Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-01-16; Planning Commission; Resolution 63691 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 6369 2 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE 3 CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION 4 MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM TO ALLOW 5 FOR THE DEMOLITION OF AN EXISTING RETAINING WALL AND CONCRETE SLAB, AND THE CONSTRUCTION 6 OF A NEW 5,210 SQUARE FOOT SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED 7 ALONG THE SOUTH SHORE OF THE BUENA VISTA LAGOON, SOUTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF 8 JEFFERSON STREET AND LAS FLORES DRIVE, WITHIN 9 THE MELLO II SEGMENT OF THE LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AND LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 10 1. CASE NAME: HAGEY RESIDENCE 11 CASE NO.: CDP 06-25 12 WHEREAS, Edward H. Hagey, "Developer/Owner" has filed a verified 13 application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property described as: 14 That portion of Tract Map No. 3 of Laguna Mesa Tracts, in the 15 City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, ,s according to map thereof No. 1719, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, June 20, 1921, more 17 particularly described as follows: 18 Commencing at the Southeasterly corner of Parcel 1 described in a Deed to Leo S. Karlyn, recorded August 7,1991 as File No. 19 1991-0398331 of Official Records; thence along the Southerly 20 line of said Parcel 1 and the Southerly line of Parcel 2 of said Deed, North 89° 27' 37" West, 230.29 feet to the Westerly line 21 of Parcel 2 of said Deed; thence along said Westerly line North 19° 15' 50" East, 79.19 feet to the True Point of Beginning; 22 thence along the Westerly, Northerly and Easterly lines of Parcel 2 of said Deed the following courses: North 19° 15' 50" East, 67.47 feet; thence North 65° 53' 16" East, 192.44 feet; 24 thence South 89° 27' 18" East, 8.33 feet; thence South 0° 32' 42" West, 15.08 feet; thence South 26° 04' 28" West, 12.18 feet 25 to the Easterly line of Parcel 1 of said Deed and a point on the arc of a non-tangent 970.00 foot radius curve, concave 26 Westerly, a radial line to said point bears North 84° 34' 57" 27 East; thence Southerly along said Easterly line and the arc of said curve through a central angle of 5° 57' 45" a distance of 28 100.94 feet; thence continuing along said Easterly line South 0° 32' 42" West, 17.34 feet; thence North 89° 27' 37" West, 204.88 feet to the True Point of Beginning. Also shown as: 2 Parcel 2 of Certificate of Compliance recorded June 11, 1993 3 as Document No. 1993-0370517. 4 ("the Property"); and WHEREAS, a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and 6 Reporting Program was prepared in conjunction with said project; and 7 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on January 16, 2008, hold a duly8 g noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and 10 WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony 1 1 and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the information submitted by staff, and 12 considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission considered all factors 13 relating to the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting 14 Program. 15 * 16 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning 17 Commission as follows: 18 A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. 19 B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning 20 Commission hereby ADOPTS the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, Exhibit "MND," according to 21 Exhibits "NOI", and "PII", attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following findings: 22 71 Findings: 24 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad does hereby find: 25 a. it has reviewed, analyzed, and considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for HAGEY RESIDENCE - 26 CDP 06-25, the environmental impacts therein identified for this project and said comments thereon, and the Program, on file in the Planning Department, prior to 2' APPROVING the project; and 28 b. the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program have been prepared in accordance with requirements of the California PC RESO NO. 6369 -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 Environmental Quality Act, the State Guidelines and the Environmental Protection Procedures of the City of Carlsbad; and c. they reflect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad; and d. based on the EIA Part II and comments thereon, the Planning Commission, finds that there is no substantial evidence the project will have a significant the environment. Conditions: effect on 1. Developer shall implement, or cause the implementation of, the Hagey Residence Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on January 16, 2008, by the vote, to wit: AYES: Chairperson Baker, Commissioners Boddy, Dominguez, Montgomery, and Whitton NOES: ABSENT: Commissioner Cardosa ABSTAIN: /-y s — -v J^r** \ *JL JULIE BAKER\ Chairperson CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: *chy\ / l&u DON NEU Planning Director PC RESO NO. 6369 -3- Planning following Douglas, F IL r \n City of Carlsbad CASE NAME: CASE NO: PROJECT LOCATION: Planning Department NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Hagey Residence CDP 06-25 The project is located on the west side of Jefferson Street, just south of Las Flores Drive in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The project is a request for approval of a Coastal Development Permit to demolish an existing foundation and retaining wall, and construct a 5,210 square foot single-family residence. The project site is a 0.45-acre parcel located on the west side of Jefferson Street along the south shore of the Buena Vista Lagoon. The Buena Vista Lagoon is identified in the City of Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan as an existing hardline preserve area. The single-family home proposes 2 stories with a day lighting basement facing west towards the lagoon. Topography of the site consists of a flat area adjacent to Jefferson Street and a steep slope leading down to the lagoon. Elevations on site range from approximately 20 feet above mean sea level (msl) near the western site boundary to approximately 65 feet msl along the eastern site boundary. Surrounding land uses consist of multi-family residential development to the north, single-family residential development to the south, Jefferson Street and single-family homes to the east, and the Buena Vista Lagoon to the west. The 0.45-acre project site consists of primarily undeveloped land supporting 0.01-acres of Wetland/Riparian habitat, 0.16-acres of Non-Native Grassland, 0.28-acres of Non-Native Vegetation, 0.01-acres of Eucalyptus Woodland, and 0.01-acres of Developed Area (an existing foundation and retaining walls). The project proposes a 100 foot wetland buffer. The Eucalyptus Woodland falls within the boundaries of the proposed 100 foot wetland buffer and will not be impacted by the project. The project will impact 0.06 acres of Non-Native Grassland, 0.20-acres of Non-Native Vegetation, and 0.01-acres of Developed Area. Impacts will be mitigated in accordance with the City of Carlsbad's Habitat Management Plan (HMP). The project proposes to plant the 100 foot wetland buffer area adjacent to the lagoon with native plant species and will establish an open space easement over this area to further restrict any future development. 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) identified potentially significant effects on the environment, but (1) revisions in the project plans or proposals made by, or agreed to by, the applicant before the proposed negative declaration and initial study are released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment would occur, and (2) there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record before 1635 Faraday Avenue « Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us the City that the project "as revised" may have a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration will be recommended for adoption by the City of Carlsbad Planning Commission. A copy of the initial study (EIA Part 2) documenting reasons to support the proposed Mitigated 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 30 days of the date of this notice. The proposed project and Mitigated 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 Jason Goff in the Planning Department at (760) 602-4643. PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD August 17. 2007 through September 6. 2007 PUBLISH DATE August 17. 2007 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - INITIAL STUDY (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) CASE NO: CDP 06-25 DATE: August 8. 2007 BACKGROUND 1. CASE NAME: Hagev Residence 2. LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS: City of Carlsbad. 1635 Faraday Avenue. Carlsabd. CA 92008. 3. CONTACT PERSON AND PHONE NUMBER: Jason Goff. (760) 602-4643 4. PROJECT LOCATION: West side of Jefferson Street, just south of Las Flores in the City of Carlsbad. County of San Diego. (APN 155-140-37 & -38) 5. PROJECT SPONSOR'S NAME AND ADDRESS: John Beery of Beery Group. Inc. 5751 Palmer Way, Ste. G-3 . Carlsbad. CA 92010 6. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: RMH (Residential Medium-High Density) 7. ZONING: R-3 (Multiple-Family Residential) 8. OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES WHOSE APPROVAL IS REQUIRED (i.e., permits, financing approval or participation agreements): None 9. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND SURROUNDING LAND USES: The project is a request for approval of a Coastal Development Permit to demolish an existing foundation and retaining wall, and construct a 5,210 square foot single-family residence. The project site is a 0.45-acre parcel located on the west side of Jefferson Street along the south shore of the Buena Vista Lagoon. The Buena Vista Lagoon is identified in the City of Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan as an existing hardline preserve area. The single-family home proposes 2 stories with a day lighting basement facing west towards the lagoon. Topography of the site consists of a flat area adjacent to Jefferson Street and a steep slope leading down to the lagoon. Elevations on site range from approximately 20 feet above mean sea level (msl) near the western site boundary to approximately 65 feet msl along the eastern site boundary. Surrounding land uses consist of multi-family residential development to the north, single-family residential development to the south, Jefferson Street and single-family homes to the east, and the Buena Vista Lagoon to the west. The 0.45-acre project site consists of primarily undeveloped land supporting 0.01-acres of Wetland/Riparian habitat, 0.16-acres of Non-Native Grassland, 0.28-acres of Non-Native Vegetation, 0.01-acres of Eucalyptus Woodland, and 0.01-acres of Developed Area (an existing foundation and retaining walls). The project proposes a 100 foot wetland buffer. The Eucalyptus CDP 06-25 Hagey Residence Woodland falls within the boundaries of the proposed 100 foot wetland buffer and will not be impacted by the project. The project will impact 0.06 acres of Non-Native Grassland, 0.20-acres of Non-Native Vegetation, and 0.01-acres of Developed Area. Impacts will be mitigated in accordance with the City of Carlsbad's Habitat Management Plan (HMP). The project proposes to plant the 100 foot wetland buffer area adjacent to the lagoon with native plant species and will establish an open space easement over this area to further restrict any future development. Rev. 01/02/07 CDP 06-25 Hagey Residence 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 Agricultural Resources Air Quality XJ Biological Resources /\| Cultural Resources I | Geology/Soils Noise Hazards/Hazardous Materials LJ Population and Housing Hydrology/Water Quality Land Use and Planning Mineral Resources | | Mandatory Findings of Significance Public Services Recreation Transportation/Circulation Utilities & Service Systems Rev. 01/02/07 CDP 06-25 Hagey Residence DETERMINATION. (To be completed by the Lead Agency) I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. 