Mahr Reservoir dam inundation area, and is subject to flooding, resulting in the potential loss of
property, in the event of dam failure.
Factual Support and Rationale. The Stanley A. Mahr reservoir is
owned and maintained by the Vallecitos Water District. It was built in 1981 and meets all
existing standards for construction and design, including all earthquake safety standards
according to the District. While the risk of failure seems low, the proposed Project has designed its grading and surface water systems to reduce the risk of any loss of life or significant property
damage to very low levels. Nonetheless, any prospective buyer of a residence within the
potential inundation area identified in the inundation study will be notified in writing in advance
so that they may make an informed decision as to the potential, however remote, of property
damage in the event of a dam failure.
3. FINDINGS OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS, DIRECT AND CUMULATIVE,
AND SUPPORTING FACTS.
3.1 Finding of No Direct Significant Impact. The following potential areas of
significant impacts were evaluated in the Final Program EIR and found to have no siguificant
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations 1652724 v3 [Word] Exhibit “EIR-B”
78 S/14/2001
adverse impacts, and therefore, no mitigation is required. The Supporting Facts and Rationale
for each item is set forth immediately following the item description.
3.1.1 Consistency with the Planned Community Zone Ordinance. The
Proposed Project is currently zoned Planned Community (P-C) pursuant to Chapter 21.38 of the
Carlsbad Municipal Code. Under Chapter 21.38, the primary requirement for P-C Zoned
property is that no development may occur unless a comprehensive Master Plan is first approved
to establish uniform standards and polices regulating development. As the Villages of La Costa Master Pan (2000) has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 21.38,
there is no significant impact and the requirements of the P-C Zone are fully satisfied.
3.1.2 Consistency with the Growth Management Program. The
comprehensive citywide Growth Management Program is set forth in Chapter 21.90 of the
Carlsbad Municipal Code. Among its principle features and requirements, it: a) limits the
number of residential units in each quadrant of the City; b) establishes a mid-point density
control range for each General Plan residential land use category; c) divides the city into 25
separate zones and requires that before development may occur within that zone, individual
Local Facilities Management Plans must be approved by the City establishing that the available
public facilities and services will be timely provided concurrent with development in satisfaction of the citywide standards for facilities and services. The Proposed Project is in the Southeast
Quadrant of the City, proposes not more than 2,390 residential units, which amount, when added
to the existing and projected future units will not exceed the Growth Management cap of 17,328
residential units for the Southeast Quadrant of the City. None of the Proposed Project
neighborhoods exceed the applicable mid-point density ranges for the applicable General Plan
land use designations. A new Zone 10 Local Facilities Management Plan is being processed to
cover La Costa Greens and the existing Zone 11 Local Facilities Management Plan is being
amended to cover La Costa Ridge/Oaks as part of the Proposed Project.
3.1.3 Consistency with Adopted HCP/OMSP & Implementation
Agreement. The June 6, 1995 Implementation Agreement and associated HCP/OMSP program was a four party agreement and Habitat Conservation Program in compliance with all applicable
Federal and State Endangered Species Laws involving the City, CDFG, USFWS and the
property owner. Under the Implementation Agreement and HCP/OMSP, a 702.5 acre area was
identified to be preserved for permanent open space habitat maintenance and protection, and all
development was to occur within the remaining “Impact Area.” As planned, the Proposed
Project increases the preserve area to a total of 835.4 acres, thereby increasing the permanent
open space habitat areas by an additional 132.9 acres (18.9%). All development is constrained
within the original designated “Impact Areas”. See FPEIR at pgs. 4.1-10 through 4.1-12 for
more detail.
3.1.4 Consistency with the City’s Landscape Manual. The City’s Landscape
Manual applies to both private and public projects requiring discretionary permits. Its standards
and guidelines have been incorporated into the Proposed Project through the Villages of La
Costa Master Plan (2000) and associated approvals.
3.1.5 Consistency with City’s Open Space and Conservation Resource
Management Plan (OSCRMP). The City’s adopted OSCRMP establishes criteria, planning
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations
1652724 v3 [word]
Exhibit “EIR-B”
79 S/14/2001
principles and design guidelines for public parks and recreation areas, trails, school siting and
other public facilities. The Proposed Project includes public parks, a school site, trails and public
facilities areas consistent with the standards of the OSCRMP. With well over 900 acres of HCP
Open Space and other Open Space, the Proposed Project well exceeds the City’s 40% goal.
3.1.6 Consistency with the City’s Subdivision Regulations. Title 20 of the
Municipal code sets forth the procedural and substantive standards and polices for processing
and approving subdivisions. The Proposed Project includes two Master Subdivision Tentative
Maps, which have been prepared in accordance with the applicable standards and policies. The
extensive list of conditions and requirements assures conformance.
3.1.7 Development of Natural Slopes of Over 40 Percent. As discussed in
more detail in Section 2.1.3.2 above, as none of the affected existing slopes are prominent land
forms, disturbance, under the limited circumstances described is considered insignificant as only
27.4 acres of non prominent 40% slopes are affected out of a total of 232.6 acres of 40% slopes.
Further, the HCP Open Space, for biological purposes, consumed substantial flatter topography, pushing the developed portions into some steeper topography.
3.1.8 Volume of Grading. As discussed in more detail in Section 2.1.3.2
above, the City’s Hillside development Ordinance establishes grading volume limitations
expressed as a quantity of grading per acre (cy/ac) of development area, exclusive of arterial
roads. As the grading volume in La Costa Greens is 9,960 cy/ac and the volume in La Costa
Ridge/Oaks is 8,950 cy/ac, both are within the conditionally acceptable category and meet
applicable standards.
3.1.9 Construction Noise. Detailed acoustic studies and models were evaluated
in the Final Program ElR at pgs.4.8-8 through 4.8-12, including the rock crushing operation sites
depicted in Fig. 4.8-2. As the sites are quite large, the predominance of the construction activity
will be generally located some distance from the nearest homes and the rock crushing sites will
be no closer than one-fourth (l/4) mile, approximately. At these distances, the noise will not
exceed applicable standards. While it is recognized that in some limited areas construction will
occur in near proximity to existing residences and may be annoying to some people, the duration
of such activities is short lived, and on the whole, does not represent a significant adverse
environmental impact. The City has enforceable noise level regulations applicable at property
boundaries as well as ordinances requiring all construction equipment have noise attenuating
devices.
3.1.10 Carbon Monoxide (CO) Hotspots. Extensive modeling and analysis to
determine the potential of CO hotspots (pockets or locations where CO levels would exceed
applicable air quality standards) for both construction equipment and vehicular traffic were
undertaken and the results set forth in the Final Program EIR at pgs. 4.9-13 through 4.9-16.
Those models demonstrate that no significant risk of CO hotspots will occur.
3.1.11 Business Park Emission Stationary Source Impact Potential. The
limited acreage and location of the 7.9 acre business park use in the Northwest portion of La
Costa Greens combined with rigorous air pollution and hazardous materials City and countywide
regulations eliminate the potential for stationary source emission incidences. The City has a
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations 1652724 v3 [Word] Exhibit “EIR-B” 80 S/14/2001
large and vigorous employment area in close proximity having a range of industry and uses
similar to those that would be permitted within the business park area. The City has not had any
frequent or serious emission problems and the complement of regulations have proven effective.
3.1.12 Impact to Air Quality from Offsite Water Reclamation Facility.
Adjacent to a portion of La Costa Ridge/Oaks, the Vallecitos Water District operates a water
reclamation facility for the purpose of producing reclaimed water. While its operation is known
to involve ammonia, carbon monoxide and dioxide, hydrogen sulfide, methane, dust and
associated endotoxins, human health and safety requirements are already in place at the site to
protect workers and will likewise be effective in protecting future residents in the Proposed
Project from any significant health or safety risk.
3.1.13 Agricultural Suitability. As only 88 acres of the entire 1,866.4 acre site
has either Grade 1 or 2 soils suitable for cultivation and no agricultural use is evident for many
years, development poses no significant risk of loss of viable agricultural property.
3.1.14 Down Stream Fiooding. The Proposed Project is designed to assure that
the surface and other storm discharge waters do not impose any down stream flooding risk as
applicable engineering design standards have been incorporated based on specialized studies and
reports as more detailed in the Final Program EIR at pgs. 4.1 l-26 through 4.1 l-27.
