HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-06-03; Planning Commission; Resolution 65601 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 6560
2 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
3 CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND A
4 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
TO WIDEN A 4,600-FOOT (0.87 MILE) LENGTH OF EL
CAMINO REAL BETWEEN TAMARACK AVENUE AND
6 CHESTNUT AVENUE IN THE MELLO II SEGMENT OF THE
LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AND WITHIN LOCAL
7 FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 1 AND 2.
CASE NAME: EL CAMINO REAL ROAD WIDENING
CASE NO.: CDP 07-227 HDP Q7-02/ SUP Q7-04/ HMP 07-08
9 WHEREAS, the City of Carlsbad, "Developer" has filed a verified application
10
with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by the City of Carlsbad and various
owners, "Owners," described as
13 Public rights-of-way on a portion of Chestnut Avenue, on El
Camino Real between Tamarack Avenue to Chestnut Avenue,
14 and properties identified by Assessor's Parcel Numbers 167-
230-24, 167-230-25, 167-154-15, 167-154-16, 167-080-33, 167-
15 080-42, and 167-080-41
16 ("the Property"); and
17
WHEREAS, a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and
18
Reporting Program was prepared in conjunction with said project; and
20 WHEREAS, as part of the public review of the Mitigated Negative
21 Declaration, the City received comments from the Native American Heritage Commission;
22 and
23 WHEREAS, in response, staff submitted the Cultural Report to the
24
Commission, and the Commission was satisfied with the mitigation and monitoring
25
measures for Cultural Resources; and26
27 WHEREAS, the draft MND evaluated potential environmental impacts
28 within the Area of Potential Effect (APE), which was assumed to be approximately 18.5
acres in size. This acreage was estimated under a worst-case assumption in the total
2 acreage; and
3
WHEREAS, since the 30-day public review of the draft MND, the City has
4
- conducted additional engineering studies on the project, resulting in minor changes to the
6 size and boundary of the APE; and
7 WHEREAS, as a result of these changes, the APE's acreage has been
o reduced from approximately 18.5 acres to approximately 16 acres as shown in the revised
9 MND Figures 2, 3, and 10; and
10
WHEREAS, as a result, biological resource impacts to sensitive vegetation
communities and jurisdictional areas have decreased from what was calculated in the Draft
13 MND, and impacts to non-native grassland have been eliminated entirely; and
14 WHEREAS, these changes are reflected in the attached memorandum from
*^ Dudek, dated December 15, 2008. The EIA Part II and the comment letter received and
staffs response are attached; and
17
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on June 3, 2009, hold a duly noticed
18
public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
2Q WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
21 and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the information submitted by staff, and
22 considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission considered all factors
23 relating to the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
24
Program.
25
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
26
~- Commission as follows:
28 A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
PC RESO NO. 6560 -2-
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning
2 Commission hereby ADOPTS the Mitigated Negative Declaration and
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, Exhibit "MND," according to
3 Exhibits "Notice of Intent (NOI)," and "Environmental Impact Assessment Form
- Initial Study (EIA)," attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the
following findings:
Findings:
6
1. The Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad does hereby find:
7
a. it has reviewed, analyzed, and considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration
and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for EL CAMINO REAL
9 ROAD WIDENING - CDP 07-22, HDP 07-02, SUP 07-04, and BMP 07-08,
the environmental impacts therein identified for this project and any comments
10 thereon prior to APPROVING the project; and
11 b. that the minor changes to the size and boundary of the APE, which occurred
after the 30-day public review of the draft MND and resulted in minor
changes to the EIA Part II, does not require recirculation of the Mitigated
13 Negative Declaration since the changes are consistent with the description of
"new information" in CEQA Section 15073.5(c)(4), which states recirculation
14 is not required if "new information is added to the negative declaration
which merely clarifies, amplifies, or makes insignificant modifications to the
negative declaration;" and
c. the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
17 Program have been prepared in accordance with requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act, the State Guidelines and the Environmental
18 Protection Procedures of the City of Carlsbad; and
d. the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
2Q Program reflects the independent judgment of the Planning Commission of the
City of Carlsbad; and
21
e. based on the EIA Part II, associated Memorandum dated December 15, 2008,
22 and comments thereon, there is no substantial evidence the project will have a
significant effect on the environment.
24
25
26
27
28
PC RESO NO. 6560 -3-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on June 3, 2009, by the following vote, to
wit:
AYES:
NOES:
Commissioners Boddy, Dominguez, Douglas, L'Heureux, and
Chairperson Montgomery
ABSENT: Commissioner Baker
ABSTAIN:
MAKTErS*B. MONTGOMERY,
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMl
ATTEST:
21*DON NEU
Planning Director
PC RESO NO. 6560 -4-
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
CASE NAME: El Camino Real Road Widening
CASE NO: CDP Q7-22/ HDP Q7-02/ SUP 07-047 HMP 07-08
PROJECT LOCATION: El Camino Real, between Tamarack Avenue and Chestnut Avenue in
Carlsbad, California 92008.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The City of Carlsbad proposes to improve the section of El Camino
Real from Tamarack Avenue north to Chestnut Avenue. The improvements include widening this
section to its full width of six travel lanes, with three northbound and three southbound lanes. Also
proposed are bike lanes, sidewalks and a landscaped median island.
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, and the City of Carlsbad finds as follows:
1X1 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.
I I 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. (Mitigated Negative
Declaration applies only to the effects that remained to be addressed).
I I 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.
A copy of the initial study (EIA Part 2) documenting reasons to support the Negative Declaration is
on file in the Planning Department, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008.
ADOPTED: June 3, 2009. pursuant to PC Resolution No. 6560
ATTEST:
DON NEU
Planning Director
City of Carlsbad
Planning Department
NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
LED
Gregory J. Smith, Recorder/County Clerk
OCT 30 Z007
CASE NAME:
CASE NO:
PROJECT LOCATION:
El Camino Real Road Widening
CDP 07-22 / HDP 07-02 / SUP 07-04 / HMPP 07-08 st__
El Camino Real, between Tamarack Avenue and Chestnut Avenue
in Carlsbad. California 92008.
DEPUTY
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The City of Carlsbad proposes to improve the section of El
Camino Real from Tamarack Avenue north to Chestnut Avenue. The improvements include
widening this section to its full width of six travel lanes, with three northbound and three
southbound lanes. Also proposed are bike lanes, sidewalks and a landscaped median island.
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 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 by
the Planning Commission. If you have any questions, please call Pam Drew in the Planning
Department at (760) 602-4644.
PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD November 1, 2007 through November 30, 2007
PUBLISH DATE November 1, 2007
^v;-i FILED IN THE OFFiCE OF JHE COUNTY CLERK
San Diego County on ___OCTj30_2fl()7 .....___
Posted JlCUULiiL, Removed _JQVjLflJ3flZ
Returned to agency on ____J)1L3-QJ3QZ—-~
Deputy
1635 Faraday Avenue « Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 » (760) S02-4600 * FAX (760) 802-8559 •> www..us
STATE OF CALIFORNIA Arnold Schwarzenegger. Governor
NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION
915 CAPITOL MALL, ROOM 364
SACRAMENTO, CA 95814
(916)653-6251
Fax (916) 657-5390
Web Site www.nahc.ca.gov
e-mail: ds nahc@pacbell.net
November 26, 2007
Ms. Pam Drew
CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DEPARTMENT
1635 Farraday Avenue
Carlsbad, CA 92008
2001
Planet'
Cartsbai
Re: SCH#2007101141: CEQA Notice of Completion: Mitigated Negative Declaration for the El Camino Real Road
Improvements: Tamarack & Chestnut Streets: CDP: HMPP & HDP: City of Carlsbad: San Diego County. California.
Dear Ms. Drew:
The Native American Heritage Commission is the state agency designated to protect California's Native
American Cultural Resources. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that any project that
causes a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource, that includes archaeological
resources, is a 'significant effect' requiring the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) per CEQA
guidelines § 15064.5(b)(c). In order to comply with this provision, the lead agency is required to assess whether the
project will have an adverse impact on these resources within the 'area of potential effect (APE)', and if so, to mitigate
that effect To adequately assess the project-related impacts on historical resources, the Commission recommends
the following action:
V Contact the appropriate California Historic Resources Information Center (CHRIS). Contact information for the
Information Center nearest you is available from the State Office of Historic Preservation (916/653-7278)/
http://www.ohp.parks.ca.gov/1068/files/IC%20Roster.pdf The record search will determine: .
• If a part or the entire APE has been previously surveyed for cultural resources.
• If any known cultural resources have already been recorded in or adjacent to the APE.
• If the probability is low, moderate, or high that cultural resources are located in the APE.
• If a survey is required to determine whether previously unrecorded cultural resources are present.
V If an archaeological inventory survey is required, the final stage is the preparation of a professional report detailing
the findings and recommendations of the records search and field survey.
• The final report containing site forms, site significance, and mitigation measurers should be submitted
immediately to the planning department All information regarding site locations, Native American human
remains, and associated funerary objects should be in a separate confidential addendum, and not be made
available for pubic disclosure.
• The final written report should be submitted within 3 months after work has been completed to the appropriate
regional archaeological Information Center.
V Contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for:
* A Sacred Lands File (SLF) search of the project area and information on tribal contacts in the project
vicinity that may have additional cultural resource information. Please provide this office with the following
citation format to assist with the Sacred Lands File search request USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle citation
with name, township, range and section: .
• The NAHC advises the use of Native American Monitors to ensure proper identification and care given cultural
resources that may be discovered. The NAHC recommends that contact be made with Native American
Contacts on the attached list to get their input on potential project impact (APE). In some cases, the existence of
a Native American cultural resources may be known only to a local tribe(s).
V Lack of surface evidence of archeological resources does not preclude their subsurface existence.
• Lead agencies should include in their mitigation plan provisions for the identification and evaluation of
accidentally discovered archeological resources, per California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) §15064.5 (f).
In areas of identified archaeological sensitivity, a certified archaeologist and a culturally affiliated Native
American, with knowledge in cultural resources, should monttqr all ground-disturbing activities.
• Lead agencies should include in their mitigation plan provisions for the' disposition of recovered artifacts, in
consultation with culturallyaffiliated Native Americans. ," . . y ; "~
V Lead agencies should include provisions for discovery of Native American human remains or unmarked cemeteries
in their mitigation plans.
* CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.5(d) requires the lead agency to work with the Native Americans identified
by this Commission if the initial Study identifies the presence or likely presence of Native American human
remains within the APE. CEQA Guidelines provide for agreements with Native American, identified by the
NAHC, to assure the appropriate and dignified treatment of Native American human remains and any associated
grave liens.
V Health and Safety Code §7050.5, Public Resources Code §5097.98 and Sec. §15064.5 (d) of the CEQA
Guidelines mandate procedures to be followed in the event of an accidental discovery of any human remains in a
location other than a dedicated cemetery.
V Lead agencies should consider avoidance, as defined in § 15370 of the CEQA Guidelines, when significant cultural
resources are discovered during the course of project planning and implementation
i
Please fe^l free to contact me at (916) 653-6251 if you have any questions.
'Sincerely,
awe t>in«Mon
Program iwiialyst
Attachine/nt List of Native American Contacts
Cc: State Clearinghouse
^ v
City of Carlsbad
Planning Department
FAX TRANSMITTAL
DATE: December 4, 2007
TIME SENT: 9:50 am
Number of Pages Being Transmitted
(Including Cover Sheet):_7
TO: Dave Singleton
COMPANY: Native American Heritage
Commission
PHONE #: 916-653-6251
FAX#:
FROM: PAM DREW
DEPT.: PLANNING
PHONE: (760) 602- 4644
FAX: (760) 602-8559
916-657-5390
SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: Dave, I received your letter dated
November 26, 2007 in regard to the City's Mitigated Negative
Declaration (MND) for the El Camino Real Road Improvements
Project (SCH# 2007101141). Attached is your letter and our
mitigation and monitor measures for Cultural Resources. I believe
that we have addressed all your concerns in our report. Please
review our report and let me know if you are satisfied or if there
are any other concerns that you do not feel we have adequately
addressed.
Thank you,
Pam Drew
Associate Planner
pdrew(S)ci.carlsbad.ca.us
Return Fax
1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, California 92008-7314
12/05/2007 14:48 FAX 916 657 5390r NAHC 1)001
STATE OP CM gQHNIA aaenf
NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION
91$ CAPITOL MALL, ROOM 364
8ACRAJKNTO, CA 9581 4
(916)6S«251
Fax (918) $57-5390
W€b Site l
December 5, 2007
Ms. Pam Drew, Associate Planner
CITY OF CARLSBAD
1635 FARADAY AVENUE
CARLSBAD, C A 92008-731 4
Sent by FAX to: (760)602-4644
Number of Pages; 8
Re: SCH#2007101141: CEQA Notice of Completion: ivafiaated Negative DedarationJbr.the.EI
Cannino Real Road Improvements Project City of Carlsbad: San Diego County, CaWbmla
Dear Pam:
Thank you for sending your comments on the NAHC CEQA advisory letter to the City of
Carlsbad. Your commente/plans look fine.
For your information, 1 am attaching a State Parks and Recreation Notice regarding Native
American cuftural resources and tribal consultation. You have a state Parks facility there at
Carisbad and I thought you would like to see it. Also, It is a good summary of state and some
federal fasws pertaining to cultural resources management
e Iny questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (916) 653-6251 .
MAIN OFFICE
605 THIRD STREET
ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA 9207.-1
T 760.9-f2.SI47 T 800.450.13 18 f 760 632.0164
MEMORANDUM
To: Ms. Pam Drew, Associate Planner
From: Shawn Shamlou
Subject: Project Description Changes -- Final Mitigated Negative Declaration for
the El Camino Real Widening Project
Date: December 15, 2008
Dear Pam,
Per your request this memorandum outlines a summary of recent changes to the project
description and impacts provided in the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the
proposed El Camino Real Widening Project, Tamarack Avenue to Chestnut Avenue. The Draft
MND was circulated for a 30-day public review period from October 31 through November 29,
2007.
The key question to be considered when preparing a Final CEQA document, per the CEQA
Guidelines Section 15088.5(a), is whether significant new information has been added to the
MND after public notice is given of the availability of the Draft MND for public review.
"Significant new information" requiring recirculation includes, for example, a disclosure
showing that:
1. A new significant environmental impact would result from the project or from a new
mitigation measure proposed to be implemented.
2. A substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact would result unless
mitigation measures are adopted that reduce the impact to a level of insignificance.
3. A feasible project alternative or mitigation measure considerably different from others
previously analyzed would clearly lessen the environmental impacts of the project, but the
project's proponents decline to adopt it.
4. The Draft MND was so fundamentally and basically inadequate and conclusory in nature that
meaningful public review and comment were precluded.
WWW.DUDEK.COM
Ms. Pam Drew, Associate Planner
Subject: Project Description Changes — Final Mitigated Negative Declaration for the El
Camino Real Widening Project
Section 15088.5(b) of the CEQA Guidelines indicates that recirculation of the MND is not
required where the new information added to the MND merely clarifies or amplifies or makes
insignificant modifications in an adequate MND.
The changes to the Draft MND's project description and impacts are presented in more detail
below.
Area of Potential Effect Modifications
The Draft MND evaluated potential environmental impacts within the Area of Potential Effects
(APE), which was assumed to be approximately 18.5 acres in size. This acreage was estimated
under a worst-case assumption in the total acreage. Since publication of the Draft MND, the City
has conducted additional engineering studies on the project, resulting in minor changes to the
size and boundary of the APE.
Three main changes were made to the APE. First, some areas within the APE were determined
not to be required as part of the proposed road improvements, including the rectangular area
south of Tamarack Avenue. Next, it was determined that an approximately 11,000-square-foot
bench area, located on the east side of El Camino Real, will require grading and was therefore
added to the APE. Third, a new storm drain improvement was added to the APE. As a result of
these changes, the APE's acreage has been reduced from approximately 18.5 acres to
approximately 16.01 acres. These changes are reflected in revised MND Figures 2, 3, and 10.
Biological Resource Impacts
As part of recent engineering design efforts for the project, impacts to biological resources have
been recalculated. The revised impacts are presented in the three tables below.
Table 1
Project Impacts to Vegetation Communities and Land Covers
P VEGETATION COMMUNITY / LAND COVER TYPE
Native
Uplands
Jurisdictional
Waters/Wetlands
Non-native
Land Covers
Coastal sage scrub
Coastal sage scrub-disturbed
Native grassland-disturbed
Riparian scrub (Southern willow scrub)
Riparian scrub (Southern willow scrub-disturbed)
Unvegetated stream channel
Concrete-lined channel
Non-native grassland
Developed
ACREAGE
COASTAL ZONE
0.24
0.05
0.012
...
_.
...
—
.„
7.68
OTHER
0,55
0.03
—
0.03
• 0.01
0.03
0.003
—
4.70
TOTAL
0,79
0.08
0.01
0.03
0.01
0.03
0.003
_
12,38
4926-01
December 2008
Ms. Pam Drew, Associate Planner
Subject: Project Description Changes — Final Mitigated Negative Declaration for the El
Camino Real Widening Project
Table 1
Project Impacts to Vegetation Communities and Land Covers
VEGETAT ION COMMUNITY 1 LAND COVER TYPE
Disturbed lands
Eucalyptus woodland
Ornamental
TOTAL4
ACREAGE
COASTAL ZONE
0.32
_
0.013
8.31
OTHER
1.87
0.34
0.14
7.70
TOTAL
2.19
0.34
0.15
16.01
14,013 square feet 32,703 square feet
2 715 square feet 4Totals may not sum precisely due to rounding
Table 2
Recommended Mitigation for Impacts to Sensitive Vegetation
and Jurisdictional Waters (Acres)
VEGETATION
COMMUNITY
Coastal sage scrub
(including disturbed)1
Native grassland-disturbed1
Non-native grassland
Riparian scrub
(including disturbed)
Ephemeral channel
Intermittent channel
Eucalyptus woodland
Disturbed lands
COASTAL ZONE
IMPACT
0.29
0,01
_
--
_
--
—
0.32
MITIGATION
Ratio
2:1
3:1
.-
—
—
—
—
0.1:1
Acres
0.58
0.03
...
—
—
—
—
0.03
OTHER
IMPACT
0.58
_
_
0.04
0.01
0.03
0.34
1.87
MITIGATION
Ratio
1:1
—
_.
3:1 1
1:11
1:11
0.1:1
0.1:1
Acres
0.58
_
_
0,12
0.01
0.03
—
0.23
TOTAL
Creation
--
...
-
0.04
0.01
0.03
_
—
Preservation
—
_.
—
0.08
...
_
0.03
0.19
Total
1.16
0.03
__
0,12
0.01
0.03
0.03
0.19
1 In accordance with Table 11 on page D-113 of the HMP, City projects with impacts to these habitats are mitigated at Lake
Calavera Mitigation Bank at the indicated ratios but no distinction is made between creation and preservation.
Table3
Project Impacts to Jurisdictional Areas
WATERS /WETLANDS TYPE
Southern willow scrub
Southern willow scrub
Southern willow scrub-disturbed
Unvegetated stream channel (ephemeral)
Unvegetated stream channel (intermittent)
Concrete-lined channel (ephemeral)
Concrete-lined channel (intermittent)
TOTAL1
ACREAGE
0.03
...
0.01
...
0.03
0.004
...
0.07/ -;*/
JURISDICTION
CDFG
CDFG, ACOE, RWQCB
CDFG
CDFG, ACOE, RWQCB
CDFG, ACOE, RWQCB
CDFG, ACOE, RWQCB
CDFG, ACOE, RWQCB:v---'-.-^'i;c:r :'\ > i-." •'•-•' •
1 Totals may not sum precisely due to rounding.
These changes are shown on revised MND Figures 9 through 9D. Revisions to mitigation
measure BIO-1 are shown below:
4926-01
December 2008
Ms. Pam Drew, Associate Planner
Subject: Project Description Changes — Final Mitigated Negative Declaration for the El
Camino Real Widening Project
BIO-1: Prior to grading, significant direct impacts to sensitive vegetation communities shall be
mitigated in the amounts shown in the discussion below. Mitigation shall be
implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Department. The mitigation ratios
are also displayed in Table 2.