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. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. 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 Declarati6n is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT 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. Planning Director's Signature Date Rev. 01/02/07 CDP 06-25 Hagey Residence 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 Cit/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 EIR 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 a Mitigated Negative Declaration may be prepared. Rev. 01/02/07 CDP 06-25 Hagey Residence • 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. Rev. 01/02/07 CDP 06-25 Hagey Residence 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 Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated D D Less Than Significant No Impact Impact D a, c) Less Than Significant Impact. The project proposes to construct a single-family home in place of a vacant parcel of land with adjacent westerly views of the Buena Vista Lagoon and the Pacific Ocean beyond. These views are currently visible from the Jefferson Street frontage. While the proposed development will partially block these existing views, the project is not considered to have a substantially adverse effect on a scenic vista given that the area is not identified in either the Local Coastal Program or the City of Carlsbad General Plan as such. Furthermore, the property has a General Plan Land Use designation of RMH (Residential Medium-High Density) and is zoned R- 3 (Multi-Family Residential), which would allow development at a density of 8 to 15 dwelling units per acre with a maximum building height of 35 feet. The project is proposing one single-family home, which is 24 feet in height as measured from the front of the house as viewed from Jefferson Street. Surrounding land uses are consistent with the proposed development both in scale and in use, i.e. a two-story multi-family project exists to the north, and two- story single-family residential exists to the south and east. Development of the site as proposed will not adversely affect scenic vistas or substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. b) No Impact. The proposed project is not located adjacent to any State scenic highways, nor are there any rock outcroppings or historic buildings existing on-site. Eucalyptus woodland, consisting of 0.01 acres in size, is located on the northwest corner of the site. The trees however are located outside of the development area and will not be impacted by the project. Therefore, no scenic resources will be damaged as a result of the proposed project. No impact assessed. d) No Impact. The proposed use is consistent with the surrounding single-family residential uses and will be designed such that it does not contribute a significant amount of light or glare. No impact assessed. Rev. 01/02/07 CDP 06-25 Hagey Residence 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? c) 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. There will be no impacts on agricultural resources since the site is not designated, nor has it been historically or currently used for farmland. The proposed project is consistent with the City of Carlsbad General Plan. The subject site is zoned R-3 (Multiple-Family Residential) and is not subject to a Williamson Act Contract. The project would not result in other changes to the environment that would result in the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses. The General Plan Land Use designation is Residential Medium-High Density (RMH), which anticipates two-family and multiple-family residential development. Given the steep slopes, surrounding residential development, and lack of existing or historical agricultural infrastructure, it is unlikely that agricultural operations would be viable at this location. Development of the site as proposed would not adversely affect agricultural resources. No impact assessed. Rev. 01/02/07 CDP 06-25 Hagey Residence 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? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is r 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 EI a) No Impact. The project site is located in the San Diego Air Basin which is a state non-attainment area for ozone (03) and for paniculate matter less than or equal to 10 microns in diameter (PM|0). 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 (SIP). The SIP was adopted by the Air Resources Board (ARE) 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 SIP in mid-1996. The proposed project relates to the SIP 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 Rev. 01/02/07 CDP 06-25 Hagey Residence 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 with 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? 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. No impact assessed. 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 incfemental 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. No impact assessed. 10 Rev. 01/02/07 CDP 06-25 Hagey Residence 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 No Impact Impact a, b, c, & f) Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation. The proposed project is a single-family home located along the south shore of the Buena Vista Lagoon. The Buena Vista Lagoon is identified in the City of Carlsbad's Habitat Management Plan (HMP) as an existing hardline preserve area. The project site is identified in the HMP as being development area. The project site is not located within an existing or proposed HMP hardline preserve area or a proposed HMP standards area. The project is designed to be consistent with the HMP. The HMP Zone 1 conservation goals require conservation of the majority of sensitive habitats in or contiguous with biological core areas, including a no net loss of wetland habitat, and preservation of coastal sage scrub and maritime succulent scrub adjacent to the lagoons. The HMP requires additional conservation standards to be applied to properties in the Coastal Zone. A 100-foot buffer is required for all wetland/riparian habitats between preserved habitats and development. A Biological Resources Report was prepared by Helix Environmental Planning, Inc. on February 6, 2007 (HAG-01). The report indicates that the project site contains four vegetative communities: Southern Willow Scrub, Eucalyptus 11 Rev. 01/02/07 CDP 06-25 Hagey Residence Woodland, Non-Native Grassland, and Disturbed Habitat (Non-Native Vegetation). The proposed development will impact both non-native grasslands and disturbed habitat (non-native vegetation) areas as illustrated below. No impacts will occur to the Southern Willow Scrub or Eucalyptus Woodland. The HMP allows impacts to non-native grassland and disturbed habitat (non-native vegetation) areas to be mitigated through the payment of an in-lieu mitigation fee. The following tables summarize impacts to vegetation types and identifies proposed mitigation for impacts as presented in the biological resources report: VEGETATION IMPACTS HABITAT | ACRE(S) I IMPACTS Group A - Wetland/Riparian Southern Willow Scrub 0.01 0.00 Group E - Annual Grasslands Non-Native Grassland 0.16 0.06 Group F - Other Lands Non-Native Vegetation Eucalyptus Woodland Totals 0.28 0.01 0.46 0.20 0.00 0.26 PROPOSED MITIGATION FOR IMPACTS TO VEGETATION COMMUNITIES VEGETATION COMMUNITY Southern Willow Scrub Non-Native Grassland Non-Native Vegetation Eucalyptus Woodland EXISTING ACREAGE 0.01 0.16 0.28 0.01 IMPACTED ACREAGE 0.00 0.06 0.20 0.00 Totals U 0.46 || 0.26 MITIGATION RATIO - In-lieu fee for Habitat Group E In-lieu fee for Habitat Group F - MITIGATION REQUIREMENT No Impact In-lieu fee In-lieu fee No Impact Sensitive Plant and Wildlife Species The biological resources report also indicates that no Federal, State, or HMP sensitive plant or animal species were observed on site. Focused surveys for rare plants and sensitive animal species were not conducted as part of the survey and report. However, a listing of sensitive species with a "potential to occur" on the property was determined by a habitat based analysis and consulting known distribution of sensitive species in San Diego County. The 18 plants and animals listed in the HMP as narrow endemic species were included in this analysis. A majority of the plant species identified in the report were listed as having a very low potential to occur on site. The majority of the animal species identified in the report were listed as having a very low potential to occur on site due to the poor quality of existing habitat and the sites isolation as a result of development on three sides, and the Buena Vista Lagoon on the other. Sensitive Vegetation Communities/Wetland habitat The biological resources report identified an area of less than 0.01 acres of southern willow scrub located along the westernmost property boundary adjacent to the lagoon. Southern willow scrub is identified in the HMP as a sensitive vegetation community. The edge of southern willow scrub also identifies the location of wetland habitat. A jurisdictional delineation was conducted to identify and map any areas that may fall under the jurisdiction of the Army Corp pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, the wetland and streambed habitats under the jurisdiction of the California Department of Fish & Game (CDFG) pursuant to Section 1600 of the Fish and Game 12 Rev. 01/02/07 CDP 06-25 Hagey Residence Code, and the wetland habitat under the jurisdiction of the California Coastal Commission (CCC) pursuant to Section 30121 of the Coastal Act. A soil pit was excavated from this area and studied. Only one of three Army Corp wetland criteria was met, resulting in the wetland area not qualifying as an Army Corp wetland. However, the wetland area is considered a CDFG and CCC-jurisdictional habitat. The HMP Zone 1 conservation goals require a no net loss of wetland habitat. To mitigate any potential impact to the wetland area, the project has been designed in accordance with the Local Coastal Program and the City's HMP to provide a 100 foot buffer between the wetland habitat area and project development. Furthermore, an open space easement will be placed over the 100 foot wetland buffer area to preclude any future development of this area, which will also be planted with native plant species as recommended in the biological resources report. Indirect Impacts The project site is located adjacent to the Buena Vista Lagoon, which is considered an existing HMP Hardline Preserve area. In order to minimize edge effects, the following adjacency standards have been incorporated into the project as mitigation to reduce indirect impacts to a level considered less than significant: 1. Fire Management: Fire Management between habitable structures and natural habitats must accomplish two objectives: (1) protection of the biological resource, and (2) a satisfactory level of protection for humans and property. The project addresses and complies with this standard by enacting multiple fire management techniques as determined in consultation with the Carlsbad Fire Department. The brush management zones have been eliminated in acknowledgement of the extensive use of fire retardant building materials and design, per Carlsbad Fire Department requirements. The following will serve to achieve fire management objectives that will be equivalent to a 60 foot wide fire suppression zone: a) No exposed wood throughout the project, including gates, fences, decks, etc. b) Interior fire sprinklers. c) Class A roof with no vents on the westerly side. d) Parking areas and driveways are sited to allow for adequate fire department access. 