Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-12-05; Planning Commission; Resolution 63591 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 6359 2 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE 3 CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A 4 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE , GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM PLANNED INDUSTRIAL TO OFFICE, A MASTER PLAN 6 AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE BRESSI RANCH MASTER PLAN LAND USE AND ZONING DESIGNATIONS FROM 7 PLANNED INDUSTRIAL TO OFFICE, AND A TENATIVE TRACT MAP, SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN, NON- 8 RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, AND A 9 SPECIAL USE PERMIT, TO DEVELOP A 1.94-ACRE PARCEL WITH A 19,760-SQUARE-FOOT MEDICAL OFFICE 10 BUILDING LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF EL CAMINO REAL AND TOWN GARDEN ROAD IN 11 PLANNING AREA 1 IN THE BRESSI RANCH MASTER PLAN AND LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 17. 12 CASE NAME: BRESSI RANCH MEDICAL PLAZA 13 CASE NO.: GPA 07-07/MP 178(F)/CT07-04/SDP 07-03/ PUD 07-04/SUP 07-01 14 WHEREAS, David Di Rienzo, "Developer," has filed a verified application with ,,- the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by Bressi Ranch Medical Plaza, LLC, 17 "Owner," described as 18 Lot 1 of Carlsbad Tract 02-15 Bressi Ranch, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according to the map thereof No. 14960, filed in the office of the County 20 Recorder of San Diego County, February 4, 2005 21 ("the Property"); and 22 WHEREAS, a Negative Declaration was prepared in conjunction with said 23 ...project; and 24 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 5th day of December 2007, 25 hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and 26 27 WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony 28 and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the information submitted by staff, and considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission considered all factors 2 relating to the Negative Declaration. 3 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning 4 <- Commission as follows: 5 A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. 7 B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning Commission hereby RECOMMENDS ADOPTION of the Negative Declaration, 8 Exhibit "ND," according to Exhibits "NOI," and "PII," attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following findings: 10 Findings; 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad does hereby find: 12 a. It has reviewed, analyzed, and considered the Negative Declaration Bressi Ranch 13 Medical Plaza - GPA 07-07/MP 178(F)/CT 07-04 /SDP 07-03/PUD 07-04/SUP 07-01 the environmental impacts therein identified for this project and any 14 comments thereon prior to RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of the project; and b. The Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with requirements of ,s the California Environmental Quality Act, the State Guidelines, and the Environmental Protection Procedures of the City of Carlsbad; and 17 c. It reflects the independent judgment of the Planning Commission of the City of 18 Carlsbad; and 19 d. Based on the EIA Part II and comments thereon, there is no substantial evidence 20 the project will have a significant effect on the environment. 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PC RESO NO. 6359 -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 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 5th day of December 2007, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: Chairperson Baker, Commissioners Boddy, Cardosa, Dominguez, Douglas, and Montgomery. ABSENT: Commissioner Whitton ABSTAIN: JULIE B AKERVChairperson CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION DON NEU Planning Director PC RESO NO. 6359 -3- City of Carlsbad Planning Department CASE NAME: CASE NO: PROJECT LOCATION: NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION Bressi Ranch Medical Plaza GPA 98-03CAVMP 178(FVSDP 07-03/PUD 07-04/SUP 07-01/ CT 07-04 East side of El Camino Real between Town Garden Road and Metropolitan Street in Planning Area 1 of the Bressi Ranch Master Plan and Local Facilities Management Zone 17 in the City of Carlsbad, San Diego County. APN 213-260-01. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The project consists of a General Plan Amendment (GPA), Master Plan Amendment (MPA), Site Development Plan (SDP), Non-Residential Planned Development (PUD), Special Use Permit (SUP), and Tentative Tract Map (CT) to allow for the construction of a 19,760 square foot medical office building on a 1.94-acre site. The site, Bressi Ranch Master Plan Planning Area 1, was previously graded with the mass grading permit approved by the Bressi Ranch Master Tentative Map project, CT 00-06. PROPOSED DETERMINATION: The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, the initial study (EIA Part 2) did not identify any potentially significant impacts on the environment. Therefore, a Negative Declaration will be recommended for adoption by the City of Carlsbad City Council. A copy of the initial study (EIA Part 2) documenting reasons to support the proposed Negative Declaration is on file in the Planning Department, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008. Comments from the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within 20 days of the date of this notice. The proposed project and Negative Declaration are subject to review and approval/adoption by the City of Carlsbad Planning Commission and City Council. Additional public notices will be issued when those public hearings are scheduled. If you have any questions, please call Dan Halverson in the Planning Department at (760) 602-4631. PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD October 30. 