• The loss of 0.01 acre (715 square feet) of disturbed native grassland within the
Coastal Zone (CZ) shall be mitigated at a ratio of 3:1 at the City of Carlsbad's
Lake Calavera Mitigation Bank.
• The loss of 0.29 acre of CZ coastal sage scrub and the loss of 0.58 acre of non-CZ
coastal sage scrub shall be mitigated at a 2:1 and 1:1 ratio, respectively, at the
City of Carlsbad's Lake Calavera Mitigation Bank.
• Loss of 0.34 acre of eucalyptus woodland and 2.19 acres of disturbed lands shall
be mitigated by 0.03 acre and 0.22 acre habitat preservation, respectively, at the
Lake Calavera Mitigation Bank, and may be out-of-kind.
Based on the above revised calculations, biological resource impacts to sensitive vegetation
communities and jurisdictional areas have decreased when compared to the calculations
presented in the Draft MND, and impacts to non-native grassland have been eliminated entirely.
No other impact areas have increased in severity. Therefore, a substantial increase in the
severity of impacts would not occur.
Landscape Plan Revisions
The City determined that the proposed project design would be enhanced by the implementation
of additional landscaping in the median, as depicted in revised MND Figures 6A through 6D,
and revised visual simulations in revised MND Figures 7 and 8. These improvements would
improve the aesthetics of the project, and no increase in the severity of impacts identified in the
Draft MND would occur.
Conclusion
Based on the project description modifications and impact revisions presented above, new
information added to the MND merely clarifies or amplifies or makes insignificant modifications
to the MND. Therefore, the MND does not require recirculation based on guidance provided in
the CEQA Guidelines Section 15073.5(c)(4),.
No other changes to the Draft MND have been identified. If you have any questions, please feel
free to call me at 760.479.4228.
Very truly yours,
4926-01
December 2008
Ms. Pam Drew, Associate Planner
Subject: Project Description Changes -- Final Mitigated Negative Declaration for the El
Camino Real Widening Project
Shawn S. Shamlou, AICP
Environmental Project Manager
att: Revised MND Figures
Cover
Figures 3, 4, 6A-6D, 7, 8, 9, 9C, 9D
cc: Eva Plajzer, City of Carlsbad
Omar Atayee, Bureau Veritas
4926-01
December 2008
OCTOBER 200V8
City^bf Carlsbad
1635?Fata:day Avenue
Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314
Dudek
605 Third Street
Encinitas, CA 92024
El A Form - Part II
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART II
(TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
CASE NO: CDP 07-22
HDP 07-02
SUP 07-04
HMP 07-08
DATE: October 2008
BACKGROUND
1. CASE NAME: El Camino Real Widening Project
2. LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS: City of Carlsbad. 1635 Faraday Avenue,
Carlsbad CA 92008-7314
3. CONTACT PERSON AND PHONE NUMBER: Pam Drew, (760) 602-4644
4. PROJECT LOCATION: El Camino Real, between Tamarack Avenue and Chestnut
Avenue in the City of Carlsbad. San Diego County, California.
PROJECT SPONSOR'S NAME AND ADDRESS: City of Carlsbad, 1635 Faraday
Avenue, Carlsbad CA 92008-7314
5. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Prime Arterial
6. ZONING: El Camino Real Corridor Overlay
7. OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES WHOSE APPROVAL IS REQUIRED (i.e., permits,
financing approval or participation agreements): The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(ACOE) will consider the MNP in its issuance of a Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404
Nationwide Permit. The California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) will consider
the MNP in its issuance of a Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement. Lastly, the
San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) will consider the MNP in
approval of the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and a CWA Section
401 Permit.
8. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND SURROUNDING
LAND USES:
See attached project description
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 1
EIA Form - Part II
Project Description—El Camino Real Widening Project
This section provides a description of the proposed project, the environmental effects of which
are evaluated in the Discussion of Environmental Evaluation Section of this MND. The site
description and project location are described in this section, followed by a description of project
characteristics and a summary of the discretionary approvals that would be required.
Site Description and Background
The El Camino Road Widening project site is located in the northeastern part of the City of
Carlsbad, California (Figure 1, Regional Map and Figure 2, Vicinity Map). As shown in Figures
2 and 3 the project's Area of Potential Effects (APE) extends from Tamarack Avenue, at
approximately 70 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) in the southeast to Chestnut Avenue, at an
elevation of approximately 300 feet AMSL in the north. The APE is the area within which
potential environmental impacts would occur, including construction-related and potential long
term effects. The APE is approximately 18.5 acres for the El Camino Real Widening Project.
The length of the APE from Tamarack Avenue to Chestnut Avenue is approximately 4,600 linear
feet or 0.87 miles. El Camino Real was built in a small canyon between northwest-southeast
trending hills. The site is located on the U.S. Geological Service (USGS) 7.5 minute San Luis
Rey quadrangle map in projected sections 4, 5 and 9; Township 12 South, Range 3 West (Figure
2). An isolated, intermittent blue line stream was mapped in the project area, running parallel
and east of El Camino Real and dissipating into the valley extending southward toward Agua
Hedionda Creek into which Tamarack Avenue was constructed. The APE lies within the Habitat
Management Plan for Natural Communities in the City of Carlsbad (HMP) plan area.
El Camino Real is classified as a Prime Arterial in the City's Circulation Plan. It is a four-lane
divided roadway between Chestnut and Tamarack Avenues. The posted speed limit is 55 miles
per hour within the APE and a bus stop and bike lanes are provided. Curbside parking is
prohibited. Existing traffic volume along the project site is approximately 24,360 average daily
traffic (LLG 2006).
Residential development surrounds the APE. Aboveground utilities exist along the length of
both sides of the APE and a concrete-lined drainage ditch occurs along a portion of the project's
west side. There is a small grove of mature eucalyptus trees located at the northwest corner of the
APE, and south of the eucalyptus grove, there are several private residences with a gravel-
covered driveway connecting El Camino Real to asphalt-paved private driveways. The portion
of the APE located south of the residences has steep slopes overlain by a relatively level
vegetated area.
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 2
Orange
County
San Diego
l Miles
El Camino Real Widening Project - MND
Regional Map
,-,
I^KW^^.^% I
KeMy" ,
?yv \>»"~ '
'f ii t.M Jyr- /~ •'///• ^^^^^fecT-''^^•^r" ^ \ ^r ¥ ^-4--^i/ ^''tf •'T >zV \'#^ (^-—-xr?//^^^^i^'w^tt.^ •*^Hmi:'fo& m^x'O-. 'i o 4, '•>>.!> ... - , // "\ h. A ' / ]'%> X
*SC -f> -\1 ^--'""^^C'*\^>C
^
»"i
"V
?
<JJ. "iVs1- 'j •^-4-},;
^ Jf^0\:^,^ '&?-•
'
,- «L.- » --•—SOURCE: USGS,'7.5 Minute Series, San Luis Rey Quadrangle
' '--' •••-''
^ r/;/'^!^; r . • &,?•}*?
1,000 2,000 r
El Camino Real Widening Project • MND
Vicinity Map
EIA Form - Part II
A drainage ditch is located along the southern half of the east side of the APE. A cleared area is
maintained along the eastern edge of the drainage. A paved sidewalk runs along the east side of
the APE, most of which is open space with a mix of native and non-native grasses and low
shrubs. The northern portion of the east side of the project is a vertical cutbank.
Project Description
The City of Carlsbad (City) proposes to improve the section of El Camino Real from Tamarack
Avenue north to Chestnut Avenue. El Camino Real is a major north/south roadway serving as a
vital parallel circulation element to Interstate 5 (1-5) for the Cities of Encinitas, Carlsbad and
Oceanside. As various developments including subdivisions have occurred in the project
vicinity, developers have been required to widen El Camino Real to full prime arterial standards.
This section of roadway, from Tamarack Avenue to Chestnut Avenue, is one of the few
remaining sections of El Camino Real that has not been widened to its full width of 6 travel lanes
with 3 northbound and 3 southbound lanes.
The proposed roadway improvements would result in a total width of 126 feet including:
• 8-foot-wide bike lanes on both sides of the roadway
• three southbound lanes, 12 feet wide each
• three northbound lanes, 12 feet wide each
• an 18-foot-wide landscaped median island
• 5 1/2 -foot-wide sidewalks on both sides of the roadway
• 4 '/2-foot-wide native planted area (including a native planted swale) on both sides of the
roadway
In the middle section of the roadway, the roadway would transition between the previously
discussed typical section to a modified width of 116 feet including:
• a 6 !/2-foot-wide bike lane on the west side of the roadway
• a 5-foot-wide bike lane on the east side
• three southbound lanes, 12 feet wide each
• a 14- foot-wide landscaped median island
• three northbound lanes, 11 !4 feet wide each
• 5 '/2-foot-wide sidewalks on both sides of the roadway
• 4 !/2-foot-wide native planted area (including a native planted swale) on both sides of the
roadway
The project proposes to keep the existing vertical profile of the road, and construction is
anticipated to extend approximately 9 months. The project's site plan and APE is displayed in
Figure 4.
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 6
ifi
ml
ill.« £o> .±?'•
EIA Form - Part II
Additional characteristics of the proposed project are described below.
Intersection Improvements. A traffic study was prepared for the subject project in April 2006
(LLG 2006). The purpose of the report was to analyze the operations at the two intersections
along this segment of El Camino Real, for the existing conditions and Year 2030 conditions. The
report then identified intersection improvements required to achieve acceptable level of service
(i.e., LOS D). These intersection improvements were consequently incorporated into the project
design.
The 2030 traffic forecast analysis shows that in 2030, the El Camino Real/Tamarack Avenue
intersection would result in an LOS F during AM and PM peak hours (LLG 2006). As such, the
project plans include an additional northbound and southbound thru lane on El Camino Real, and
an additional northbound left-turn lane on El Camino Real at its intersection with Tamarack
Avenue, as shown in Figure 5. This improvement would improve the LOS at this intersection to
LOS D or better in the AM peak hour and LOS C in the PM peak hour. Accommodating the
additional northbound and southbound lanes, just north of the intersection, would consist
primarily of re-striping the existing roadway, as sufficient width exists within the current
roadway geometry. Associated signal modifications to accommodate the new lane configuration
would also be provided.
At the El Camino Real/Chestnut Avenue intersection, the project would result in the removal of
the existing free right turn islands located at the northwest and southwest corners of the
intersection and replace these with standard curb returns, pedestrian ramps, and associated signal
modifications to accommodate the road widening improvements. These intersection
improvements must satisfy Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements, and therefore,
ramps that meet ADA gradient criteria would be constructed near the northwest and southwest
corners to connect the improvements to existing sidewalks.
Storm Drains. Currently, the roadway in the APE exhibits erosion on the embankment on the
east side, pavement cracking and weathering, and bumps/sags. Storm water from the storm
drains currently outlets at erosive velocities into a ditch east of the roadway. Storm drains within
the APE would be replaced and/or improved, as shown in Figure 4. The project includes the
placement of erosion protection in the ditch and/or construction of check dams within the ditch
to remedy the issue. The pavement for the roadway would be overlaid with asphalt concrete
and/or replaced with a full structural section as necessary.
Brow ditches are proposed along the west side of El Camino Real to prevent hillside stormwater
from flowing over the sidewalk and onto El Camino Real. The proposed locations are at Stations
513+50 and 536+00. The sizes of the brow ditches would vary from approximately 12-inch
minimum depth to 24-inch maximum depth.
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 8
LEGEND
lol - Traffic Signal
BS - Bus Stop
4D - Four lane divided roadway
RTOL- Right-turn Overlap
—^— Existing Lane Configuration
—^— Proposed Lane Configuration
REV. 12/15/05
LL66291 FIG7-1.0WS
SOURCE: UNSCOTT. LAW * GREENSPAN ENGINEERS
NOT TO SCALE
El Camino Real Widening Project - MNO
Intersection Improvements
EIA Form - Part II
Lighting. Overhead lighting is proposed as part of the project. Lighting would be installed per
applicable City standards for wattage and spacing. Each light pole would produce up to 22,000
lumens and would be staggered at 300-foot intervals along both sides of the project section of El
Camino Real.
Bus Stops. One existing North County Transit District (NCTD) bus stop located on the west side
of El Camino Real just south of Chestnut Avenue would be relocated as part of the project,
although the specific location is in the process of being determined in concert with North County
Transit District. It is assumed that the chosen location would not be located outside of the
project APE. A second bus stop exists along the east side of El Camino Real north of Tamarack
Avenue. No improvements or alterations to this bus stop are proposed.
Utilities. Depending on the availability of funding, the existing overhead power lines along the
west and east sides of El Camino Real may be undergrounded as part of the project. Should
funding be available at the time of construction, possibly as a joint cost sharing effort with
SDG&E, the City would underground these electrical utilities. If a funding source for
undergrounding is not located, the existing power poles along the west side, north of APN 207-
090-20, Station 526+00, are proposed to be relocated 5 to 10 feet to the west. The relocation or
undergrounding of these poles is necessary to accommodate the proposed street widening.
Grading. Minor grading would occur along the west side of El Camino Real to accommodate
construction of proposed retaining walls, which are described below. Additional grading behind
and at the top of the retaining walls would occur to construct brow ditches and drainage
facilities. The proposed grading at the top of the walls would be contoured to a 1.5:1 or 2:1
inclination to blend into the natural look of the existing terrain. The proposed grading would
range from 5 to 8 feet in height above the top of wall.
Both minor grading and major grading would occur on the east side of the project. Minor re-
grading is required at two locations (at approximately Station 512+50 and Station 517+00) to
stabilize the existing fill slope adjacent to the east edge of the roadway, which also represents the
west edge of the existing drainage channel. These two locations are situated approximately in
the middle third of the APE and represent distressed areas where slope failure (Station 512+50)
and sloughing (Station 517+00) have occurred. The existing slope height at these areas varies
from 5 feet or less to approximately 15 feet with the height generally increasing toward the
north. Both of these areas would be over-excavated and reconstructed with reinforced earth or
equal methods in accordance with the geotechnical report for the project to stabilize the slope
and re-establish the initial slope inclination.
Major grading is proposed along the northern segment of the east side of El Camino Real,
predominantly across Assessor Parcel Numbers 167-230-24 and 167-230-25. Slope heights
October 2008 . 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 10
El A Form ~ Part 11
would range from 30 to 50 feet with the height increasing toward the south. The proposed
grading will be contoured to a 1.5:1 or variable slope inclination and be graded in such a fashion
as to replace the in-kind driveway access to the property.
Retaining Walls. Retaining walls are proposed on the west side of El Camino Real in the
approximate midpoint of the APE. A portion of the proposed retaining walls would be located
outside of the project ROW, therefore, property acquisition of 6,946 square feet (0.16 acre)
would be required on Czajkowski property (within parcel numbers 207-180-08, -09, -10, and -
12), which is located approximately 2000 feet south of the El Camino Real/Chestnut Avenue
intersection. The height of the retaining walls would vary from 6 feet to a maximum of 15 feet
high. The specific wall types would be Caltrans cast-in-place concrete or masonry block
cantilever with fascia for walls less than 10 feet in height. These have a concrete spread footing
and a vertical retaining face.
For walls over 10 feet in height, a tieback wall type would be implemented. This type of
retaining wall is an anchored wall system that relies on steel bars grouted into the retained slope
and a reinforced facing. The anchors are prestressed to provide an active clamping force. The
facing is typically constructed with reinforced shotcrete or cast-in-place concrete, and is
constructed with a "top-down" approach that does not require substantial excavation behind the
wall face.
The retaining walls are proposed to be built with a boulderscape architectural treatment and
landscaping screening. Drainage systems would be included behind the walls to allow proper
drainage of the adjacent hillside.
Landscape Concept Plan. A Landscape Concept Plan has been prepared as part of the project to
provide a transition between the ornamental landscape and natural landscape on either side of the
project reach of El Camino Real. The Landscape Concept Plan takes into account the City's El
Camino Real Corridor Development Standards by incorporating a median landscape treatment
that continues adjacent median designs. The Landscape Concept Plan is displayed in Figures 6a
through 6d. The specific objectives of the design include low water use, minimization of fire
hazards, minimization of visual impacts of the proposed retaining walls, and stabilization of
disturbed slopes.
Staging Areas. Staging areas for temporarily storing construction equipment would be identified
during final design of the project, and would be located within previously paved areas within the
APE.
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 11
\/
3
0.
O
_l
UJ
O
OUJ
CO
O
(0 m
Z g
|zl
O >
-UJ
.=. HiS 80- ECD O
1 «03 QJ
:H O.S eo— o
CO
S OO- E
05 O
S asr5 ta.5 ra— u
Q
aivDui
ai
Q-
<o
ii
is.QH
J8M5SO
Q
o O
fit
O
LUW
s
«0
Ol •"II
g: re— u
re
EIA Form - Part II
Discretionary Actions
The MND serves as an informational document for use by public agencies, the general public,
and decision makers. This MND discusses the impacts of road improvements and related
components. This MND will be used by the City of Carlsbad in assessing impacts of the
proposed project.
Discretionary actions required for project approval from the City include a Hillside Development
Permit (HDP), a Special Use Permit (SUP) due to the project's location within the El Camino
Real Corridor, a Coastal Development Permit (CDP), and a Habitat Management Plan Permit
(HMPP).
Also, the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board will consider the MND in issuing a
Storm Water Discharge Requirements (WDR) Permit, Section 401 Water Quality Certification,
and approval of the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (ACOE) will consider the MND in issuing a Nationwide Permit (NWP) 14 in
accordance with Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act. Lastly, the CDFG will consider the
MND in issuing a Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement.
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.
X Biological Resources
Aesthetics
Agricultural Resources
Air Quality
Biological F
X Cultural Resources
1X1 Geology/Soils
Hazards/Hazardous Materials
Noise
Population and Housing
XI Hydrology/Water Quality
Land Use and Planning
Mineral Resources
X Public Services
Recreation
X Transportation/Circulation
X Mandatory Findings of
Significance X Utilities & Service Systems
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 16
EIA Form - Par! II
DETERMINATION.
(To be completed by the Lead Agency)
D
n
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 Declaration 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.
Planner Signature Date
^/\
Planning Director's Signature Date
September 2007 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 17
ElA Form - Part II
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, Section 15063 requires that the City
conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment 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 (in this case, the City of Carlsbad, since
the project is a public works project) must agree to the mitigation, and the City must
describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less
than significant level.
• "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an
effect is significantly adverse.
• Based on an "EIA-Part II", 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.
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 18
EIA Form - Part II
• 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 (i.e.,
City) 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.
• 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 City 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-Part II 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 at the end of the
form under DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention
should be given to discussing mitigation for impacts, which would otherwise be determined
significant.
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 19
El A Form - Part II
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
I. 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?
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
S
H
Bl
13
D
D
D
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?
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
*
m
HI. 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
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?
D
D
°
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
IE!
El
El
m
m
D
n
n
D
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 20
E1A Form - Part II
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
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?
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
Ei
n
n
n
n
n
n
EI
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 paleontologi-
cal resource or site or unique geologic feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries?
n
n
n
n
n
E
n
n
n
n
i*
n
H
u
n
KI
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:
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 21
EIA Form - Part II
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
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 1 8
- 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
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
D
D
D
K
H
D
D
D
Less Than
Significant
Impact
IKI
13
IE!
n
n
IE1
IE!
D
No
Impactn
n
n
n
n
n
n
IEI
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS - Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
D
D
D
D
D
D
IE!
IEI
n
n
n
Ei
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 22
E1A Form - Part II
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
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
D
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
D
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
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?
n n n
TTf) 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?
D
U
n n
"D"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?
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY - Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements?
D n n
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)?
n n n
"U"c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the
site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, in a manner, which would
result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-
site?
D
"LT "LTd) 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?
n
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 23
EIA Form - Part II
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
e) Create or contribute runoff water, which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff?