2. Erosion Control: To prevent the loss of vegetative cover and address slope stabilization, the project shall prohibit bare surface grading for fire control on slopes and ensure that fire control leaves (or replaces) adequate vegetative cover to prevent surface erosion. The project shall also ensure that all areas of habitat creation are adequately stabilized (e.g. with a binder) after planting to minimize surface erosion. Finally, the project shall ensure that no new surface drainage is directed into the HMP Preserve. 3. Landscaping Restrictions: The project shall not use any non-native invasive plant species in landscaping the 100 foot wetland buffer area adjacent to the HMP Preserve. The project shall control irrigation of landscaping adjacent to the HMP Preserve to prevent runoff into it. 4. Fencing. Signs and Lighting: The steepness of the slopes west of the proposed home will act as a natural barrier to preclude access to the HMP Preserve. Project lighting in the back yard adjacent to the HMP Preserve shall be of the minimum necessary for safety and security and shall be shielded and directed to shine downward and not into the HMP Preserve. 5. Predator and Exotic Species Control: The project proposes one single-family home. A very small introduction of domestic pets is expected to occur within the project area. The homeowners will be made aware of the dangers of letting domestic pets encroach into the preserve area. For exotic species control, the project shall not use any non-native, invasive plant species in landscaping adjacent to the existing HMP Preserve. The list of invasive exotic plant species outlined in the HMP will be avoided. In addition, the 100 foot wetland buffer area between the HMP Preserve and development will need to be protected by an open space easement to preclude any future development of this area. The conditioned mitigation will result in a less than significant impact to biological resources. d, e) Less than Significant Impact. The project site is located within the Core 1 Focus Planning Area (FPA) of the HMP. Core 1 consists of the Buena Vista Lagoon and adjoining wetland and upland habitats. The Buena Vista 13 Rev. 01/02/07 CDP 06-25 Hagey Residence Lagoon and its surrounding vegetation provide habitat for critical populations of the California least tern, western snowy plover, light-footed clapper rail, American peregrine falcon, California brown pelican, white-faced ibis and the southwestern pond turtle. As a result, the lagoon and its associated vegetation have been designated as a "Hardline Preserve Area" by the City and "Conserved Lands" by the CDFG. However, the project site is located outside of, but adjacent to the "Hardline Preserve Area." Several HMP Conservation Goals are applicable to the project: a) No net loss of wetland habitat. b) Retain and manage natural habitats adjacent to the lagoon to buffer wetland resources from adverse effects and to provide upland nesting habitat for pond turtles and other HMP species. c) Maximize the preservation of habitat adjacent to the lagoon, and d) If native habitats cannot be avoided, mitigate by creation or enhancement of like habitats adjacent to the lagoon. The proposed project has taken these goals into consideration and is avoiding the small amount of wetland habitat that occurs on site. A 100-foot buffer between the wetlands and the development area has been incorporated into the project design. Although the project site is located adjacent to an existing HMP Hardline Preserve area, it is identified in the biological resources report as being in a highly disturbed state and located adjacent to developed properties on three sides. As such, the property is of limited value to wildlife, and the habitat on site is not expected to provide suitable nesting habitat for HMP species. Therefore, project associated impacts are considered to be less than significant. 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 a, b & d) Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. A Phase I Archaeological Assessment was prepared for the site by Brian F. Smith and Associates on January 23, 2007. The assessment program was conducted in accordance with CEQA to determine the presence of any archaeological or historical cultural resources that could be affected by the proposed project. A Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) records search was negative for the presence of cultural resources within the project boundaries, however a records search requested from the South Coastal Information Center (SCIC) identified that a prehistoric site (CA-SDI-8455) is located adjacent to the project boundaries. A field survey was conducted on the site, but failed to produce any evidence of archaeological materials within the project area. The report indicates there is a minimal potential still remaining that the proposed project could disturb elements of SDI-8455 that may be buried beneath'the sill slope. As such, it is required that archaeological monitoring by a qualified archaeologist occurs during all ground 14 Rev. 01/02/07 CDP 06-25 Hagey Residence disturbing activities in order to ensure resources are not lost. In the event that any cultural resources, concentrations of artifacts, or culturally modified soil deposits are discovered within the project at any time during construction, it is required that all work be halted and the discovery be evaluated by a qualified archeolegist. If any deposits are evaluated and determined to be significant, further mitigation measures may be required. Implementation of the mitigation measures recommended in the Phase I Archeological Assessment, will reduce project associated impacts to a level of less than significant. c) Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. A Paleontological Resource & Monitoring Assessment was prepared for the site by Brian F. Smith and Associates on January 9, 2007. According to the report, the basement rocks in the area of the site are mapped as the middle Eocene (~ 40 to 50 million year old) Santiago Formation, which is known to contain a variety of lithologies, including ones derived from marine, estuarine, and terrestrial environments. Paleontological collections and records of the Department of Paleontology at San Diego Natural History Museum in San Diego were reviewed to determine if any previously recorded fossil localities exist within the project boundaries. It was determined that no previously recorded fossil localities exist within the project boundaries; however a fossil mammoth locality was discovered approximately one half mile to the north-northwest, and ten marine .terrace localities with abundant marine invertebrate fossils to the north-northeast. Because of the "high paleontological resource sensitivity" of the middle Eocene Santiago Formation and of the Pleistocene marine terrace sediments, the report recommends full-time paleontological monitoring of the mass grading and excavation activities by a qualified paleontologist. A mitigation program which involves review of the grading plans; full time attendance of a paleontologist during the grading operation with the authority to direct grading operations to salvage resources, and curation, at the direction of the property owner, of the resources will mitigate impacts to a less than significant level. Areas left in a natural state will further mitigate impacts to the paleontological resources. 15 Rev. 01/02/07 CDP 06-25 Hagey Residence 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? 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 Impact No Impact D D a.i.) No Impact. There are no Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault zones within the City of Carlsbad and there is no other evidence of active or potentially active faults within the City. No impact assessed. a.ii.-a.iv. & c) Less Than Significant Impact. There are no Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault zones within the City of Carlsbad and there is no other evidence of active or potentially active faults within the City. However, there are several active faults throughout Southern California, and potential earthquakes resulting from these faults could affect Carlsbad. A Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation of the site was prepared by GeoSoils, Inc. on September 18, 2003 (W.O. 3213-A-SC) and further amended in an addendum dated November 20, 2006 (W.O. 3213-A1-SC). The reports identified the site as having a relatively low exposure to seismic risks (i.e. liquefaction, surface rupture, etc.), and did not find any evidence of slope instability (i.e., slope creep, surficial failures, or deep-seated landslides). 16 Rev. 01/02/07 CDP 06-25 Hagey Residence All existing artificial fill, colluvium/topsoil materials, and near surface weathered terrace deposits will require removal and recompaction in accordance with the recommendations outlined in the reports. By following the recommendations contained within the referenced reports, the site is suitable for the proposed project, and will not expose people or structures to geotechnical related hazards. b) Less Than Significant Impact. Grading of the site is primarily restricted to the footprint of the home. Some grading is anticipated around the perimeter of the home to allow for guest parking and front yard improvements. The entire site outside of the building footprint will be landscaped to reduce the potential of soil erosion or loss of top soil. Therefore, impacts to soil erosion or loss of top soil are considered to be less than significant. d) Less Than Significant Impact. The Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation indicates that existing artificial fill and colluvium/topsoil materials will require removal and re-compaction in accordance with the recommendations of the reports. Onsite soils are considered very low to low in expansion potential and recommendations for foundation design and construction are presented in the report. The report indicates that development of the property appears to be feasible from a geotechnical viewpoint, provided the recommendations presented in the report are properly incorporated into the design and construction of the project. Standard conditions of approval require implementation of the recommendations included in the Geotechnical Report. Therefore, impacts are considered to be less than significant. e) No Impact. The proposed project does not propose septic tanks and will utilize the public sewer system. Therefore, there will be no impacts involving soils that support the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. No impact assessed. 17 Rev. 01/02/07 CDP 06-25 Hagey Residence 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 t 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 Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact El 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? El El a-h) No Impact. The project is a single-family home, which does not involve the transport or storage of hazardous materials. The site is not listed as a hazardous materials site. The proposed home is designed with fire rated construction to reduce risk of loss, injury or death resulting from wildland fires. The project, which is approximately 4.5 miles northwest of the McClellan-Palomar Airport and well outside of the Airport Influence Area, will not expose people to airport safety hazards. No impact assessed. 18 Rev. 01/02/07 CDP 06-25 Hagey Residence 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)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the t 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) h) 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? Place within 100-year flood hazard area structures, which would impede or redirect flood flows? 