2007 through November 19, 2007 PUBLISH DATE October 30, 2007 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 » FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - INITIAL STUDY (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) CASE NO: GPA 98-03 (A) /MP 178 (F) /CT 07-04 /PUD 07-04 /SDP 07-03 /SUP 07-01 DATE: October 23. 2007 BACKGROUND 1. CASE NAME: Bressi Ranch Medical Plaza 2. LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS: City of Carlsbad 3. CONTACT PERSON AND PHONE NUMBER: DAN HALVERSON - 760-602-4631 4. PROJECT LOCATION: South side of Town Garden Road between El Camino Real and Metropolitan Street. Carlsbad. San Diego County. APN 213-260-01-00 5. PROJECT SPONSOR'S NAME AND ADDRESS: Bressi Ranch Medical Plaza. LLC. 936 East Santa Ana Boulevard. Santa Ana. CA 92701 6. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Existing: Planned Industrial (PI) Proposed: Office (O) 7. ZONING: Existing: Planned Community (PC). Existing Master Plan Designation: Planned Industrial (PM). Proposed Master Plan Designation: Office (O). 8. OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES WHOSE APPROVAL IS REQUIRED (i.e., permits, financing approval or participation agreements): San Diego County Regional Airport Authority 9. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND SURROUNDING LAND USES: The project consists of a General Plan Amendment and Master Plan Amendment to change the General Plan Land Use designation of the site from Planned Industrial (PI) to Office (O). A Master Plan Amendment is required to change the proposed underlying Master Plan Zoning from Planned Industrial (PM) to Office (O) to develop the 1.94-acre parcel with a 19.760 square foot medical office building. The project proposal is also a request for approval of a Tentative Tract Map. Site Development Plan, and Non-Residential Planned Development Permit to construct and subdivide the medical office building into 15 non-residential airspace condominium units. The project also requires the processing of a Special Use Permit as it is within Area 4 of the El Camino Real Scenic Corridor, and as such is subject to the El Camino Real Corridor Development Standards. The site is a previously graded industrial pad with utility services provided to the site. Site access is provided via a proposed driveway on the eastern portion of the lot off of Metropolitan Street. The site is bordered by proposed Planned Industrial office's to the north. Office use to the south, a large Open Space lot to the east, and Planned Industrial Office's to the west. The environmental impacts of the development of the site were evaluated in the previously approved Bressi Ranch Master Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR 98-04), certified by the City Council in July, 2002. GPA 98-03(A) /MP 178(F) /CT 07-04 /PUD 07-04 /SDP 07-03 /SUP 07-01 Bressi Ranch Medical Plaza ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The summary of environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact," or "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics J Agricultural Resources I I Air Quality J Biological Resources Cultural Resources J Geology/Soils Hazards/Hazardous Materials Hydrology/Water Quality Land Use and Planning Mineral Resources Mandatory Findings of Significance Noise Population and Housing Public Services Recreation Transportation/Circulation Utilities & Service Systems Rev. 01/02/07 GPA 98-03(A) /MP 178(F) /CT 07-04 /PUD 07-04 /SDP 07-03 /SUP 07-01 Bressi Ranch Medical Plaza DETERMINATION. (To be completed by the Lead Agency) £3 I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. CD I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. H] I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. l~~l I find that the proposed project MAY have "potentially significant impact(s)" on the environment, but at least one potentially significant impact 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. A Negative Declaration is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. CD I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WELL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Therefore, nothing further is required. Planner Signature Date Planning Director's Signature Date Rev. 01/02/07 GPA 98-03(A) /MP 178(F) /CT 07-04 /PUD 07-04 /SDP 07-03 /SUP 07-01 Bressi Ranch Medical Plaza ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, Section 15063 requires that the City conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the environment. The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist. This checklist identifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be impacted by the proposed project and provides the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Negative Declaration, or to rely