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as
mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or
Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood delineation
map?
h) Place within 100-year flood hazard area structures,
which would impede or redirect flood flows?
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
loss, injury or death involving flooding, including
flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
Potentially
Significant
Impactn
n
n
n
n
n
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporatedn
n
n
n
n
n
Less Than
Significant
Impact
IEI
H
D
D
D
IEI
No
Impactn
D
IE!
[El
IE!
n
IX. LAND USE 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?
n
n
D
n
n
n
D
13
IEI
&
n
n
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?
n
n
n
D
n
n
IE1
IEI
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?
n n IE!D
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 24
EIA Form - Part II
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
groundbourne vibration or groundbourne noise
levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan
or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2
miles of a public airport or public use airport, would
the project expose people residing or working in the
project area to excessive noise levels?
0 For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise levels?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
D
D
n
n
n
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
D
D
D
D
D
Less Than
Significant
Impact
El
El
D
D
No
Impactn
u
n
El
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?
n
n
D
D
D
D
D
D
n
Ki
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?
n
n
n
n
n
El
El
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
n
n
N
El
El
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 25
El A Form - Part II
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XIV. RECREATION
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?
D
D
D
D
D
n m
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)?
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
' D
D
m
n
D
n
n
D
n
n
n
H
m
E
E
n
m
D
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?
D
D
D
n
n
n
m
m
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 26
EIA Form ~ Part II
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
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?
XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the range
of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumula-
tively considerable" means that the incremental
effects of a project are considerable when viewed in
connection with the effects of past projects, the
effects of other current projects, and the effects of
probable future projects?)
c) Does the project have environmental effects, which
will cause the substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
D
D
D
D
n
Less Than
Significant
Impact
D
13
D
D
D
D
El
No
Impact
D
LJ
D3
D
Kl
D
D
D
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 27
ElA Form - Part II
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.
October 2008 . 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 28
El A Form - Part II
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
I. AESTHETICS—Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
No Impact. In 1988, the City prepared Scenic Corridor Guidelines to identify roadways and
transportation routes within the City to be designated as scenic corridors, and to suggest methods
to preserve and enhance the character of those corridors (City of Carlsbad 1994). According to
the City's Circulation Element (1994), Carlsbad has adopted four categories of scenic corridors.
Transportation routes with potential corridor status are identified below; however, currently, El
Camino Real is the only designated roadway within the City for which a set of development
standards have been adopted.
Community Theme Corridors. These connect Carlsbad with adjacent municipalities and present
the City of Carlsbad to persons entering and passing thought the community. Community
Theme Corridors include El Camino Real, Carlsbad Boulevard, Palomar Airport Road, La Costa
Avenue, and Melrose Drive.
Community Scenic Corridors. These roadways interconnect major subareas of the present and
planned Carlsbad community. They include College Boulevard, Cannon Road, Carlsbad Village
Drive, Faraday Avenue, 1-5, La Costa Avenue, Olivenhain Road/Rancho Santa Fe Road, and
Poinsettia Lane/Carrillo Way.
Natural Open Space and Recreation Corridors. These offer spectacular views of waterscapes,
landforms, wildlife, and the Pacific Ocean, and include Adams Street/Park Drive, Batiquitos
Drive, and Jefferson Street (the portion adjacent to the Buena Vista Lagoon).
Railroad Corridor. This corridor presents the City to people passing through by rail, on the
Atchison, Topeka, & Santa Fe (AT&SF) Railroad.
While El Camino Real has been designated as a Community Theme Corridor by the City, there
are no officially designated scenic vistas identified in the City's General Plan (1994), and no
scenic vistas are afforded while driving along the project segment of El Camino Real. Therefore,
no impacts to a scenic vista would result.
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway?
Less Than Significant Impact. As described above in response a), there are no officially
designated state highways located within the project vicinity, but the City has designated El
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 29
EIA Form - Part II
Camino Real under its Scenic Corridor Overlay Zone. El Camino Real is also listed under the
Community Theme Corridor category. The proposed project is not located within a section of El
Camino Real that is adjacent to the adjoining jurisdictional areas to the north or south.
The Open Space and Conservation Element's Special Resource Protection Implementing Policies
and Action Programs C4 states that the City shall "Designate for preservation as open space
those areas that provide unique visual amenities and define the urban form as contained in the
Open Space and Conservation Resource Management Plan. These areas shall include
agriculture, hillsides, ridges, valleys, canyons, beaches, lagoons, lakes and other unique
resources that provide visual and physical relief to the cityscape by creating natural contrasts to
the built-up manmade scene" (City of Carlsbad 1994). A small portion of land located to the
west of El Camino Real is designated as Open Space in the City's General Plan. No designated
Special Resource Protection areas are located in the vicinity of the project site. Unique resources
as defined in policy C4, such as hillsides and agriculture, are located near the proposed project
site.
The project site is also subject to the El Camino Real Corridor Development Standards (1984).
The intent of these standards is to maintain and enhance the appearance of the El Camino Real
roadway area, and reflect the existence of certain identified characteristics which the City
considers worthy of preservation (City of Carlsbad 1984). The project site is located in Area 2 of
the Standards. The project involves improvements and widening of this segment of El Camino
Real, and many of the standards discussed in the regulations pertain to such details as signage,
setback from roadway, and building height, which do not apply to the proposed project. The
project would incorporate other design features such as sidewalks and would not modify the
existing identified design theme of suburban residential. Overall, the project would not conflict
with the El Camino Real Corridor Development Standards, and impacts would be less than
significant.
As described in the project description, a retaining wall would be required along the west side of
El Camino Real in the approximate midpoint of the APE, as shown in the visual simulations
provided in Figures 7 and 8. The height of the retaining walls would vary between 6 to 15 feet
in height, and would be constructed with a naturalized boulderscape architectural treatment and
landscaping screening. A native hydroseed mix would be applied along the western side of the
proposed retaining wall, in addition to native shrubs to be planted on both the western and
eastern sides of the proposed wall. Vines and native groundcover would also be provided on the
eastern side of the proposed wall, the section of the wall visible to passing travelers. The
retaining walls would introduce a manmade feature to an otherwise natural hillside, but because
travelers are typically driving at relatively high speeds (55 mph), views would not last more than
5 seconds. Also, due to the proposed boulderscape treatment, the retaining wall would be
constructed to look similar to existing conditions, and over time, the proposed landscaping would
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 30
s .2'§" 3
£ E
f 55
-I "«
3
_
COCJ
.23
E
55
cc
O
EIA Form - Part II
mature and further soften the visual appearance of the retaining wall. No other scenic resources
such as trees, rock outcroppings, or historic buildings would be affected. If the existing overhead
power lines along the west side are undergrounded, thereby removing the poles and wires from
existing views, a beneficial impact would result. A planted median and proposed parkways on
both sides of the roadway (including sidewalks and 4 1/2 feet of native planted area) would also
result in beneficial visual effects to the corridor. For these reasons, visual impacts would be less
than significant.
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its
surroundings?
Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project entails the widening of an existing
roadway. The additional lanes and project components along this stretch of El Camino Real
would not alter adjacent land uses. As such, the project would not substantially degrade the
existing visual character or quality of the project site or its surroundings, and impacts would be
less than significant.
d) Create a new source of substantial light and glare, which would adversely affect
day or nighttime views in the area?
Less Than Significant Impact. Lighting is currently provided along this stretch of El Camino
Real. The project would replace the existing lighting to the ultimate width of El Camino Real.
The lighting would be installed per applicable City standards for wattage and spacing which
permits each light post to be staggered at 300-foot intervals along both sides of El Camino Real
and produce up to 22,000 lumens per light post. Therefore the amount of light and glare would
not substantially differ from existing conditions, and impacts would be less than significant.
II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES—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?
No Impact. As stated in the Open Space and Conservation Element of the City's General Plan,
it is the City's intention to support and utilize all measures available to secure agricultural land
uses for as long as possible prior to development, and to promote the long-term economic
viability of agricultural uses. There are only a limited number of areas within the City that are
considered to possess important farmlands as defined by the California Department of
Conservation. The City consists mainly of Urban and Built-Up Land along the western,
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 33
EIA Form - Part II
southern, and northwestern portions of the City, with large areas of Other Land interspersed
throughout the eastern and central portions (City of Carlsbad 1994).
According to the State of California Department of Conservation (DOC) San Diego County
Important Farmland 1998 Map, the proposed project site and the areas immediately to the north,
east, south and west are designated as Urban and Built Up Land, with areas to the southeast of
the El Camino Real/Tamarack Road interchange designated as Other Land (DOC 1998). No
Prime, Unique or Farmland of Statewide Importance would be converted as a result of
implementing the proposed project, and no impacts would result.
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
No Impact. According to the City of Carlsbad's Zoning Map dated July 25, 2006, the project
site is zoned as El Camino Real Corridor Overlay. It should also be noted that the designated
zoning for the surrounding land uses includes Planned Community (P-C) for the southern half
and One-Family Residential (R-l) in the northern half, with a small portion of land to the
northwest zoned as Residential Density - Multiple (RD-M). No agricultural uses have been
zoned for land surrounding the project site; therefore the proposed project would not conflict
with existing zoning for agricultural uses or any Williamson Act contracts in the City, and no
impacts would result.
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?
No Impact As described in responses a) and b) above, the proposed widening improvements to
El Camino Real would not result in the conversion of farmland at the proposed project site or
surrounding areas. No other changes to the existing environment would result in conversion of
farmland to non-agricultural use, and no impact would result from implementing the proposed
project.
III. AIR QUALITY—Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
No Impact. The project site is located in the San Diego Air Basin which is a federal and state
non-attainment area for ozone (Os), and a state non-attainment area for particulate matter less
than or equal to 10 microns in diameter (PMio). The periodic violations of national Ambient Air
Quality Standards (AAQS) in the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB), particularly for ozone in inland
foothill areas, requires that a plan be developed outlining the pollution controls that will be
undertaken to improve air quality. In San Diego County, this attainment planning process is
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 34
El A Form - Part 11
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 Environment Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines
contains specific reference to the need to evaluate any inconsistencies between the proposed
project and the applicable air quality management plan. Transportation Control Measures
(TCMs) are part of the RAQS. The RAQS and TCM plan set forth the steps needed to
accomplish attainment of state and federal ambient air quality standards. The California Air
Resources Board provides criteria for determining whether a project conforms 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 site 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 growth assumptions of the
City's General Plan and the RAQS. Therefore, the project is consistent with the regional air
quality plan and will in no way conflict or obstruct implementation of the regional plan, and no
impact would result.
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 35
EIA Form - Part II
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or
projected air quality violation?
Less Than Significant Impact. The closest air quality monitoring station to the project site is in
Camp Pendleton. Data available for this monitoring site through April, 2002 indicate that the
most recent air quality violations recorded were for the state one hour standard for ozone (one
day in both 2000 and 2001) and one day in 2001 for the federal 8-hour average for ozone and
one day for the 24-hour state standard for suspended particulates in 1996. No violations of any
other air quality standards have been recorded recently. The project would involve minimal
short-term emissions associated with grading and construction. The principal source of
emissions would be fugitive dust from earth moving activities, storage piles, and vehicle travel
on unpaved and paved surfaces. Such emissions would be minimized through standard
construction measures such as the use of properly tuned equipment and watering the site for dust
control. Therefore, impacts from construction related emissions would be less than significant.
Operations of the proposed project would not generate substantial traffic, increase the number of
vehicles operating in the cold start mode, or worsen congestion, since it would widen the existing
roadway per General Plan standards. Therefore, pollutant emission would likely be the same or
less than without the proposed project. Long-term impacts would be less than significant overall.
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which
the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air
quality standard?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Air Basin is currently in a 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, construction emissions associated with the proposed project would be
short-term, and long-term operational air quality emissions would be essentially the same as the
baseline emissions. Therefore, according to the CEQA Guidelines Section 15130, the proposed
project's contribution to the cumulative impact is considered de minimus, and impacts would be
less than significant.
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
Less Than Significant Impact. Residences are located along both the eastern and western sides
of the proposed project site. No other sensitive receptors (e.g. schools or hospitals) are located in
the vicinity of the proposed project. As noted above, the proposed project would not result in
substantial pollutant emissions or concentrations. Therefore, impacts to sensitive receptors
would be less than significant.
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 36
EIA Form - Part II
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?
Less Than Significant Impact. The construction of the proposed project could generate fumes
from the operation of construction equipment and from asphalt paving and grading, which may
be considered objectionable by some people. Such exposures would be short-term and/or
transient since they would occur during the construction phase only, and would not reach a level
of significance.
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?
Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated. A Biological Resources
Technical Report (Dudek 2007) was prepared for the project. Regarding sensitive habitats,
direct permanent impacts to vegetation communities include all areas within the proposed project
APE, as shown in Figures 9 and 9a through 9d. As shown in the figures, a 28.9-acre study area
was surveyed, which included the 16.01-acre APE. Implementation of the proposed project
would potentially result in the direct permanent loss of the vegetation community and non-
natural land cover acreages shown in Table 1 below, including the acreage of each within the
Coastal Zone.
TABLE 1
Project Impacts to Vegetation Communities and Land Covers
? / ;VEGETATION COMMUNITY /LAND COVER TYPE
Native
Uplands
Jurisdictional
Waters/Wetlands
Non-native
Land Covers
Coastal sage scrub
Coastal sage scrub-disturbed
Native grassland-disturbed
Riparian scrub (Southern willow scrub)
Riparian scrub (Southern willow scrub-disturbed)
Unvegetated stream channel
Concrete-lined channel
Non-native grassland
Developed
Disturbed lands
Eucalyptus woodland
Ornamental
TOTAL*" :.-&•';. "• •:T--V^-;V?V"' '•<:;.' :^~--'<. / "•'"•• c
ACREAGE'^^-VrUw^O
COASTAL ZONE
0.24
0.051
0.012
_
_
—
_
—
7.68
0.32
_.
0.013
,/;; 8.31 "•'•;"•
OTHER
0.55
0.03
—
0.03
0.01
0.03
0.003
._.
4.70
1.87
0.34
0.14
'%,7.7ff^ .-'
TOTAL
0.79
0.08
0.01
0.03
0.01
0.03
0.003
_
12.38
2.19
0.34
0.15
16:01
1 2,335 square feet
2 630 square feet
3 508 square feet
4Totals may not sum precisely due to rounding
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 37
S CO:> ^
*1 xu CD
.2L "O"o c
ol ~—
05 W
CO
CDcc
I g
" V)= s
09cc
"re_o
"5»^o
o
co
CM
(095'c0>
IjjjjMjjji I'll ^Ml/^i:: '//A
Slfiil;-.- iiulj^^^i^^/
^ilii' - ItJI^mli^
=i<i>
1 1
11
§
75 S 5egg
~ UJ
•g -s.€ 2
Q
^ P.
Q SO 2
1 « if l!l§"§ £ o
E|l
» £ -S w .
? o 3 d °,_J .... | (OO Z (O W >
i gg g I
a:
§8
5 (Ds s£ 3
2 « 1t i SS i otL < «
§ S S
BlP CO
s s52
•o O O ill
11 B3
^
COo
i.2= .1.1 IZj5j
09 UJ
:=> S
S O.
To ™
1C S
o CO.£ 03E Uco ^u 3
in g
U
COU
«> f
E? e0) O
o
a
I £
« 1c So I
2 2 | «
Ills
Ou.Q
CD H
C
§ 1
g *
o E^ en 01
& g|
H!
Ill£ o ^
3
£ gCO CO
o:
§oo
_ _Q _,
Sill 3 »
<o Sto
CD CO< o
CO ,.CO >o UJ
§£s E
« 1^CJo> LLJ
'=" Q.
Q. <
&JB•E .*;-§ 3
.E CDE Uro >—
COU
oa
EIA Form - Part II
Direct permanent impacts to vegetation communities and land covers listed as HMP habitats in
the City HMP would be considered significant. Direct impacts to 0.86 acre of coastal sage scrub
(including disturbed), 0.01 acre of disturbed native grassland, 0.04 acre of southern willow scrub
(including disturbed), 0.34 acre eucalyptus woodlands, and 2.19 acres disturbed land, all
vegetation communities and land covers listed as HMP habitats in the City HMP, are considered
significant. Refer to mitigation measures listed below that would reduce impacts to a level
below significance.
Regarding sensitive wildlife species, the project has the potential to impact 0.38 acre of potential
Cooper's hawk nesting habitat (southern willow scrub and eucalyptus); 0.87 acres of Dulzura
pocket mouse and northwestern San Diego pocket mouse habitat (coastal sage scrub and
grasslands). Potential impacts to nesting Cooper's hawk, Dulzura California pocket mouse and
northwestern San Diego pocket mouse, if present, would be considered significant. Refer to
mitigation measures listed below that would reduce impacts to a level below significance.
Surveys for monarch butterfly roosting sites were negative, and therefore no impacts would
occur to this species.
Potential indirect impacts to sensitive plant and wildlife species include construction-related
edge effects such as dust which could disrupt plant vitality in the short-term or construction-
related soil erosion and water runoff. Edge effects generally would only occur along the
interface between the project impact area and adjacent sensitive habitat, including coastal sage
scrub, native grassland, non-native grassland, southern willow scrub, and jurisdictional stream
channels. However, standard construction BMPs and construction-related minimization
measures to control dust, erosion, and runoff will be implemented and will ameliorate these
effects (refer to Section VIII, Hydrology and Water Quality, response a). Therefore, significant
indirect impacts to sensitive plant and wildlife species would be avoided through these measures.
Regarding sensitive plant species, the Biological Resources Technical Report concludes that no
sensitive plant species occur in the APE, and no direct impacts to sensitive plant species would
result.
Mitigation Measures for Sensitive Vegetation Communities
BIO-1: Prior to grading, significant direct impacts to sensitive vegetation communities shall be
mitigated in the amounts shown in the discussion below. Mitigation shall be
implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Department. The mitigation ratios
are also displayed in Table 2.
• The loss of 0.01 acre (715 square feet) of disturbed native grassland within the
Coastal Zone (CZ) shall be mitigated at a ratio of 3:1 at the City of Carlsbad's
Lake Calavera Mitigation Bank.
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 43
EIA Form - Part II
The loss of 0.29 acre of CZ coastal sage scrub and the loss of 0.58 acre of non-CZ
coastal sage scrub shall be mitigated at a 2:1 and 1:1 ratio, respectively, at the
City of Carlsbad's Lake Calavera Mitigation Bank.
Loss of 0.34 acre of eucalyptus woodland and 2.19 acres of disturbed lands shall
be mitigated by 0.03 acre and 0.22 acre habitat preservation, respectively, at the
Lake Calavera Mitigation Bank, and may be out-of-kind.
TABLE 2
Recommended Mitigation for Impacts to Sensitive Vegetation
and Jurisdictional Waters (Acres)
VEGETATION
COMMUNITY
Coastal sage scrub
(including disturbed) '
Native grassland-disturbed 1
Non-native grassland
Riparian scrub
(including disturbed)
Ephemeral channel
Intermittent channel
Eucalyptus woodland
Disturbed lands
COASTAL ZONE
''-••''..-- •:••-,
IMPACT
0.29
0.01
_
—
—
—
—
0.32
MITIGATION
Ratio
2:11
3:11
—
—
—
—
—
0.1:1
Acres
0.58
0,03
—
—
—
--
—
0.03
OTHER
IMPACT!
0.58
—
—
0.04
0.01
0.03
0.34
1.87
MITIGATION
Ratio
1:1
—
_.
3:1'
1:11
1:11
0.1:1
0.1:1
Acres
0.58
—
_
0.12
0.01
0.03
—
0.23
TOTAL
Creation
—
—
—
0.04
0.01
0,03
—
—
Preservation,:• : • : ' - •••;•;•; '
—
_
—
0.08
—
—
0.03
0,19
-' •'. . - •'
Total
1.16
0.03
...
0.12
0.01
0.03
0.03
0.19
1 In accordance with Table 11 on page D-113 of the HMP, City projects with impacts to these habitats are mitigated at Lake
Calavera Mitigation Bank at the indicated ratios but no distinction is made between creation and preservation.