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 No Impact Impact D Kl D 19 Rev. 01/02/07 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? n) Increase any pollutant to an already impaired water body as listed on the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) list? CDP 06-25 Hagey Residence Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact D D D o) Increase impervious surfaces and associated runoff? 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? a) Less Than Significant Impact. The subject property is required to comply with all federal, state and local water quality regulations, including the Clean Water Act (California Administrative Code Title 23). The project will comply with the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements. The project will develop and implement specific erosion control and Storm Water Management plans to protect the downstream water quality of Buena Vista Lagoon. These plans will ensure acceptable water quality standards will be maintained both during the construction phase as well as post-development. b) No Impact. This project does not propose to directly draw any groundwater. The project will be served via existing public water distribution lines that are adjacent to the site. No impact assessed. c-e) Less Than Significant Impact. Grading of the site will be limited to 0.07 acres of the 0.46-acre site, with over 82% of the site remaining as undeveloped open space. No streams or rivers are present on the site. Project grading is designed to match the historical drainage pattern of the site, with exception of grading for the footprint of the home. Storm runoff generated from the roof of the home, driveway, guest parking area, and front yard will be directed towards Jefferson Street to the maximum extent practicable. The project driveway and guest parking area will utilize permeable pavers to reduce off-site runoff. All other drainage will be routed through vegetated bio- swales to eliminate pollutants of concern. The total post development runoff discharging from the site will not significantly exceed the pre-development amounts. Therefore, the project will not violate any water quality standards, deplete groundwater supplies or quality, substantially alter existing drainage patterns, cause substantial erosion or flooding, or significantly impact the capacity of stormwater drainage systems. f) Less Than Significant Impact. Construction of the proposed project improvements will comply with all federal, state and local water quality regulations, including the Clean Water Act and associated NPDES regulations. A grading permit is required for the project prior to commencement of grading, which requires review and approval of an erosion control plan. The erosion control plan will employ grading construction BMP's which will reduce 20 Rev. 01/02/07 CDP 06-25 Hagey Residence temporary impacts on water quality. In addition, a Preliminary Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) was prepared for the project by Sampo Engineering, Inc., dated July 20, 2007. Through implementation of the recommended site design and source control BMP's, post construction impacts to water quality will be mitigated. Therefore, the project will not result in permanent or long term degradation of water quality and impacts are considered to be less than significant. g-i) No Impact. The project site is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area according to the Flood Insurance Rate Map. Map No. 06073C0761. June 19. 1997. Therefore, the proposed project will not result in the placement of housing or structures within a 100-year flood hazard area. According to the City of Carlsbad Geotechnical Hazards Analysis and Mapping Study. November 1992. the project site is not located within any dam failure inundation area. No impact assessed. j) Less Than Significant Impact. According to the City of Carlsbad Geotechnical Hazards Analysis and Mapping Study, November 1992, and based on historical events, and the generally accepted and favorable geologic and seismic conditions along the San Diego County Coastline, the potential for damage to the project site caused by tsunamis or seiches is considered to be low. k) Less Than Significant Impact. The construction phase of the project could result in increased erosion. However, as a result of the NPDES requirements associated with the proposed project, no significant increase in erosion (sediment) into receiving surface waters will result from the project. Urban runoff from the proposed development will be channeled into the appropriate storm water receptors to maximum extent practicable as indicated in the project's Preliminary Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) prepared by Sampo Engineering, Inc., dated July 20, 2007. The greatest potential for short-term water quality impacts to the drainage basin would be expected during and immediately following the grading and construction phases of the project, when cleared and graded areas are exposed to rain and storm water runoff. Standard conditions require compliance with NPDES sediment control requirements during the construction phase and implementation of the grading and construction BMPs for the project. l-n) Less Than Significant Impact. A Preliminary Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) was prepared for the project by Sampo Engineering, Inc. dated July 20, 2007. In their report, the project site is identified as discharging into the Buena Vista Lagoon Cal Watershed 904.20, which is considered impaired by Bacteria indicators, nutrients and sedimentation/siltation. The primary pollutants of concern associated with the project are sediments, nutrients, trash and debris, oxygen demanding substances, oil and grease, bacteria, viruses and pesticides. The project is designed to maximize grass and landscape areas for BMP's and to direct storm runoff, to the maximum extent practicable, from the.project driveway, guest parking area, front yard and portions of the roof towards Jefferson Street. The remainder of storm runoff flowing from the roof will be directed where possible to landscaped bio- swales, which will act as a filtration system to clean storm water of any pollutants. As proposed, and subject to compliance with the proposed BMP's, the project will not result in an increase of pollutants into downstream waters, including the Buena Vista Lagoon, and no receiving water quality will be adversely affected through implementation of the proposed project. o) Less Than Significant Impact. The project will result in a slight increase in impervious surfaces due to construction of the single-family home. However, approximately 82% of the site will remain as undeveloped open space. The project is designed to maximize grass and landscaped areas for BMP's and to direct stormwater runoff from the roof, driveway, guest parking area, and front yard of the proposed dwelling to the Jefferson Street right-of- way to the maximum extent possible. The project driveway and guest parking areas will be constructed of interlocking permeable pavers to allow for ground water recharge and reduction in surface runoff. The project also proposes landscaping which minimizes water usage and thus minimizes site runoff. Given the small size of the project, the increase in impervious surface and associated runoff is considered to be less than significant. p) Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is located along the east side of the Buena Vista Lagoon between the lagoon edge and Jefferson Street. The Biological Resources Report, prepared by Helix Environmental Planning, Inc., identified a 0.01 acre patch of wetland/riparian habitat consisting of Southern Willow Scrub along the most westerly edge of the subject parcel. A 100 ft. wetland buffer area between the edge of development and the outside boundaries of the wetland has been designed into the project consistent with the requirements of the City of Carlsbad's Habitat Management Plan and the Local Coastal Program. An open space easement will be placed over 21 Rev. 01/02/07 CDP 06-25 Hagey Residence the 100 foot wetland buffer area to preclude any future development and/or disturbance of this area or to the HMP Hardline Preserve. Construction and post construction BMP's will further eliminate impacts on aquatic and wetland habitats by filtering pollutants. Therefore, impacts are considered to be less than significant. q) No Impact. The project will not result in the exceedance of applicable surface or groundwater receiving water quality objectives or degradation of beneficial uses. Please refer to the preceding responses. No impact assessed. 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? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact a-c) No Impact. The project is a single-family dwelling consistent with the surrounding land uses. The site does not physically divide an established community. The proposed project does not conflict with any existing or proposed land use plans or policies of the City of Carlsbad. The project is consistent with both the City of Carlsbad General Plan and the Local Coastal Program Land Use designations. The General Plan Land Use designation is RMH (Residential Medium High Density), RMH anticipates two-family and multiple-family dwellings at 8 to 15 dwelling units per acre, but allows single-family dwellings that fall below the minimum density range when a single, one-family dwelling is constructed on a legal lot that existed as of October 28, 2004. The subject lot was created prior to October 28, 2004 and, therefore is consistent with the General Plan. The Local Coastal Land Use designation is RLM (Residential Low-Medium Density). RLM anticipates one-family dwellings at 0 to 4 dwelling units per acre. The project proposes one single-family residence, and therefore is consistent with the RLM land use designation. The project is consistent with the City of Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan and does not conflict with any applicable plans or policies. No impact assessed. 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 D 22 Rev. 01/02/07 CDP 06-25 Hagey Residence a-b) No Impact. There is no indication that the subject property contains any known mineral resources that would be of future value to the region or the residents of the State. No impact assessed. 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? 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 r 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 Potentially Unless Significant Mitigation Impact Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact D D D El x D b & d) Less Than Significant Impact. The anticipated grading operation associated with the proposed single- family dwelling will result in a temporary and minor increase in groundborne vibration and ambient noise levels. Following the conclusion of the grading, the ambient noise level and vibrations is expected to return to pre-existing levels. a, c, e & f) No Impact. The project consists of a single-family dwelling which is consistent in use and intensity as the surrounding residential development. As such, the project would not result in sustained ambient noise levels which exceed the established standards. No impact assessed. 23 Rev. 01/02/07 CDP 06-25 Hagey Residence 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? 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 D a-c) No Impact. The project is one single-family dwelling unit, which is consistent with the surrounding land uses. The area surrounding the proposed development is designated for residential development and was analyzed in the City's Growth Management Plan accordingly. The density of the proposed development is consistent with the City of Carlsbad General Plan. No impact assessed. Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact 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? a.i. - a.v.) No Impact. The project's size of one single-family dwelling unit is consistent with the General Plan and surrounding land uses, and therefore will not effect the provision and availability of public facilities (fire protection, police protection, schools, parks, libraries, etc.). The proposed project shall be subject to the conditions and facility 24 Rev. 01/02/07 CDP 06-25 Hagey Residence service level requirements within the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 1. Therefore, no significant public service impacts will occur as a result of this project. No impact assessed. 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? 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? a-b) No Impact. The project's size of one single-family dwelling unit will not result in the deterioration of existing neighborhood or regional parks or cause such parks to be expanded. Therefore, no adverse physical effect on the environment will occur as a result of this project. No impact assessed. 25 Rev. 01/02/07 CDP 06-25 Hagey Residence 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? f) 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 U El EI EI a) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed single-family home will generate 10 Average Daily Trips (ADT), which is not substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system. While the increase in traffic from the proposed project may be slightly noticeable, the street system has been designed and sized to accommodate traffic from the project and cumulative development in the City of Carlsbad. The proposed project will not cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system. Project associated impacts are therefore considered 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: Rancho Santa Fe Road El Camino Real Palomar Airport Road SR78 LOS "A-C" "A-D" "A-D" 26 Rev. 01/02/07 CDP 06-25 Hagey Residence 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 consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan for the McClellan-Palomar Airport. It would not, therefore, result in a change of air traffic patterns or result in 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. The proposed project is consistent with the City's general plan and zoning. Therefore, it would not increase hazards due to an incompatible use. 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 would comply with the City's parking requirements to ensure an adequate parking supply. No impact assessed. g) No Impact. The project is located along the west side of Jefferson Street and is served by the North County Transit District (NCTD) bus route 322. The proposed single-family dwelling unit will not conflict with any adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation. No impact assessed. 27 Rev. 01/02/07 CDP 06-25 Hagey Residence 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 D D El El a-g) No Impact. The proposed residential development will be required to comply with all Regional Water Quality Control Board Requirements. In addition, the Zone I LFMP anticipated that the project site would be developed with a residential use and wastewater treatment facilities were planned and designed to accommodate future residential 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 development on the site will increase the demand for these facilities. However, the proposed density is less than originally anticipated for this site and thus will not result in an overall increase in the City's growth projection in the NW quadrant. Therefore, the project does not create development that will result in a significant need to expand or construct new water facilities/supplies, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage facilities. No impact assessed. 28 Rev. 01/02/07 CDP 06-25 Hagey Residence Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact 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? a) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project's required mitigation, as outlined in the Biological Resources section of this report, will preclude any possible degrading of the environment or substantial reductions of habitat and wildlife species. Cumulative impacts to sensitive plant and wildlife species within the MHCP Subarea would occur through the proposed project, in absence of the implementation of the HMP, and specifically the adjacent preserve system. However, the implementation of the HMP provides mitigation for these cumulative impacts because the plan has anticipated region-wide impacts and has adopted a preserve system that mitigates for these impacts. The Project is consistent with the MCHP guidelines and the HMP regional planning efforts in the City of Carlsbad. Therefore, there will be no cumulative impacts to sensitive uplands, and plant and wildlife species. Furthermore, the project's required mitigation as outlined in the Cultural Resources section of this report will preclude any elimination of important examples of major periods of California history or prehistory, thus reducing impacts to less than significant. b) Less Than Significant Impact. The 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 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 standards, 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. There are two regional issues that development within the City of Carlsbad has the potential to have a cumulatively considerable impact on. Those issues are air quality and regional circulation. As described above, the project would contribute to a cumulatively considerable potential net increase in emissions throughout the air basin. As described above, air quality would be essentially the same whether or not the development is implemented. 29 Rev. 01/02/07 CDP 06-25 Hagey Residence The County Congestion Management Agency (CMA) has designated three roads (Rancho Santa Fe Rd., El Camino Real and Palomar Airport Rd.) and two highway segments in Carlsbad as part of the regional circulation system. The CMA had determined, based on the City's growth projections in the General Plan, that, these designated roadways will function at acceptable levels of service in the short-term and at build-out. The project is consistent with the City's growth projections, and therefore, the cumulative impacts from the project to the regional circulation system are less than significant. 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. c) No Impact. Based upon the residential nature of the project and 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. No impact assessed. 30 Rev. 01/02/07 CDP 06-25 Hagey Residence 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. 31 Rev. 01/02/07 CDP 06-25 Hagey Residence 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. City of Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan for Natural Communities. City of Carlsbad. November 2004. 3. City of Carlsbad Geotechnical Hazards Analysis and Mapping Study, November 1992. 4. Flood Insurance Rate Map. No. 06073C0761 F. June 19. 1997. 5. Biological Resources Report (HAG-01). Helix Environmental Planning, Inc., February 6, 2007. 6. Preliminary Storm Water Management Plan. Hagev Residence. Sampo Engineering, Inc., July 20, 2007. 7. Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation (W.O. 3213-A-SC). GeoSoils, Inc., September 18, 2003. 8. Geotechnical Update (W.O. 3213-A 1-SCI. GeoSoils, Inc., November 20, 2006. 9. Paleontological Resource and Monitoring Assessment. Hagey Residence. Brian F. Smith & Associates, January 9, 2007. 10. Phase I Archaeological Assessment. Hagev Residence. Brian F. Smith & Associates, January 23, 2007. LIST OF MITIGATING MEASURES 1. Paleontological mitigation measures shall be implemented as follows: a) Prior to issuance of a grading permit the project developer shall retain a qualified paleontologist to carry out the mitigation program outlined here. (A qualified paleontologist is defined as an individual with a MS or Ph.D. in paleontology or geology that is familiar with paleontological procedures and techniques.) b) A qualified paleontologist shall be present at the pre-construction meeting to consult with the grading and excavation contractors. c) A paleontological monitor shall be onsite at all times during mass grading and excavation activities, including utility trenching, etc. (A paleontological monitor is defined as an individual who has experience in the collection and salvage of fossil materials. The paleontological monitor shall work under the direction of a qualified paleontologist.) d) When fossils are discovered, the paleontologist (or paleontological monitor) shall recover them. In most cases this fossil salvage can be completed in a short period of time. However, some fossil specimens (such as a complete large mammal skeleton) may require an extended salvage period. In these instances the paleontologist (or paleontological monitor) shall be allowed to temporarily direct, divert, or halt grading to allow recovery of fossil remains in a timely manner. Because of the potential for the recovering of small fossil remains, such as isolated mammal teeth, it may be necessary to set up a screen-washing operation on the site. e) Fossil remains collected during the monitoring and salvage portion of the mitigation program shall be cleaned, repaired, sorted, and cataloged. 32 Rev. 01/02/07 CDP 06-25 Hagey Residence f) Prepared fossils, along with copies of all pertinent field notes, photos, and maps, shall be deposited (as a donation) in a scientific institution with permanent paleontological collections such as the San Diego Natural History Museum. Donation of the fossils shall be accompanied by financial support for initial specimen storage. g) A final summary report shall be completed that outlines the results of the mitigation program. This report shall include discussions of the methods used, stratigraphic section(s) exposed, fossils collected, and significance of recovered fossils. 2. Archeological mitigation measures shall be implemented as follows: a) Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project developer shall retain a qualified archeologist to monitor all ground disturbing activities and carry out the mitigation program outlined here. b) A qualified archeologist shall be present at the pre-construction meeting to consult with the grading and excavation contractors. c) In the event that any cultural resources, concentration of artifacts, or culturally modified soil deposits are discovered within the project area at any time during construction, all work shall be halted near the discovery and a qualified archeologist shall record and evaluate the discovery under CEQA. d) The discovery of any resource shall be reported to the City of Carlsbad Planning Director prior to any evaluation testing. e) If any deposits are evaluated as significant, further mitigation measures may be required, as recommended by the qualified archeologist. 