Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-02-03; Planning Commission; Resolution 66641 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 6664 2 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE 3 CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION 4 MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM AND ADDENDUM TO PERFORM MAINTENANCE ON A WAVE AND TIDE ROCK REVETMENT ALONG THE NORTH 6 SHORE OF THE AGUA HEDIONDA LAGOON FOR THE TU CASA HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION ON PROPERTY 7 LOCATED AT 4747 MARINA DRIVE, IN THE AGUA HEDIONDA LAGOON SEGMENT OF THE LOCAL COASTAL 8 PROGRAM AND IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT 9 ZONE1. CASE NAME: TU CASA REVETMENT 10 CASE NO: SUP 09-06 11 WHEREAS, Tu Casa Homeowners Association, "Developer," and "Owner," has filed a 12 verified application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property described as 13 Lot 1 of Carlsbad Tract Map 72-14, in the City of Carlsbad, 14 County of San Diego, State of California, according to map thereof no. 7930, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of 15 San Diego, April 26,1974 16 ("the Property"); and 17 . WHEREAS, a Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring and 18 Reporting Program, and addendum were prepared in conjunction with said project; and 2Q WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on February 3, 2010, hold a duly 21 noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and 22 WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony 0 ^and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the information submitted by staff, and 24 considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission considered all factors 25 relating to the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting26 27 Program, and addendum. 28 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission as follows: A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. 2 B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning 3 Commission hereby ADOPTS the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and addendum, Exhibit 4 "MND," according to 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: 6 Findings: 7 The Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad does hereby find:8 n a. it has reviewed, analyzed, and considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and addendum for the Tu Casa 10 Revetment and the environmental impacts therein identified for this project and any comments thereon prior to APPROVING the project; and 11 b. the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and addendum have been prepared in accordance with requirements of the California 13 Environmental Quality Act, the State Guidelines and the Environmental Protection Procedures of the City of Carlsbad; and 14 c. it reflects the independent judgment of the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad; and d. based on the EIA and comments thereon, there is no substantial evidence the project 17 will have a significant effect on the environment. 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PC RESO NO. 6664 -2- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on February 3, 2010, by the following vote, to wit: AYES:Commissioners Baker, Dominguez, L'Heureux, Montgomery, Nygaard, Schumacher, and Chairperson Douglas NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: FARRAIT^DOUGLAS, Chairperson CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: DON NEU Planning Director PC RESO NO. 6664 -3- City of Carlsbad Planning Department NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CASE NAME: CASE NO: PROJECT LOCATION: Tu Casa Revetment SUP 09-06 4747 Marina Drive, Carlsbad, San Diego County. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The project involves maintenance work to repair existing shoreline armoring (rock revetment) by removal of rock that has migrated vertically down the shore slope into the Agua Hedionda Lagoon and replace the rock on a steepened shoreface. On average, the work would change the rock slope from an approximately 2.8:1 slope to a slightly steeper 2-2.5:1 slope through moving the toe of the existing armoring back towards the shoreface. Some of the rock will be reused, while some of the material will be upsized to larger revetment stone to prevent further vertical movement of rock. The work would also include the importation and placement of not more that 25 cubic yards of quarried armor stone. The area of work totals approximately 0.12 acre and site access will be from an existing shoreline access point on Bayshore Drive. The revetment is on the southerly side of the Tu Casa Condominium which faces onto Agua Hedionda Lagoon and on a roughly three foot scarp of the adjacent property to the east to prevent erosion. 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 (CEQA) and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, the initial study (E1A 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 (E1A 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. Pursuant to Section 15204 of the CEQA Guidelines, in reviewing Mitigated Negative Declarations, persons and public agencies should focus on the proposed finding that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment. If persons and public agencies believe that the project may have a significant effect, they should: (1) identify the specific effect; (2) explain why they believe the effect would occur; and (3) explain why they believe the effect would be significant. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within 30 days of the date of this notice. The proposed project and Mitigated Negative Declaration are subject to review and approval/adoption by the City of Carlsbad Planning Commission and City Council. Additional public notices will be issued when those public hearings are scheduled. If you have any questions, please call Van Lynch in the Planning Department at (760) 602-4613 or van.lynch@carlsbadca.gov. PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD PUBLISH DATE December 23. 2009 - January 22. 2010 December 23. 2009 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - INITIAL STUDY (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) CASE NO: SUP 09-06 DATE: December 1. 