3.1.15 Fire Services. The entire Proposed Project is within the required response
time as established by the Citywide Public Facilities Performance Standards and the Growth
Management Ordinance. Further, as detailed in Alternatives Section, the City is evaluating the
relocation of the existing interim Fire Station at La Costa Avenue and Levante Street to one of
three alternative locations within La Costa Oaks. Any relocation would only further improve
response times throughout the Proposed Project. See FPEJR at pgs. 9-26 through 9-35.
3.1.16 Reclaimed Water Service. The City has a long-standing program and
requirement for new development to incorporate use of reclaimed water for public/common area
and median landscaping wherever available. As detailed in the final Program ElR at pgs. 4.12-
13 and 4.12-15, the Proposed Project is in close proximity to the two main sources of reclaimed
water in the City and the Proposed Project incorporates dual piping and other reclaimed water
distribution facilities in conformity with the adopted policies and standards.
3.1.17 Sewer Service; Wastewater Treatment. Portions of the Proposed
Project are served by three different wastewater treatment providers: Carlsbad Sewer Service
District; Leucadia County Water District; and Vallecitos Water District. As detailed in the Final
Program EIR at pgs 4.12-16 though 4.12-22, the Proposed Project incorporates adequate
collection facilities meeting the standards of the respective districts and each district has
adequate treatment capacity to process the wastewater from the Proposed Project.
3.1.18 Solid Waste. Solid waste collection and disposal at county owned and
operated landfills is franchised in the City to Coast Waste Management and includes curbside
pick up recycling programs for all residential areas. The Proposed Project would increase the
volume of solid waste that is directed to landfills as well as curbside recycling volumes. As
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B” 1652724 v3 [Word] 81 S/14/2001
detailed in the Final Program EIR, adequate landfill capacities exist and the Proposed Project
creates no significant adverse impact.
3.1.19 Dry Utilities Services. The Proposed Project will increase demand for
electricity, natural gas, telephone and cable television facilities similar to other residential areas
within the City. The Proposed Project includes connections to the various utilities and adequate
capacity exists in the local distribution networks for these services. While in the recent year or
so, electricity rolling blackouts have occurred sporadically throughout the State of California, the
State Government has stepped in to secure long term forward delivery electricity contracts and
increased the licensing of new electrical generating facilities. The electrical generating and
distribution issues and network is regional, statewide and to a significant extent, national in
scope and while important, are beyond the realistic reach of the City.
3.1.20 Recreational Services. The Proposed Project includes park land, off
street hiking and bike trails, which meet or exceed the citywide performance standards under the
Growth Management Program.
3.1.21 Library Facilities. The City library system consists of two libraries, the
Main Library in La Costa and the Georgina Cole Library in the downtown Village Area. The
Proposed Project will not overload these facilities as they continue to exceed the citywide
performance standards for library facilities under the Growth Management Program.
3.1.22 Disaster Preparedness. Although the Proposed Project would increase
population in the City, additional street and transportation improvements are included which will
improve the overall evacuation route network and would not adversely affect the City’s Emergency Plan.
3.1.23 Electromagnetic Fields. Several existing high voltage electrical
transmission facilities owned by SDG&E traverse the Proposed Project and are adjacent to
several future residential areas. The Proposed Project does not include any new overhead
transmission facilities nor the relocation of existing facilities. From time to time, the issue of
potential adverse health effects form proximity of high voltage transmission facilities have been
the subject of studies, reports, litigation and public debate, a survey of the generally recognized
materials do not establish a scientific credible link, and therefore, any adverse impact would be
speculative. See FPEIR at pgs. 4.13-7 through 4.13-10.
3.1.24 Population and Housing. Only a single old residential unit is occupied
by a caretaker. The Proposed Project does not displace significant existing residents or workers.
The Proposed Project will provide up to 359 units of affordable workforce housing consistent
with the City’s Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (requiring 15% of the total housing be income
qualified affordable units) within the master plan area and provide for a range of types and
densities of market rate housing opportunities. As the number of units overall is within the
Southeast Quadrant unit cap, the Southeast Quadrant does not exceed the mid-point density
range for the various areas, it is fully consistent with the General Plan and Growth Management
Program population and housing requirements.
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B” 1652724 v3 [Word] 82 S/14/2001
4. FINDINGS CONCERNING FEASIBILITY OF PROJECT ALTERNATIVES.
4.1 Applicable Standards. Under CEQA, whenever a public agency considers
approving a project for which the EIR concludes that notwithstanding the incorporated
mitigation measures, there will nonetheless remain significant impacts that are not avoided or
lessened below a level of significance, the public agency must consider and make findings
regarding the feasibility of alternatives discussed in the EIR. As stated in CEQA (PRC $21002):
“[It] is the policy of the state that public agencies should not approve projects as
proposed if there are feasible alternatives or mitigation measures available which
would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such
projects. . . . The legislature further finds and declares that in the event specific economic, social, or other conditions make infeasible such project alternatives or
mitigation measures, individual projects may be approved in spite of one or more
significant effects thereof.”
Here, the FPEIR concludes that after the incorporation of the specific mitigation
measures outlined in Section 2 above, the Proposed Project will still have the following
significant, unmitigable environmental effects:
A. Direct impact on Landform Alteration from converting approximately half the project
area from largely open space to a variety of residential, public facilities, commercial, street and
recreational uses.
B. A cumulative impact, in combination with other existing and planned development in
the vicinity, to Transportation (2 intersections in the City of San Marcos at Year 2005 and 2020),
Visual Quality-Aesthetics (from the overall residential and business growth and urbanization of
the region), Noise (as a result of the minimal contribution in existing Alga Road traffic noise
impacts to the existing residences just east of El Camino Real), Air Quality (as a result of the
entire San Diego Air Basin being a Non-attainment area for NO-x (ozone) emissions and
Hydrology/ Water Quality (as a result of the incremental contribution to urban pollutant runoff
into storm drain system receiving waters such as Batiquitos Lagoon).
The determination of the infeasibility of alternatives is necessarily an evaluation of the
many elements of specific economic, social or other considerations. (Guidelines $15091).
Elsewhere in the Guidelines $15364, “feasible” is defined as ” . ..capable of being accomplished in
a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic,
environmental, legal, social, and technological factors.” At the same time, infeasibility is not
equated with impossibility and case law recognizes that an alternative or mitigation measure may
also be infeasible if it is undesirable or impractical from a policy standpoint. As an example, a
conflict between project alternatives and a city’s growth management policies and programs
supported a finding of infeasibility in City of De1 Mar v. City of San Diego (1982) 133 CA3d
401. The Court went on to describe the alternatives analysis under CEQA necessarily involves
the balancing of economic, environmental, social and technological factors within the province
of the decision makers.
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B” 1652724 v3 [Word] 83 S/14/2001
In undertaking the comparative analysis called for under CEQA in considering the
feasibility of project alternatives, it is also necessary to keep in mind the Project objectives as
expressed in the FPEIR. The overall Project Objectives are set forth at Pages l-7 and l-8 of the
FPEIR as follows:
1. Citv Plans and Policies. Conform to and implement the City’s Growth Management
Program, General Plan and associated policies, ordinances and goals.
2. Residential Buildout Limits. Limit the maximum number of dwelling units at bellow the
Growth Management control point to avoid exceeding the City and Quadrant General Plan and
Growth Management buildout limits.
3. Housing Affordability/Diversity. Assure that not less than 15% of all residential units
constructed in the project area will meet the City’s affordable housing program requirements
thereby adding to the City’s affordable housing stock and inventory of safe, clean and diverse
housing opportunities.
4. Circulation Facilities. Contribute to the City’s completion of its overall traftic and
transportation network of roads and streets, bike lanes and pedestrian trails by constructing,
improving or fmancing important arterials such as Ranch0 Santa Fe Road, El Camino Real, Alga
Road, Alicante Road, Poinsettia Lane and others while providing public and alternative
transportation opportunities with bike lanes, bus facilities and pedestrian trails linking to other
citywide facilities, helping to complete the entire area network in addition to providing safe,
adequate neighborhood level streets, walking and biking opportunities.
5. Onen Snace, Natural Habitat, Parks and Recreational Facilities. Provide extensive open
space, viewsheds, managed natural habitat preserve areas, and active and passive recreational
and park opportunities by establishing extensive permanent open space, multi-species natural
habitat preserves, a public community park, bike and walking trails strategically located
throughout the Proposed Project area and providing connectivity to surrounding open space,
natural habitat and trails networks.