Mitigation measures for impacts to southern willow scrub are discussed below under response b).
Mitigation Measures for Sensitive Wildlife Species
BIO-2: Prior to grading, significant direct impacts to sensitive wildlife species shall be mitigated
to the satisfaction of the City Planning Department. The following mitigation measures
would avoid impacts to Cooper's hawk, other raptors and other migratory bird species
nests protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act:
• The City's construction contractor shall conduct vegetation clearing outside of the
January through September bird breeding season; or
• A qualified biologist shall conduct a focused survey for bird nests not more than
72 hours prior to commencement of vegetation clearing activities. If active nests
are found, the City's construction contractor shall cease construction within an
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 44
EIA Form - Part II
appropriate buffer zone of 50 to 300 feet, as determined by the project biologist,
around the nest site until juveniles have fledged and the nesting cycle is complete.
Impacts to Cooper's hawk, Dulzura California pocket mouse, and northwestern San Diego
pocket mouse shall be mitigated through creation and/or preservation of riparian scrub and
eucalyptus woodland (Cooper's hawk), and coastal sage scrub and grassland (pocket mice)
habitats discussed under BIO-1 above. [Note: the loss of approximately 0.38 acre of potential
Cooper's hawk nesting habitat (eucalyptus and riparian scrub) shall be mitigated through
creation or preservation of 0.12 acre of riparian habitat and 0.03 acre of eucalyptus woodland.]
The location of the riparian scrub would be determined as part of the CDFG 1602 permit
process.
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?
f
Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. Direct permanent impacts to 0.03
acre of waters, including wetlands, under the jurisdiction of ACOE, CDFG, and RWQCB, and an
additional 0.04 acre of riparian vegetation under the jurisdiction of CDFG only (for a total
CDFG-jurisdictional area of 0.07 acre) are considered significant (Dudek 2007). Table 3 below
shows the breakdown of waters/wetlands impacts and the acreage of each. Potential indirect
impacts to jurisdictional stream channels and sensitive vegetation communities (i.e., southern
willow scrub, coastal sage scrub, native grassland, non-native grassland) include construction-
related edge effects such as dust which could disrupt plant vitality in the short-term or
construction-related soil erosion and water runoff. Edge effects generally would only occur
along the interface between the APE (i.e., where construction and/or grading or other physical
impacts would occur) and adjacent sensitive habitat, including jurisdictional stream channels,
southern willow scrub, coastal sage scrub, native grassland and non-native grassland. However,
standard construction BMPs and construction-related minimization measures to control dust,
erosion, and runoff will be implemented and will ameliorate these effects as stated under Section
VIII, Hydrology and Water Quality response a). Therefore, significant indirect impacts to
jurisdictional areas and other sensitive vegetation communities would be reduced to less than
significant levels through these measures.
TABLE 3
Project Impacts to Jurisdictional Areas
WATERS /WETLANDS TYPE
Southern willow scrub
Southern willow scrub
Southern willow scrub-disturbed
Unvegetated stream channel (ephemeral)
Unvegetated stream channel (intermittent)
ACREAGE
0.03
...
0.01
...
0.03
; JURISDICTION
CDFG
CDFG, ACOE, RWQCB
CDFG
CDFG, ACOE, RWQCB
CDFG, ACOE, RWQCB
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 45
EIA Form - Part II
TABLE 3
Project Impacts to Jurisdictional Areas
WATERS / WETLANDS TYPE
Concrete-lined channel (ephemeral)
Concrete-lined channel (intermittent)
TOTAU f
ACREAGE
0.004
...
. •; 0.07,; ¥
JURISDICTION :
CDFG, ACOE, RWQCB
CDFG, ACOE, RWQCB
1 Totals may not sum precisely due to rounding.
Mitigation Measures for Jurisdictional Waters
BIO-3 Prior to grading, significant direct impacts to Jurisdictional waters and riparian habitats
shall be mitigated to the satisfaction of the City Planning Department. The following
mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a level below significance:
• Mitigation for impacts to Jurisdictional waters and riparian habitats shall include
1:1 creation in accordance with the "no net loss" wetlands policy in the Carlsbad
HMP. Impacts to 0.04 acre of riparian scrub shall be mitigated at a ratio of 3:1,
including creation at a minimum 1:1 ratio. Mitigation will occur in the City of
Carlsbad within the Agua Hedionda Creek watershed or through the purchase of
wetlands mitigation credits at the North County Habitat Bank.
• Impacts to 0.03 acre of ephemeral and intermittent stream channels shall be
mitigated through creation of 0.03 acre of stream channel (or superior) habitat.
• A combined total of 0.07 acre of wetland habitat and Jurisdictional stream
channels shall be created in partial mitigation for wetland impacts.
• A Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404 Nationwide Permit shall be required from
the ACOE for project impacts to 0.03 acre of ACOE-jurisdictional waters.
• A CWA Section 401 permit from RWQCB shall be required for impacts to 0.03
acre of waters under their jurisdiction.
• A CDFG Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement shall be required from
CDFG for impacts to 0.07 acre of Jurisdictional waters and riparian vegetation.
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?
Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. Refer to response b) above.
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?
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 46
EIA Form - Part II
Less Than Significant Impact. The City of Carlsbad specifically identifies habitat linkages as
part of the Habitat Management Plan (HMP), with Linkages consisting of conserved habitat that
provides a connection between the HMP core areas and other natural habitat areas. The vicinity
of the proposed project is not identified as a Linkage in the HMP and is not located within a
habitat corridor. The project would involve widening of an existing roadway. As such, impacts
would be less than significant.
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources,
such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
No Impact. The project would not conflict with the Carlsbad HMP, or any other local policies
or ordinances protecting biological resources. Also refer to response f) below. No impacts would
result.
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?
No Impact. The proposed project site is located within the City of Carlsbad HMP and is part of
the El Camino Real Widening - South Chestnut to South Alga Street project, which is covered
by the proposed City Lands mitigation bank. (Note: subsequent to publication of the HMP, the
"South Alga" street name was changed to Aviara Parkway to the west of El Camino Real, and
Alga Road east of El Camino Real.) The proposed project would comply with the HMP
guidelines and requirements, and therefore, the project is consistent with the Carlsbad HMP. No
impacts would result.
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as
defined in §15064.5?
No Impact. A Cultural Resources Technical Report was conducted for the proposed project in
2006 (ASM 2006). A review of historic maps of the project vicinity in addition to a database
search of the National Register of Historic Places, California Register of Historic Resources,
California State Landmarks, California Points of Historic Interest and other historic property lists
were conducted and did not reveal any historic structures within the project vicinity (ASM
2006). Therefore, no impacts to historical resources would result.
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archeological
resource pursuant to §15064.5?
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 47
EIA Form - Part II
Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated. According to the Cultural
Resources Technical Report, two prehistoric habitation sites have previously been recorded
within a one-mile radius of the project site. No additional archeological resources were
identified during the site reconnaissance survey. Because a number of large habitation sites are
located within a one-mile radius of the project, the known presence of large archaeological sites
in the vicinity, and due to the fact that during surveys, heavy leaf litter was present which limited
visibility, potentially significant impacts to archaeological resources could result. Accordingly,
implementation of the following mitigation measures during project grading and construction
activities would reduce potential impacts to archeological resources to less than significant
levels.
CULT-1: Archeological monitoring shall occur during all earthmoving activities, to the
satisfaction of the City of Carlsbad Planning Department. The mitigation monitoring
program shall consist of the following measures:
Prior to Preconstruction (Precon) Meeting
1. Planning Department Plan Check
a. The requirements for Archaeological Monitoring and Native American
Monitoring shall be included on the appropriate construction documents.
Archaeological and Native American Monitoring shall be performed by separate
qualified individuals.
2. Submit Letter of Qualification to the Planning Department
a. Prior to the first Precon Meeting, the City shall provide a letter of verification
stating that qualified monitors have been retained to implement the monitoring
program.
3. Records Search Prior to Precon Meeting
a. At least thirty days prior to the Precon Meeting the qualified monitors shall verify
to the City that a records search has been completed and updated as necessary and
be prepared to introduce any pertinent information concerning expectations and
probabilities of discovery during grading activities. Verification includes, but is
not limited to, a copy of a confirmation letter from South Coast Information
Center or, if the search was in-house, a letter of verification from the monitors
stating that the search was completed.
Precon Meeting
1. Archaeologist & Native American Monitors Shall Attend Precon Meetings
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 48
El A Form - Part II
a. Prior to beginning any work that requires monitoring, the City shall arrange a
Precon Meeting that shall include the Monitors, Construction Manager and/or
Grading Contractor. The qualified Monitors shall attend any grading related
Precon Meetings to make comments and/or suggestions concerning the
Archaeological and Native American Monitoring program with the Construction
Manager and/or Grading Contractor.
2. Identify Areas to be Monitored
a. At the Precon Meeting, the Monitors shall submit to the City Planner a copy of
the site/grading plan (reduced to 11x17) that identifies areas to be monitored as
well as areas that may require delineation of grading limits.
During Construction
1. Archaeologist & Native American Monitors Shall be Present During Grading/Excavation
The qualified Monitors shall be present full-time during grading/excavation of native
soils and shall document activity via the Consultant Monitor Record. This record shall be
sent to the City Planner (CP), as appropriate, each month.
a. Monitoring
Monitoring of holes and/or trenches is required for all components that impact
native soils one foot deeper than existing as detailed on the plans or in the
contract documents identified by drawing number or plan file number. It is the
Construction Manager's responsibility to keep the monitors up-to-date with
current plans.
b. Discoveries
In the event of a discovery, and when requested by a Monitor, or the Principal
Investigator (PI) if the Monitor is not qualified as a PI, the Construction Manager
(CM), as appropriate, shall be contacted and shall divert, direct or temporarily halt
ground disturbing activities in the area of discovery to allow for preliminary
evaluation of potentially significant archaeological resources. The PI shall also
immediately notify the CP of such findings at the time of discovery.
c. Determination of Significance
The significance of the discovered resources shall be determined by the PI. For
significant archaeological resources, a Research Design and Data Recovery
Program shall be prepared, approved by the agency and carried out to mitigate
impacts before ground-disturbing activities in the area of discovery will be
allowed to resume.
d. Minor Discovery Process
The following is a summary of the criteria and procedures related to the
evaluation of small cultural resource deposits during excavation.
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 49
EIA Form - Part II
2. Coordination and Notification
a. Monitors shall notify PI, CM and CP, as appropriate.
3. Criteria used to Determine if it is a Small Cultural Resource Deposit
a. The deposit is limited in size both in length and depth; and,
b. The information value is limited and is not associated with any other resources;
and,
c. There are no unique features/artifacts associated with the deposit.
d. A preliminary description and photographs, if available, shall be transmitted to
the CP.
e. The information will be forwarded to the Planning Department for consultation
and verification that it is a small historic deposit.
4. Procedures for documentation, curation and reporting
The following constitutes adequate mitigation of a small historic deposit to reduce
impacts due to excavation activities to below a level of significance.
a. 100 percent of the artifacts within the alignment and width shall be documented
in-situ, to include photographic records, plan view of the trench and profiles of
sidewalls, recovered, photographed after cleaning, and analyzed and curated.
b. The remainder of the deposit within the limits of excavation (trench walls) shall
be left intact.
c. The Final Results Report shall include a requirement for monitoring of any future
work in the vicinity.
5. Notification of Completion
The Monitors shall submit monitoring reports to the CP at the end date of monitoring.
Post Construction
1. Handling and Curation of Artifacts and Letter of Acceptance
a. The Archaeologist Monitor shall be responsible for ensuring that all cultural
remains collected are cleaned, catalogued, and permanently curated with an
appropriate institution; that a letter of acceptance from the curation institution has
been submitted to the Planning Department; that all artifacts are analyzed to
identify function and chronology as they relate to the history of the area; that
faunal material is identified as to species; and that specialty studies are completed,
as applicable.
b. Curation of artifacts associated with the survey, testing and/or data recovery for
this project shall be completed in consultation with the CP and the Native
American Monitor, as applicable.
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 50
El A Form - Part II
2. Final Results Reports (Archaeological Monitoring and/or Research Design and Data
Recovery Program)
a. Within three months following the completion of monitoring, two copies of the
Final Results Report (even if negative) and/or evaluation report, if applicable,
which describes the results, analysis, and conclusions of the Archaeological
Monitoring Program (with appropriate graphics) shall be submitted to the CP for
approval.
b. For significant archaeological resources encountered during monitoring, the
Research Design and Data Recovery Program shall be included as part of the
Final Results Report.
3. Recording Sites with State of California Department of Park and Recreation
The Archaeologist Monitor shall be responsible for recording (on the appropriate State of
California Department of Park and Recreation forms-DPR 523 A/B) any significant or
potentially significant resources encountered during the Archaeological Monitoring
Program in accordance with the City's Historical Resources Guidelines, and submittal of
such forms to the South Coastal Information Center with the Final Results Report.
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature?
Less Than Significant Impact, No previous paleontological resources have been recorded
within one mile of the project site. During the site survey, one piece of marine shell and one
fragment of a large mammal bone were identified in the project vicinity (ASM 2006). However,
a close inspection of extensive excavations in the area where these resources were found did not
reveal any further potential remains, and impacts to paleontological resources would be less than
significant.
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal
cemeteries?
No Impact. No human remains were identified in the Cultural Resources Technical Report
prepared for the proposed project, and the report did not indicate the potential for remains to be
encountered during construction activities (ASM 2006). As a result, no impacts are anticipated.
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
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 51
EIA Form - Part II
Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known
fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
Less Than Significant Impact. A Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Report was
prepared in 2006 for the proposed project (Testing Engineers 2006). According to the report,
the proposed project is not located within any Earthquake Fault Zone delineated by the State
of California for the hazard of fault surface rupture (Testing Engineers 2006).
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
Less Than Significant Impact. Southern California, including the proposed project site is
located in a seismically active area. The closest known active fault to the project site is the
Rose Canyon fault zone, which is located approximately 6 miles from the site (Testing
Engineers 2006). Other active faults in the area include Elsinore-Julian, Newport-Inglewood,
Coronado Bank and Elsinore-Temecula fault zones, located approximately 23 miles, 6.5
miles, 22 miles, and 23 miles from the project site respectively. The most significant seismic
hazard at the site is considered to be shaking caused by an earthquake occurring on a nearby
or distant active fault (Testing Engineers 2006). The project does not propose to construct
any structures, and the proposed widening of the existing roadway would not result in a
significant impact such as risk of loss, injury or death due to seismic ground shaking. For
these reasons, impacts related to seismic ground shaking would be less than significant.
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
Less Than Significant Impact. Liquefaction is generally known to occur in saturated
cohesionless soils at depths shallower than approximately 50 feet. Dynamic settlement due
to earthquake shaking can occur in both dry and saturated sands. The project site is mainly
underlain by relatively dense Santiago Formation overlain by shallow, fine grained alluvial
deposits, without a groundwater table. As such, the project site is not considered to be
subject to liquefaction. The potential for liquefaction and associated ground deformation
occurring beneath the site is considered low (Testing Engineers 2006), and impacts would be
less than significant.
iv) Landslides?
Potentially Significant Impacts Unless Mitigation Incorporated. Portions of the adjacent
hillsides to the immediate west are proposed to be graded and contoured to a 1.5:1 slope, and
held in place with retaining walls, as described in the project description and under Section I,
Aesthetics. The grading and construction of retaining walls would be conducted in conformance
with the City's standards, but due to their height, scale, and potential for erosion, impacts to
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 52
EIA Form - Part 11
people or structures due to landslides is considered potentially significant. Impacts would be
mitigated with implementation of the following mitigation measure:
GEO-1: Prior to grading, the project geotechnical engineer or engineering geologist shall
prepare a Final Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Report reflecting the approved
project configuration. This geotechnical study shall, as deemed necessary by the City
Engineer and consulting geotechnical engineer, further assess slope stability and slope
stability remediation within the proposed widening footprint. The findings and
recommendations of the geotechnical assessment shall be incorporated into the final
engineering design for the project.
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated. The project would include
the improvement of the existing roadway's pavement and would also include replacement/repair
of existing storm drains to the east of the roadway, including the use of rip rap to reduce erosive
runoff velocities (refer to Figure 4 for the location of storm drains). In this way, beneficial
impacts would result.
As a result of grading and project construction, potential erosion and siltation impacts could
occur. As described in the Project Description section, grading along the western and eastern
slopes of El Camino Real is proposed. Standard BMPs would be employed during grading and
construction, such as installation of sediment barriers and gravel/sand bags to prevent offsite
sedimentation; dust abatement to minimize fugitive dust; and removal of soil tracked onto paved
surfaces. Potentially significant erosion impacts would be mitigated by implementation of the
following mitigation measures:
GEO-2: All proposed cut and fill slopes identified as susceptible to future erosion and/or soil
slippage shall be planted with an erosion retardant ground cover adhering to the
following criteria:
• The ground cover is effective in preventing surface erosion;
• The ground cover is drought resistant;
• The ground cover has a relatively low surface mass/weight;
• Has a fairly deep and extensive root system;
• Requires minimum maintenance by the owner; and
• Has a low irrigation demand.
GEO-3: The City Engineer shall be responsible for approving the appropriate erosion
control/slope failure control-planting program prior to grading.
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 53
El A Form - Part II
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?
Less Than Significant Impact. As mentioned above in response a) iii), the potential for ground
deformation occurring beneath the project site is considered low (Testing Engineers 2006). In
addition, the site is not located in an area of known ground subsidence due to the withdrawal of
subsurface fluids. Therefore the potential for subsidence or collapse occurring at the site is
considered remote (Testing Engineers 2006), and impacts would be less than significant.
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?
Less Than Significant Impact. Soils within the project site consist of silty sand, clayey sand
and/or sandy clay (Testing Engineers 2006). According to the Uniform Building Code Table 18-
I-B, these soil types are classified as having a medium to high potential as an expansive soil.
Existing soils at the project site would be removed to a depth of at least 1 foot below existing
ground surface and at least 2 feet beyond the road embankment footprint and replaced with fill
soils. Therefore, because expansive soils would be replaced, potential impacts would be less
than significant.
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?
No Impact. The project does not propose to provide septic tanks or alternative wastewater
disposal systems. Therefore, no impact would result.
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?
Less than Significant Impact. Construction activities used for the proposed widening of El
Camino Real would not include the use of explosives or acutely, hazardous materials. No
hazardous materials would be used with the exception of fuels commonly employed in
construction vehicles. As such, the project would have no significant impact with regard to
creating a potential hazardous condition to the public or the environment through routine
transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials. Impacts would be less than significant.
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?
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 54
El A Form - Part II
Less Than Significant Impact. Relatively small amounts of hazardous substances, such as
fossil fuels, lubricants, and solvents would be used onsite for construction and maintenance of
the project; however, these materials shall be transported and handled in accordance with all
federal, state, and local laws regulating the management and use of hazardous materials.
Consequently, use of these materials for their intended purpose would not pose a significant risk
to the public or environment, and impacts would be less than significant.
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
No Impact. The proposed project would not be located within one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school (City of Carlsbad 2002). As such, no impact to existing or proposed schools
would result.
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?
No Impact. According to the County of San Diego Department of Environmental Health
website (http://www.co.san-diego.ca.us/deh, accessed in August 2006), two database listings
are located along the APE, but no waste, inventory, environmental assessment, or tank
information was identified for these sites. A total of eight other listings are located within a one
mile radius of the APE. These listings consist of medical/dental facilities and one dry cleaner
site. These sites were reported as chemicals storage areas with no reports of hazardous spills or
contamination issues. Therefore, no listed sites would create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment, and no impact would occur.
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?
No Impact. The proposed project is not located within the McClellan-Palomar Airport Influence
Area of the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan for the McClellan-Palomar Airport (SANDAG
2004). In addition, the proposed project is not located within a two mile radius of any other
airport. The McClellan-Palomar Airport is located approximately 2.2 miles south of the
proposed project site. No safety hazard or impacts would result.
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?
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 55
El A Form - Pan 11
No Impact. The proposed project is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip, and no
impact would result.