on a previously approved EIR or Negative Declaration. • A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by an information source cited in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved. A "No Impact" answer should be explained when there is no source document to refer to, or it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards. • "Less Than Significant Impact" applies where there is supporting evidence that the potential impact is not significantly adverse, and the impact'does not exceed adopted general standards and policies. • "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The developer must agree to the mitigation, and the City must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level. • "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significantly adverse. • Based on an "EIA-Initial Study", if a proposed project could have a potentially significant adverse effect on the environment, but all potentially significant adverse effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, and none of the circumstances requiring a supplement to or supplemental EIR are present and all the mitigation measures required by the prior environmental document have been incorporated into this project, then no additional environmental document is required. • When "Potentially Significant Impact" is checked the project is not necessarily required to prepare an EER if the significant adverse effect has been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and the effect will be mitigated, or a "Statement of Overriding Considerations" has been made pursuant to that earlier EIR. • A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the project or any of its aspects may cause a significant adverse effect on the environment. • If there are one or more potentially significant adverse effects, the City may avoid preparing an EIR if there are mitigation measures to clearly reduce adverse impacts to less than significant, and those mitigation measures are agreed to by the developer prior to public review. In this case, the appropriate "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated" may be checked and Rev. 08/02/07 GPA 98-03(A) /MP 178(F) /CT 07-04 /PUD 07-04 /SDP 07-03 /SUP 07-01 Bressi Ranch Medical Plaza a Mitigated Negative Declaration may be prepared. • An EIR must be prepared if "Potentially Significant Impact" is checked, and including but not limited to the following circumstances: (1) the potentially significant adverse effect has not been discussed or mitigated in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and the developer does not agree to mitigation measures that reduce the adverse impact to less than significant; (2) a "Statement of Overriding Considerations" for the significant adverse impact has not been made pursuant to an earlier EIR; (3) proposed mitigation measures do not reduce the adverse impact to less than significant; or (4) through the EIA-Initial Study analysis it is not possible to determine the level of significance for a potentially adverse effect, or determine the effectiveness of a mitigation measure in reducing a potentially significant effect to below a level of significance. A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears after each related set of questions. Particular attention should be given to discussing mitigation for impacts, which would otherwise be determined significant. AESTHETICS - Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light and glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Significant Mitigation Impact Incorporated D D D Less Than Significant No Impact Impact a)-d) No Impact. The lot is proposed along the east side of El Camino Real and will be visible from the surrounding lots as well as along El Camino Real. The project would not have an impact as the project would be setback over 50 feet from the prime arterial (El Camino Real) and is set lower than the roadway, which would help preserve distant views and reduce a corridor effect caused by buildings being placed near the roadway. The site is Land Use designated as a Planned Industrial building site and the change of the site to an Office Land Use designation would not have any negative aesthetic effects above those analyzed with the previous land use designation. The same intensity and design of building could be developed under either land use designation. Rev. 08/02/07 GPA 98-03(A) /MP 178(F) /CT 07-04 /PUD 07-04 /SDP 07-03 /SUP 07-01 Bressi Ranch Medical Plaza II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES - (In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model-1997 prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland.) Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact D a) - c) No Impact. The site is a previously graded industrial pad and does not support agricultural uses and is not under Williamson Act contracts. All impacts to agricultural resources were previously mitigated consistent with the Bressi Ranch Master Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR 98-04), certified by the City Council in July, 2002 which was implemented for the Master Tract Map and project mass grading permit that created the lot that is the subject of this application. III. AIR QUALITY - (Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.) Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact Rev. 08/02/07 GPA 98-03(A) /MP 178(F) /CT 07-04 /PUD 07-04 /SDP 07-03 /SUP 07-01 Bressi Ranch Medical Plaza c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact a) No Impact. The project site is located in the San Diegp Air Basin which is a state non-attainment area for ozone (Os) and for paniculate matter less than or equal to 10 microns in diameter (PMio). The periodic violations of national Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS) in the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB), particularly for ozone in inland foothill areas, requires that a plan be developed outlining the pollution controls that will be undertaken to improve air quality. In San Diego County, this attainment planning process is embodied in the Regional Air Quality Strategies (RAQS) developed jointly by the Air Pollution Control District (APCD) and the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG). A Plan to meet the federal standard for ozone was developed in 1994 during the process of updating the 1991 state-mandated plan. This local plan was combined with plans from all other California non- attainment areas having serious ozone problems and used to create the California State Implementation Plan (SEP). The SEP was adopted by the Air Resources Board (ARB) after public hearings on November 9th through 10th in 1994, and was forwarded to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for approval. After considerable analysis and debate, particularly regarding airsheds with the worst smog problems, EPA approved the SEP in mid-1996. The proposed project relates to the SEP and/or RAQS through the land use and growth assumptions that are incorporated into the air quality planning document. These growth assumptions are based on each city's and the County's general plan. If a proposed project is consistent with its applicable General Plan, then the project presumably has been anticipated with the regional air quality planning process. Such consistency would ensure that the project would not have an adverse regional air quality impact. Section 15125(B) of the State of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines contains specific reference to the need to evaluate any inconsistencies between the proposed project and the applicable air quality management plan. Transportation Control Measures (TCMs) are part of the RAQS. The RAQS and TCM plan set forth the steps needed to accomplish attainment of state and federal ambient air quality standards. The California Air Resources Board provides criteria for determining whether a project conforms to the RAQS which include the following: • Is a regional air quality plan being implemented in the project area? • Is the project consistent with the growth assumptions in the regional air quality plan? Rev. 08/02/07 GPA 98-03(A) /MP 178(F) /CT 07-04 /PUD 07-04 /SDP 07-03 /SUP 07-01 Bressi Ranch Medical Plaza The project area is located in the San Diego Air Basin, and as such, is located in an area where a RAQS is being implemented. The project is consistent with the regional air quality plan and will in no way conflict or obstruct implementation of the regional plan. b) Less Than Significant Impact. The closest air quality monitoring station to the project site is at Camp Pendleton. Data available for this monitoring site from 2000 through December 2004 indicate that the most recent air quality violations recorded were for the state one hour standard for ozone (a total of 10 days during the 5-year period). No other violations of any air quality standards have been recorded during the 5-year time period. The project would involve minimal short-term emissions associated with grading and construction. Such emissions would be minimized through standard construction measures such as the use of properly tuned equipment and watering the site for dust control. Long-term emissions associated with travel to and from the project will be minimal. Although air pollutant emissions would be associated with the project, they would neither result in the violation of any air quality standard (comprising only an incremental contribution to overall air basin quality readings), nor contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. Any impact is assessed as less than significant. c) Less Than Significant Impact. The air basin is currently in a state non-attainment zone for ozone and suspended fine particulates. The proposed project would represent a contribution to a cumulatively considerable potential net increase in emissions throughout the air basin. As described above, however, emissions associated with the proposed project would be minimal. Given the limited emissions potentially associated with the proposed project, air quality would be essentially the same whether or not the proposed project is implemented. According to the CEQA Guidelines Section 15130(a)(4), the proposed project's contribution to the cumulative impact is considered de minimus. Any impact is assessed as less than significant. d) No impact. As noted above, the proposed would not result in substantial pollutant emissions or concentrations. In addition, there are no sensitive receptors (e.g., schools or hospitals) located in the vicinity of the project. No impact is assessed. e) No Impact. The construction of the proposed project could generate fumes from