6. HCPIOMSP. Preserve environmental resources and implement the Habitat Conservation
Plan/Ongoing Multi-Species Plan (HCP/OMSP) in accordance with all local, state and federal
laws, regulations and policies.
7. Administrative, Fire, Police, Drainage, Sewer, Water. and Related Facilities. Assure
adequate levels of services and required public facilities through participation in construction and
financing programs to achieve City standards adequacy, design and safety.
8. Schools. Libraries. Assure adequate, available facilities through participation in site
location and financing programs to meet City, school district and state standards.
9. Neinhborhood Oualitv and Landform Comnatibility. Establish comprehensive grading,
building and landscaping design standards to create balanced, attractive resident friendly
neighborhoods internally complimentary and compatible with surrounding neighborhoods;
provide for permanent maintenance funding and enforcement of standards by creation of one or
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B”
1652724 v3 word] 84 S/14/2001
more homeowner associations. Protect significant viewsheds where feasible and otherwise
satisfy all landform alteration ordinances and policies.
10. Product Design, Phasing and Overview. Permit residential design flexibility to meet
market demand and allow for the incorporation of positive technical advancements. Allow
individual villages to develop at their independent pace based on phasing necessary
infrastructure improvements and response to market conditions. Establish overview procedures
to regulate project development while providing necessary flexibility for individual, site specific
adjustments to occur without affecting the Proposed Project as a whole.
4.2 Findings on Project Alternatives.
The Final Program EIR evaluated a range of potential project alternatives, as well as
consideration of three tire station site alternatives for possible relocation of the City’s existing
Fire Station No. 6 from its interim site to a La Costa Oaks location better enabling it to serve its
primary service area. The findings regarding the fire station site alternatives will be addressed
separately from the overall project alternatives.
The project alternatives included a No Development Alternative, a No Project
Alternative, a Wetland Avoidance Alternative and the Reduced Development/Canyons Network
Alternative suggested in the EIR public scoping meetings conducted prior to the preparation of
the EIR. CEQA requires consideration of the No Project and No Development alternatives and
the City selected the others on the basis they represent a reasonable range of alternative project
proposals that appear to be potentially compatible with most of the overall Project Objectives.
Applying the criteria discussed above for considering the feasibility of project
alternatives and considering the totality of the information in the Final Program ElR, testimony
and information received during the public hearings and the evidence in the administrative
record as a whole, the City has determined that the identified project alternatives are not feasible
in light of the Project Objectives, the City’s programs and policies and general legal principles
applicable to a landowner’s right or privilege to make beneficial use of its property in accordance
with all applicable laws, polices, standards and land use regulations uniformly applied. The
factual support, reasoning and analysis supporting this conclusion will be set forth below with
respect to each of the Project alternatives evaluated in the Final Program EIR.
4.2.1 No Development Alternative. (FPEIR Section 9.4)
The No Development Alternative retains the entire project area in substantially its
existing condition and assumes no further development. While initially seductive in that the No
Development Alternative would avoid all impacts from the Proposed Project, it is not realistic or feasible given economic, social, policy, environmental and legal considerations and factors at
work.
A. The private property owner has legal rights of reasonable beneficial use of its
property consistent with uniformly applied policies, ordinances, regulations and constitutional
protections. The No Project Alternative is essentially a denial of all beneficial use.
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B”
1652724 v3 [word] 85 S/14/2001
B. The No Project alternative is inconsistent with the City’s General Plan, Housing
Element and Growth Management Program which identifies and permits a range of housing
types and other uses on the property. No development would be inconsistent with the city’s
responsibility under State Planning Law to adopt and implement a General Plan providing for a
range of land uses, including residential, employment, open space and other areas to provide for
the orderly and balanced range of uses. If no development were to take place in the areas
designated for development, the City would fail to meet its local, regional and state obligations
to provide housing and job opportunities not just for the existing residents, but for the future
population growth forecast for the city and the region generally.
C. The Proposed Project will provide a range of useful and needed public facilities
and other infrastructure that is needed by existing residents to enhance and improve the quality
of life. Those include the large community park and school site in La Costa Greens, hiking and
biking trails throughout the Project, the financing or construction of critical circulation element
roads to complete the City’s circulation element road system (Poinsettia Lane, Ranch0 Santa Fe
Road, Alicante Road as examples) which are needed to support existing local and regional
traffic.
D. The Proposed Project would add approximately 359 units of workforce affordable
housing in the City to assist the City in meeting its obligations under State law to provide its
regional fair share of affordable housing. The No Development Alternative would not contribute
to the affordable housing obligations of the City.
E. While the property would remain undeveloped, it would not dedicate the 834.9
acres of HCP Gpen Space, protect it with permanent conservation easements in favor of the
California Department of Fish and Game, convey it to a natural habitat management organization
acceptable to the City, USFWS and CDFG, or permanently endow the owner with sufficient
funds such that the HCP Open Space can be managed and maintained in perpetuity for multi-
species habitat protection purposes as required by the HCP/OMSP in exchange for development
of the balance for private and public purposes. The entire property could be closed off to the
public as it would remain private property and tax revenues would be reduced if no use or
development is permitted. The open space would not be managed for the benefit of endangered
species through the private habitat endowment funding, nor would there be a public education
component for preserve management.
F. The City’s efforts to provide a balance of jobs and housing opportunities would be
adversely affected as both needed housing stock and some employment land would remain
unbuilt. The city’s analysis shows approximately 70% of the people who live in Carlsbad
commute elsewhere to work and roughly 70% of the people employed in Carlsbad commute
from other cities or the county.
G. By the property remaining undeveloped, existing surface water runoff and
sediment would remain uncontrolled and unfiltered. Without water quality control devices the
No Development Alternative would continue contributing sediment and urban pollutants
discharge to receiving water such as Batiquitos Lagoon.
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B”
1652724 v3 [Word] 86 S/14/2001
H. The City, by not benefiting from the range of development fees and exactions, as
well as increased tax base would be adversely impacted in terms of tax revenues to support
public facilities and infrastructure that would be built or financed by the Proposed Project. The
City’s Growth Management Program and facilities performance standards would be jeopardized
as the cost of additional facilities and infrastructure to serve existing and future citizens, and the
sources of those funds and facilities, were spread proportionately for future development to
finance and construct. This financing shortfall could affect a range of citywide facilities such as libraries, fire support, police, city government, parks, recreation as well as transportation and the
needed road network. In other words, the Citywide capital infrastructure funding mechanism
would be jeopardized.
4.2.2 No Project Alternative. (FPEIR Section 9.5)
Under CEQA, the No Project Alternative is analyzed to represent the impacts if the area
were to be developed under the existing plans, ordinances, policies and requirements, instead of the particular Proposed Project. The No Project Alternative, assumes then that future
development would occur consistent with land use regulations.
A. The overall density permitted under the existing land use regulations would allow
approximately 3,070 dwelling units at the Growth Management control point density ranges for
the various areas, resulting in approximately 680 more units than proposed, thereby,
incrementally increasing the environmental impacts directly related to population and number of
units, such as traffic, air pollution and similar impacts.
B. The Proposed Project will set aside 834.9 acres of managed, maintained and
funded HCP Open space as the Proposed Project implements the HCP/OMSP. Development in
accordance with the existing General Plan and land use regulations of the City would not protect as many acres of habitat and open space nor would the open space configuration be planned and
located, with substantial habitat core areas and linkages, in order to obtain the maximum species
protection and recovery opportunities as the UFWS and CDFG approved HCP/OMSP. Further,
development under existing regulations would not implement the HCP/OMSP nor assure funding or coordination with the City’s HMP or regional MHCP programs. Under existing regulations,
the property could develop piecemeal and habitat and species preserve protections would
likewise be piecemeal and potentially fragmented. While future development would have to
obtain authorization, there is no assurance that future development would result in a
comprehensive management and funding program superior to the comprehensive HCP/OMSP
preserve system.
C. As less of the project area would be preserved in open space generally under the
existing regulations, the amount of landform alteration, grading and associated visual and
aesthetic impacts would be exacerbated.