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated. The widening of El Camino
Real would alleviate existing and future traffic conditions along this roadway segment.
However, during construction activities, the potential exists for increased traffic to occur within
the APE which could result in delayed response times to emergency vehicles. Mitigation has
been provided below to reduce this short-term impact to less than significant levels:
HAZ-1: Prior to grading, a traffic control plan shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the City of
Carlsbad Engineering Department. The traffic control plan shall show all signage,
striping, delineation detours, flagging operations, and any other devices, which shall be
used during construction to guide motorists safely through the construction zone and
allow for a minimum of one lane of travel. The plan shall also identify temporary
construction employee parking areas. The traffic control plan shall also include
provisions for coordinating with local emergency service providers regarding
construction times and locations of lane closures as well as specifications for pedestrian
and bicycle safety. Emergency vehicles would be permitted access through the
construction zone.
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?
Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project is located in areas adjacent to vegetated
open space that could be susceptible to wildland fires. These areas are located on both sides of
El Camino Real within and near the project APE. During the construction phase, the use and
storage of construction equipment fuel and petroleum products would increase the potential risk
of fire hazard in the area. The project incorporates design features that would comply with
County of San Diego Fire Department fuel modification requirements. Therefore, impacts are
considered less than significant.
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY - Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements?
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 56
El A Form - Part II
Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated. A Water Quality Technical
Report (WQTR) was prepared for the proposed project (Bureau Veritas 2007), as required under
the City's local Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP). The purpose of the
WQTR is to document the process that was used to select and design the site, source, and
treatment control storm water BMPs that would be incorporated in the project to mitigate the
impacts of urban runoff during and after construction.
The WQTR identifies the project as "high priority" in the City's SUSMP because it involves a
site 5 acres or larger (Bureau Veritas 2007). Also, since the project meets one or more of the
SUSMP applicability criteria, it is required to incorporate permanent stormwater BMPs into the
project design. These BMPs include site design, source control, and treatment control BMPs.
The project site is located in the Carlsbad Hydrologic Unit of the California Water Quality
Control Board's Region 9 - San Diego, within the Agua Hedionda Lagoon and Agua Hedionda
Creek Hydrologic Areas. The Carlsbad Watershed Urban Runoff Management Program
prepared by the California Water Quality Control Board's Region 9 - San Diego, identified the
following major water quality problems in the Carlsbad Hydrologic Unit: fecal coliform or
bacterial indicators and sedimentation and siltation. The San Diego Regional Water Quality
Control Board 303(d) list of impaired waterbodies included Agua Hedionda Creek for total
dissolved solids, and Agua Hedionda Lagoon for bacteria indicators and sedimentation/siltation.
The construction phase of the project is anticipated to generate sediment and construction
material waste. Sedimentation can typically be caused through erosion of unprotected graded
slopes and poor stockpile management. Construction material waste can pollute downstream
water bodies, resources and aqueous environments if not treated, handled and disposed of
properly. Grading would increase the erosion potential of onsite soils which could lead to offsite
sediment transport. Sediment, nutrients, heavy metals, organic compounds, potential oxygen
demanding substances, and oil and grease are the potential pollutants generally of concern for
roadway projects (Bureau Veritas 2007). This potential impact would be short-term (during the
construction phase) and is considered significant. Mitigation in the form of site-specific BMPs,
as recommended in the WQTR, would be implemented as discussed below. These mitigation
measures would reduce water quality impacts to below a level of significance:
HYDRO-1: A stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) shall be prepared by the City
prior to grading. The SWPPP shall identify potential sources of pollution, practices to be
used to reduce pollutants, and shall help ensure compliance with the stormwater permit.
The construction contractor shall be required to implement the approved SWPPP and any
amendments thereafter, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The SWPPP will have a
Sampling and Monitoring Program that addresses both direct discharges from the project
into a Section 303(d) water body and discharges that have been discovered through visual
October 2008 . 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 57
EIA Form - Part II
monitoring to be potentially contaminated by pollutants not visually detectable in the
runoff.
HYDRO-2: The construction contractor shall be required to implement BMPs during
construction in accordance with the plans, specifications and SWPPP prepared for the
project, the General Construction Storm Water Permit (NPDES Order 99-08-DWQ), and
to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. These BMPs shall address temporary soil
stabilization, temporary sediment control, wind erosion control, tracking control, and
non-stormwater management.
Several BMPs have been incorporated into the project design to reduce potential future impacts
related to water quality and water discharge (Bureau Veritas 2007). BMPs would be
implemented to address water quality impacts during the planning and design, and operational
stages of this project. These project BMPs are included in mitigation measures below, and
would reduce potential long-term water quality impacts to below a level of significance:
HYDRO-3: The project is considered a priority project and is therefore required to incorporate
treatment BMPs into the site. Based on the impaired waterways that exists downstream
of the APE, this project shall incorporate native planted swales as a treatment control
BMP designed to remove sedimentation/siltation to a medium or high level. This BMP
shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to grading. Native planted swales shall be
located along either side of the roadway in the parkway area or in the median as
determined by the City during the final design phase of the project. The length and
configuration of the native planted swales shall be consistent with those identified in
detail in the Water Quality Technical Report prepared for the project (Bureau Veritas
2007).
HYDRO-4: The City shall implement all maintenance operations of permanent BMPs as
outlined in Section 2.5 [Maintenance of Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4)
of their Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Plan (JURMP)]. The City's Contractor
is responsible for maintenance of construction BMPs. Operation and maintenance
requirements for the proposed permanent BMPs are provided in Table 4 below.
Table 4
Permanent BMP Operation and Maintenance Requirements
Design Criteria,
Routine Actions
Maintenance
Indicator
Field
Measurement
Measurement
Frequency
Maintenance Activity
Native Planted Swales
Inspect for erosion,
damage to vegetation,
and sediment and
Presence of erosion,
missing vegetation,
and accumulation of
Visual observation
of erosion,
damaged
Once per year
(preferably at the
beginning of the
Reinforce eroded areas with
rock rip rap.
Reseed damaged vegetation
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 58
EIA Form - Part II
Table 4
Permanent BMP Operation and Maintenance Requirements
Design Criteria,
Routine Actions
trash/debris
accumulation
Shrubbery Trimming
Inspection for standing
water
Maintenance
indicator
sedimentation and/or
debris/trash that could
interfere with proper
functioning of swale.
High growth of
shrubbery and
presence of weeds,
and/or woody
vegetation.
Standing water is
present and does not
drain after a maximum
of 72 hours.
Field
Measurement
vegetation, and
presence of
sediment and
trash/debris.
Visual observation
of shrubbery height
exceeding a 6-in.
depth and
presence of weeds
and/or woody
vegetation.
Visual observation
of standing water.
Measurement ~1
Frequency
rainy season -
October 1=1).
Trim once per year
for aesthetic and
safety purposes
and/or suppression
of shrubbery and
woody vegetation.
Once per year
(preferably at the
beginning of the
rainy season -
October 1=').
Maintenance Activity
areas.
Remove and properly dispose
of accumulated sediment
when it exceeds 3 inches
depth.
Remove and properly dispose
of debris/trash.
Trim shrubbery to no less
than 4-inch depth, but no
taller than 6-inch depth.
Weed control strategies.
Regrade areas downstream
of location where standing
water accumulates to ensure
water flows smoothly.
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)?
Less than Significant Impact. As described in response Vl.a.iii), the project site is mainly
underlain by relatively dense Santiago Formation overlain by shallow, fine grained .alluvial
deposits, without a groundwater table. The widening of El Camino Real from four to six lanes
would result in an increase to impervious surfaces along this roadway. No depletion in
groundwater supplies would result, and the scale of the project is such that it would not
substantially interfere with ground water recharge. Therefore, impacts to groundwater supplies
would be less than significant.
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner, which
would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
Less Than Significant Impact. Although the project would impact adjacent waters of the U.S.,
as analyzed in Section IV.a), the proposed project will not significantly alter drainage patterns on
the site (Bureau Veritas 2006). Stormwater within the existing storm drains currently flows at
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 59
EIA Form - Part II
erosive velocities into a ditch east of the roadway. This has resulted in erosion of the existing
embankment along the east side of the roadway, pavement cracking and weathering, and
bumps/sags. The project proposes to replace and/or improve the existing storm drains within the
project APE and provide erosion protection in the ditch and/or construct check dams within the
ditch. These proposed project features would remedy the existing erosion condition. Impacts
would be less than significant.
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?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will not significantly alter drainage
patterns on the site (Bureau Veritas 2006). The proposed project would replace and/or improve
the existing storm drains within the project limits as the majority of the existing system is at
capacity. The proposed project would result in a minor increase to surface runoff due to the
proposed widening of El Camino Real, and this minor increase in surface runoff would not
substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area. Therefore, impacts would be
• less than significant.
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?
Less Than Significant Impact. The widening of El Camino Real from four to six lanes would
result in a minimal increase in runoff, including polluted runoff. As stated in the Preliminary
Hydrology/Hydraulics Study for El Camino Real Widening (Bureau Veritas 2006) the majority
of the existing storm drain system within the project limit is at capacity and therefore the project
is proposing to replace and/or improve the existing storm drains within the project limits to
accommodate project runoff. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
Less Than Significant Impact. See responses to Hydrology and Water Quality a) through e)
above.
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a Federal Flood
Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood delineation map?
October 2008 • 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 60
EIA Form - Part II
No Impact. The proposed project does not include the construction of any housing units. In
addition, the project is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area (SANGIS 1997). No
impact is assessed.
h) Place within 100-year flood hazard area structures, which would impede or
redirect flood flows?
No Impact. The propose project does not propose the construction of any structures that would
impede or redirect flood flows. In addition, as mentioned above the proposed project is not
located within a 100-year flood hazard area. No impact is assessed.
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving
flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
No Impact. The proposed project is not located within any inundation area and therefore would
not expose people or structures to a significant risk or loss of injury or death involving flooding.
No impact assessed.
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is located approximately 1 mile northeast of
Agua Hedionda Lagoon, 2.5 miles east of the Pacific Ocean, and 1.6 miles south of Buena Vista
Lagoon. The proposed project is located approximately 77 to 286 feet above mean see level.
Due to the elevation and distance of the Pacific Ocean tsunamis are not considered a hazard at
the project site. Due to the shallowness of the lagoons, and the position of the site being upslope
from these water bodies, potential impacts from a seiche or mudflow would not result.
Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
No Impact. The proposed project is located in the northern part of the City and would consist of
widening an existing roadway from four to six lanes to accommodate existing and future traffic.
The improvement of the existing road facility is consistent with the City's General Plan. Since
El Camino Real is an existing roadway, the proposed widening of the roadway would not
physically divide an established community, and no impact would result.
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,
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 61
El A Form - Part II
specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
Less Than Significant Impact. The project proposes to widen El Camino Real to its ultimate
width of six travel lanes, which is consistent with its General Plan designation for prime arterial
roadways. As such, no conflict with the General Plan would result, and since the project would
provide ultimate Circulation Element configuration improvements for this segment of El Camino
Real, a land use policy benefit would result.
As shown in Figures 9a through 9d, the project site is located within the Coastal Zone as part of
the City's Local Coastal Program (LCP). The project would be consistent with the City General
Plan and would not conflict with the LCP. For a discussion on sensitive biological resources
within the Coastal Zone, refer to Section IV, Biological Resources, responses a) and b).
The project is also subject to the City's Hillside Development Regulations, per Chapter 21.95 of
the City Municipal Code (1998). The key purpose and intent of the regulations is to assure
hillside conditions are properly identified and incorporated into the planning process, and to
preserve and/or enhance the aesthetic qualities of natural hillsides and manufactured slopes of
the land, minimizing the amount of project grading, especially in highly visible public places.
The project is subject to a Hillside Development Permit due to its proposed grading and
construction of a retaining wall along the western slope of the project segment. As described
above under Aesthetics, the project is subject to El Camino Real Corridor Development
Standards and would not conflict with those standards given its incorporation of key features
such as a boulderscape retaining wall, landscaping, and other improvements such as sidewalks.
These project features would also be consistent with the Hillside Development Regulations since
they intend to improve the visual quality of the adjacent hillsides and street corridor.
Overall, the project would be consistent with applicable plans, and impacts would be less than
significant.
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community
conservation plan?
Less Than Significant Impact. As stated in Section IV, Biological Resources item f), the
proposed project site is located within the City of Carlsbad's HMP and is part of the El Camino
Real Widening - South Chestnut to South Alga street project, which is covered by proposed City
Lands mitigation bank. The proposed project would comply with its guidelines and
requirements, and would be consistent with the Carlsbad's HMP. Impacts would be less than
significant.
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 62
El A Form - Part II
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?
No Impact. According to the California Department of Conservation Division of Mines and
Geology's (CDMG) Generalized Mineral Land Classification Map of Western San Diego
County, California, the proposed project site and its surrounding areas are classified as Mineral
Resource Zone (MRZ)-3 (CDMG 1996). MRZ-3 is defined as areas containing mineral deposits
the significance of which cannot be evaluated from available data (CDMG 1996). Also, the
City's General Plan does not identify mineral resources within its jurisdictional area. Overall, no
impacts to mineral resources would occur.
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?
No Impact. As stated above in response a), the project site is not located in an area designated
for possessing locally important minerals. The project site is located in a semi-developed area
and consists of widening an existing roadway, with no impacts to any known mineral resource
recovery sites. No mineral impacts would result as a result of implementing the proposed
project.
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?
Less Than Significant Impact. An Acoustical Assessment Report was prepared for the project
in 2006, and is summarized in this section (Dudek 2006).
The City's General Plan has designated the maximum noise exterior level of 60 dBA community
noise equivalency level (CNEL) for new residential, schools and churches. In addition, interior
noise levels for new residential development should not exceed 45 dBA CNEL. The City has not
adopted specific road widening significance thresholds for existing noise sensitive land uses. The
existing measured hourly average noise levels ranged from 67 to 72 dBA at the backyards of the
adjacent residences along both sides of El Camino Real, within the project APE (Figure 10).
These noise levels do not account for noise attenuation of any existing barriers such as sound
walls or wood fences that exist. Since the existing noise levels exceed the City's threshold, the
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 63
El A Form - Part II
Acoustical Assessment Report determined that a noise impact would be significant if the traffic
noise level increase exceeds three (3) dBA CNEL and either elevates noise levels above the
City's noise criteria limits or exceeds three (3) dBA increase above an already noisy existing
condition.
Noise levels generated by construction equipment would vary greatly depending on factors such
as the type and specific model of the equipment, the operation being performed and the condition
of the equipment. The maximum noise levels would range from approximately 75 to 95 dBA for
the equipment normally used for this type of project. Construction activities are expected to
comply with the City's permitted hours of operation - for prime arterials, the City's standard
weekday construction hours are 8:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Since this segment of El Camino Real
has substantial directional flow, the City may pursue an extension of construction hours until
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 64
LEGEND
Scale in Feet
TOPO SOURCE: Berryman & Henigar, Dec. 2005
. . . Noise Measurement Location
. . . Receptor Location
. . APE Boundary
El Camino Real Widening Project - MND
Noise Measurement & Receiver Locations
El A Form - Part II
5:00 p.m. in the afternoon, depending on the direction of El Camino Real under construction.
The extension of hours would require use of a traffic control plan, as identified in the HAZ-1
mitigation measure (Section VII, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, response g). Because the
Tamarack Avenue and Chestnut Avenue intersections have school pedestrians crossing El
Camino Real, the contractor would not be allowed to initiate the traffic control plan in either
direction before 8:30 a.m.
Furthermore, the City may elect to allow construction on Saturdays, in an effort to reduce the
overall duration of construction. This option would also result in the need to implement the
traffic control plan (per HAZ-1).
Overall, regardless of which construction scenario the City ultimately pursues, construction
activities would comply with the City's permitted hours for construction activities, and would be
short-term, and therefore the construction noise impact would be less than significant.
The short-term with project CNEL would result in an increase of less than one (1) dBA at the
adjacent residences as compared to the short-term noise levels without the project (Dudek 2006).
Therefore, short-term noise impacts are considered less than significant, since the noise levels
would not exceed the three (3) dBA threshold.
Long-term impacts were addressed for the year 2030. Year 2030 noise levels with incorporation
of the proposed project would range from approximately 68 to 74 dBA CNEL at the backyards
of the adjacent residents along El Camino Real. The year 2030 with the proposed project CNEL
would result in an increase of less than one (1) dBA at the adjacent residences as compared to the
noise levels without the proposed project. Therefore, long-term noise increase impacts would
also be less than significant, since the project noise increase would not exceed the significance
threshold.
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundbourne vibration or
groundbourne noise levels?
Less Than Significant Impact. During the construction phase of the project, the generation of
groundbourne vibration or intermittently high noise levels may occur. However, these activities
would occur during the permitted hours of construction activities in compliance with the City's
Noise Ordinance and therefore impacts would be less than significant.
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity
above levels existing without the project?
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 66
EIA Form - Part II
Less Than Significant Impact. As mentioned above in response a) the proposed project would
result in an increase of one (1) dBA CNEL over the long term. Since a noise level change of
three (3) dBA is generally considered to be a perceptible change in environmental noise, a
substantial permanent increase in ambient noise level within the project vicinity would not result.
The increase in ambient noise level would be less than significant.
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the
project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
Less Than Significant Impact. As mentioned above in response a), the proposed project would
result in a temporary noise increase during construction activities. However, construction
activities would be permitted to occur in accordance with the hours stated in the City's Noise
Ordinance and therefore impact would be less than significant.
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?
No Impact. The proposed project is not located within 2 miles of a public airport or public use
airport. Therefore, no impact would result.
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?
No Impact. The proposed project is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip.
Accordingly, no impact would result.
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)?
Less Than Significant Impact. The widening of El Camino Real to the proposed configuration
of this segment of roadway would accommodate planned development consistent with the City's
General Plan. The widening of this existing roadway from four to six lanes would not induce
substantial unplanned growth in the area, and would not change any allowed density and/or
zoning on adjacent properties. Impacts would be less than significant.
October 2008 . 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 67
El A Form - Part II
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction
of replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact. As identified in the project description, the proposed project would result in the
acquisition of 6,946 square feet (0.16 acre) of private property on the western side of El Camino
Real, affecting parts of 4 parcels. These parcels are privately owned and currently vacant. There
are no structures within the proposed acquisition area and no displacement of existing housing
would result. Also, no change to allowed density or zoning would result. Therefore, no impact
would result. The City of Carlsbad would work with the private property owner to determine the
fair market value of the property to be acquired. Also, the proposed grading across APNs 167-
230-24 and 167-230-25 along the northeast portion of the APE would not result in impacts to
existing housing. No housing would be displaced, and the proposed grading would be performed
in such a fashion as to replace the in-kind driveway access to the property.
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact. Refer to response b) above. No people would be displaced as a result of
implementing the proposed project. No impact assessed.
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES - Would the project:
a) 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?
Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated. The nearest fire
protection station, Fire Station 3, is located approximately 300 feet northeast of the project
site at 3701 Catalina Drive. The widening of El Camino Real would alleviate the existing
traffic congestion along the roadway and allow better access for public emergency services
and improve their response times. The demand for fire services in the area is not expected to
increase as a result of implementing the proposed project. Temporary construction phase
impacts may result during project construction, and as identified in HAZ-1 mitigation
measure provided in the Hazards and Hazardous Materials section, response g), the Traffic
Control Plan would ensure that emergency response services would be provided with
information concerning the closures and the applicable contract information to reach the
October 2008 ________^__ 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 68
E1A Form - Part II
onsite construction manager. This would allow prior notification to ensure that access
through the construction area is possible upon arrival of an emergency vehicle. Therefore,
temporary impacts during the construction phase would be reduced to less than significant.
No long-term operational phase impacts are assessed.
ii) Police Protection?
Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated. The City of Carlsbad
maintains one police station at 2560 Orion Way. The station is located approximately 1.2
miles southeast of the proposed project site. The demand of police protection services is not
anticipated to increase with implementation of the proposed project, and no impacts were
assessed for the long-term operational phase of the proposed project. As described in
response i) above, the Traffic Control Plan provided in Hazards and Hazardous Materials
section, response g), would ensure that temporary impacts would be reduced to less than
significant.