the operation of construction equipment, which may be considered objectionable by some people. Such exposure would be short-term or transient. In addition, the number of people exposed to such transient impacts is not considered substantial. Rev. 08/02/07 GPA 98-03(A) /MP 178(F) /CT 07-04 /PUD 07-04 /SDP 07-03 /SUP 07-01 Bressi Ranch Medical Plaza IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian, aquatic or wetland habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally, protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including but not limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact D D D a) - f) No Impact. The project site is a previously graded industrial pad and does not contain any flora or fauna. The adjacent open space preserve area to the east will not be impacted by the project as adequate setbacks, drainage, and light shielding are provided. All impacts to biological resources were previously mitigated consistent with the Bressi Ranch Master Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR 98-04), certified by the City Council in July, 2002 which was implemented for the Master Tract Map and project mass grading permit that created the lot that is the subject of this application. Rev. 08/02/07 GPA 98-03(A) /MP 178(F) /CT 07-04 /PUD 07-04 /SDP 07-03 /SUP 07-01 Bressi Ranch Medical Plaza V. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the signifi- cance of an archeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique pale ontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact n a) - d) No Impact. The project site is a previously graded industrial pad and does not contain any cultural resources. All impacts to cultural resources were previously mitigated consistent with the Bressi Ranch Master Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR 98-04), certified by the City Council in July, 2002 which was implemented for the Master Tract Map and project mass grading permit that created the lot that is the subject of this application. VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS - Would the project. a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving: i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv. Landslides? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact D n 10 Rev. 08/02/07 GPA 98-03(A) /MP 178(F) /CT 07-04 /PUD 07-04 /SDP 07-03 /SUP 07-01 Bressi Ranch Medical Plaza b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soils, as defined in Table 18 - 1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1997), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the, disposal of wastewater? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact El El El a) - e) No Impact. The project site is a previously graded industrial pad which has been graded pursuant to the grading standards of the City of Carlsbad. VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS - Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or environment? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorpo rated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact EI EI Rev. 08/02/07 GPA 98-03(A) /MP 178(F) /CT 07-04 /PUD 07-04 /SDP 07-03 /SUP 07-01 Bressi Ranch Medical Plaza e) For a project within an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact D No Impact D D a) - d) and f) - h) No Impact. The project site does not contain nor is adjacent to hazardous materials. e) No Impact. The site has been reviewed by the San Diego County Regional Airport Authority on October 4, 2007, for consistency with the McClellan-Palomar Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP). The authority found the Land Use Amendment project to be consistent with the ALUCP. VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY - Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with ground water recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local ground water table level (i.e., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact 12 Rev. 08/02/07 GPA 98-03(A) /MP 178(F) /CT 07-04 /PUD 07-04 /SDP 07-03 /SUP 07-01 Bressi Ranch Medical Plaza c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off- site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the flow rate or amount (volume) of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off- site? e) Create or contribute runoff water, which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood delineation map? h) Place within 100-year flood hazard area structures, which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact D D k) Increase erosion (sediment) into receiving surface waters. 1) Increase pollutant discharges (e.g., heavy metals, pathogens, petroleum derivatives, synthetic organics, nutrients, oxygen-demanding substances and trash) into receiving surface waters or other alteration of receiving surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? m) Change receiving water quality (marine, fresh or wetland waters) during or following construction? 13 Rev. 08/02/07 GPA 98-03(A) /MP 178(F) /CT 07-04 /PUD 07-04 /SDP 07-03 /SUP 07-01 Bressi Ranch Medical Plaza n) Increase any pollutant to an already impaired water body as listed on the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) list? o) Increase impervious surfaces and associated runoff? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated D Less Than Significant Impact No Impact p) Impact aquatic, wetland, or riparian habitat? q) Result in the exceedance of applicable surface or groundwater receiving water quality objectives or degradation of beneficial uses? D a-q) No Additional Impact. Impacts to Water Quality and Hydrology were analyzed in the Bressi Ranch Master Plan Final Program EIR 98-04. Mitigation measures to reduce impacts to a less than significant impact were identified and include implementation of the Drainage Control Plan and Storm Water Management Plan. The subject property is required by law to comply with federal, state and local water quality regulations including the Clean Water Act, California Administrative Code Title 23, and specific basin plan objectives identified in the "Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin". The project is required to adhere to all applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) regulations for control of sedimentation and erosion, and to comply with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements and Best Management Practices (BMPs). The proposed project will include all water quality infrastructure as required by the City of Carlsbad. As a result, there will be no impact to water quality, site erosion, pollution discharge, or drainage from the site as it may affect adjacent properties and existing storm water infrastructure. No additional mitigation is required. The required mitigation measures include the current Best Management Practices and Best Available Technologies (BMP's and BAT's) 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. The BMP Plan Options address the use of treatment control methods using flow based and volume based BMP's such as: 1) Grass Bio-filters and Strips; 2) Wetland Pond/Retention Basins; 3) Continuous Deflective Separation (CDS) Units/Fossils Filters; or 4) A combination of BMP options one through three. IX. LANDUSE AND PLANNING - Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact 14 Rev. 08/02/07 GPA 98-03(A) /MP 178(F) /CT 07-04 /PUD 07-04 /SDP 07-03 /SUP 07-01 Bressi Ranch Medical Plaza c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impa<r x a) - c) No Impact. The proposed General Plan Land Use change from Planned Industrial to Office will not have an impact in that the site will be developed as an Office building which could be built under the Planned Industrial Land Use designation. The difference in the use of the building would be that the Office uses would allow the sales of goods and services to the general public whereas the Planned Industrial office uses are not retail in nature, do not cater to the general public, and do not generate walk- in or drive-in traffic and are incidental to the industrial uses in the vicinity. The proposed development of an Office Land Use would not have an impact on the Industrial Park in that the site is located adjacent to El Camino Real, a prime arterial roadway, and Town Garden Road, a collector street, and would not bring traffic into the Bressi Ranch industrial park. The site is separated from other industrial uses by significant open space area and the proposed Office land use would not bias the ability of industrial users to conduct uses allowed in the industrial zone. Other uses in the immediate area are professional Office and light manufacturing uses. X. MINERAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact a) and b) No Impact. The site is a previously graded lot and is not known to possess any significant mineral resources. XI. NOISE - Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance or applicable standards of other agencies? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact 15 Rev. 08/02/07 GPA 98-03(A) /MP 178(F) /CT 07-04 /PUD 07-04 /SDP 07-03 /SUP 07-01 Bressi Ranch Medical Plaza b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundbourne vibration or groundbourne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact D No Impact D D D a - f) No Impact. The project will not create or be subject to excessive noise or ground borne vibration. The project site is riot located in the vicinity of a private airstrip. The project is located wholly outside the 60 CNEL noise contour of the McClellan Palomar Airport and exterior CNEL levels between 65 and 75 dBA are considered "conditionally acceptable" for office, business commercial, planned industrial, and professional land uses. As depicted in the Bressi Ranch Master Plan Final Program EIR, section 5.4 Noise, by the year 2020 the noise levels generated by vehicles south of Palomar traveling on El Camino Real are projected to be 76.1 dBA CNEL at 75 feet from the roadway centerline. According to the Final Program EIR, a distance from roadway centerline of 86 feet would meet the City's industrial outdoor noise standards. The planned 50-foot setback along El Camino Real combined with the distance to the roadway centerline will meet or exceed the 86 foot distance needed to comply with the noise standard. This is not considered a significant impact. XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING - Would the project: a) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact 16 Rev. 08/02/07 GPA 98-03(A)7MP 178(F) /CT 07-04 /PUD 07-04 /SDP 07-03 /SUP 07-01 Bressi Ranch Medical Plaza c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact a- c) No Impact. The project will not induce substantial growth or displace homes or people as none exist on the site. XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered government facilities, a need for new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services: i) Fire protection? ii) Police protection? iii) Schools? iv) Parks? v) Other public facilities? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) No Impact. The proposed project is in compliance with the City of Carlsbad's Growth Management Plan and is not exceeding the development projections anticipated for the site. As a result the project will have no impacts on public services. Less Than Significant No Impact Impact XIV. RECREATION Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? 17 Rev. 08/02/07 GPA 98-03(A) /MP 178(F) /CT 07-04 /PUD 07-04 /SDP 07-03 /SUP 07-01 Bressi Ranch Medical Plaza b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Potentially Significant Impactn Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporatedn Less Than Significant No Impact Impac X a) and b) No Impact. The proposed project will not generate uses that would substantially cause physical deterioration to a regional or existing neighborhood park or require expansion of existing facilities. XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC - Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? r) Result in insufficient parking capacity? g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turn- outs, bicycle racks)? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact n n a) Less Than Significant Impact. The project will generate 988 Average Daily Trips (ADT) and 168 peak hour trips. This traffic will utilize the following roadways: El Camino Real, Palomar Airport Road, and Town Garden Road. Existing traffic on El Camino Real at Town Garden Road is 29,801 ADT (2006) and the 2006 peak hour level of service at the arterial intersection impacted by the project is 0.43 or an "A" LOS. The design capacity(ies) of the arterial roads affected by the proposed project is 40,000 vehicles per day. While the increase in traffic from the proposed project may be slightly noticeable, the 18 Rev. 08/02/07 GPA 98-03(A) /MP 178(F) /CT 07-04 /PUD 07-04 /SDP 07-03 /SUP 07-01 Bressi Ranch Medical Plaza street system has been designed and sized to accommodate traffic from the project and cumulative development in the City of Carlsbad. The proposed project would not, therefore, cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system. The impacts from the proposed project are, therefore, less than significant. b) Less Than Significant Impact. SANDAG acting as the County Congestion Management Agency has designated three roads (Rancho Santa Fe Rd., El Camino Real and Palomar Airport Rd.) and one highway segment in Carlsbad as part of the regional circulation system. The existing LOS on these designated roads and highway in Carlsbad is: LOS Rancho Santa Fe Road "A-C" El Camino Real "A-D" Palomar Airport Road "A-D" SR 78 "F" The Congestion Management Program's (CMP) acceptable Level of Service (LOS) standard is "E", or LOS "F" if that was the LOS in the 1990 base year (e.g., SR 78 in Carlsbad was LOS "F" in 1990). Accordingly, all designated roads and highway 78 is currently operating at or better than the acceptable standard LOS. Achievement of the CMP acceptable Level of Service (LOS) "E" standard assumes implementation of the adopted CMP strategies. Based on the design capacity(ies) of the designated roads and highway and implementation of the CMP strategies, they will function at acceptable level(s) of service in the short- term and at buildout. c) No Impact. The proposed project does not include any aviation components. The project is located wholly outside the 60 CNEL noise contour of the McClellan Palomar Airport and exterior CNEL levels between 65 and 75 dBA are considered "conditionally acceptable" for office, business commercial, planned industrial, and professional land uses. It would not, therefore, result in a change of air traffic patterns or result in any substantial safety risks. No impact assessed. d) No Impact. All project circulation improvements will be designed and constructed to City standards; and, therefore, would not result in design hazards. No impact assessed. e) No Impact. The proposed project has been designed to satisfy the emergency requirements of the Fire and Police Departments. No impact assessed. f) No Impact. The proposed project is not requesting a parking variance. Additionally, the project complies with the City's parking requirements to ensure an adequate parking supply. No impact assessed. g) No Impact. Public transportation is located off El Camino Real adjacent to the project and is accessible from the site. The project will be conditioned to install bike racks as part of their approval. 