4.2.3 Wetland Avoidance Alternative. (FPEIR Section 9.6)
The Wetland Avoidance Alternative was included to evaluate the comparative impacts of
a project design that avoided all Federal and State wetland jurisdictional waters, which include
both wetlands and other jurisdictional waters of the United States. As the State and Federal
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations
1652724 v3 [Word]
Exhibit “EIR-B”
87 S/14/2001
definitions vary slightly, for ease of reference, the following references will use the more
expansive State definitions and totals, and collectively refer to the entirety as “wetlands”. The
FPEIR contains a detailed chart of the individual components of the wetlands for La Costa
Greens (Table 4.4-6, pg. 4.4-27/28) and La Costa Ridge/Oaks (Table 4.4-7, pg. 4.4-32). The
impact to Federal wetlands is administered through the US Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE)
under the Clean Water Act through the issuance of ACOE 404 permits and the State wetlands are
regulated through the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) through the issuance of
CDFG 1603 permits.
The Proposed Project impacts relatively little wetlands, a total 5.61 acres for La Costa
Greens (total 19.42 acres of wetlands onsite of which 12.78 is conserved) and a total of 1.02 acres for La Costa Ridge/Oaks (total of 25.865 acres of wetlands onsite of which 24.85 is
conserved). Nonetheless, to completely avoid the impacted wetlands would result in a total of
94.3 fewer graded acres, but the loss of approximately 712 units as arterial roads and other
facilities would have to be pushed into otherwise habitable areas. In addition, 13 or 14 bridge
structures would be required to carry the various streets and circulation roads over the wetlands.
After evaluating the environmental benefits of the Wetlands Avoidance Alternative and
considering the FPER, the evidence presented at the public hearings and the entire
administrative record, the City has concluded the alternative is not feasible within the meaning of
CEQA.
A. While wetlands are important biological resources, considering the entire Project
area is 1866 acres and would only disturb a total of 7.66 wetlands while preserving 37.63 acres
of wetlands onsite is vastly disproportional considering the loss of approximately 712 units,
representing approximately 30% of the residential units. Further, the reduction in units would
mean approximately 107 fewer workforce affordable units would be constructed. The
combination of market rate and workforce affordable units would adversely affect the ability of
the City to provide adequate housing in order to meet its housing needs and goal of providing a
suitable jobs/housing balance.
B. The 7.66 acres of wetlands impacted are of relatively low quality and will be
replaced onsite by new wetlands and restored wetlands so that the overall wetlands will suffer no
net loss in acreage, and will actually function more effectively through the rehabilitation and
replacement. As to the 0.045 acres of vernal pools in the Oaks area, these are not naturally
occurring and are so isolated as not to provide significant benefit compared to the preservation
offsite of high quality vernal pool resources and habitat. Further, biological analysis establishes no endangered or threatened species are present. From the biological information available, it
supports the offsite preservation of vernal pools as there does not appear that comparable, quality
vernal pool habitat is available elsewhere in the City,
C. The construction of approximately 13 bridges would be very expensive.
Estimates are that the bridges would cost approximately $6 Million more to construct than
normal surface streets as well as considerably more in ongoing maintenance. Using the
estimated additional cost alone and spreading it to the fewer remaining market rate units would
significantly add to the cost of each house, thereby making housing even more expensive in our
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B”
1652724 v3 [Word] 88 8/14/2001
City and increasing our street maintenance costs for no discernible advantage or benefit as the
impacted wetlands areas will be replaced and overall wetland performance enhanced.
D. While approximately 94.3 fewer acres would be graded, the additional bridges
would result in adverse visual impacts in that landscaped streets would be replaced with stark
bridge structures in the numerous crossings, detracting from the visual quality and atmosphere of
the residential areas affected. The Proposed Project includes a wetland bridge structure in the
most abundant wetland area near the intersection of Poinsettia Lane and Alicante Road, which is in the major wetland habitat and course. Bridge structures do not add positively to the residential
character of the remaining areas and standard street and landscaping solutions are preferred. The
Wetland Avoidance Alternative would also adversely impact the size and configuration of the
Community Park and elementary school site.
E. The City is also mindful of the provisions of Guidelines 15092(c) which states
that for projects involving housing development, the public agency considering the project shall
not reduce the proposed number of dwelling units if it determines another feasible mitigation
measure is available to provide a comparable level of mitigation. As discussed above, the
modest 7.66 acres of wetland resources impacted onsite will be fully replaced and superior
vernal pool habitat preserved elsewhere. Because the total amount of wetlands in the project
area will be equal or greater under the Proposed Project in both amount and function, effectively
reducing the residential units, both market rate and affordable, by 30% is not supportable under
these circumstances.
F. The proposed alternative would be inconsistent with the designation of
development areas in the completed HCP/OMSP and would jeopardize the successful
implementation of that plan as the development area would be significantly altered. If the
HCP/OMSP is not implemented, then not only is the preservation of the 834.9 acres of HCP
Open space not assured, but the $l,OOO,OOO contribution to inclusion of offsite gnatcatcher core
area habitat and the $150,000 contribution to the City’s HMP would be lost, as well as an
additional $50,000 toward gnatcatcher research. While additional open space would be
preserved, its permanent private funding and maintenance would not occur, thereby adversely
affecting its habitat value.
4.2.4 Reduced Development/Canyons Network Alternative. (FPEIR Section 9.7)
The Reduced Development/Canyons Network Alternative was suggested by the Canyons
Network group at the public scoping hearings. The Canyons Network group has been an
advocate for preserving the Box Canyon waterfall feature in San Marcos Creek canyon area and
for expanded open space and natural habitat conservation generally. Under the Reduced
Development/Canyons Network Alternative, the La Costa Ridge development area would be left
undeveloped and La Costa Oaks Neighborhoods 3.1, 3.3 and 3.5 would also remain
undeveloped. The effect would be to reduce the total residential units by 580 (320 in Ridge and
260 in Oaks) , eliminate an additional 87 workforce affordable units, and increase the open space
by an additional 258 acres generally (increasing the existing HCP and Non-HCP Open Space
acreage from 657.3 acres in the La Costa Ridge/Oaks out of a total of 1,205 acres). As the Box
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B” 1652724 v3 [Word] 89 8/14/2001
Canyon area is already fully preserved and protected in the Proposed Project’s HCP Open Space
area, this alternative would not have a direct impact on Box Canyon.
After considering the environmental benefits of the Canyons Network Alternative set
forth in the FPEIR, the evidence presented in writing and personally at the public hearings and
the entire administrative record, the City has concluded the alternative is not feasible within the
meaning of CEQA.
A. The Canyons Network Alternative would significantly reduce the future
residential units in the Proposed Project area by 580 homes and increase open space by 258 acres
in the La Costa Ridge/Oaks area only. Reducing 580 units would also result in reduction of 87
workforce affordable units, thereby adversely impacting the City’s ability to provide both market
rate and affordable living opportunities for existing and fhture residents. The City’s General Plan
and Growth Management Program is based on the balance of residential, job, open space and
recreational land and the need to maintain appropriate balance throughout the City. As the City
nears buildout, residential units not provided as planned in one area would not likely be made up
in other areas as community opposition and City policies generally disfavor zoning and density
increase over existing planned levels.
B. A reduction in the number of units would adversely affect the financing of needed
public infrastructure, including Ranch0 Santa Fe Road (each unit is required to contribute
$10,250 to financing Ranch0 Santa Fe Road improvements), would eliminate the completion of
El Fuerte Road widening and sidewalks in the vicinity of La Costa Meadows Elementary School,
as well as significantly reduce the public facilities fees, traffic impact fees and taxes generated by
the omitted units which funds are used for capital projects such as libraries, parks, fire, police
and other public services and facilities. Further, reduction in units would lower Project parkland
dedication requirement, thereby increasing significantly the public funds necessary for 27.2 acre
community park and threaten its financing.
C. The alternative would be inconsistent with the HCP/OMSP and jeopardize its
implementation, risking the availability of 834.9 acres of HCP Open space, the $l,OOO,OOO
contribution to acquisition of offsite gnatcatcher core area habitat, the $150,000 contribution to
the City HMP program and the $50,000 contribution to gnatcatcher research, as well as public
trails and access. If the HCP/OMSP is not implemented, then the guaranteed private funding for
the permanent management and maintenance of the HCP Open space for habitat purposes is
jeopardized and the quality and protection of the remaining open space areas would be
jeopardized. The additional 258 acres of open space is not high quality habitat, and based on
studies, would preserve range for only 3 pairs of gnatcatchers. The HCP/OMSP studies concluded this area was much less biologically significant than other areas.