Since emergency response services would be provided with information concerning any
potential road closures and the applicable contract information of the onsite construction
manager to ensure prior notification of access, temporary impacts would be less than
significant.
iii) Schools?
No Impact. The proposed project would not affect existing or proposed schools within the
area, since no housing is proposed, and no increase in students would result. No impact
assessed.
iv) Parks?
No Impact. The proposed project would not result in the increased use of existing parks,
since no population would be introduced as a result of the project. No impact assessed.
v) Other public facilities?
No Impact. No additional public facilities, such as public libraries, would be impacted as a
result of the proposed widening of El Camino Real. No impact assessed.
XIV. RECREATION - Would the project:
a) 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?
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 69
EIA Form - Part II
No Impact. The proposed widening of El Camino Real and its project components would not
result in the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities. No
impact is assessed.
b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the
environment?
No Impact. The proposed project does not include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational facilities. It should also be noted that the City's
General Plan does not propose any recreational facilities within the APE. No impact assessed.
XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC—Would the project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to the existing traffic
load and capacity of the street system?
No Impact. El Camino Real, between Chestnut Avenue and Tamarack Avenue, currently
consists of two northbound and two southbound traffic lanes. The City of Carlsbad's General
Plan has designated this road as a prime arterial roadway. Various developments in the project
vicinity have resulted in requirements of developers to widen El Camino Real to its full prime
arterial standards. The proposed project area is one of the few remaining sections of El Camino
Real that has not been widened to its ultimate width of three southbound lanes and three
northbound lanes. The proposed project consists of the widening of El Camino Real, from
Chestnut Avenue to Tamarack Avenue, to its ultimate width of three lanes in each direction. The
widening of this roadway would help to alleviate traffic along this segment. The project consists
of road widening improvements and therefore does not generate traffic.
As described in the MND project description, based on recommendations provided in the traffic
study, the project plans include improvements at the El Camino Real/Tamarack Avenue
intersection, consisting of an additional northbound and southbound thru lane on El Camino
Real, and an additional northbound left-turn lane on El Camino Real at the intersection, as shown
in Figure 5. With these improvements in place, future 2030 operating conditions would result in
LOS D at this intersection, and no impacts would result.
The traffic study projected a year 2030 LOS D for the El Camino Real / Chestnut intersection
(LLG 2006). No other deficiencies or impacts were identified, and therefore no impacts would
result.
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 70
El A Form - Part II
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard
established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads
or highways?
No Impact. SANDAG, acting as the County Congestion Management Agency, has designated
three roads (Rancho Santa Fe Road, El Camino Real and Palomar Airport Road) and two
highway segments in Carlsbad as part of the regional circulation system. The Existing and
Buildout average daily traffic (ADT) and Existing LOS on these designated roads and highways
in Carlsbad are:
Existing ADT* LOS Buildout ADT*
Rancho Santa Fe Road 17-35 "A-D" 35-56
El Camino Real 27-49 • "A-C" 33-62
Palomar Airport Road 10-57 "A-D" 30-73
SR78 124-142 "F" 156-180
I-5 199-216 "D" . 260-272
*The numbers are in thousands of daily trips.
The Congestion Management Program's (CMP) acceptable 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 highways are currently operating at or better than the acceptable
standard LOS.
Note that the CMP buildout ADT projections are based on the full implementation of the
region's general and community plans. The proposed project is consistent with the City General
Plan (including the Circulation Element) and, therefore its traffic was used in modeling the
buildout projections. Achievement of the CMP acceptable LOS E standard assumes
implementation of the adopted CMP strategies. Based on the design capacities of the designated
roads and highways and implementation of the CMP strategies, they will function at acceptable
levels of service in the short-term and at buildout.
The traffic study forecasted 2030 volumes for El Camino Real between Chestnut Avenue and
Tamarack Avenue to be 34,700 ADT (LLG 2006). This buildout ADT volume is consistent with
what is projected by the County's Congestion Management Agency, and no impacts would
result.
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?
No Impact. The proposed project does not include any aviation components, and no part of the
proposed roadway improvements would conflict with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan for the
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 71
E1A Form - Part II
McClellan-Palomar Airport. It would not result in a change of air traffic patterns or result in
substantial safety risks, and no impacts would result.
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature or incompatible uses?
No Impact. All project circulation improvements would be designed and constructed to City
standards and no feature of the project would result in a design hazard. The proposed project is
consistent with the City's General Plan and would not result in any incompatible land uses.
Overall, no impacts would result.
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated. The proposed project has
been designed to satisfy the emergency requirements of the Fire and Police Departments. During
the construction phase lane closures along El Camino Real (within the project boundary) could
occur, which could result in inadequate emergency response times. However, with
implementation of a Traffic Control Plan, potential impacts would be reduced to less than
significant levels. Refer to HAZ-1 mitigation measure in Section VII, Hazards and Hazardous
Materials, response g).
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity?
No Impact. Parking is currently prohibited along El Camino Real, within the project boundary.
The proposed project would not produce the need for increased parking facilities within the APE.
Construction staging areas including employee parking areas would be defined in the Traffic
Control Plan that is described in the HAZ-1 mitigation measure provided above in the Hazards
and Hazardous Materials section, response g). No impacts to parking would result.
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative
transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks, etc.)?
Less Than Significant Impact. An existing North County Transit District (NCTD) bus stop is
located on the west side of El Camino Real just south of Chestnut Avenue. This existing bus
stop would be relocated within the project APE, although no specific location has yet been
determined by the City. No bicycle racks or other alternative transportation is provided along
this portion of El Camino Real. A bicycle lane is currently located on both sides of El Camino
Real, and the widening of this roadway segment involves the reconstruction of the bicycle lanes.
During construction of the proposed project, access to one of the two bicycle lanes would be
provided at all times. Therefore the redirected bicycle route would be short term. For these
October 2008 __^_____ 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 72
El A Form - Part II
reasons, the project would not conflict with alternative transportation programs and impacts
would be less than significant.
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS - Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water
Quality Control Board?
No Impact. Project implementation would not impact wastewater treatment services of the
applicable wastewater service provider, since the project involves a roadway widening project
with no alteration to vicinity wastewater services. No impact would result.
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?
No Impact. The proposed project would not result in the construction of a new water or
wastewater treatment facility, and would not entail the expansion of existing facilities, since
water and wastewater systems are not proposed to be altered. Therefore, no impacts would
result.
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?
Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated. According to the Preliminary
Hydrology/Hydraulics Study for El Camino Real Widening (Bureau Veritas 2006), the majority
of the existing storm drain systems within the project limits are at capacity. As identified in the
project description, the project proposes to replace or improve the existing storm drains within
the APE and provide erosion protection in the existing ditch. These improvements have the
potential to result in significant effects to biological resources as analyzed in that section, since
waters and wetlands would be significantly affected. Mitigation provided under response b) in
Section IV, Biological Resources, would reduce potential impacts to less than significant.
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing
entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would require minimal new water
supplies to serve irrigation needs of the project. Also, the project does not meet the requirements
of a "regionally significant project" per Senate Bill (SB) 610 as it would not require expanded
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 73
EIA Form - Part II
use of water supplies. Therefore, the project is not subject to enhanced CEQA requirements per
SB 610. Impacts would be less than significant.
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?
No Impact. The City owns and maintains sewage pipelines, pump stations and other facilities
used to convey wastewater for treatment. Within the City, the wastewater system is comprised
of major trunk lines, smaller collector lines, and lift stations. Wastewater treatment services are
provided by the Encina Wastewater Authority (EWA). Project implementation would not impact
wastewater treatment, since no demand would result with implementation of the road widening
project. No impact would result.
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the
project's solid waste disposal needs?
Less Than Significant Impact. Solid waste disposal is provided by Waste Management, Inc.,
which operates under a franchise agreement with the City. The project would generate a limited
amount of solid waste during construction. It is anticipated that the solid waste generated by
project construction would not be substantial or interfere with the permitted capacity of nearby
landfills and therefore would have a less than significant impact on local solid waste facilities.
No regular solid waste disposal is proposed as part of project operations. Impacts would be less
than significant.
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid
waste?
No Impact. All solid waste would be disposed of in an approved site in compliance with
federal, state and County regulations (see response f) above). No impacts would result.
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?
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 74
El A Form - Part II
Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated. Based on evaluation and
discussions contained in this Initial Study and MND, the proposed project has limited potential
to degrade the quality of the environment. The proposed project would not significantly affect
the environment with the recommended mitigation measures incorporated into the project,
particularly for the topics of biological resources and cultural resources as analyzed herein.
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects
of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future
projects?)
Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated. Mitigation measures are
provided to reduce the project's significant impacts to biological resources, cultural resources,
geology/soils, hazard and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, public services,
transportation/traffic, and utilities and service systems. With the incorporation of the project
mitigation measures identified in this MND, project-level impacts to the environment would be
reduced to less than significant levels, and impacts would not be cumulatively considerable when
viewed in connection with the effects of reasonably foreseeable projects.
c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause the substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Less Than Significant Impact. No feature of the proposed project would result in substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. Impacts would be less than
significant.
XVIII. 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.
Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan for the McClellan-Palomar Airport. San Diego Association
of Governments (SANDAG). Amended October 4, 2004.
Biological Resources Technical Report for the El Camino Real Road Widening Carlsbad,
California. Dudek. September 2007.
October 2008 . . 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 75
EIA Form - Part II
California, State of. Department of Conservation, Division of Land Resources Protection
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. 1998. San Diego County Important
Farmland. Sheet 1 of 2.
California, State of. Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology. 1996. Tan,
S.S., and Kennedy, M.P. Geologic Maps of the Northwestern part of San Diego County,
California. DMG Open-File Report 96-02, pis. 1-2 (map sheets, 1:24,000).
Carlsbad General Plan. City of Carlsbad. April 20, 1994. Adopted September 6, 1994.
County of San Diego Department of Environmental Health, DEH home page, accessed via
http://www.co.san-diego.ca.us/deh website. Visited in August 2006.
Cultural Resource Report for the El Camino Real Widening Project, Carlsbad, San Diego
County, California. ASM Affiliates. September 4, 2007.
El Camino Real Corridor Development Standards, February 8,1984.
El Camino Real Widening (Tamarack Avenue to Chestnut Avenue) Acoustical Assessment
Report. Dudek. September 2007.
Final Master Environmental Impact Report for the City of Carlsbad General Plan Update (MEIR
93-01). City of Carlsbad Planning Department. March 1994.
Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Report. El Camino Real Road Widening Project.
Testing Engineers - US Labs, Inc. 2006. March 28, 2006.
Habitat Management Plan for Natural Communities in the City of Carlsbad. City of Carlsbad.
November 2004.
Hillside Development Design Regulations, Chapter 21.95 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. City
of Carlsbad 1998.
Preliminary Hydrology/Hydraulics Study for El Camino Real Widening. Bureau Veritas. March
13, 2006.
San Diego County Floodplain. SANGIS. June 1997.
Traffic Analysis Report. El Camino Real Widening. City of Carlsbad, California. Linscott Law
and Greenspan Engineers. April 20, 2006.
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 76
EIA Form - Part II
Update of Mineral Land Classification: Aggregate Materials in the Western San Diego County
Production - Consumption Region. DMG Open File Report 96-04. State of California,
Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology. 1996.
Water Quality Technical Report - El Camino Real Widening Improvement Project. Bureau
Veritas, August 3, 2007.
Zoning Map. City of Carlsbad GIS. July 25, 2006
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 77
ElA Form - Part II
LIST OF MITIGATING MEASURES
Biological Resources
Mitigation Measures for Sensitive Vegetation Communities
BIO-1: Prior to grading, significant direct impacts to sensitive vegetation communities shall be
mitigated in the amounts shown in the discussion below. Mitigation shall be
implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Department. The mitigation ratios
are also displayed in Table 2.
• The loss of 0.01 acre (715 square feet) of disturbed native grassland within the
Coastal Zone (CZ) shall be mitigated at a ratio of 3:1 at the City of Carlsbad's
Lake Calavera Mitigation Bank.
• The loss of 0.29 acre of CZ coastal sage scrub and the loss of 0.58 acre of non-CZ
coastal sage scrub shall be mitigated at a 2:1 and 1:1 ratio, respectively, at the
City of Carlsbad's Lake Calavera Mitigation Bank.
• Loss of 0.34 acre of eucalyptus woodland and 2.19 acres of disturbed lands shall
be mitigated by 0.03 acre and 0.22 acre habitat preservation, respectively, at the
Lake Calavera Mitigation Bank, and may be out-of-kind.
TABLE 2
Recommended Mitigation for Impacts to Sensitive Vegetation
and Jurisdictional Waters (Acres)
VEGETATION
COMMUNITY
Coastal sage scrub
(including disturbed)1
Native grassland-disturbed 1
Non-native grassland
Riparian scrub
(including disturbed)
Ephemeral channel
Intermittent channel
Eucalyptus woodland
Disturbed lands
COASTAL ZONE
IMPACT
0.29
0.01
—
—
_
...
—
0.32
-MITIGATION?
Ratio
2:1
3:1
—
—
--
...
—
0.1:1
Acres
0.58
0.03
_
—
—
_
—
0.03
OTHER
IMPACT
0.58
—
—
0.04
0.01
0.03
0.34
1.87
MITIGATION
Ratio
1:1
—
_.
3:11
1:1'
1:11
0.1:1
0.1:1
Acres
0.58
—
—
0.12
0.01
0.03
—
0.23
TOTAL
Creation
—
—
-
0.04
0.01
0.03
—
...
Preservation
—
—
_
0.08
_
_
0.03
0.19
Total
1.16
0.03
_
0.12
0.01
0.03
0.03
0,19
1 In accordance with Table 11 on page D-113 of the HMP, City projects with impacts to these habitats are mitigated at Lake
Calavera Mitigation Bank at the indicated ratios but no distinction is made between creation and preservation.
Mitigation measures for impacts to southern willow scrub are discussed below under response b).
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 78
EIA Form - Part II
Mitigation Measures for Sensitive Wildlife Species
BIO-2: Prior to grading, significant direct impacts to sensitive wildlife species shall be mitigated
to the satisfaction of the City Planning Department. The following mitigation measures
would avoid impacts to Cooper's hawk, other raptors and other migratory bird species
nests protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act:
• The City's construction contractor shall conduct vegetation clearing outside of the
January through September bird breeding season; or
• A qualified biologist shall conduct a focused survey for bird nests not more than
72 hours prior to commencement of vegetation clearing activities. If active nests
are found, the City's construction contractor shall cease construction within an
appropriate buffer zone of 50 to 300 feet, as determined by the project biologist,
around the nest site until juveniles have fledged and the nesting cycle is complete.
Impacts to Cooper's hawk, Dulzura California pocket mouse, and northwestern San Diego
pocket mouse shall be mitigated through creation and/or preservation of riparian scrub and
eucalyptus woodland (Cooper's hawk), and coastal sage scrub and grassland (pocket mice)
habitats discussed under BIO-1 above. [Note: the loss of approximately 0.38 acre of potential
Cooper's hawk nesting habitat (eucalyptus and riparian scrub) shall be mitigated through
creation or preservation of 012 acres of riparian habitat and 0.03 acre of eucalyptus woodland.]
The location of the riparian scrub would be determined as part of the CDFG 1602 permit
process.
Mitigation Measures for Jurisdictional Waters
BIO-3 Prior to grading, significant direct impacts to Jurisdictional waters and riparian habitats
shall be mitigated to the satisfaction of the City Planning Department. The following
mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a level below significance:
• Mitigation for impacts to Jurisdictional waters and riparian habitats shall include
1:1 creation in accordance with the "no net loss" wetlands policy in the Carlsbad
HMP. Impacts to 0.04 acre of southern willow scrub shall be mitigated at a ratio
of 3:1, includingcreation at a minimum 1:1 ratio. Mitigation will occur in the City
of Carlsbad within the Agua Hedionda Creek watershed or through the purchase
of wetlands mitigation credits at the North County Habitat Bank.
• Impacts to 0.03 acre of ephemeral and intermittent stream channels shall be
mitigated through creation of 0.03 acre of stream channel (or superior) habitat.
• A combined total of 0.07 acre of wetland habitat and Jurisdictional stream
channels shall be created in partial mitigation for wetland impacts.
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 79
EIA Form ~ Part II
• A Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404 Nationwide Permit shall be required from
the ACOE for project impacts to 0.03 acre of ACOE-jurisdictional waters.
• A CWA Section 401 permit from RWQCB shall be required for impacts to 0.03
acre of waters under their jurisdiction.
• A CDFG Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement shall be required from
CDFG for impacts to 0.07 acre of jurisdictional waters and riparian vegetation.
Cultural Resources
CULT-1: Archeological monitoring shall occur during all earthmoving activities, to the
satisfaction of the City of Carlsbad Planning Department. The mitigation monitoring
program shall consist of the following measures:
Prior to Preconstmction (Precon) Meeting
1. Planning Department Plan Check
a. The requirements for Archaeological Monitoring and Native American
Monitoring shall be included on the appropriate construction documents.
Archaeological and Native American Monitoring shall be performed by a single
qualified individual.
2. Submit Letter of Qualification to the Planning Department
a. Prior to the first Precon Meeting, the City shall provide a letter of verification
stating that a qualified Archaeologist has been retained to implement the
monitoring program.
3. Records Search Prior to Precon Meeting
a. At least thirty days prior to the Precon Meeting the qualified Archaeologist shall
verify to the City that a records search has been completed and updated as
necessary and be prepared to introduce any pertinent information concerning
expectations and probabilities of discovery during grading activities. Verification
includes, but is not limited to, a copy of a confirmation letter from South Coast
Information Center or, if the search was in-house, a letter of verification from the
Archaeologist stating that the search was completed.
Precon Meeting
1. Archaeologist/Native American Monitor Shall Attend Precon Meetings
a. Prior to beginning any work that requires monitoring, the City shall arrange a
Precon Meeting that shall include the Archaeologist, Construction Manager
and/or Grading Contractor. The qualified Archaeologist shall attend any grading
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 80
El A Form - Part II
related Precon Meetings to make comments and/or suggestions concerning the
Archaeological Monitoring program with the Construction Manager and/or
Grading Contractor.
2. Identify Areas to be Monitored
a. At the Precon Meeting, the Archaeologist shall submit to the City Planner a copy
of the site/grading plan (reduced to 11x17) that identifies areas to be monitored as
well as areas that may require delineation of grading limits.
During Construction
1. Archaeologist/Native American Monitor Shall be Present During Grading/Excavation
The qualified Archaeologist shall be present full-time during grading/excavation of native
soils and shall document activity via the Consultant Monitor Record. This record shall be
sent to the City Planner (CP), as appropriate, each month.
a. Monitoring
Monitoring of holes and/or trenches is required for all components that impact
native soils one foot deeper than existing as detailed on the plans or in the
contract documents identified by drawing number or plan file number. It is the
Construction Manager's responsibility to keep the monitors up-to-date with
current plans.
b. Discoveries
In the event of a discovery, and when requested by the Archaeologist, or the
Principal Investigator (PI) if the Monitor is not qualified as a PI, the Construction
Manager (CM), as appropriate, shall be contacted and shall divert, direct or
temporarily halt ground disturbing activities in the area of discovery to allow for
preliminary evaluation of potentially significant archaeological resources. The PI
shall also immediately notify the CP of such findings at the time of discovery.
c. Determination of Significance
The significance of the discovered resources shall be determined by the PI. For
significant archaeological resources, a Research Design and Data Recovery
Program shall be prepared, approved by the agency and carried out to mitigate
impacts before ground-disturbing activities in the area of discovery will be
allowed to resume.
d. Minor Discovery Process
The following is a summary of the criteria and procedures related to the
evaluation of small cultural resource deposits during excavation.
2. Coordination and Notification
a. Archaeological Monitor shall notify PI, CM and CP, as appropriate.