19 Rev. 08/02/07 GPA 98-03(A) /MP 178(F) /CT 07-04 /PUD 07-04 /SDP 07-03 /SUP 07-0.1 Bressi Ranch Medical Plaza XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS - Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which would cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact a) - g) No Impact. The proposed project will be required to comply with all Regional Water Quality Control Board Requirements. In addition, the Zone 17 LFMP anticipated that the project site would be developed with industrial/professional office uses and wastewater treatment facilities were planned and designed to accommodate industrial/professional office uses on the site. All public facilities, including water facilities, wastewater treatment facilities and drainage facilities, have been planned and designed to accommodate the growth projections for the City at build-out. The proposed project will increase the demand for these facilities. However, the proposed 19,760 square feet of office would not result in an overall increase in the City's growth projection in the SE quadrant. Therefore, the project will not result in development that will result in a significant need to expand or construct new water facility supplies, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage facilities. Existing waste disposal services are adequate to serve the proposed project without exceeding landfill capacity. In addition, the proposed development will be required to comply with all federal, state, and local statues and regulations related to solid waste. 20 Rev. 08/02/07 GPA 98-03(A) /MP 178(F) /CT 07-04 /PUD 07-04 /SDP 07-03 /SUP 07-01 Bressi Ranch Medical Plaza XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumula- tively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects?) c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause the substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact D a) - c) No Impact. The proposed project was evaluated in the Final Program Environmental Impact Report for the Bressi Ranch Master Plan (2002) MP 178. dated April, 2002, by Cotton/ Bridges/ Associates (CBA), Inc. and evaluates the potential environmental effects of the development and/or operation of the "Bressi Ranch Master Plan (2002)" and associated actions. The "Bressi Ranch Master Plan (2002)" is a planning document which will guide the development of 623 dwelling units and non- residential land uses on a 585.1 gross acre site consisting of 15 planning areas and 6 open space areas. The Planned Areas consist of 346.4 gross acres and provides for 623 residential units and 191.5 acres for non-residential land uses. The planned Open Space areas consist of 190.7 acres spread out throughout the site. EIR 98-04 analyzed the following environmental issue areas: 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, and Population and Housing. The Initial Study prepared for the Bressi Ranch Master Plan and related action is included in Volume 1 of the Appendices for EIR 98-04 and analyzed additional issues, which were determined not to have a significant environmental impact. The City of Carlsbad City Council certified EIR 98-04 in April, 2002. At that time CEQA Findings of Fact, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program were all approved. All mitigation measures applicable to this Master Plan have been completed, incorporated into the project design, or are required as a condition of approval for the projects. The EIR 98-04 "Statement of Overriding Considerations" applies to all projects covered by the Bressi Ranch Final Program EIR. San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) projects regional growth for the greater San Diego area and local general plan land use policies are incorporated into SANDAG projections. Based upon 21 Rev. 08/02/07 GPA 98-03(A) /MP 178(F) /CT 07-04 /PUD 07-04 /SDP 07-03 /SUP 07-01 Bressi Ranch Medical Plaza those projections, region-wide standards, including storm water quality control, air quality standards, habitat conservation, congestion management standards, etc., are established to reduce the cumulative impacts of development in the region. All of the City's development standards and regulations are consistent with the region wide standards. The City's standards and regulations, including grading standards, water quality and drainage standard, traffic standards, habitat and cultural resource protection regulations, and public facility standards, ensure that development within the City will not result in a significant cumulatively considerable impact. With regard to any other potential impacts associated with the project, City standards and regulations will ensure that development of the site will not result in any significant cumulatively considerable impacts. Based upon the Professional Office nature of the project and the fact that future development of the site will comply with City standards, the project will not result in any direct or indirect substantial adverse environmental effects on human beings. XVIII. EARLIER ANALYSES Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets: a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures, which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. EARLIER ANALYSIS USED AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES The following documents were used in the analysis of this project and are on file in the City of Carlsbad Planning Department located at 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California, 92008. 1. Final Master Environmental Impact Report for the City of Carlsbad General Plan Update (MEIR 93-01), City of Carlsbad Planning Department. March 1994. 2. Bressi Ranch Master Plan EIR. Cotton/Bridges/Associates, December 2001. 3. Bressi Ranch Master Plan. Hofman Planning Associates, May 2002. 4. Traffic Impact Analysis. Urban Systems Associates, Inc., July 2007. 22 Rev. 08/02/07