D. Under CEQA Guidelines 15092(c), the City cannot reduce the number of
residential units of a Proposed Project if it concludes other mitigation measures are available to reduce the adverse impacts. On those issues that the FPEIR concludes would not be reduced
below a level of significance, the Canyons Network Alternative, while marginally reducing
traffic through the elimination of units and reducing the development area, thereby reducing
visual impacts, it does not result in fundamentally different overall environmental impacts, just proportionately less. The scope and range of mitigation measures would remain the same for the
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations 1652724 v3 [Word] Exhibit “EIR-B” 90 8/14/2001
Canyons Network Alternative as for the Proposed Project and therefore does not incorporate
significant environmental advantages overall.
E. The supplemental wetlands protection is minimal; less than one acre in total.
F. The Reduced Development/Canyons Network Alternative, by substantially
reducing residential units by 24.3%, but without proportional reduction in circulation element
roads, back-bone infrastructure, results in a significant increase in the infrastructure costs
allocation to the remaining units. This result would further exacerbate housing costs in the
Carlsbad area for existing and future residents.
4.3 FIRE STATION ALTERNATIVE.
The potential significant impacts of the three separate Fire Station Alternative locations
are discussed in detail in the FPEIR, beginning at Section 9.8 (pg. 9-26).
Alternative Site “A*. The first site is the existing City owned 0.5 acre parcel located on
the western side of the existing alignment of Ranch0 Santa Fe Road north of the Cadencia Street
intersection. However, upon the relocation of Ranch0 Santa Fe Road to the east, this site would
be surrounded by HCP Open space and need an extended driveway connection to Ranch0 Santa
Fe Road through more HCP Open Space and the future connection with realigned Ranch0 Santa
Fe Road would not meet the City’s intersection spacing safety standards. Further, since its
access would not be at an already controlled intersection, “emergency access signaling” would
be required. City experience demonstrates that such emergency access signaling is less safe and
noticeable, than is emergency access at a regularly controlled intersection.
Alternative Site “B”. The second site is slightly further north at the southeast comer of
the realigned Ranch0 Santa Fe Road and future Street “H”, which will be a controlled
intersection for access to the east to La Costa Oaks Neighborhoods 3.6 and 3.7, and to the west
to Neighborhoods 3.3 and 3.5. Site “B” is presently designated for multifamily affordable
housing and the site, approximately 1.0 acres, including slopes, is larger than needed for a fire
station, but would not leave enough room for shared or joint use. The displaced multifamily
affordable housing would have to be relocated to and the density increased to accommodate the
fire station at this site and the City would have to spend more money to acquire the oversized
useable area, thereby increasing the costs.
Alternative Site “Cn. The third site is immediately across Street “H” from Site “B” and
would also get access to realigned Ranch0 Santa Fe Road at the Street ‘Y-P’ controlled
intersection. While the site itself is 1.9 acres, including slopes, the useable area is appropriately
sized for the tire station and while proximate to the proposed multifamily affordable housing
planned in the area, the site itself is not particularly suitable for multifamily development
because of the grade separation from the adjoining site. Site “C” would provide a self-contained
location for the fire station and a desirable “downhill” start for the heavy fire equipment to
initiate their rollout response, thereby improving response times.
Conclusion. The sites are comparative as far as environmental impacts are concerned,
with the exception of Site “A” which would occupy space that would otherwise be habitat
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations 1652724 v3 [Word] Exhibit “EIR-B” 91 8/14/2001
preserved and managed as part of the HCP Opens Space and potential safety hazards/concerns
with equipment entering Ranch0 Santa Fe Road at a below desirable standard for intersection
spacing and at a an emergency controlled access point. Based on the comparative analysis,
including environmental impacts, cost and effkiency, Alternative Site “C” is the preferred
location which will provide the best overall response times to the service area, access at a
regularly controlled intersection, will not displace multifamily affordable housing that will
increase effective densities elsewhere and will afford the City an appropriately sized location.
5. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS.
As discussed in Section 4.1 of these CEQA findings, the FPEIR concludes that the
Proposed Project, even with incorporation of all feasible mitigation measures and consideration
of alternatives, will nonetheless have significant direct impact on Landform Alteration and
cumulative impacts on Transportation, Visual Quality/Aesthetics, Noise, Air Quality and
Hydrology/Water Quality. The cumulative impacts all arise from the marginal contribution the
Proposed Project will make, when combined with the impacts from existing and other future
projects, to pre-existing conditions that fail to meet applicable standards currently.
The City has adopted all feasible mitigation measures with respect to these impacts,
which may have substantially lessened the impacts, but have not been successful in reducing
them below a level of significance. In the case of the cumulative Transportation impacts,
available mitigation measures are within the province of another jurisdiction, the City of San
Marcos, which should cause the necessary improvements to the intersections irrespective of the
Proposed Project. The City understands that future improvement plans exist for the Ranch0
Santa Fe Road intersections in the City of San Marcos.
Under CEQA, before a project which is determined to have significant, unmitigated
environmental effects can be approved, the public agency must consider and adopt a “statement
of overriding considerations” pursuant to CEQA Guidelines 15043 and 15093. As the primary
purpose of CEQA is to fully inform the decision makers and the public as to the environmental effects of a proposed project and to include feasible mitigation measures and alternatives to
reduce any such adverse effects below a level of significance, CEQA nonetheless recognizes and
authorizes the approval of projects where not all adverse impacts can be fully lessened or
avoided. However, the agency must explain and justify its conclusion to approve such a project
through the statement of overriding considerations setting forth the Proposed Project’s general
social, economic, policy or other public benefits which support the agency’s informed conclusion
to approve the Proposed Project.
The city finds that the Proposed Project has the following substantial social, economic,
policy and other public benefits justifying its approval and implementation, notwithstanding not
all environmental impacts were fully reduced below a level of significance:
A. Citv General Plan and Policies. The Proposed Project is consistent with the City’s
General Plan and Policies in that it provides for primarily residential development in the La
Costa area with a predominance of single family detached neighborhoods. The range of product
types are compatible with existing neighborhoods in the area and are located so as to harmonize
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B”
1652724 v3 [Word] 92 8/14/2001
and largely complete the residential neighborhoods and supporting amenities for that portion of
the City until buildout.
B. Growth Management Program: Zoning. The Proposed Project is fully consistent
with the density limitations, including the Growth Management control point, and the Southeast
Quadrant cap on total housing units and has not sought an increase in zoning or density. The
Proposed Project has completed a Master Plan setting forth the uses, densities and development
standards that will guide the entire buildout of the Proposed Project and the Local Facilities
Management Plans setting forth the phasing and timing of needed public infrastructure. These
programs assure the Proposed Project will develop as a balanced whole and needed public
infrastructure and facilities will be provided commensurate with need in order to meet the
performance public facilities performance standards of the City’s Growth Management Program.
C. Housing and Emnlovment Qnnorhmities. The Proposed Project will have a
maximum of 2,390 residential units, a 7.9 acre business park located adjacent to the City’s major
industrial/office area and two designated Community Facilities areas to support the surrounding
residential areas. The range of housing types vary from multi-family, townhomes and small and
larger lot detached, located and sized to compliment the housing types in surrounding
neighborhoods. These units will assist Carlsbad in providing sufficient, desirable and safe
housing and neighborhood opportunities for existing and future residents and improve the
jobs/housing balance.
D. Affordable Housing. The Proposed Project will provide 15% of all units as
workforce affordable housing within the Villages of La Costa Master Plan boundaries in full
compliance with the City’s Affordable Housing Inclusionary Ordinance and policies. This
commitment represents about 359 units that will be owned and managed to provide workforce
housing to Carlsbad employees who meet the income limitations beginning at 80% of the area
median income levels. This represents the continuation of an existing successful policy and is
necessary to meet the City’s obligations and commitments to increased housing opportunities in
Carlsbad.
E. Parks and Recreation. The Proposed Project includes a 27.2 acre community park
site with fully improved access from Poinsettia Lane/Alicante Road in La Costa Greens. It is
anticipated that a community swim complex will be located at this site as well as a range of other
public park and recreational facilities. Other neighborhood parks and recreational facilities will
be dispersed throughout the Proposed Project as will biking and walking opportunities.
Additionally, the Proposed Project includes a number of off street hiking and biking improved
trails that will connect up with the citywide trail network as well as providing localized
opportunities.
F. School Site. As proposed, the 7.2 acre elementary school site for Carlsbad
Unified School District is located in La Costa Greens, Neighborhood 1.4 adjacent to the
community park. However, the City has determined it wishes to designate the elementary school
site reservation in La Costa Greens Neighborhood 1.7 as the preferred location.