2009 BACKGROUND 1. CASE NAME: TU CASA REVETMENT 2. LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS: City of Carlsbad. 1635 Faraday Av. Carlsbad. CA 92008 3. CONTACT PERSON AND PHONE NUMBER: VAN LYNCH (760) 602-4613 (van. lynch@carlsbadca. gov) 4. PROJECT LOCATION: 4747 MARINA DRIVE. CARLSBAD. SAN DIEGO COUNTY 5. PROJECT SPONSOR'S NAME AND ADDRESS: TU CASA ASSOCIATION. 6131 INNOVATION _WY. CARLSBAD. CA. 92009 6. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Residential High Density (RH) 7. ZONING: Residential Waterway (R-W) 8. OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES WHOSE APPROVAL IS REQUIRED (i.e., permits, financing approval or participation agreements): Calif. Coastal Commission. Regional Water Quality Control Board, and US Army Corps of Engineers 9. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND SURROUNDING LAND USES: The project involves maintenance work to repair existing shoreline armoring (rock revetment) by removal of rock that has migrated vertically down the shore slope into the Agua Hedionda Lagoon and replace the rock on a steepened shore face. On average, the work would change the rock slope from an approximately 2.8:1 slope to a slightly steeper 2-2.5:1 slope through moving the toe of the existing armoring back towards the shoreface. The maintenance proposed is generally considered preventive revetment maintenance since no segment within the work area has so completely failed as to require shoreline reconstruction beyond rock removals from the lower intertidal areas and replacement of large rock on the upper shoreline. Some of the rock will be reused, while some of the material will be upsized to larger revetment stone to prevent further vertical movement of rock. The work would also include the import and placement of not more that 25 cubic yards of quarried armor stone. The area of work totals approximately 0.12 acre and site access will be from an existing shoreline access point on Bayshore Drive. The revetment is on the southerly side of the Tu Casa Condominium which faces onto Agua Hedionda Lagoon and on a roughly three foot scarp of the adjacent property to the east to prevent erosion. The project site is surrounded by residential multifamily units to the north, Agua Hedionda lagoon to the south, open space in the form of a sandy beach at low tide as part of a developed multifamily project to the east, and a waterway for the Bristol Cove development to the west. SUP 09-06 Tu Casa Revetment 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. fj Aesthetics I I Agricultural Resources I I Air Quality £3 Biological Resources O Cultural Resources D Geology/Soils CD Hazards/Hazardous Materials [>3 Hydrology/Water Quality [H Land Use and Planning O Mineral Resources ^ Mandatory Findings of Significance Noise Population and Housing Public Services Recreation Transportation/Circulation Utilities & Service Systems Rev. 10/02/09 SUP 09-06 Tu Casa Revetment DETERMINATION. (To be completed by the Lead Agency) I | I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. £3 I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. [H I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. HH 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 I 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 Sfg^ure Date'' Planning Director's Signature Date Rev. 10/02/09 SUP 09-06 Tu Casa Revetment ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, Section 15063 requires that the City conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the environment. The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist. This checklist identifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be impacted by the proposed project and provides the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Negative Declaration, or to rely on a previously approved EIR or Negative Declaration. • A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by an information source cited in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved. A "No Impact" answer should be explained when there is no source document to refer to, or it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards. • "Less Than Significant Impact" applies where there is supporting evidence that the potential impact is not significantly adverse, and the impact does not exceed adopted general standards and policies. • "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The developer must agree to the mitigation, and the City must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level. • "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significantly adverse. • Based on an "EIA-Initial Study", if a proposed project could have a potentially significant adverse effect on the environment, but all potentially significant adverse effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, and none of the circumstances requiring a supplement to or supplemental EIR are present and all the mitigation measures required by the prior environmental document have been incorporated into this project, then no additional environmental document is required. • When "Potentially Significant Impact" is checked the project is not necessarily required to prepare an EIR if the significant adverse effect has been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and the effect will be mitigated, or a "Statement of Overriding Considerations" has been made pursuant to that earlier EIR. • A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the project or any of its aspects may cause a significant adverse effect on the environment. • If there are one or more potentially significant adverse effects, the City may avoid preparing an EIR if there are mitigation measures to clearly reduce adverse impacts to less than significant, and those mitigation measures are agreed to by the developer prior to public review. In this case, the appropriate "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated" may be checked and a Mitigated Negative Declaration may be prepared. Rev. 10/02/09 SUP 09-06 Tu Casa Revetment • An EIR must be prepared if "Potentially Significant Impact" is checked, and including but not limited to the following circumstances: (1) the potentially significant adverse effect has not been discussed or mitigated in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and the developer does not agree to mitigation measures that reduce the