3. The following biological resources mitigation measures shall be implemented: a) Prior to issuance of a grading permit, mitigation for impacts to 0.06 acres of Group-E Non-Native Grassland, and 0.20 acres of Group-F Disturbed Habitat shall be mitigated by payment of an in-lieu mitigation fee. b) Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the 100 wetland buffer shall be placed within a dedicated open space easement. c) Landscaping Restrictions: The project shall not use any non-native invasive plant species for landscaping adjacent to the HMP Preserve. The project shall control irrigation of landscaping adjacent to the HMP Preserve to prevent runoff into it. These requirements shall be reflected on the final landscape plans. d) Fire Management: No exposed wood shall be allowed throughout the project, including gates, fences, decks, etc. The residence shall be constructed with a Class-A type roof, with no vents along the westerly side, and interior fire sprinklers shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Carlsbad Fire Department. Parking areas and driveways shall be sited to allow for adequate fire department access. These requirements shall be reflected on the building plans. e) Erosion Control: To prevent the loss of vegetative cover and address slope stabilization, the project shall prohibit bare surface grading for fire control on slopes and ensure that fire control leaves (or replaces) adequate vegetative cover to prevent surface erosion. The project shall also ensure that all areas of habitat creation are adequately stabilized (e.g. with a binder) after planting to minimize surface erosion. Finally, the project shall ensure that no new surface drainage is directed into the HMP Preserve. These requirements shall be reflected on both the final grading and landscape plans. 33 Rev. 01/02/07 CDP 06-25 Hagey Residence f) Lighting: Lighting in the back yard adjacent to the HMP Preserve shall be of the minimum necessary for safety and security and shall be shielded and directed to shine downward and not into the HMP Preserve. This requirement shall be reflected on the building plans. g) Predator and Exotic Species Control: Homeowners shall be made aware of the dangers of letting domestic pets encroach into the preserve area. For exotic species control, the project shall not use any non-native, invasive plant species in landscaping adjacent to the existing HMP Preserve. APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATION MEASURES THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASURES AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT. Date Signature 34 Rev. 01/02/07 Page 1 of 5 PROJECT NAME: Hagev Residence FILE NUMBERS: CDP 06-25 APPROVAL DATE: August 8. 2007 The following environmental mitigation measures were incorporated into the Conditions of Approval for this project in order to mitigate identified environmental impacts to a level of insignificance. A completed and signed checklist for each mitigation measure indicates that this mitigation measure has been complied with and implemented, and fulfills the City's monitoring requirements with respect to Assembly Bill 3180 (Public Resources Code Section 21081.6). Mitigation Measure 1. Paleontological mitigation measures shall be reflected on the final grading plans and implemented as follows: a) Prior to issuance of a grading permit the project developer shall retain a qualified paleontologist to carry out the mitigation program outlined here. (A qualified paleontologist is defined as an individual with a MS or Ph.D. in paleontology or geology that is familiar with paleontological procedures and techniques.) b) A qualified paleontologist shall be at the pre- construction meeting to consult with the grading and excavation contractors. c) A paleontological monitor shall be onsite at all times during mass grading and excavation activities, including utility trenching, etc. (A paleontological monitor is defined as an individual who has experience in the collection and salvage of fossil materials. The paleontological monitor shall work under the direction of a qualified paleontologist.) Monitoring Type Project Monitoring Department Planning/ Engineering - Shown on Plans Verified Implementation Remarks Explanation of Headings: Type = Project, ongoing, cumulative. Monitoring Dept. = Department, or Agency, responsible for monitoring a particular mitigation measure. information. Shown on Plans = When mitigation measure is shown on plans, this column will be initialed and dated. Verified Implementation = When mitigation measure has been implemented, this column will be initialed and dated. Remarks = Area for describing status of ongoing mitigation measure, or for other RD - Appendix P. Page 2 of 5 Mitigation Measure d) When fossils are discovered, the paleontologist (or paleontological monitor) shall recover them. In most cases this fossil salvage can be completed in a short period of time. However, some fossil specimens (such as a complete large mammal skeleton) may require an extended salvage period. In these instances the paleontologist (or paleontological monitor) shall be allowed to temporarily direct, divert, or halt grading to allow recovery of fossil remains in a timely manner. Because of the potential for the recovering of small fossil remains, such as isolated mammal teeth, it may be necessary to set up a screen-washing operation on the site. e) Fossil remains collected during the monitoring and salvage portion of the mitigation program shall be cleaned, repaired, sorted, and cataloged. f) Prepared fossils, along with copies of all pertinent field notes, photos, and maps, shall be deposited (as a donation) in a scientific institution with permanent paleontological collections such as the San Diego Natural History Museum. Donation of the fossils shall be accompanied by financial support for initial specimen storage. g) A final summary report shall be completed that outlines the results of the mitigation program. This report shall include discussions of the methods used, stratigraphic section(s) exposed, fossils collected, and significance of Monitoring Type Monitoring Department Shown on Plans Verified Implementation Remarks Explanation of Headings: Type = Project, ongoing, cumulative. Monitoring Dept. = Department, or Agency, responsible for monitoring a particular mitigation measure. information. Shown on Plans = When mitigation measure is shown on plans, this column will be initialed and dated. Verified Implementation = When mitigation measure has been implemented, this column will be initialed and dated. Remarks = Area for describing status of ongoing mitigation measure, or for other RD - Appendix P. Page 3 of 5 Mitigation Measure recovered fossils. 2. Archeological mitigation measures shall be reflected on the final grading plans and implemented as follows: a) Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project developer shall retain a qualified archeologist to monitor all ground disturbing activities and carry out the mitigation program outlined here. b) A qualified archeologist shall be present at the pre-construction meeting to consult with the grading and excavation contractors. c) In the event that any cultural resources, concentration of artifacts, or culturally modified soil deposits are discovered within the project area at any time during construction, all work shafl be halted near the discovery and a qualified archeologist shall record and evaluate the discovery under CEQA.. d) The discovery of any resource shall be reported to the City of Carlsbad Planning Director prior to any evaluation testing. e) If any deposits are evaluated as significant, further mitigation measures shall be required as recommended by the qualified archeologist. 3. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, mitigation for impacts to 0.06 acres of Group-E Non-Native Grassland, and 0.20 acres of Group-F Disturbed Habitat shall be mitigated by payment of an in-lieu Monitoring Type Project Project Monitoring Department Planning/ Engineering Planning Shown on Plans Verified Implementation Remarks Explanation of Headings: Type = Project, ongoing, cumulative. Monitoring Dept. = Department, or Agency, responsible for monitoring a particular mitigation measure. information. Shown on Plans = When mitigation measure is shown on plans, this column will be initialed and dated. Verified Implementation = When mitigation measure has been implemented, this column will be initialed and dated. Remarks = Area for describing status of ongoing mitigation measure, or for other RD - Appendix P. Page 4 of 5 Mitigation Measure mitigation fee. 4. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the 100 wetland buffer shall be placed within a dedicated open space easement. 5. The project shall not use any non-native invasive plant species in landscaping adjacent to the HMP Preserve. The project shall control irrigation of landscaping adjacent to the HMP Preserve to prevent runoff into it. These requirements shall be reflected on the final landscape plans. 6. No exposed wood shall be allowed throughout the project, including gates, fences, decks, etc. The residence shall be constructed with a Class-A type roof, with no vents along the westerly side, and interior fire sprinklers shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Carlsbad Fire Department. Parking areas and driveways shall be sited to allow for adequate fire department access. These requirements shall be reflected on the building plans. 7. To prevent the loss of vegetative cover and address slope stabilization, the project shall prohibit bare surface grading for fire control on slopes and ensure that fire control leaves (or replaces) adequate vegetative cover to prevent surface erosion. The project shall also ensure that all areas of habitat creation are adequately stabilized (e.g. with a binder) after planting to minimize surface erosion. Finally, the project shall ensure that no new surface drainage is directed into the HMP Preserve. These requirements shall be reflected on both the final grading and landscape plans. 8. Lighting in the back yard adjacent to the HMP Monitoring Type Project Project Project/ On-going Project/ On-going Project/ Monitoring Department Planning Planning Planning/ Fire Planning/ Fire Planning Shown on Plans Verified Implementation Remarks Explanation of Headings: Type = Project, ongoing, cumulative. Monitoring Dept. = Department, or Agency, responsible for monitoring a particular mitigation measure. information. Shown on Plans = When mitigation measure is shown on plans, this column will be initialed and dated. Verified Implementation = When mitigation measure has been implemented, this column will be initialed and dated. Remarks = Area for describing status of ongoing mitigation measure, or for other RD - Appendix P. Page 5 of 5 Mitigation Measure Preserve shall be of the minimum necessary for safety and security and shall be shielded and directed to shine downward and not into the HMP Preserve. This requirement shall be reflected on the building plans. 9. Homeowners shall be made aware of the dangers of letting domestic pets encroach into the preserve area. 10. For exotic species control, the project shall not use any non-native, invasive plant species in landscaping adjacent to the existing HMP Preserve. ' Monitoring Type On-going Project Project/ On-going Monitoring Department Planning Planning Shown on Plans Verified Implementation Remarks Explanation of Headings: Type = Project, ongoing, cumulative. Monitoring Dept. = Department, or Agency, responsible for monitoring a particular mitigation measure. information. Shown on Plans = When mitigation measure is shown on plans, this column will be initialed and dated. Verified Implementation = When mitigation measure has been implemented, this column will be initialed and dated. Remarks = Area for describing status of ongoing mitigation measure, or for other RD - Appendix P. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office 6010 Hidden Valley Road Carlsbad, California 92011 (760)431-9440 FAX (760) 431-5901 CALIFORNIA California Department of Fish and Game South Coast Region 4949 Viewridge Avenue San Diego, California 92123 (858) 467-4201 FAX (858) 467-4299 r---/ofca*6ad In Reply Refer To: FWS-CDFG-SDG-5449.1 Mr. Jason Goff City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 Subject: Comments on Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Hagey Residence Project (CDP 06-25) Dear Mr. Goff: The U.S Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) and the California Department of Fish and Game (Department), hereafter collectively referred to as the Wildlife Agencies, have reviewed the above-referenced draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) dated August 8,2007. The project proposes to construct a single-family residence adjacent to the southeastern shore of Buena Vista Lagoon in the City of Carlsbad (City). The primary concern and mandate of the Service is the protection of public fish and wildlife resources and their habitats. The Service has legal responsibility for the welfare of migratory birds, anadromous fish, and endangered animals and plants occurring in the United States. The Service is also responsible for administering the Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). The Department is a Trustee Agency and a Responsible Agency pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Sections 15386 and 15381, respectively) and is responsible for ensuring appropriate conservation of the state's biological resources, including rare, threatened, and endangered plant and animal species, pursuant to the California Endangered Species Act and other sections of the Fish and Game Code. The Department also administers the Natural Community Conservation Planning (NCCP) Program. The City currently participates in the NCCP program by implementing its approved Habitat Management Plan (HMP). The Department owns and manages Buena Vista Lagoon as an Ecological Reserve. The 0.45-acre proposed project site is located on the west side of Jefferson Street just south of Las Flores Drive and adjacent to Buena Vista Lagoon to the west. Surrounding land uses consist of the Buena Vista Lagoon Ecological Reserve to the west, multi-family residential development to the north, and single-family homes across Jefferson Street to the south and east. Buena Vista Lagoon is within the existing hardline preserve of the City's HMP (Core 1 Focus Planning Area) and serves as habitat for several avian species, including light-footed clapper rail (Rallus longirostris levipes), American Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinsus), and California Brown Pelican (Pelecanus occidentalis californicus). The project falls within the Coastal Zone and is subject to Coastal Zone planning standards required by the City's HMP. TAKE PRIDED£M ERICA Mr. Jason Goff (FWS-CDFG-SDG-5449.1) 2 According to the MND, the project would involve the construction of a 5,210 square foot, two story, single-family residence on the eastern portion of the 0.45-acre parcel. The project proposes an open space easement (OSE) over a 100-foot wide buffer between the wetland habitat supported by Buena Vista Lagoon and the development footprint. This OSE/lOO-foot buffer would not be directly impacted by development and would be planted with native plant species. Storm water runoff would be directed towards Jefferson Street away from the Lagoon to the maximum extent practicable. A brush management zone would not be required by the Carlsbad Fire Department because the following characteristics of the project would constitute the equivalent to a 60-foot wide fire suppression zone: no exposed wood throughout the project, including gates, fences, decks, etc.; interior fire sprinklers; Class A roof with no vents on the westerly side; and the placement of parking areas and driveways to allow for adequate fire department access. According to the Biological Resources Report (BRR, Helix Environmental Planning, Inc., February, 2007) prepared for the Hagey parcel, the project site supports 0.01 acre of southern willow scrub, 0.16 acre of non-native grassland, 0.28 acre of non-native vegetation (disturbed habitat), 0.01 acre of eucalyptus woodland, and 0.01'acre of developed land. No Federal, State, or HMP sensitive plant or animal species were observed on the project site during a general biological survey conducted by Helix in October, 2003. Vegetation mapping was updated in December, 2006. In the BRR, Helix determined that focused surveys for rare plants and sensitive animals were not necessary because of the low potential for sensitive species to occur on site. The project would impact 0.06 acre of non-native grassland, 0.20 acre of non-native vegetation, and 0.01 acre of developed land. In addition, according to the BRR though the MND does not mention it, a 25-foot wide access easement is proposed to satisfy the City's Local Coastal Program (LCP) Policy 7-6, which requires an access trail along the southern shore of Buena Vista Lagoon. The proposed location for the trail is within the proposed 100-foot wetland buffer at a minimum distance of 10 feet from the edge of the wetland vegetation. The Wildlife Agencies offer the following comments and recommendations to assist the City in avoiding, minimizing, and adequately mitigating project-related impacts to biological resources, and to ensure that the project is consistent with all applicable requirements of the City's HMP. Our comments and recommendations are based on information provided in the MND and associated documents, the BRR prepared for the Hagey parcel, our knowledge of sensitive and declining vegetation communities in the County of San Diego, and our participation in regional conservation planning efforts. 1. The Wildlife Agencies request an opportunity to review the City's responses to our comments, and further discuss our comments with the City, as necessary, before the City Council considers the final MND for certification. 2. For projects proposed within the Coastal Zone, the City's HMP requires that buffers between wetlands and development be 100 feet wide (page D-l 16). To enable the Wildlife Agencies to determine whether the proposed project meets this requirement, we request the following. Mr. Jason Goff (FWS-CDFG-SDG-5449.1) 3 a. The City's responses to our comments and the final MND should provide (a) the number of acres within the OSE, and (b) a figure similar to Figure 3 in the BRR that clearly delineates the proposed 100-foot wide OSE/buffer. The figure should clarify whether the blue and white line labeled "100' from Southern Willow Scrub" in Figure 3 of the BRR denotes the eastern boundary of the proposed 100- foot OSE/buffer. b. The City's responses to our comments and the final MND should clarify whether the proposed 100-foot OSE/buffer is measured from the outermost drip line of the Lagoon vegetation or the southern willow scrub. 3. We are concerned that the proposed access trail easement would compromise the biological function of the buffer, which is to protect the wetland and riparian vegetation and the many sensitive species it supports from the project-related edge effects. For areas within the Coastal Zone, the Carlsbad HMP outlines permitted trail use in buffers as follows: "Recreation trails and public pathways [may be placed] within the first 15 feet of the buffer closest to the development, provided that construction of the trail or pathway and its proposed use is consistent with the preservation goals for the adjacent habitat, and that appropriate measures are taken for physical separation from sensitive areas" (page D- 117). Furthermore, Policy 7-6 of the City's Local Coastal Program states that an access trail shall be provided along the southern shoreline of Buena Vista Lagoon and shall be "upland from environmentally sensitive areas and any required buffers thereto."1 We understand from the California Coastal Commission (CCC) that the CCC may not support the placement of a trail within the OSE/wetland buffer because such a trail would not conform to Policy 7-6 of the LCP (pers. comm., phone discussion with Toni Ross, August 22, 2007). In order to optimize the biological function of the buffer, and because there is no trail along Buena Vista Lagoon within the already developed properties to the north and the south of the project site, we recommend that the final MND prohibit the placement of a access trail easement within the proposed OSE/buffer. However, if the project design retains a access trail easement within the buffer, the final MND should require that the access trail easement within the buffer be no more than 15 feet wide, and that it be placed within the first 15 feet of the buffer closest to development. The final MND should include a figure showing the location and width of the access trail easement. 4. We request that the final MND demonstrate how the proposed project would conform to the adjacency standards in the City's HMP, particularly the standards pertaining to fencing and signage. We recommend fencing be placed at the boundary between the development and the OSE/wetland buffer. 5. Due to the presence of sensitive avian species associated with Buena Vista Lagoon and adjacent habitat, we recommend that non-reflective glass be used in all windows facing 1 Paragraph i of section 7-9 on page D-116, states, "If any conflict should arise between the provisions of the HMP and the policies of the LCP, the LCP shall take precedence." However, this statement falls under the upland habitat mitigation section, so it is unclear whether this also applies to the requirements pertaining to wetland habitats and buffers thereto. Mr. Jason Goff (FWS-CDFG-SDG-5449.1) the Lagoon to reduce the frequency of avian collisions with the proposed building. Avian collisions also occur when birds are attracted to or disoriented by indoor lighting shining out through windows at dusk and after dark. Therefore, we recommend the windows also be treated to prevent indoor light from shining through them. We can provide information on technology available to meet these requests. 6. If irrigation is required to establish native vegetation within the buffer, the final MND should require that this irrigation be used only as necessary and only temporarily, as long- term irrigation promotes invasive and non-native plant growth. 7. We would like a copy of documentation from the City's Fire Marshal approving the fire management plan for the project, specifically excluding the need for brush management or removal of hazardous vegetation within the OSE/wetland buffer. We appreciate the opportunity to comment on- the MND for this project and to assist the City in further minimizing and mitigating project impacts to biological resources. If you have questions or comments regarding this letter, please contact Dan" Schrimsher (Department) at (858) 467- 6926 or Marci Koski (Service) at (760) 431-9440, ext. 304. Sincerely, Therese O'Rourke Assistant Field Supervisor U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service MidhkelJ. Mullig-an DeputyKegional Manager California Department of Fish and Game cc: Toni Ross, California Coastal Commission Warren Wong, California Department of Fish and Game (Lands Branch) State Clearinghouse (fax only) FILECOPY City of Carlsbad Planning Department November 28, 2007 Theresa O'Rourke U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Carlsbad Fish & Wildlife Office 6010 Hidden Valley Road Carlsbad, CA 92011 Michael J. Mulligan California Dept. of Fish & Game South Coast Region 4949 View Ridge Avenue San Diego, C A 92123 RE: COMMENTS (FWS-CDFG-SDG-5449.1) ON MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR HAGEY RESIDENCE (CDP 06-05) IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Dear Ms. O'Rourke and Mr. Mulligan, Thank you for your joint comment letter dated September 6, 2007 (according to facsimile transmittal cover sheet) on the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) Hagey Residence project located adjacent to the southeast shore of the Buena Vista Lagoon in the City of Carlsbad, California. With regards to the specific items and issues identified in your letter, the following is a response to each comment raised: 1. For projects proposed within the Coastal Zone, the City's HMP requires that buffers between 'wetlands and development be 100 feet wide (page