G. Citvwide Road Network Imnrovements. The Proposed Project will construct
portions of Poinsettia Lane east from El Camino Real, a critical east/west circulation element
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations 1652724 v3 [Word] Exhibit “EIR-B”
93 g/14/2001
road as well as portions of Alicante Road north from Alga Road, an important alternative
circulation element road paralleling El Camino Real through La Costa Greens. In addition, the
Proposed Project will further improve portions of El Camino Real, Alga Road, El Fuerte and
Mehose Avenue. The realignment of Ranch0 Santa Fe Road through La Costa Oaks is a major
road improvement undertaking of the City and the Proposed Project Ridge and Oaks are within
the financing area required to pay $10,250 for each unit to finance the road project. These road
improvements are each important elements of the overall road network of the City supporting
local as well as regional traffic.
H. Onen Snace and Natural Habitat Protection. The Proposed Project would set
aside 834.9 acres of managed and maintained HCP Open Space, representing approximately 46%
of the overall site. The HCP Open Space is 132.4 acres more than required under the
HCP/OMSP and Implementation Agreement signed by the City, USFWS, CDFG and prior
landowner in 1995 after several years of work and effort to establish a viable, comprehensive
habitat management plan for the project area applying biological standards and criteria under the
State and Federal Endangered Species Acts, the California Natural Communities Conservation
Program, and similar multi-jurisdictional efforts to assure viable multi-species habitat preserves.
Similar programs elsewhere include the Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP) in the
southern portion of the county. The HCP/OMSP is also a completed sub-component and
complimentary to the city’s proposed Habitat Management Program @IMP), which in turn is a
sub-area plan for the North San Diego County regional Multiple Habitat Conservation Program
(MHCP) managed by SANDAG for the incorporated cities in North County in cooperation with
the USFWS and CDFG. The 1995 HCP/OMSP was one of the first of its kind in the area and its
successful implementation is a critical step in the process for multi-species habitat protection
programs. In addition to the 834.9 acres of HCP Open Space, the Proposed Project will
contribute $l,OOO,OOO to the offsite acquisition of additional gnatcatcher core area habitat which
is critical to the approval of the HMP, $150,000 to support the City’s HMP program and $50,000
to support gnatcatcher research. The HCP/OMSP is also unique in that it requires the property
owner to permanently endow a conservation entity who will take title to the HCP Open space
with sufficient funds to pay for the ongoing maintenance and management of the HCP Open
Space subject to the oversight of an Advisory Committee including the City, USFWS and
CDFG. In this way, the HCP Open Space will be permanently preserved and protected for
species habitat purposes without becoming a drain on municipal or other public tax f?mds in the
future.
I. Fiscal Contributions to the Citv.
General Fund. Revenue contributions and impacts on the City’s General Fund
were analyzed in a report titled “VILLAGES OF LA COSTA Fiscal Impact Analysis of Master
Plan Amendment 149(Q) and Related Documents” prepared by Onaka Planning & Economics, dated December 19,2000, using City General Fund data for the City’s FY 2000-2001.
According to the report, the Proposed Project will contribute General Fund revenues to
the City of approximately $2,683,100 annually and consist of the following components:
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Owrriding Considerations Exhibit “EIFGB”
1652724 v3 [Word] 94 8/14/2001
(a) the City’s share of real estate property taxes, both secured and unsecured,
estimated to be $1,69 1,100 annually;
@I the City’s share of sales taxes estimated to be $433,700 annually;
(4 vehicle license in-lieu fees estimated to be $255,900 annually;
60 real property transfer taxes estimated to be $86,400 annually;
03 other state subventions estimated to be $60,200 annually; and
(0 business license taxes estimated to be $11,700 annually.
The grand total estimate of $2,683,100 is without regard to any other indirect sources.
Excluding the mandated affordable housing components of the project, the residential and
limited business park development will essentially break even running a cumulative negative
estimated to be $3,500 annually (which amount represents a positive $133/unit for La Costa
Greens, a positive $l,776/acre for the La Costa Greens Industrial, and a negative $11 l/unit for
La Costa Ridge and La Costa Oaks). However, compared to existing development on a per unit
basis, this “break even” is far less than the current average negative of $426 per residential unit.
The above figures do not include, and are offset by, the following additional indirect
fiscal contributions to the City’s General Fund: (x) contribution to Landscape and Lighting
District Zone M that will maintain the future Ranch0 Santa Fe Road median through La Costa
Oaks which amount is estimated to be $16,700 annually, (y) excess parkland land value subsidy
under the 1996 Parks Agreement wherein the Project will sell to the City that portion of the 32.9
acre community park in excess of the project dedication requirements at $175,000 per acre for
the approximately 22.661 being sold (approximately 10.239 acres are being dedicated without
cost), which represents several millions in parkland subsidy compared to its development market
value, and (z) the Project has expended approximately $3.2 Million for acquisition of primarily
gnatcatcher offsite habitat lands needed by the City for its HMP, which represents an interest free
loan for the monies advanced.
Additional Public Infrastructure Capital Contributions. The City’s Growth Management
Program and land use ordinances provide a series of public facilities fees and exactions that are
charged to new development, which are generally payable at either time of final subdivision map
or issuance of individual building permits. Based on the Project as proposed, these public
infrastructure capital contributions are estimated to be $48,408,202 for the construction of public
infrastructure and facilities on a Citywide basis, including city administrative facilities, parks and
recreation improvements, fire stations, libraries, roads, storm drainage systems as well as public
water and sewer facilities. These capital contributions are in addition to the infrastructure being
constructed on site and represent the Project’s share of citywide infrastructure needs. The
Proposed Project’s $48,408,202 capital public facilities contributions consists of the following
components:
CEQA Findings of Facts
and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B” 1652724 v3 [Word] 95 8/20/2001
1. Ranch0 Santa Fe Road Fee at $10,250 per equivalent dwelling unit (EDU) for La
Costa Ridge/Oaks only.
2. Growth Management Local Facilities Fees estimated at $3 10 per EDU.
3. Citywide Community Facilities District No. 1 estimated at $3,127 to $4,954 per
EDU and a per square footage charge for business park based on the actual use; this CFD funds
major area Interstate 5 bridges/ramps at La Costa Avenue, Poinsettia and Palomar Airport Road
along with other citywide transportation facilities.
4. Traffic Impact Fee estimated at $540 to $840 per EDU and per square footage
charges to the business park based on type of use; this fee pays for various other road, signal,
intersection and similar transportation impacts throughout the City.
5. Public Facilities Fees estimated at $3,278 to $5,517 per EDU and a business park
charge, both of which are based on 1.82% of the “construction valuation” of the improvements;
this fee is used to finance city administration and maintenance facilities, parks, libraries, fire
stations, the police station and similar city infrastructure.
6. Drainage Fees estimated at $35 to $57 per acre depending on location; this fund
used to construct master stormdrain facilities.
7. Sewer Connection Fees estimated at $1,824 to $3,950 per EDU (also applies to
business uses) depending on sewer district and additional sewer benefit fee estimated at $626 per EDU within the Carlsbad Municipal Water District service area: these fees represent the facilities
capacity and connection charges for sanitary sewers and treatment plants.
8. Water Capacity Charges estimated at $1,580 to $2,400 per EDU (also applies to
business uses) depending on the water district and additional meter connection fees estimated at
$130 to $160 per meter; charges and fees represent facilities capacity and connection charges for
water facilities and distribution/storage systems.
The foregoing amounts may be subject to periodic adjustment and escalations in
accordance with the underlying ordinance or laws applicable thereto. The total amount of
$48,408,202 represents public facilities capital contributions only and does not include (a) park
fees as the Project’s park obligation is being handled entirely through dedication of additional
land for Alga Norte Park, (b) any school fees or mitigation as the Project’s impacts on school
facilities is being addressed directly with the affected school districts, and (c) various city
processing, application and plan check charges for processing approvals.
These fees and exactions are necessary to construct and replace important public
improvements in order to fund the public facilities and infrastructure necessary to maintain our
community’s quality of life for existing and future residents in Carlsbad.