adverse impact to less than significant; (2) a "Statement of Overriding Considerations" for the significant adverse impact has not been made pursuant to an earlier EIR; (3) proposed mitigation measures do not reduce the adverse impact to less than significant; or (4) through the EIA-Initial Study analysis it is not possible to determine the level of significance for a potentially adverse effect, or determine the effectiveness of a mitigation measure in reducing a potentially significant effect to below a level of significance. A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears after each related set of questions. Particular attention should be given to discussing mitigation for impacts, which would otherwise be determined significant. Rev. 10/02/09 SUP 09-06 Tu Casa Revetment AESTHETICS - Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light and glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Potentially Significant Impact D n D Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated D D D Less Than Significant No Impact Impact D E D IEI D D a - d) No Impact. The project site is presently developed as a rock revetment and the maintenance of the revetment will not significantly change the scenic resource value or visual character of the area. The revetment will not create any new light or glare. II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES - (In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model-1997 prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland.) Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other "changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact D D D D D D D a - c) No Impact. The area of work is subject to tidal action and does not support agricultural activities. Rev. 10/02/09 III.AIR QUALITY - (Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.) Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated SUP 09-06 Tu Casa Revetment Less Than Significant No Impact Impact a) Conflict with or obstruct applicable air quality plan? implementation of the 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 a) No Impact. The project site is located in the San Diego Air Basin which is a state non-attainment area for ozone (O3) and 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 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 (ARB) after public hearings on November 9th through 10th in 1994, and was forwarded to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for approval. After considerable analysis and debate, particularly regarding airsheds with the worst smog problems, EPA approved the 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(d) of the State of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines contains specific reference to the need to evaluate any inconsistencies between the proposed project and the applicable air quality management plan. Transportation Control Measures (TCMs) are part of the RAQS. The RAQS and TCM plan set forth the steps needed to accomplish attainment of state and federal ambient air quality standards. The California Rev. 10/02/09 SUP 09-06 Tu Casa Revetment Air Resources Board provides criteria for determining whether a project conforms to the RAQS which include the following: • Is a regional air quality plan being implemented in the project area? • Is the project consistent with the growth assumptions in the regional air quality plan? The project area is located in the San Diego Air Basin, and as such, is located in an area where a RAQS is being implemented. The project is an accessory flood control use which is consistent with the growth assumptions in the regional air quality plan and will in no way conflict with or obstruct implementation of the regional plan. b) Less Than Significant Impact. The closest air quality monitoring station to the project site is at Camp Pendleton. Data available for this monitoring site from 2000 through December 2004, indicates that the most recent air quality violations recorded were for the state one hour standard for ozone (a total of 10 days during the 5-year period). No other violations of any air quality standards have been recorded during the 5-year time period. The project would involve minimal short-term emissions associated with grading and construction. Such emissions would be minimized through standard construction measures such as the use of properly tuned equipment and watering the site for dust control. Long-term emissions associated with travel to and from the project will be minimal. Although air pollutant emissions would be associated with the project, they would neither result in the violation of any air quality standard (comprising only an incremental contribution to overall air basin quality readings), nor contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. Any impact is assessed as less than significant. c) Less Than Significant Impact. The air basin is currently in a state non-attainment zone for ozone and suspended fine particulates. The proposed project would represent a contribution to a cumulatively considerable potential net increase in emissions throughout the air basin. As described above, however, emissions associated with the proposed project would be minimal. Given the limited emissions potentially associated with the proposed project, air quality would be essentially the same whether or not the proposed project is implemented. According to the CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(h)(3), the proposed project's incremental contribution to the cumulative effect is not cumulatively considerable. Any impact is assessed as less than significant. d) No impact. As noted above, the proposed project would not result in substantial pollutant emissions or concentrations. In addition, there are no sensitive receptors (e.g., schools or hospitals) located in the vicinity of the project. No impact is assessed. e) No Impact. The construction of the proposed project could generate fumes from the operation of construction equipment, which may be considered objectionable by some people. Such exposure would be short-term or transient. In addition, the number of people exposed to such transient impacts is not considered substantial. Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would the project. a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or [H Q CH [X] 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? Rev. 10/02/09 SUP 09-06 Tu Casa Revetment b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian, aquatic or wetland habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including but not limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Potentially Significant Impact D Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact D No Impact D D D D D D D n n n n a) No impact. According to the Biological Resources Assessment for the Tu Casa HOA Revetment Maintenance Project, Carlsbad CA, Merkel and Associates, October 2009, the project site does not contain 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) Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. Potential significant impacts have been identified to intertidal Parish's glasswort (Salicornia Subterminalis) and eelgrass bed. The upland glasswort is located adjacent to the project site. Mitigation measures in the form of flagging the glasswort for identification and hand placement of rock armor in a manner that does not result in the impact to the existing plants will reduce the potential impacts to less than significant. The eelgrass beds are located outside of and immediately adjacent to the shoreline area on which the work is anticipated to occur. There is no reason the eelgrass should be impacted directly from the proposed work. Potential for impacts does exist as a result of equipment maneuvering on the low beach, excessive displacement of shoreline sands and sediments and resultant burial of adjacent eelgrass beds. Mitigation in the form of staking a 10-foot buffer from existing eelgrass beds, control of sediments, precluding the stockpiling of sediments, and the staging of all work at an approved upland location will reduce the potential impacts to the eelgrass beds to less than significant. Monitoring of the eelgrass beds shall be preformed to ensure they are not disturbed. A post construction report shall be provided. If disturbed, mitigation in the form of restoration at a 1.2:1 ratio of eelgrass habitat shall be provided. c) Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. According to the Biological Resources Assessment for the Tu Casa HOA Revetment Maintenance Project, Carlsbad CA, Merkel and Associates, October 2009, the project area is not defined as a wetland habitat. The glasswort plants are too sparsely distributed and lack a suitable scale to function as wetland habitat. Impacts have been determined to be potentially significant and avoidable through implementation of construction period mitigation measures including: Rev. 10/02/09 SUP 09-06 Tu Casa Revetment 1. Equipment shall be removed from the beach areas during any tidal condition that inundates the work area. Equipment staging areas should be at the foot of Bayshore Drive on improved surfaces only and not within other upland areas or intertidal areas. Rock shall be brought to the beach only as needed and stockpiled as high on the shore as practical. 2. Designate no-fueling zones a minimum distance of 10 meters (33 feet) from all drainages and away from fire sensitive areas. For the proposed work, equipment fueling shall not occur on the beach or within 10 meters of lagoon waters and adjacent wetlands. 3. The footprint of disturbance shall be minimized to the extent feasible and shall be specified in the construction plans. All employees shall be instructed that their activities, vehicles, equipment, and construction materials are restricted to the proposed project footprint, designated staging areas, and routes of travel. Construction limits shall be delineated with PVC stakes along the lower edge of the existing rubble beach and not less than 10 feet from existing eelgrass. Staking shall be maintained until the completion of all construction activities. Access will only be taken from Bayshore Drive and no equipment work shall be conducted from the upland areas above the project work site. 4. A water pollution control plan shall be developed that describes turbidity, sediment, and hazardous material control, fueling and equipment management practices. The plan shall include designated areas for equipment fueling and maintenance, inspections for leaks that occur not less than twice each workday, and spill prevention and clean-up preparations. The contractor shall maintain a waterborne petroleum spill clean-up kit on site during all work. 5. Erodible fill material shall not be deposited into watercourses. Sediment control shall be performed in a manner that sediments are not pushed or allowed to flow down shore into adjacent eelgrass beds. This means minimizing beach sediment disturbance, and not creating stockpiles of sediments where they are subject to tides and wave action between work periods. Temporary sediment stockpiles shall be minimized in scale and protected against erosion. Sediment/erosion control measures shall be continued at the project site until such time as the revetment has been completed to provide a stable shore condition. 6. A post construction survey of the eelgrass beds shall be performed by a qualified marine biologist to determine if there was any excessive displacement of shoreline sands or sediments which resulted in the burial of adjacent eelgrass beds. The report shall be submitted to the Planning Director. If it is determined that burial of adjacent eelgrass beds has occurred, mitigation in the form of restoration of eelgrass in accordance with the Southern California Eelgrass Mitigation Policy (SCEMP) (National Marine Fisheries Service 1991, revision 11) at a 1.2:1 areal extent ratio shall be established in the Agua Hedionda lagoon at the direction of a qualified marine biologist. 7. All existing glasswort on site shall be flagged by a qualified biologist and riprap revetment hand placed around the plants in a manner that does not result in impacts to the existing plants. d) Less Than Significant Impact. According to the Biological Resources Assessment for the Tu Casa HOA Revetment Maintenance Project, Carlsbad CA, Merkel and Associates, October 2009, the habitat is not suitable for nesting by sensitive birds and the rocky shoreline is not suitable for foraging by the western snowy plover. Occasional foraging use of the lagoon shoreline by least terns may occur, however, the absence of an established nesting colony in the vicinity substantially limits this use. No impact is assessed. e and 0 No Impact. According the City of Carlsbad's Habitat Management Plan, the project is in Core area 4. The project site is fully developed with structures and exotic landscapes with much disassociated salicornia plants and is subject to inundation by tidal action. There is no native habitat existing onsite. Overall, the project site does not support any high-quality biological resources, nor does it conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, or any provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan. 10 Rev. 10/02/09 SUP 09-06 Tu Casa Revetment V. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the signifi- cance of an archeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique pale ontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact n n D n n n n n n n n a - d) No Impact. The project site is a previously disturbed site developed with an armored revetment. No subsurface grading is anticipated as the project involves the movement of existing rock material within the tidal zone. There are no known historical resources, archeological resources, paleontological resources, or human remains on-site. VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS - Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving: i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv. Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact D D D n n n n n n n Rev. 10/02/09 SUP 09-06 Tu Casa Revetment 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 Section 1802.3.2 of the California Building Code (2007), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated D Less Than Significant Impact D No Impact D D D D D n a - d) No impact. The project involves the maintenance of an existing shoreline rock revetment. No impacts to people or structures related to earthquakes or earthquake related impacts, erosion, ground stability is expected to occur from the maintenance of the revetment. e) No impact. The site is connected to a public sewer system. VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS - Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or environment? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact D D D D D D D D D D D 12 Rev. 10/02/09 SUP 09-06 Tu Casa Revetment Potentially Significant Impact D Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated D Less Than Significant Impact D 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? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? a - h) No Impact.The proposed project does not involve the use of hazardous materials nor is the project located on a site identified with hazardous materials. The project does not interfere with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan and is not located in proximity to an airport or private airstrip. The site is not located near wildlands. D D n n D n n n n VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY - Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with ground water recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local ground water table level (i.e., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the 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? Potentially Significant Impact D n Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact n n n n n 13 Rev. 10/02/09 SUP 09-06 Tu Casa Revetment d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the flow rate or amount (volume) of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off- site? e) Create or contribute runoff water, which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood delineation map? h) Place within 100-year flood hazard area structures, which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? k) Increase erosion (sediment) into receiving surface waters. 1) Increase pollutant discharges (e.g., heavy metals, pathogens, petroleum derivatives, synthetic organics, nutrients, oxygen-demanding substances and trash) into receiving surface waters or other alteration of receiving surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? m) Change receiving water quality (marine, fresh or wetland waters) during or following construction? n) Increase any pollutant to an already impaired water body as listed on the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) list? o) Increase impervious surfaces and associated runoff? p) Impact aquatic, wetland, or riparian habitat? q) Result in the exceedance of applicable surface or groundwater receiving water quality objectives or degradation of beneficial uses? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated D Less Than Significant Impact No Impact D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D 14 Rev. 10/02/09 SUP 09-06 Tu Casa Revetment a) Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. Agua Hedionda lagoon is listed on the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) list as an impaired water body for sediments and turbidity. The proposed project has the potential to result in temporary impacts to water quality as a result of beach disturbance during revetment maintenance activities. In general, it is anticipated that water quality impacts will be limited to disturbance of beach sediments and thus short-term elevation of turbidity levels as exposed fine sediments are winnowed from the sands and gravels of the beach. Risk also exists for the potential petroleum discharges to the lagoon in association with equipment fuels, hydraulic leaks, or other fluid leaks from excavators and placement equipment. Implementation of construction period mitigation measures (listed in Section IV(c) above), preventing discharges of excess sediments, and prevention of fluid spills and preparation in the event of a fluid spill will minimize the potentially significant impacts. Project mitigation includes compliance with measures for the control of urban runoff flow rates and velocities, urban pollutants, erosion and sedimentation in accordance with: (1) the requirements of the city's grading ordinance, storm water ordinance, standard urban storm water mitigation plan (SUSMP) dated April 2003 and as amended, and the City of Carlsbad Drainage Master Plan, as those documents are certified as part of the city's LCP; (2) the city's jurisdictional urban runoff management program (JURMP) and the San Diego County Hydrology Manual to the extent that these requirements are not inconsistent with any policies of the LCP. b) No Impact. The project is in the intertidal zone and will not impact groundwater supplies or recharging. c and e) No Impact. The revetment maintenance project will not alter the drainage pattern, increase the flow rate of surface runoff, or contribute to the storm water system. The revetment is a pervious rock surface and is not being expanded in area. The site is in the intertidal zone and is subject to inundation. 