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 81
El A Form - Part II
3. Criteria used to Determine if it is a Small Cultural Resource Deposit
a. The deposit is limited in size both in length and depth; and,
b. The information value is limited and is not associated with any other resources;
and,
c. There are no unique features/artifacts associated with the deposit.
d. A preliminary description and photographs, if available, shall be transmitted to
the CP.
e. The information will be forwarded to the Planning Department for consultation
and verification that it is a small historic deposit.
4. Procedures for documentation, curation and reporting
The following constitutes adequate mitigation of a small historic deposit to reduce
impacts due to excavation activities to below a level of significance.
a. 100 percent of the artifacts within the alignment and width shall be documented
in-situ, to include photographic records, plan view of the trench and profiles of
sidewalls, recovered, photographed after cleaning, and analyzed and curated.
b. The remainder of the deposit within the limits of excavation (trench walls) shall
be left intact.
c. The Final Results Report shall include a requirement for monitoring of any future
work in the vicinity.
5. Notification of Completion
The Archaeologist shall submit a monitoring report to the CP at the end date of
monitoring.
Post Construction
1. Handling and Curation of Artifacts and Letter of Acceptance
a. The Archaeologist shall be responsible for ensuring that all cultural remains
collected are cleaned, catalogued, and permanently curated with an appropriate
institution; that a letter of acceptance from the curation institution has been
submitted to the Planning Department; that all artifacts are analyzed to identify
function and chronology as they relate to the history of the area; that faunal
material is identified as to species; and that specialty studies are completed, as
applicable.
b. Curation of artifacts associated with the survey, testing and/or data recovery for
this project shall be completed in consultation with the CP and the Native
American representative, as applicable.
2. Final Results Reports (Archaeological Monitoring and/or Research Design and Data
Recovery Program)
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 82
EIA Form - Part II
a. Within three months following the completion of monitoring, two copies of the
Final Results Report (even if negative) and/or evaluation report, if applicable,
which describes the results, analysis, and conclusions of the Archaeological
Monitoring Program (with appropriate graphics) shall be submitted to the CP for
approval.
b. For significant archaeological resources encountered during monitoring, the
Research Design and Data Recovery Program shall be included as part of the
Final Results Report.
3. Recording Sites with State of California Department of Park and Recreation
The Archaeologist shall be responsible for recording (on the appropriate State of
California Department of Park and Recreation forms-DPR 523 A/B) any significant or
potentially significant resources- encountered during the Archaeological Monitoring
Program in accordance with the City's Historical Resources Guidelines, and submittal of
such forms to the South Coastal Information Center with the Final Results Report.
Geology and Soils
GEO-1: Prior to grading, the project geotechnical engineer or engineering geologist shall
prepare a Final Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Report reflecting the approved
project configuration. This geotechnical study shall, as deemed necessary by the City
Engineer and consulting geotechnical engineer, further assess slope stability and slope
stability remediation within the proposed widening footprint. The findings and
recommendations of the geotechnical assessment shall be incorporated into the final
engineering design for the project.
GEO-2: All proposed cut and fill slopes identified as susceptible to future erosion and/or soil
slippage shall be planted with an erosion retardant ground cover adhering to the
following criteria:
• The ground cover is effective in preventing surface erosion;
• The ground cover is drought resistant;
• The ground cover has a relatively low surface mass/weight;
• Has a fairly deep and extensive root system;
• Requires minimum maintenance by the owner; and
• Has a low irrigation demand.
GEO-3: The City Engineer shall be responsible for approving the appropriate erosion
control/slope failure control-planting program prior to grading.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 83
El A Form - Part II
HAZ-1: Prior to grading, a traffic control plan shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the City of
Carlsbad Engineering Department. The traffic control plan shall show all signage,
striping, delineation detours, flagging operations, and any other devices, which shall be
used during construction to guide motorists safely through the construction zone and
allow for a minimum of one lane of travel. The plan shall also identify temporary
construction employee parking areas. The traffic control plan shall also include
provisions for coordinating with local emergency service providers regarding
construction times and locations of lane closures as well as specifications for pedestrian
and bicycle safety. Emergency vehicles would be permitted access through the
construction zone.
Hydrology and Water Quality
HYDRO-1: A stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) shall be prepared by the City
prior to grading. The SWPPP shall identify potential sources of pollution, practices to be
used to reduce pollutants, and shall help ensure compliance with the stormwater permit.
The construction contractor shall be required to implement the approved SWPPP and any
amendments thereafter, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The SWPPP will have a
Sampling and Monitoring Program that addresses both direct discharges from the project
into a Section 303(d) water body and discharges that have been discovered through visual
monitoring to be potentially contaminated by pollutants not visually detectable in the
runoff.
HYDRO-2: The construction contractor shall be required to implement BMPs during
construction in accordance with the plans, specifications and SWPPP prepared for the
project, the General Construction Storm Water Permit (NPDES Order 99-08-DWQ), and
to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. These BMPs shall address temporary soil
stabilization, temporary sediment control, wind erosion control, tracking control, and
non-storm water management.
HYDRO-3: The project is considered a priority project and is therefore required to incorporate
treatment BMPs into the site. Based on the impaired waterways that exists downstream
of the APE, this project shall incorporate native planted swales as a treatment control
BMP designed to remove sedimentation/siltation to a medium or high level. This BMP
shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to grading. Native planted swales shall be
located along either side of the roadway in the parkway area or in the median as
determined by the City during the final design phase of the project. The length and
configuration of the native planted swales shall be consistent with those identified in
detail in the Water Quality Technical Report prepared for the project (Bureau Veritas
2007).
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 84
EIA Form - Part II
HYDRO-4: The City shall implement all maintenance operations of permanent BMPs as
outlined in Section 2.5 [Maintenance of Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4)
of their Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Plan (JURMP)]. The City's Contractor
is responsible for maintenance of construction BMPs. Operation and maintenance
requirements for the proposed permanent BMPs are provided in Table 4 below.
Table 4
Permanent BMP Operation and Maintenance Requirements
Design Criteria,
Routine Actions
Maintenance
Indicator
Field
Measurement
Measurement
Frequency
Maintenance Activity
Native Planted Swales
Inspect for erosion,
damage to vegetation,
and sediment and
trash/debris
accumulation
Shrubbery Trimming
Inspection for standing
water
Presence of erosion,
missing vegetation,
and accumulation of
sedimentation and/or
debris/trash that could
interfere with proper
functioning of swale.
High growth of
shrubbery and
presence of weeds,
and/or woody
vegetation.
Standing water is
present and does not
drain after a maximum
of 72 hours.
Visual observation
of erosion,
damaged
vegetation, and
presence of
sediment and
trash/debris.
Visual observation
of shrubbery height
exceeding a 6-in.
depth and
presence of weeds
and/or woody
vegetation.
Visual observation
of standing water.
Once per year
(preferably at the
beginning of the
rainy season -
October 1st).
Trim once per year
for aesthetic and
safety purposes
and/or suppression
of shrubbery and
woody vegetation.
Once per year
(preferably at the
beginning of the
rainy season -
October 1st).
Reinforce eroded areas with
rock rip rap.
Reseed damaged vegetation
areas.
Remove and properly dispose
of accumulated sediment
when it exceeds 3 inches
depth.
Remove and properly dispose
of debris/trash.
Trim shrubbery to no less
than 4-inch depth, but no
taller than 6-inch depth.
Weed control strategies.
Regrade areas downstream
of location where standing
water accumulates to ensure
water flows smoothly. '
October 2008 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 85
EIA Fonn - Part 11
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
September 2007 4926-01
El Camino Real Widening Project 86
Q.
ID
CO
oio
o
Q_
Q
X
CN
CN
O
Q_
Q
O
C/5
UJ
\L
o
9>'o
CL
D
C'c
0)
CO0)a
oc
COo
UJ
w oT- LU
(D ^cn Oco a:Q. a.
§
°
(D
I
Q-
CL
<
m ro —ro ^: -QCD*- E;-E co 0
E - $
o o <
"^ T3 ^
0 •— ^~P m °
.- w en-b CO CD
ro •£.« g> 0
£:F E
05.582
<1o o.— -^
oEot5§
•5 "P >,
Q c w£ ro =**~
-§2-2
•— "55 T3
- I5 8o
ooc
o .Eto ~
to _ TJ CNg 0 (D _
r- CB ^ Ol~. _H ^— ™
•^3 ro o CD
1 -2 ^ •§E tS cu o_ ro -Q t •>
"c E ro 0<D ~ -C o
E J5 a) D||i|> ^ 0 a:S | E.a
c5 c 2 3'5 ® -ft; 0.s ro —O "D O)Q== 0 '-£5 fno •— '^— w
S £ CQ
ITCDE<U
Co•*=
CU °r~s 5i- r-cu t
"5.
E
c
c g5 jo
W
4-*D) CC CU
11c ro
i &s Q
O)c•c cu
.-i &C (_o ^5
Mitigation MeasureL—CU
c:ro
D.
^>
O
1
0 -2.9^, "-o".Q
ol ix
c co o
- 11
o?«> T3
Si•*3'to .E
§ s») "I
asures for Sensitive Vegetation Communitie• to grading, significant direct impacts tomunities shall be mitigated in the amounts sh» o B
1 £8_o
o TS Qs m
D)
^
O
^O
03
"5
c_o
"o
!<5
to
03
S
.0
•a
03a.
to
czot3
O3
O
03
*-•'EL_(\\M/Q.
CNi
1
CO
73
76
«tog
.0"roO3
03
03
CDa.
03
c.'c.cz
51
"O 03CZ -CZ
-55 t^
CD ••-
03 CO
Q) "o
•|.g
||
to ,S>
«_ 0)o s
II
(P =
^3 COO"to Mm O
1 03
03 0b M
o o
to •£*-2 =
,
j^:cz
City of Carlsbad's Lake Calavera Mitigation Ba02
o
'o
_o
03
-o
CD
ZJbCO
03O)CDCO
3COro8
MO
'o
CD
Oro
O3CM
0
IDto
CO
°03
K
,
-^
-oczro
(Siro
to-a
£roO)
czo
'•TO
03:*=
2
CD
03>ro"roO
03.*:acre of non-CZ coastal sage scrub shall be mitratio, respectively, at the City of Carlsbad's LaBank."B
CO03
S
CM
CZro
cJ5
CO
"5.
103
03
Oro
CO
0
M —O
COCO3
.
sIdro
03
ro
CMCM
o
I
ico
o>,_Q
T3
ts_03
'1
03-Q
"ro-£ZCO
CO
JD
-o03
"to
T3CZro
^czrom
czo:*=;roO3
§
ro
preservation, respectively, at the Lake Calavermay be out-of-kind."0&cCD
ECD
Q.E
§0-*^tora.c
CD
toroCD
"Oc CD
••= -§
D) "O
= "S0) -g
ii
" 'i
.3 =| 'i
® C
i!-1
03 *"
t
CD
03f-
0
•2
o
cu
toraCDE
c0
foD)
E
c'oD)CO
"oto
to
enc
1CDT3
£ ^ra o03 -4=< 1ll
ra
E0)o:
CD
•i=_
1
Project, ongoing, cuii
CDa.
^
ras•j^raQ.
ra
Io
'co
E
^.03
'to
§.05a>i
cu
^o
t r
C
ing Dept. = Departmmitigation measure.rr
'co
5
CD.a
1c
E
to
!c
CO"Cra
Q.co
c
JZ
a?
iora0)E
cgts
O)on Plans = When miinitialed and dated._
O.CW
CO
0)o;aa>
o
o
O
CN
(U
O)
03
CL
^ t
_c
•o 1.2 c*- a
'a5 E> ua.
E
c
^ ccO n~
CO
c d
o|-t5 T_
"?~ (Tt- g
2<S
c?'C (n.-ilc Hi
£
3
(0ta0S
c£
at
i
-
o
*^^Cj
0)
O)3
>
_>
•"5 ^
<D b
OT <,
O */)
'*— ^
u toCM 55 >
U. ^^
Jo ^ ^i5 J? o•"" £ *3
I**^ ••£(0 ^
*S "5
•D (0
0)
0)Recomi1
H™
oc
Ul
i
UJz
N
1
O
I
c
12Q.
5-
0"
M
S o
<c **
r;
S ^3Q 0
:C'T-3-
-.•:•.-' ?£":
z* 8O u
rf*n
p •
* -1 0
J
VEGETATIONCOMMUNITYCD
1
|
S
*—
•«-
S
CD
CD
oi
cnOJ
CD
Coastal sage scrub(including disturbed) 1COo
CD
I
i
!
i
1i
COCD
CD
CO
0
CD
Native grassland-disturbed1I
i
i
i
i!
|
I
!
i
| Non-native grasslandCM
CD
OOCD
CD
S
CD
0
i—
CO
S
CD
1
1
!Riparian scrub(including disturbed)o
I
CD
CD
0
CD
<-
•^
5
CD
i
1
1
Ephemeral channelCOCD
CD
i
COCD
CD
CD
CD
•-
•^
S
CD
i
i
i
Intermittent channelCOCD
0
S
o
i
s
•^~;
O
s
CD
I
i
i
| Eucalyptus woodlandCD
cn
CD
i
CN
CD
VI
CD
CO
•^
COCD
CD
_
5
o
I Disturbed lands2CD
CO
COo
TO
to
3O3Oi
'I
COsloCO-C
C/) r—
^-2
*~* COo £
t cu
e*i
E c:— co
f-i« s
-1 =2 SQ_ <1>>? -S
O -Q
ilCO
CT f~"^ .2
"1si
£t3O3 -O
If
1 In accordance with Table 11Mitigation Bank at the indicatedCD
CC
.S3Q.
b
i
~ 0 CT
0 S C .-"co ._ '-a E
'a*-0 2 ^i— L_ *— CD
Q. Q. (D Q.
«m^-« o> B §? b .9 .ffi
'g "^ cl ? '1 p. u> 'I H g 'J2
9-^"c-cj -32 jjf ^5 -52 -^ »- <S
<D _c/> c WcO^^fn
il II | § l| g 1st
sf,s| Iftflll!
'H "1 "> S" "o H It "o o ~° ^ <»
§3 ro H ^" -o~°5>~'O'ca-"'>-'§Io ~o o ">*• 'c o u
-g-^.§ ==£ |I5|5|
.£ CO ^ > Q (J5 Q) ** — Q) •*"" CO d) C
JP O ^ CO tO ^_ Q_ CO C -«" ^ "Q* flj
^ .i^os^ •§$"§o§co^-:S
£ ilif Iflsllfs! 11 IL.2 i»= <u <u >- y =! zj cn =5 „. c: fc a>•S !«£!< 1|8>1J|||
g "55 .2 = t5 to c"5cMca°-cj
•2 fo>:-i>«'S >°ll8l-s-|
8 1,1 E s ffi o « ^ ^ :-i S >ffi 1
= om^ro'S' ® ^ a- o = "TO o S(A jj ;= C ^ O -C. ^ ^- O f* ^3 Cco -Q'a,_'ro 1— o<Eeou5co =
S -I ^ = -= -21
_o
i oS ca
~i
Explanation of Headings:i i^ »E ro— (D
§ E
(U r-
•° o(A Wra ra£ cn
§ 1
« cn<s .^
5 -a |>CO) S
S ™ °ra •" o
CTIT3 tf).•= C 3E£ SS^ "5 13 0>
§ 'c J3
cl '§
o n>*1 ^•B * O .5 c *- cc £ ra °E § a) =(U -2 b ra
f| Li
T3 £ -£.£.2 ra
=£ E2 2
0)*— _Qra _
D ~O >•E cra cQ. g
ra o
c »
S £
5 wO c
E ™i- Q-£ =^ °
.•Q >
C ^a "(0 M
£ J,
>< ^O U>c ra(U (D
« ? 1•*= o °ra - •£•= «-> ra2 c cn
Type = Project, ongoing, currMonitoring Dept. = Departmemitigation measure.Shown on Plans = When mitiinitialed and dated.
O
CO
O)(0
Q.
(A
CO
E0)oc
^1
s S
1 H"5.
E
co
$ m
0)C.S o>
o £
§15 <I>•^ Q
D)C
'"— Q)
~ >;
o *~2
Mitigation MeasureC *X .O CO CO CD O>
<5§°l°t^s
c .g co oj ^-_. "5
o5 75 0) S S - ,- co
awk, Dulzura California pocket mouse, and northwestshall be mitigated through creation and/or preservcalyptus woodland (Cooper's hawk), and coastal sag: mice) habitats discussed under BIO-1 above. [Note:acre of potential Cooper's hawk nesting habitat (eu<all be mitigated through creation or preservation of 0,d 0.03 acre of eucalyptus woodland.] The locatiore determined as part of the CDFG 1 602 permit proces-i= a, 3 -55 co •{= cja(rtiocuJScococD^.,
lUtjfll<siiii"-i
2 8 % « "I ™ c °,
o)°-ceoSS-=co o.| cl §:•§-§..§
Q-m^COTJ COT3 "- COC-— Q.CZu_ CM— Q.-S Q ~ ca o CD o -d
<D
c.m
Q.
•4— 'b
1JL 0 o>^
a> " '-5 E'77 O m tS 'C S CDa. a. O a.
"O O> O CO!:-*t^-J:;'O<D co^r "m"O CD,,1, X CDJO
s|j |lg||| If li =8 | ||
III llfffllll If II lsll
ill ili'llllil 1^ if ^l|ii til n it Isii
1 if|8 U
'•5 c^5S B''": aIl~-I-DinJ"o*j"coco <ta>^cca§Q
~* cj>co-co> >2T3a_Sc<CcoOSjS^co s2cat^C3'''2
S §,-§ "=^ :s^^.|;Ec:i"S^-§£E^^.2^g-GQ.2
//) -tj £ *^ — "^ ^^ Si ^^ "^ ^~ £ ^~ ^ *• "^^ ^ -rf* QJ -^ ^j» P ^^ Q)JL; (Q v_ QJ ^^ yj ^ *r~ CO > O CO C/) *^, CO ^^ t- -. ^^. .» ^» ^
.0
2 CO
i 6s m
T?"
S
C9 . ,S
"3.
c
1
(Q^1
CO
CO(U0)
l!01*0
E|si|.s
§cII •"
rt
plementatil:olumn willE » .
•a £CU1C
CD
CUt-
'S
o
P
i
i
co
raD).ti
E
CDc'oO)c0•s<n
1
O),5:
bCOCD
Area for dmation.XCO -2-s.eco
CDOL
IJ5
E3O
C
'oa>cotfCD'Q
II
CDQ.
.9tCOa.
CO
g"•c0
'co
E
fi^)
~
coa.m
£
S"c:CD
<
0
, r
C
CU
. = Departmn measure.Monitoring Deptmitigatio3c
==
15o
.—£
co~cCO
Q.
Coc3o
CO
CD
io
CUEc.0
raO)•C
i = When miand dated.VIC T3CO CD
O_ co
§1
co
o
•s.^r
(D0)03
0.
roE(Uo:
c:.S
fli "*^*= §
'fe |
^.E
c0 wC c5 raOQ_
CO
O) "cc <v"C Co §
'c Wo °ss
O)cis
'tz i_o2
i(0n«S
co
'•§
CDSS
and riparian vegetation._
I
!i S
"ro !_O 0'o ^ c02 c
o 'E -£5
(D O Q-JS 2> >»
< ^
J, 0> J, 0 0)o o> c o 2 c .t:
(U C T3 <B i_ T3 E
'O"'h: 03 'O\2 P ^CI J *— £1 C ^- (UQ. Q O Q. Q. O Q.