CEQA Findings of Facts and Statements of Overriding Considerations Exhibit “EIR-B” 1652724 v3 [Word] 96 8f 201200 1
EXHIBIT “EIR-Cl’
c3 2
0
E
4 c1 CA 0 v
3 ch 0
e( E
E
E
I
2 r .J” (P .g .- E
gfe -CC sg ‘E= ot Ek
(r 0
QC Eo .I .- b% 22 *g
B-z
I3
ga Gj 't i c o4 o=: i ==C
rMs
%
“C EO u .-
+z
% y
bn
8’
SW d .f 2g 1 0 .z : n=n
dJ
-
: s : s i 2
-
8 33 !B a c : 0 , ‘3 : P n :E zs
YW a .9 E $ i
p=C
$2
M 2 b E 8 ‘S a ‘S .I E
-
‘f z s
-
I i I I i
I , I
3
i i
:
Q 22 on
;8 ) ‘;: :P P :E
is
CEh :s ;a f = := SE EL%
E 2
8 E
g ‘S a .c” .- iz
iz I
2’ s .s
.% ‘J .I E
UC Eo .- .I bz %Y .k g Bc
d
-
0) hi in
l c
: .P a-
:P
n :E 88
F:“e e= EP EU
gk
8
by- 8 O-Sa
B .c M.Eg E aI.= 0 Y d?,EQt; *;C@e,PIa n.oon 3 2 M% E oc ce- ; 0s oz Ii or,=% 3%
;ELo~e~a
2”e ‘C e
.z = OQ,
c=
Sk
8 8 ‘S .’ uj
08 $3 4 2 2 3 ei 2
0% Za
00 b3 h3 ; i&D.“3 wo
g?Jzs
‘; “$$
SS ba MZ SG.4” WC 0 8Sf t; =Ln 2 Q n 0 OmD i s 2 2
‘L ‘,
B E; b B
3-j !g c +I .a
5 s -ii 2 2 22 CUE
8
1 B
[
c : t i
7 i
[
1
i :
: 3 ‘
E r
.
L
. :
$sl ec sp EU .i?i EL=
YW g.E 2$i &EC
5%
.I ; i 1
(I
I
,
c
: c t
1
, .I
! I /
c
L
.i c
F
318 SLz *,x 0 ;’ C= n $E
3s
*h =w ‘i: a s8 ‘E u
E”k
‘i,
Bs :- ‘S Fe8
s=’ .b 2
B-+
B
E 3
I E e .s
8 .- .z E
B P
d C .$
“M .Z .I
E
1
I
I
I I I I I
1
! I
I
I I
I I I
i I I
i
:
j
I :
,
;
I I ,
i
1
I
!
j
I
I
I I 1 I
I 0 I I
I
I I 0
i I
I
I
I
I
I I 1 I I
1 I I
I I I I
I
I 1 I I
v. a .- .Z f
2 .o t 2 w
9 s
0’ Em 2 ZP $ ‘g 9 d .- ‘zj 1 &T- CC? g 2 2 onf- L = o-J& 35s E cu-c m c1 5 &.MO 2 w- a t-,2 10
u .5 3 ?cnE 9
$.gq .
“gJ;g +I+-~ -.E 0 -0 Q zxs 5 j $30 2 w- 0 2%z AC,
M g
ii E
g ‘S 3 3 .- E
!! 3
P
P e 0 P
%I ‘J .I
r
%
WC Eo .I .I
z
8
E t .s
SJ ‘S .I
E
8 .o t 2, za 8 ‘s 82
;a 8-Z .- .- 8 .z $ p ‘; $3 S%* MM= EC;; .=.=a t-2 atiss
8 5 P E z .I s .Y P
2 w ,= Eo II - *z w Y :g =
,g2
d
v: s 3 2 .= .=
f E
2 s 0 .c z 5
ii
2
%
58 2% 8 8 .- 0, B 82
SE
5s
B n ZM z .E % 2 k 2
og ‘5 0% ‘5 CQg. g*s. 0 r’Gkbn w r’i;oZ
u%s SSSB
a
2 0 a
w z r4 ta
tij ia g
gr; g 8
.E B .E .E
5 .E~ mf y1 In 5 P g.E E8 -v
‘2 6 ‘i: ‘6 0 -w :I ‘&
sz
ha 0
WC Eo - ‘S WC8 3 .s -4 a aa ud
d
s v: 2 v1 .; .z .r, .z 'E .Z .i: .=: E 5 5
8s 82 8< SE Iii 6-B fj 8" H 62 8" z E 62 52 !j
w M&j Cc.ESS u w af&
2
S.E::E u w caag
AZ= =t, .=‘s c= 10 S9Q ii S.EG,m u
“3 82 so C’PQ ii
3c:-0, 3sL?-0,. .z ‘3 c 2 s o
-SW gs3a -I- L x00
3n2- u-
8 0 2 wL E,O~S.PO . sLgg28:: QSC Lay w ?2 wk kj wy w W tw QSC 8 . =gs
u s-z ,E$j gc; z g*- ET LWVlW
g 30 3% = 8 .z 8
SaL v1oag 52 W~OiiiO gijE5236
v.9 g:a Esm V.Y em EDN Ovlb$o~g u.Z nm Eom
u u 2 2 -3 n “2 QJ SW 5 ‘g &J-J .e 2 .E
“02 1-8 U&
.$‘gJ $ 0s .- G %2
own 2 2 t? uwn 0.p g vwn
.= v ML-8
-z “U ‘0 ‘0) r -1
“S .$
#k
I
1 , I
;
I I I
;
I
;
;
;
I I 1 I I
i I I
i
:
j
I I
I
:
! I
i
; 1 1 I I
j I
“0 tg - .- b% 34 t ;z “a-t d
B G 8 ‘;: v) .j * cgcu 8 ,+cz 2 E .z .- w .= ulu c-0 0 a ‘5 2 02 = ,,Li2OC ~-.osww
,wbu b n.l? .E
“&z”b Lu w Q w ,.Q 5 ;e g .a a - 03 L 3 ma ‘G; = z Q w.0 8 B OY $5 L wu 2 VII, 2 -g 2.5 L 0 w
;aa In.- e &
&rnCL i SZ-oU .= .o w Q w f w -a.- QQf 8 Z n6: 3 a.2 WalL;i;S
3
i
E x J & ‘;: *- E
s Qk
.gM 5 .o - 2
C-88 8 2
c&S.” 8 & 0” h
A” E z2 03 x.2 8 83 =0 00
w .E WV) 8 .z SEW 2
- E2::“k n 0 Mu s .E $
92 w k L=al .o a 2%;
LI 2 Uk 8 .o E s .s
O& 0 .o
J Z asM@
2E .g w 8 .- -
OS am CL.=$ g
R.EZ kbbg .,
U
W ” I =C CU- z-g2 i? =- =os :; E ‘0’ W’X & 8
$ = M
2 5.5; Et mserw zig g c&n.s ;u 8.2 g-525 =L~~ZWu- EG-0 = ou32n”33j 3f-a v1 w A ME; M-0 S&3& =&go $ .f Q = .a 2 5 8 w .- n 6 gf~‘~~EM~~ijn
= *s 8 w adz 2.2 s .E kt=- ggg
UQZJ Z”$<wwe,;E ge.ii~Sn~eSg~ g Mz.g c f an.,0 - - & - w sa; S-g'E 0 = zg.2 B M sB= $ E Orr’.zu,- =wo~~wgomg 3
CJ w 0 0 wR...f$:: g . . zw2Bw.$gp~z e4O~~OJs &~se~n~ww~-~ g .COOCXmG= w .- IA ” .- n mu 3522 a
1
se! :m in *u : .f! ‘t; :Z a E b .s
22 ; m Y 5 -= ‘2 $ 2 .r s .I! .= p - 3 + E ‘tt I ;3 P ii & s
a
: b UE
i 53 ii : 6 .u
1 s
: y ; -2 2s E
J 8 St 6 d 2
z
.g .- 8 . UtibO2
2 g.E 5
R.f-0 bm5z.i 00
== 2 z tg: sul E iii2 00
2-E O =c
?“8. f-E .o
c 8 .z a B
5s 2 g t s.5 w
ag
n is:8
8
Ug
j ‘2 8 C SF
$5 wz2 o., 5t*F 0 .o 2 a
GZM z: .~WE~ii;
Em n-r m E .g w ES
R.EZ 88 $m a.= rrr 2 g.E fi M
R.EZ $ B IfJ s gz
.e g.” a ‘;
SW &ta=
a.E-0 w m R.E-8 &OS
% A LQI %
B
x .z
=3 “0 c, 5
UL +:a
2a M 1;
a 5
.g 5 n
2s
*= 8-J ‘B e =0
.an h au’ g ,g- -- .E -r iis
SM 9 -5 3 ,g i 0 :.z :
,#j p
a s t z P .,o 3 M
2
“0
g .z + = -0 2 ,f ‘-% ‘5 a ff( d
*;,
-g ..g sg
%- 2 b g
#,”
0 .Lo 2 .Z .s E .Z
eg E -0 ‘3 22 a
5 2-s ’ E
U$
g ‘S
U”Mo,M .