0 Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. The project has the potential to temporarily increase the turbidity by the disturbance of the existing rock material and stirring up silt into the lagoon water during construction. Mitigation measures in the form of construction practices will reduce the potential for impacts to water quality. g - j) No Impact. The project does not propose improvements of structures within the 100 year flood hazard area. The revetment is within the 100 year flood hazard area but will not impede flows or expose people to significant risk of flooding because the site is within the intertidal zone of the Agua Hedionda Lagoon and will not significantly change the flow characteristics or capacity of the lagoon. The repair of the revetment will not cause or expose people to inundation from seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. k) Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. The project proposes to maintain an existing revetment which is in place to prevent the erosion of underlying soil material. Additional rock armoring material will be placed along the eastern shore to prevent further erosion. Construction period mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project to mitigate potential erosion impacts. The project may have a less than significant short term impact on water turbidity as noted in (a) above. 1 - n) Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. Agua Hedionda lagoon is listed on the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) list as an impaired water body for sediments and turbidity. The proposed project has the potential to result in temporary impacts to water quality as a result of beach disturbance during revetment maintenance activities. In general, it is anticipated that water quality impacts will be limited to disturbance of beach sediments and thus short-term elevation of turbidity levels as exposed fine sediments are winnowed from the sands and gravels of the beach. Risk also exists for the potential petroleum discharges to the lagoon in association with equipment fuels, hydraulic leaks, or other fluid leaks from excavators and placement equipment. Implementation of construction period mitigation measures, preventing discharges of excess sediments, and prevention of fluid spills and preparation in the event of a fluid spill will minimize the potentially significant impacts. o) No Impact. The revetment maintenance does not increase the impervious surface area of the project site. p) Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. Potential significant impacts have been identified to intertidal Parish's glasswort (Salicornia Subterminalis) and eelgrass bed. The upland glasswort is located adjacent to the project site. Mitigation measures in the form of flagging the glasswort for identification and hand placement of rock armor in a manner that does not result in the impact to the existing plants will reduce the potential impacts to less than significant. The eelgrass beds are located outside of and immediately adjacent to the shoreline area on 15 Rev. 10/02/09 SUP 09-06 Tu Casa Revetment which the work is anticipated to occur. There is no reason the eelgrass should, be impacted directly from the proposed work. Potential for impacts does exist as a result of equipment maneuvering on the low beach, excessive displacement of shoreline sands and sediments and resultant burial of adjacent eelgrass beds. Mitigation in the form, of staking a 10-foot buffer from existing eelgrass beds, control of sediments, precluding the stockpiling of sediments, and the staging of all work at an approved upland location will reduce the potential impacts to the eelgrass beds to less than significant. Monitoring of the eelgrass beds shall be performed by a qualified biologist to ensure they are not disturbed. A post construction report shall be provided to the City of Carlsbad, California Department of Fish and Game, National Marine Fisheries, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for review no more than 30 calendar days after the completion of the project. If disturbed, mitigation in the form of restoration at a 1.2:1 replacement ratio in accordance with the Southern California Eelgrass Mitigation Policy (SCEMP) (National Marine Fisheries Service 1991, revision 11, adopted by federal and state resource agencies dated July 31, 1991) of eelgrass habitat shall be provided. The eelgrass mitigation shall be implemented in the inner basin of Agua Hedionda Lagoon and be overseen by a qualified biologist experienced in eelgrass restoration. All required eelgrass mitigation shall be implemented within 4 months after the eelgrass impacts occurred. q) No Impact. The project will not result in the exceedance of applicable surface or groundwater receiving water quality objectives or degradation of beneficial use with the implementation of the mitigation measures proposed. The maintenance of the revetment is to reduce the potential for increased siltation and sedimentation of the Agua Hedionda Lagoon from erosion of the underlying soil material by means of the revetment. IX. LANDUSE AND PLANNING - Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? Potentially Significant Impact D D Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated D D Less Than Significant No Impact Impact D D D D a - c) No Impact. The revetment maintenance project does not separate established communities. According to the City of Carlsbad's Habitat Management Plan, the project is in Core area 4. The project site is fully developed with structures and exotic landscapes with a limited and patchy distribution of salicornia plants and is subject to inundation by tidal action. There is no native habitat existing onsite. Overall, the project site does not support any high-quality biological resources, nor does it conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, or any provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan. 16 Rev. 10/02/09 SUP 09-06 Tu Casa Revetment X. MINERAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? Potentially Significant Impact D Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated n n Less Than Significant Impact n n No Impact a and b) No Impact. The developed site is not known to contain any significant mineral resources. XI. NOISE - Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundbourne vibration or groundbourne noise levels? c)A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact n n n n n n n n n n n a) Less than Significant impact. The project would temporarily increase noise levels during the use of construction machinery for the maintenance of the revetment. 