D-116). To enable the Wildlife Agencies to determine whether the proposed project meets this requirement, we request the following. a. The City's response to our comments and the final MND should provide (a) the number of acres within the OSE, and (b) a figure similar to Figure 3 in the BRR that clearly delineates the proposed 100-foot wide OSE/buffer. The figure should clarify whether the blue and white line labeled "100' from Southern Willow Scrub" in Figure 3 of the BRR denotes the eastern boundary of the proposed 100-foot OSE/buffer. Response: a) The Open Space Easement (OSE) is 0.19 acres in total size and has now been identified on the revised Figure 4. b) Figure 3 has been revised for purposes of clarification and is attached for your review. It now clearly delineates the proposed 100- foot wide OSE/Wetland Buffer. The blue and white dashed line is the proposed eastern boundary of the 100-foot wide OSE/Wetland Buffer. Revised Figure 4 also clearly denotes this. The black hatched area on Figure 3 represents an existing 100-foot wide 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us FWS-CDFG-SDG-5449.1 November 28, 2007 Page 2 OSE/Wetland Buffer that was established by a California Coastal Commission Coastal Development Permit No. 6-92-184. This existing OSE is 0.9 acres in total size. b. The City's response to our comments and the final MND should clarify whether the proposed 100-foot OSE/buffer is measured from the outermost drip line of the Lagoon vegetation or the southern willow scrub. Response: The 100-foot buffer line was measured from the edge of the southern willow scrub, as that vegetation was determined to meet the definition of wetland vegetation. If you refer to the attached Figure 3 and 4, the 100-foot OSE/Wetland Buffer is identified by the blue and white dashed line. The new OSE totals 0.19-acres in size and will be delineated by a fence. 2. We are concerned that the proposed access trail easement would compromise the biological function of the buffer, which is to protect the wetland and riparian vegetation and the many sensitive species it supports from the project-related edge effects. For areas within the Coastal Zone, the Carlsbad HMP outlines permitted trail use in buffers as follows: "Recreation trails and public pathways [may be placed] within the first 15 feet of the buffer closest to the development, provided that construction of the trail or pathway and its proposed use is consistent with the preservation goals for the adjacent habitat, and that appropriate measures are taken for physical separation from the.sensitive areas" (page D- 117). Furthermore, Policy 7-6 of the City's Local Coastal Program states that an access trail shall be provided along the southern shoreline of the Buena Vista Lagoon and shall be "upland from environmentally sensitive area and any required buffer thereto. " We understand from the California Coastal Commission (CCC) that the CCC may not support the placement of a trail within the OSE/wetland buffer because such trail would not conform to Policy 7-6 of the LCP (pers. Comm.., phone discussion with Toni Ross, August 22, 2007). In order to optimize the biological function of the buffer, and because there is no trail along the Buena Vista Lagoon within the already developed properties to the north and south of the project site, we recommend that the final MND prohibit the placement of an access trail easement within the proposed OSE/buffer. However, if the project design retains an access trail easement within the buffer, the final MND should require that the access trail easement with in the buffer be no more than 15 feet wide, and that it be placed within the first 15 feet of the buffer closest to development. The final MND should include a figure showing the location and width of the access trail easement. Response: To protect sensitive lagoon resources, the lateral access easement shall be reduced to 15 feet in width and relocated as requested within the first 15 feet of the buffer closest to development. A recommended condition to this effect will be added to project. The recommended condition shall read as follows: The owner shall comply with the Coastal Shoreline Development Overlay Zone (Chapter 21.204 of the Zoning Ordinance), and dedicate a 15 foot wide lateral access easement to the California Coastal Commission or their designee as agreed to with FWS-CDFG-SDG-5449.1 November 28, 2007 Page 3 the California Coastal Commission. The lateral access easement shall be located within the first 15 feet of the 100 foot wetland buffer closest to the development. 3. We request that the final MND demonstrate how the proposed project would conform to the adjacency standards in the City's HMP, particularly the standards pertaining to fencing and signage. We recommend fencing be placed at the boundary between the development and the OSE/wetland buffer. Response: The project shall be conditioned to provide a fence at the boundary between the development and the OSE/Wetland Buffer. The recommended condition shall read as follows: A minimum 42-inch tall fence shall be installed across the full width of property between the boundary of development and the 100 foot wetland buffer with signs to identify the area as a preserve area. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the developer shall submit a fence plan to the City, subject to approval of the Fire Marshall and the Planning Director. 4. Due to the presence of sensitive avion species associated with the Buena Vista Lagoon and adjacent habitat, we recommend that non-reflective glass be used in all windows facing the Lagoon to reduce the frequency ofavian collisions with the proposed building. Avian collisions also occur when the birds are attracted to or disoriented by indoor lighting shining out through windows at dusk and after dark. Therefore, we recommend the windows also be treated to prevent indoor light from shining through them. We can provide information on technology available to meet these requests. Response: The recommendation has been forwarded onto the applicant as requested. 5. If irrigation is required to establish native vegetation within the buffer, the final MND should require that this irrigation be used only as necessary and only temporarily, as long- term irrigation promotes invasive and non-native plant growth. Response: The applicant has revised the landscape plans and removed all plant species requiring permanent irrigation. A note is included on the revised landscape plans stating that no permanent irrigation will be included west of the 100 foot wetland buffer line; and in accordance with the Biological Resources Report, Helix Environmental Planning, February 6, 2007, Table 3 - Suggested Plants for Slope Re-vegetation the following drought tolerant plant species have been selected to be planted within the 100 foot wetland buffer area: Hvdroseed Mix: Eriophyllum cenfertiflorum - Golden Yarrow Isocoma menziesii - Goldenbush Lasthenia californica - Common Goldfields Lotus scoparius - Deerweed FWS-CDFG-SDG-5449.1 November 28, 2007 Page 4 Muhlenbergis rigens - California Deergrass Nasella pulchra - Purple Needle Grass Plantago insularis - Woolly Plantain Shrubs: Elymus condensatus.- Giant Wild Rye (1 gallon container size) Muhlenbergia rigens - California Deergrass (1 gallon container size) Opuntia littoralis — Coastal Prickly Pear (5 gallon container size) Sambuccus Mexicana - Mexican Elderberry (5 gallon container size) Yucca schidigera - Mohave Yucca (5 gallon container size) 6. We would like documentation from the City's Fire Marshal approving the fire management plan for the project, specifically excluding the need for brush management or removal of hazardous vegetation within the OSE/wetland buffer. Response: Please see the attached letter from, the City of Carlsbad Fire Department dated November 19, 2007. Thank you for the assistance in the planning of this project. Sincerely, JASON GOFF Associate Planner C: Gary Barberio, Assistant Planning Director John Beery, 5751 Palmer Way, Suite G-3, Carlsbad, CA 92010 Edward Hagey, P.O. Box 99961, San Diego, CA 92169-1961 LEGEND ^B Southern Willow Scrub* Non-native Grassland Eucalyptus Woodland Non-native Vegetation Developed « Sample Plot ^S^ 100-Foot Setback from Lagoon Vegetation for Deed Restricted Open Space** (0.09 acre - Existing Open Space) * CDFG and Coastal Commission jurisdictional habitat. "Source: San Diego, CA Document - Year DOCID 1993.83757 Page 16 of 21 Las Flares Drive Project Boundary TTlis map is based on site conditions as observed at the time of our field investigations. The information presented herein was developed by visual inspection and/or aerial photograph interpretation. Note that both site conditions and applicable regulatory requirements may change. I:\ArcGIS\H\HAG-01 Hagey \Map\BlO\Exi ns\Fig3_Vegeution.mxd -JP HELIX Vegetation Map HAGEY PARCEL Figure 3 LEGEND <O Southern Willow Scrub* Non-native Grassland Eucalyptus Woodland Non-native Vegetation Developed » Sample Plot x£x' Proposed 15' Wide Access Easement $S5 Proposed Open Space (0.19 Acre) to Extend 100' from Lagoon Vegetation (Southern Willow Scrub) ' CDFG and Coastal Commission jurisdictional habitat. #1* Lagoon Vegetation (Southern Willow Scrub) 40 20 s 0 40 Feet Job No: HAG-01 Date: 11/14/07 Note: This map is based on site conditions as observed at the time of our field investigations. The information presented herein was developed by visual inspection and/or aerial photograph interpretation. Note that both site conditions and applicable regulatory requirements may change. I:\ArcGIS\H\HAG-01 Hagey\Map\B[O\ExislCondiuons\Fig4_VegSiiePlan.mxd -JP Vegetation Map and Site Plan HELIX HAGEY PARCEL Figure 4 City of Carlsbad Fire Department Office of Fire Prevention Division November 19, 2007 Theresa O'Rourke U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Carlsbad Fish & Wildlife Office 6010 Hidden Valley Road Carlsbad, CA 92011 Michael J. Mulligan California Depf. of Fish & Game South Coast Region 4949 View Ridge Avenue San Diego, CA92123 RE: Comments (FWS-CDFG-SDG-5449.1) on Mitigated Negative Declaration for Hagey Residence (CDP 06-05) in the City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, California. Dear Ms. O'Rourke and Mr. Mulligan, On behalf of the Carlsbad Fire Department I provide this letter to you regarding the Hagey Residence (CDP 06-05) project within the City of Carlsbad. As you are keenly aware this project is a 'Single-family' Residential project located adjacent to the South shore of the Buena Vista Lagoon in the City of Carlsbad, Ca. Our review of this proposed project has presented many challenges, both to the applicant and to those responsible approving agencies. After extensive review and consultation amongst our staff, it is my conclusion and opinion that there is minimal risk to the proposed structure from the effects from a vegetation fire occurring outside of the structure. Aside from the location of the proposed structure on this slope, the Carlsbad Fire Department has required the applicant to take exhaustive measures to design and construct an otherwise fire rated/resistive structure. Furthermore, it is our opinion that there is a lesser risk to the environment if a fire were to occur within this structure largely because of our requirement to protect the occupants first and the structure second. 1635 Faraday Avenue « Carlsbad, CA 92008 « (760) 602-4666 « FAX (760) 602-8561 In closing, the Carlsbad Fire Department shall not seek a vegetation management or modifications that would otherwise change the look and balance of the naturally occurring plants and trees along the shore of the lagoon. Should you have further questions regarding this matter, feel free to contact me directly at 760-602-4663. Respectfully, nGregory!. Ryan, Deputy Fire Marshal Cc: James Weigand, Fire Marshal Jason Goff, Associate Planner