-2^ %&£• 0-9 « 1 g c? ™ -§ .2 11 -sf •§»H-.. -MS^ 55 T, g^JTitsjar «•§>£•-S . 8 i|| |1 l^S'SrSJ „ »-§ 3lg= i§i -i IsS-g-sj?™ Is s CT
1 ill ill 111 11!•§**! ill 1°^ ISil^is sii.i>3 .0 to "^ ^ 2: I-J 5 o S c ~ *c E -C o~ -^ ^
"^ "^^ O ~m TO r— £? "^^ C Ti 0) G3 (D — O ^^ t_ 2
"** CO O O CQ "?- ~ O ^- rt_ Ol "^ "55 *^~ 2 •*—• CD
8 ° =1 g> I5 — •= el J5 ? e .i5 2 § <B .1 ^ § .2 ~ s s
f"" ^" -^— *^ — — *^ — *•*• "^ i^-J *^ * — -••• "*-— . — CJ ^ii Q Q
C XT O ^ -J£ O5^
*°- 5 111.11 °§:i; sSa-s-'i^ §sl™isi { {Jin m mm m
1 ffl 1 !!itf Siii ill f 11^* £ E ^* "r- 1 — 2 ^ t/> -^ Q_ > ._ ^ ^ (O 3 .— O) O 5 C/> ® CO *"*- fO C_5§"0. ^^ - ^^ - C ^p
ii i fe os f^ -g S .
^ C3 On ^~ csi co Q» •*—•
^Q..i
c
1
£CD
i
E
c.0
IS•— .
Ec
i
"c
•—ra
c0)
"o.
^n of Headings:ect, ongoing, cumulative.0 'c7So:
C II
"5 S.
UJ H"
£3(A
.3
eo>
'5
g1
ra 'S
:1 In l
ra o
ca
E
raQ.ra
O).c
2
'co
E
Q
«JD
'(flCa(A0)
§C0)
?o
, r
C
ID
•i Sra ^Q. «<u raQ g
II fc
jlQ en
0)'^
•§Eo.*;co
c
3
8
(A
J=
{/)"Cra
0.
c0
I.c(A
CO
2>^u)ra<uEc.0
ro01
E .,jc oID *i
II <=<!> ra
g^Q_ m-»-•
o.E
r-
V)
o
(1)U/o>
COQ.
CO
ES
c.g
1 E^> CDa
-
Ig1 ro
.C
CO
.*-»O) Cc a)
0 E-2 -e'cr CO•i s-Q
en
1 ^o *~5»Mitigation MeasureArchaeologist shall attend any grading related Precon Meetings to makecomments and/or suggestions concerning the Archaeological and NativeAmerican Monitoring program with the Construction Manager and/orGrading Contractor.ntify Areas to be MonitoredAt the Precon Meeting, the Archaeologist shall submit to the City Plannera copy of the site/grading plan (reduced to 11x17) that identifies areas to03
csi
CO
O3c.
1en*•_o
ezo••s03C
"53•o
03
'5O-CD
s-
1o
£
0)COs>
CO
COco
1
CO
3
^2'Eo
E «
51
8
O)oo0)CO
J2^r*
1ts0)'o*
a
Construct/onc
'§
Q
0) S 52£ 8 oro 'c •"=-3. 0 C
^ E °°3 <• «S^^
O)0) C
.E TJ3 2QO
;haeologist & Native American Monitors Shall be Present Duringading/Excavation. The qualified Archaeologist shall be present full-time<E o
^ing grading/excavation of native soils and shall document activity via thensultant Monitor Record. This record shall be sent to the City Planner (CP),appropriate, each month.5 o coT3 O CO MonitoringMonitoring of holes and/or trenches is required for all components thatimpact native soils one foot deeper than existing as detailed on the plansor in the contract documents identified by drawing number or plan filenumber. It is the Construction Manager's responsibility to keep themonitors up-to-date with current plans.DiscoveriesIn the event of a discovery, and when requested by the Archaeologist, orthe Principal Investigator (PI) if the Monitor is not qualified as a PI, theConstruction Manager (CM), as appropriate, shall be contacted and shalldivert, direct or temporarily halt ground disturbing activities in the area ofdiscovery to allow for preliminary evaluation of potentially significantarchaeological resources. The PI shall also immediately notify the CP ofsuch findings at the time of discovery.Determination of SignificanceThe significance of the discovered resources shall be determined by thePI. For significant archaeological resources, a Research Design and DataRecovery Program shall be prepared, approved by the agency andcri jd o carried out to mitigate impacts before ground-disturbing activities in thearea of discovery will be allowed to resume.0)
'o
I £C Vd) o
f, g
! |
1 Iat '~ra ra.c o>
CB «
5 E
$ c?
E o•ri o>c d) *••
O "m
(0 "O O
i| 1
51 1
^ o11 f23 t
C ^ (*-g c raC 3 CO
•5.8 ^E « "— ••? CO•o£ -£<B ra
fe ECD (U> ce
ation of Headings:Project, ongoing, cumulative.ing Dept. = Department, or Agency, responsible for monitoring a particularmitigation measure.CM C
m O
X °" §uj|- 2
o•^CO
c
3
<nc._raa.coI
inra(U
rag>*±
I?
^
_
D_ to
il
c
O
"S
<D
0)O)CO
Q_
1(0
0)a:
co
"O CO
1 1^> CD
Q.
E
c
</)C C5 ro
C"
03
0) CC d)'c F•-!o g
5Q
en
'C (U
il
^j^—ation MeasureO)5
S
o>S
j procedures related toluring excavation.CD 'w'C O0) Q.
S*j|M- OO to
?** 22
CO C fc-
^ C -2 C
a </> w TO
d. Minor Discovery PThe following is aevaluation of smallCoordination and Notifiloi
05 ES
>• -cI s i"tw fi|l Ji |«
i 1 f-^ If
£ £ S "§ S Eo co o ;g .CD ii
CO C to
-= z: '« «» 3 -^J2 ^ c ' <x> "S.
C •— .S ^ ~i Si? CJ
^> ^ *P .^~ ~^ <3)
___ (D i^ ^ - C -^
O Q 52 E C/5~ 0> 'F <1>O_XO<Di=ci^fill I ill
<-=f^f^ 2i^<2
52•£Zra O to -Q d-o
CO
^**~Planning Departmentstoric deposit.-o ro
<l> CO•g ;„
CD '»-,
§5
£ §
— iH
3 fli
e. The informationconsultation and vI
oi ifll O1 gg- 3E co
CD
5 §
</} 'i3ca to-C O)
i 1
c3 °*0) .—
E oT3 O)
CO) £
~ ^0"co "^ o
.9*"o w" rti CI 3
c| 1
« ?i 1•^ c « §o> >- S -Q SR00 -2 = -S7^ ~ ra § •_
S § Ig £ =5 E 1 i s sf 1 <U -rr J= ra" 0.8 "* g
•a £ 42 "c
._ CO <D§ > *
15
4-1
<-• w
OT Co oa.0
2^^cn^>> "o "fflS
•*— • "*""* •— co ^ Q) ^5
'gai^'oroS'S ^ 'g-a m-S
S. « -= ® ^: en °-2 •§ =Hj!i iii n | i
|?-o-i."S 1 i i sl J 8-COC:--CCDI— n o>c: .5<o
^^"•2§-|S & 8|1 1 ss^i§f 8 i i f§g. i i
2> CD--cr_crOOJ Q m"O V_QL
C ^ rr» r^ "?^ *— O i— C O••P -X 0 -21 -^ °- « '3 -C 8 0 co -2 co°-mCD-=-,-,-:ecr o <*-„ <u °
g-g-^cuSEl^ g- -5 flj-g i§ 1
! 1 1 iff | !g E 1 1 °- -. £ 1 1 ^ g S £ e1 JS 8 * « | * = | S a -o &3b=CD,_iG^g.-t±a3 fc to^S c co0:30°"o5<»-C CO -j2j;ic CD COO" •— TO r~ QJ • ^ C/) ^^. Cj ^ Ui C= -Ss;e'~:?«S'"e:s:- "i s2^— §< cQ J-2 > i= *-> CO -i-Z « o ^-« C ^ CO fj > L. *r.gcOco^Su.™13 o_'F J3 S -c *s o °13o ^^aicD-^r-3 < u> a> a . ~+-* CO >£ di ~ ^ J— .iy " ^ CO .. 1—^4-* CO^=<Ba5-c.3co0£ tr:'> o_ "S^ca gc ens = S s -a ® -g -B ts a S ••§ -a ° -g,-o .. | g . |iimO^oro^^lS -bi-cS .2 c?-§ $3 ifi E^
SlI^^S-'Sl-l-5 l« 1II.S? |1 |ll^Sllltl^il SI .§ SI2J5 ?2 fliiloi^iss^s Ht i 1:1*5 il il
|S|S«£S|E«IES ||j | i^ljf °| |1
B » -§ '•§ s ° X i 1 °- -i e s ~dli52cD ^Jc5 Zi^E iJ X « g « S i
<0 Q Q. C §.yi . x >i o ^•^l- in Q...-UJI-5M
O
|s~
0)CO
Q.
roE(Do:
co
-a'roS? c
'I 1
^ Q)
"Q.
£
Ig5 CO05:^^
*-•
C* (D•c £
^ 'C
o ™J§ 5:
O)
'C (Do a
?f
^M
Mitigation Measure§=12-° SO- -o -c3*=a><» dijg B^o'-co-co
Ii ii I !!i! 11 fill
E £ In S o> c "§ - ^3 ~o 'a. = _Q CC a. "^ -o — CO
•^aja i'i 1 -f 1 1 i. ^g lf^l»fi
Illl .^11 1 lisi l| l|l IIs
"o.c2c(u9>"o-£> E -o .„- a. -g 2 ;: -2- £5 £ 3 «§c.c-gS£c-^'o "~ c '55 2 §05 ^ gj-S "> E
CO J5 "^ *" ^^ "O CO __ ci -^- "55 Q- = n qj -^ o m d *
III! if HUH!
"*i:.li*sSl Jg £•&*!«,, Iil1~ll
f liiil ils«!l
Silfi
^ ~i § <" ° ^"S § £jd iZaco JD oin:'o-c/5<oi-H
csi co
a3a>
cLLJ
^b
|tss ™«a) i_ ^ E'o1 o ro t:ti 'C <- <DQ. Q. O Q.
o> c 75 o> >? "o "oc o o .£ = c .2
OJ Sf= « £ "> 0
till alls ! a-o j-1 s
0 0>.« CO " CD S0 c S ,_ -o _c -o,_•=!- cu S 1- =CD <K 0) ro COg.l §-§,.^--s
|>
lfllS:S's-S_ =i £r-« o E .3ir°&-8i*|55*|8&||I-i|sI
ao2r|^|^«lli»l|.&
'$"- 1 g^ §-§,SQ. CO £. C= 3 ^ ^-O
CD £ <-«fi =
S|l|§^olga.g.*-rli-|1 1 "I 8 ^ 5 -1 S_« b,-S 5=- s §-g roi «%!«ili!— ^_ 0 0 >^ 0> CD S =1 gifllill>•6J
.2 VO f*>
O (3
0)£o
S £S >-a) oI §
°- ME ra
c~ ci E
! 1to 1o
£ O)§ 1
ro ^
E ^j o>§a i
— CO y_ra -o ocn-o «»
fi C 3
cE| 1
J= ra 21
31 'I11 « oll 1
^ o
E C co^ (U 1CO — i="7^ ^5 ^.
C (A^ •— </) '
S E0) 0)> o:
CO
3
O'•eraQ.
CO
C3),c
o
'co
ngs:g, cumulative.jartment, or Agency, responsible fosure.'•n •— m COr? ?iX o . cy_ *-" Oit ItO O^ ™'^• — tl O) • jrID- = E
n " 2— • fl> • —
5 & omi- 5
O
ra
plans, this columnc
o
.C '
10
w
I
toCO(U
co
raO);»:
!?|i> T>11 SS^ra (Ua> Q_ ra
ox:CO
0
?
00
<U
O)(0
Q.RemarksVerifiedImplementation|s1 «OQ.
O>MonitoringDepartmentMonitoringTypeMitigation Measure0) (UCU 0)c c
'CD 'o>c cLU LU>, ^,
O 0
c -2
•2 (X o>
J. § J.=iO O)i: O CO0) C CO (U >-
e"i § 's*?Q. Q O 0. Q
II proposed cut and fill slopes identified as susceptible to future erosionmd/or soil slippage shall be planted with an erosion retardant ground;over adhering to the following criteria:> The ground cover is effective in preventing surface erosion;• The ground cover is drought resistant;> The ground cover has a relatively low surface mass/weight;• Has a fairly deep and extensive root system;• Requires minimum maintenance by the owner; and> Has a low irrigation demand.The City Engineer shall be responsible for approving the appropriate;rosion control/slope failure control-planting program prior to grading.c>i <r>
6 6U| HI
O O
u.<u0c:
'encLU
Sfb
g
£ 0)I .E•~ 73O CDQ) »--o-O
a. o
and Hazardous Materialsor to grading, a traffic control plan shall be prepared to the satisfaction ofCity of Carlsbad Engineering Department. The traffic control plan shalliw all signage, striping, delineation detours, flagging operations, and anyer devices, which shall be used during construction to guide motoristsely through the construction zone and allow for a minimum of one lane of/el. The plan shall also identify temporary construction employee parkingas. The traffic control plan shall also include provisions for coordinatingi local emergency service providers regarding construction times andations of lane closures as well as specifications for pedestrian and bicycleety. Emergency vehicles would be permitted access through theistruction zone.» CL.£.cSl5S£.^"lSjc5•a "-Sc/jotn-JsraS-ScnoL.
08 V
I 5!X :r
k_0)0)c:
'o>cLUifo
g
ol o>
1 .£
o"co<u >-fo
is
A stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) shall be prepared byhe City prior to grading. The SWPPP shall identify potential sources ofDilution, practices to be used to reduce pollutants, and shall help ensure;ompliance with the stormwater permit. The construction contractor shall)e required to implement the approved SWPPP and any amendmentshereafter, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The SWPPP will havej Sampling and Monitoring Program that addresses both directiischarges from the project into a Section 303(d) water body andiischarges that have been discovered through visual monitoring to be>otentially contaminated by pollutants not visually detectable in the runoff.60£
1
I5
0)
Q.
E
i&
inro.c
§CO
CO
c
"D
C 0).2 toto "°
S c
^ 5§ £
> 'cII —.If
id Implementatthis column wil<u
~
CDf-
t5
£
o
£3
roCDE
cg
13CDS
CDC'5
CDco
"8
•3
§
o>c3
-r^rks = Area for (information.ro
JO
3E
ongoin•croa.
co
a>.a
'«>
I
s-
<uco
a>
raa.
an
a enl
1
c
c_co
0.
3
I
Co••§
15
C T3_CO ^>Q. ro§1
o.cW
O
O)
CDO)COQ_
-iraEo>/erifiedsmentationCL
E
c
0 COC c
OE
CO
O)"cC <D'c Eo £.•S "c rao jp^? jS?
O)
1 &
'f i_^
O3s
Mitigation Measurec .
•B°o o3 ro-fa .faw cc oo o0U
1
t5 o>0) c
2*3CLQ
: The construction contractor shall be required to implement BMPs duringconstruction in accordance with the plans, specifications and SWPPPCM6
Q
^1
C.g
"o
In
o0
prepared for the project, the General Construction Storm Water Permit(NPDES Order 99-08-DWQ), and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.These BMPs shall address temporary soil stabilization, temporarysediment control, wind erosion control, tracking control, and non-stormwater management.L.
<D(U
O)C
LU
.^
•C**b
i
O -i'
(D t—
2"-iQ. Q.
O "O
"S 's.± Q-
15 §
^ m
CD
Q. CD
3sCU -2
11
t> *".92, cu
iE |
co6Qia>-
D)C'~rj
2O
waterways that- exists downstream of the APE, this project shallincorporate native planted swales as a treatment control BMP designed toremove sedimentation/siltation to a medium or high level. This BMP shallCO C
CD o
8SID <"
If
D.J
I aco cu
»-sc >%
"i i!- T3o> co
0 CD
.§ *
f-os-s.£ 'toen i_c cuLU £
^•'5
0 §?
cu o
£ CD
:>«~o-O CU
"S SS-9
W CDO- _Q
SI_Q CO the median as determined by the City during the final design phase of theproject. The length and configuration of the native planted swales shall beconsistent with those identified in detail in the Water Quality TechnicalReport prepared for the project (Bureau Veritas 2007).« c ..i-siOJ 3 fOc ^— ^-
LU co "c-ifc C o•2* 0^1bou
cg**-•1 ^
O O) ^3<D .C CO
2^ 3 OQ. Q O
.: The City shall implement all maintenance operations of permanentBMPs as outlined in Section 2.5 [Maintenance of Municipal SeparateStorm Sewer System (MS4) of their Jurisdictional Urban Runoff6ft^o>-
X Management Plan (JURMP)]. The City's Contractor is responsible formaintenance of construction BMPs. Operation and maintenancerequirements for the proposed permanent BMPs are provided in Table 41
E
c.
ccuau>
COraco
«s
si^: ro5-1« T.
S'5
f!
t U)
cu
£O
racu
cg
ra
E
O)
'oD)
O
a>
I
O)
3
o
T3
CO Ocu ^i: CO
.2
I II
CO
I
>
s
1
o
ngoing,o
tfCD'§"
QL
II
CUQ.
0•t^raQ.ra
I
'coE*_.p
CO
5
coQ.U)
£
OccuO)
^
o
cu
c £ra ^Q. Wm co
Q 2
n fc
PQ g>Monitor5c
|
1
co"
ra
Q.
coi
5
£
U)racuE
cg
IS
E _j
c S
f T3
TJII cIs
O_ ro
si
c
W
O
0
0)D)
OJ
Q.
U)
roEQ)
i
C
O
VerifiedlementatiQ.
c
° CO
I roS —0 CLJC
CO
MonitoringDepartmento>
^—
|l
on Measure13.£?ance Requirementsa
53
53,* 5
Table <Operation and Io
PH
^^CO
"3
Perman•'ii
'^*
•'5*nance Actiii
IB
io
I?.o
1
1
•£Field Measuremei•-
=?~~
o
Maintenance IndieS.2
<
%
1<2
1"
*••>
f'&"
I
CO
(O
CO
"S4_«
C
OL
<u
'1
cT_osCD
CD
P .«
CD -QO) CD
CO ^
CO COT3 JO~ -t->
.11CO mo . .Inspect for enand sedimeniaccumulationCD —Inspect for erosion, damagto vegetation, and sedimerand trash/debrisaccumulationCD *±cn >=CO §
C £
•o ^_ tn
Inspect for erosion,to vegetation, and iand trash/debrisaccumulation-2 -o
CD <=
c?~ cc C OC <D -jr:
-g.i-2
Inspect for erosion,vegetation, and sedtrash/debris accumio
^J Cco -~ £E C OCD T~-
-g.if
ef-g 1O CO 3
118
^ ..CO
£ o -Q.n -.= CD
III
-5sC Q.•T CD^f "O
CO O5 .S
CO CO
O -^ O3C— i CD
O CD CO— == i5
|||
eil
(^ -o 5
Trim once per year foraesthetic and safetypurposes and/orsuppression of shrubberyand woody vegetation.c? <u•— • o
CD CD >»
'o 9 S "o
Visual observationshrubbery height e:a 6-in. depth and pof weeds and/or wevegetation.T3Cco i_>» °
11
High growth of shrupresence of weeds,woody vegetation."E
:=i—
or
-Q
1
•32co to
-— "co
"o "=c E ^
TO o "^
"55 ^ E
C OJ CO
§ § S
all
Regrade areewhere standirensure water^Once per year (preferablyat the beginning of the rainseason -October 1st)."5
Visual observationstanding water."O =1
S E'55
S iCOCD CO
0- CD_OT *i
^ .s
111
"i CO 04
w3 -o "o
SQco
c
•o
to
•P
o
"o2.CO
T3"
c'aE
-Q.
E
1JD
03£
1(OCOCO
C COII
1 ™
C 0
** "cS2.1II
— -Q
mplementatils column will"D £
1CO
0)£o
$
w
o
2
3
CO<u
E
co
TOO)Its
0)c'oo>c0
"5
3s0)
O)
5•co(0CO
i = Area for dormation.OT H—
£.£CO
COcr
3£
o
I
CO
ro
co
£
S
au>£
o
CO2
CO
ro
2(0
I
ttta.
I
asco
.o
13
c co-QjQ
.«. Q o> Q; 1^ .,_«..
i2l 0
si
0
OT