17 Rev. 10/02/09 SUP 09-06 Tu Casa Revetment b - f) No Impact. The project will not increase ambient noise levels or groundbourne vibration other than short term construction noise impacts. The site is not nor located within an airport land use plan nor located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING - Would the project: a) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Potentially Significant Impact D D D Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated D D D Less Than Significant No Impact Impact D a - c) No Impact. The maintenance of the rock revetment will not induce growth as no new land is being created. The project does not displace any existing housing or persons necessitating the construction of replacement housing. Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES b) 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? D D D D D D D D D D a - v) No Impact. The maintenance of the rock revetment does not impact existing, or the demand for, public facilities. 18 Rev. 10/02/09 SUP 09-06 Tu Casa Revetment 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? Potentially Significant Impact n Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact n n n a - b) No Impact. The maintenance of the rock revetment is not a recreational facility and does not increase the use of recreation facilities. The lagoon, as a recreational area, would not be impacted by the revetment maintenance. XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC - Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in Q 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 I I 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 I I 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 I I (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? I I f) Result in insufficient parking capacity? I I g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs C] supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turn- outs, bicycle racks)? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact D D n n n n n n n 19 Rev. 10/02/09 SUP 09-06 Tu Casa Revetment a) Less Than Significant Impact. The project will generate a few vehicle trips from the temporary construction traffic generated by the project. The proposed project would not, therefore, cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system. The impacts from the proposed project are, therefore, less than significant. b) Less Than Significant Impact. SANDAG acting as the County Congestion Management Agency has designated three roads (Rancho Santa Fe Rd., El Camino Real and Palomar Airport Rd.) and one highway segment in Carlsbad as part of the regional circulation system. The existing LOS on these designated roads and highway in Carlsbad is: LOS Rancho Santa Fe Road "A-D" El Camino Real "A-D" Palomar Airport Road "A-D" SR 78 "F" The Congestion Management Program's (CMP) acceptable Level of Service (LOS) standard is "E", or LOS "F" if that was the LOS in the 1990 base year (e.g., SR 78 in Carlsbad was LOS "F" in 1990). Accordingly, all designated roads and highway 78 is currently operating at or better than the acceptable standard LOS, Achievement of the CMP acceptable Level of Service (LOS) "E" standard assumes implementation of the adopted CMP strategies. Based on the design capacity(ies) of the designated roads and highway and implementation of the CMP strategies, they will function at acceptable level(s) of service in the short-term and at buildout. c) No Impact. The proposed project does not include any aviation components. The project is not located within the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, McClellan-Palomar Airport. It would not, therefore, result in a change of air traffic patterns or result in substantial safety risks. No impact assessed. d) No Impact. No circulation improvements are proposed to be developed with the project and therefore, would not result in design hazards. The proposed project is consistent with the City's general plan and zoning. Therefore, it would not increase hazards due to an incompatible use. No impact assessed. e) No Impact. The proposed project does not impact emergency requirements of the Fire and Police Departments. No impact assessed. f) No Impact. The proposed project does not change the demand for parking. No impact assessed. g) No Impact. The proposed project does not generate a transit demand or impact alternative modes of transportation. 20 Rev. 10/02/09 SUP 09-06 Tu Casa Revetment XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS - Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which would cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Potentially Significant Impact n Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated n n Less Than Significant No Impact Impact n n n n n n n a ~ g) No Impact. The revetment maintenance project does not have a demand or impact upon public utility or service systems. 