,g 0 E .-
rrtjwg .o .- tm a..= 3 2 g.E 5
$2 5 &Is 2 &.E 5 A cl..EZ $ gmsrn IL-E-0 kb $m &rnC c..E< $8
g %
EP) B z”r AT .- c 3 -LB 00 0;
5fE-
g 2 ‘5 C 3 E t M” E 8Z El a.sga .
co 0 0-z
9 b .E wt 5 .e ob
em-Em u aI=zo .gj 22 a art0 00
P 3 -8 0 P’
i2 2 ycln +s
d ‘5 a .r, ?: F
%;@ U$ d ‘C
%E bc.8
g-2 $ *zb OS. h’BB uwn ‘6 5 & &sa
s q .-
=. h
S$ q 0 2”
3
E = 2 . n-a ‘0 E 5a.z 8 MZ c .E +$ gx = > &i-J;08
i .:
;
1
i
I ,
,
c
‘:
. .
.
I ,
1
5 ug p ‘3 4-t ,zz .z”C:S
bm a*= m E e.EZ $8
P 0 son a .r ut b-0 O .E G 2 2 e vwn
ZQ 34 . . 58 g- gsz .o $gg &zq$ .f Q k 3Yb 00 =B
=oE P I-mS:
m 00 *xl> d= op - mP 45%
-
ZQ >c&+. 0m
EE gz E
G ‘Jm m-nn b
200 mz n 0-c ELPI 0
9-0 E s c .- m t 00
L e, ".- 0 wrnw~
E%S E aI
S g 5 23 g A czi $B o~nrJc-s= * ‘3.8 2 d .E “qf $28 E n~O”~‘S ov,pl.,g : z 0u.s PSTOd 50 -” ‘5 E * nk.e 0 g! 8
.P c = ‘U 0 .aJ zz= ‘I $ grt
P ; :
3 ; i
-
g 8.R 4s :O s ;’ I= a 5s rl u
5
P= : .E l ‘S
SQ
rg
3a
cr(
2
3
i
) , :
: I
j 2.
s
i LiJ
z
?a
g $
P
3
332 q a z ‘CI
hz: :O > “L
32 a EE a.8
2 am P;f
g.g .
Or;’
gg .I
2 .s .S E
u .- s
as CG .- 09 cp .o g
e .E am 8g
c .E 6s
3
a I!
23 z .
CG 3 .z 03 0
2 0.:25z gazEI,.= 2
“agj3Bg E #&~00g:‘” 0 v) 0 ‘1 p v 3 o‘c1., nS2-Oti 5 oZ3’;: E >
na".ePnrE
.
5%
9P MI 10 , -s 3% a :E
$ .G
g 2 .-
::
3%
I .E
8, s- =I *g wo .-p . 2 Uo.~ - .E .E 5 sg 2 = L .ss:=:z 2% E 8
s B m 2 -g
3S.E &‘P $EzQz no p m 0 0.5 L 0 0 La 2 gg z=
O!20gC, mm
=ssE;z S- mz 0s cc 3.- -.~u-o 3p 53=“Cw s E- ‘3UOU~~ f-j 2 $ L .- .-
5 g.2 $g: ooQoW95 > “.- 0 0 @-“US . . m 0 0 M as ne z -5 A.2 2
d 8 4 2 g f
1 ‘K g 2 ‘F 3 -3p. 0 m 0.2
5: In *a :o > -3 :P n :E zs
,$= n-0 e, = E
zmsi;5 eL.S ‘Z 2 8 % 0-g 3 g 0 rZZ~no 0 o.- 3 0
B F s%Z-: vs e, m ma E t 0 m h~ -amE < aa c.,
2 ” n.z$g ._ 8 =!i
s 8-z h
:: 2
fj$$&G =S
$0 E 6 Z
0 =g 0 ii 0.E E?E EE 08
L b 0 O- Et Seg$--o 2
‘5 .- OEkl.ib ,~gPwu OC .- ” ” E’z1” r; E.2 e O”o c u~.Sfv, .q-== .5? 8 & g.gz.sr L i u MO tw “” Xo’Bmp ES 5 zzhf<
258
S$ ha g .g
P= 5 gE E.s
2M p, .E n .L 2 CO P r : &=a
dS
8
z 2
,% c 0
‘C 0
.E? r
E
T- T’ E .9 .I .G .= .Z .Z E E E
=l g.c Cd
=Z g.0 8 5 ‘g 3 75 =. h sg .-
:E 08 =0 23
0” 08
8 . s 2 8 5
g E ti ‘E is& .- g .2 =
gM UM
.E 3 .E
s-0 _a5 U
&I? Lfz se
OM ‘C L OM -g ‘;; .$ 2 LO 2%
% 2 L 0 F ‘iT ox 8 AU ‘5
‘6.S E j .tt m u
0’;‘Zn v*=.
lwd8
u-;:‘zlz.
Ed58 Cc758
,.g -I g.5 az ./
&s
.
m 2 a
t E 0 .E z M -s .I i2
Z 2 w 2 i! .- u- 7 2-D 3
“GM mz .5 0 u ‘t4”u ougg
8 - u-0 0. .- ‘Z 0 ci$E!B
,
I
I I I I
1
I
;
i
:
i
i
!
I
;
i
i
I
!
i
,
:
)
:
i I
:
:
Pe -c 0 OW .= =
$,I
SW a .E -s& ; c 0’ 0 -2 : gw dE
I k ii E x -= sh .I .Z s
m v: m 3 .‘F: 3 z .E .‘= .= .Z .r: f 5 E E
=* e.s? 8 8 =. B c .-
82 0. h E *- OZ g.3
Q a.i = =. 9
=0 =0 0” EE sg
0” OS =0 0”
2 7,*
.Z A
ii 7-X
i! $2 Bgw 3 EL&
“02 a-a
3 8 t *” xz SD M
:: -0 3;<
C:u 3”s
32 ggE u: $ :s 5 4
2.p 8” B uu <2 v- mH
. . .3 q-5
OmWr ..EGY
2
Iii85
75n-
22
-- -=a m =:3 g
ixzs ATi *if AZiE 4ccw
U % u z In C” 8 Be 2
k-z!
ET4 s E 2 ‘3 %j ~~~~~ “m ej
0 .er E EZ E 2’2 g 2 ‘= ‘3 O 84 3.sm
=A 8 uaszu=m $3 z = +Eg E .- u g gg L u
-5 5 v) 2 s ‘g 3 g 8 x
n.E 3w.E~ ms ngm 2 z ga.ggz 5 g= 3 3
50
g!‘G+j g ZbErrYfJ!l ET--U n mmon net 3.c J 2 Sua ;gpg 2
1
‘;js ga”
.:, 3 .O‘T
.p
,eEo mu
b 0 ,4) ‘.c Eo F .s
1s -- a .%
2
‘-f .v Mh z “= 23 u .‘W e-g.. xf.
%.2 ‘j: 0 .O’ .Y .y a *er ..g ,g ;z. *
3 .r -s L : ==I .giTE $
&z
8 2
.g
.P .4 % M
2
2iz
3 Ln .n 0 0 -s P= a .: E sg
%
z
ii
a 0 ‘S a M *-
I
%
z
e C .4 f .P .=
E
*w s= p *e 3 c 0 .- 0 L ; 3 3 .a
dx
!i t : 2 .- 2 .9 P
-3 v)
8E$E ‘3” ZIG
&Z &r
“0 p!S.”
gEJoJ=gr;
08uSe~
g=CiipS
gu In O-OS -ar”L,Z
~~g+gO +3cmrz
32 33
$2 o= c = a tE SO WV
i
: :
1
; i
i i : ) I !
/ * ,
i :
! I : :
1 .
;
i
i
i 1 l I I
i 1
.-am .r 6 i’ n ,o .&‘S I .w -2.2
tr ‘0
i38 - .-
*s
‘St3
.f g
j”