21 Rev. 10/02/09 XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumula- tively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects?) c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause the substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated SUP 09-06 Tu Casa Revetment Less Than Significant No Impact Impact D D D D D D a) Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. The project has the potential to add sediment and turbidity to the Agua Hedionda Lagoon during the maintenance for the rock revetment. The mitigation measures included in the project will reduce potential impacts from sedimentation and turbidity. The project includes mitigation measures to protect, through avoidance, the existing salicornia and eelgrass beds. The project does not have any significant impacts to fish or animal populations. b) Less Than Significant Impact The revetment maintenance project does not have a cumulative impact on the environment. The size and scope of the project is very small in relation to the overall Agua Hedionda Lagoon environment. c) No Impact. The revetment maintenance project will not have any environmental effects which would cause a substantial adverse impact on human beings, directly or indirectly. The rock revetment is for the protection of private property from wave and tidal action and does not have a negative environmental impact as it relates to humans. 22 Rev. 10/02/09 SUP 09-06 Tu Casa Revetment XVIII. EARLIER ANALYSES Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets: a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures, which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. EARLIER ANALYSIS USED AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES The following documents were used in the analysis of this project and are on file in the City of Carlsbad Planning Department located at 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California, 92008. 1. Biological Resources Assessment for the Tu Casa HOA Revetment Maintenance Project, Carlsbad CA, Merkel and Associates, October 2009. 2. Wave Runup, letter report prepared by GeoSoils Inc., dated November 30, 2009. 3. Final Master Environmental Impact Report for the City of Carlsbad General Plan Update (MEIR 93-01). City of Carlsbad Planning Department. March 1994. 4. Carlsbad General Plan, City of Carlsbad Planning Department, dated March 1994. 5. City of Carlsbad Municipal Code, Title 21 Zoning, City of Carlsbad Planning Department, as updated. 6. Habitat Management Plan for Natural Communities in the City of Carlsbad, City of Carlsbad Planning Department, dated November 2004. 23 Rev. 10/02/09 SUP 09-06 Tu Casa Revetment LIST OF MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE') 1. Equipment shall be removed from the beach areas during any tidal condition that inundates the work area. Equipment staging areas should be at the foot of Bayshore Drive on improved surfaces only and not within other upland areas or intertidal areas. Rock shall be brought to the beach only as needed and stockpiled as high on the shore as practical. 2. Designate no-fueling zones a minimum distance of 10 meters (33 feet) from all drainages and away from fire sensitive areas. For the proposed work, equipment fueling shall not occur on the beach or within 10 meters of lagoon waters and adjacent wetlands. 3. The footprint of disturbance shall be minimized to the extent feasible and shall be specified in the construction plans. All employees shall be instructed that their activities, vehicles, equipment, and construction materials are restricted to the proposed project footprint, designated staging areas, and routes of travel. Construction limits shall be delineated with PVC stakes along the lower edge of the existing rubble beach and not less than 10 feet from existing eelgrass. Staking shall be maintained until the completion of all construction activities. Access will only be taken from Bayshore Drive and no equipment work shall be conducted from the upland areas above the project work site. 4. A water pollution control plan shall be developed that describes turbidity, sediment, and hazardous material control, fueling and equipment management practices. The plan shall include designated areas for equipment fueling and maintenance, inspections for leaks that occur not less than twice each workday, and spill prevention and clean-up preparations. The contractor shall maintain a waterborne petroleum spill clean-up kit on site during all work. 5. Erodible fill material shall not be deposited into watercourses. Sediment control shall be performed in a manner that sediments are not pushed or allowed to flow down shore into adjacent eelgrass beds. This means minimizing beach sediment disturbance, and not creating stockpiles of sediments where they are subject to tides and wave action between work periods. Temporary sediment stockpiles shall be minimized in scale and protected against erosion. Sediment/erosion control measures shall be continued at the project site until such time as the revetment has been completed to provide a stable shore condition. 6. A post construction survey of the eelgrass beds shall be performed by a qualified marine biologist to determine if there was any excessive displacement of shoreline sands or sediments which resulted in the burial of adjacent eelgrass beds. A post construction report shall be provided to the City of Carlsbad, California Department of Fish and Game, National Marine Fisheries, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for review no more than 30 calendar days after the completion of the project. If disturbed, mitigation in the form of restoration at a 1.2:1 replacement ratio in accordance with the Southern California Eelgrass Mitigation Policy (SCEMP) (National Marine Fisheries Service 1991, revision 11, adopted by federal and state resource agencies dated July 31, 1991) of eelgrass habitat shall be provided. The eelgrass mitigation shall be implemented in the inner basin of Agua Hedionda Lagoon and be overseen by a qualified biologist experienced in eelgrass restoration. All required eelgrass mitigation shall be implemented within 4 months after the eelgrass impacts occurred. 7. All existing glasswort on site shall be flagged by a qualified biologist and riprap revetment hand placed around the plants in a manner that does not result in impacts to the existing plants. 8. Project shall be in compliance with measures for the control of urban runoff flow rates and velocities, urban pollutants, erosion and sedimentation in accordance with: (1) the requirements of the city's grading ordinance, storm water ordinance, standard urban storm water mitigation plan (SUSMP) dated April 2003 and as amended, and the City of Carlsbad Drainage Master Plan, as those documents are certified as part of the city's LCP; (2) the city's jurisdictional urban runoff management program (JURMP) and the San Diego County Hydrology Manual to the extent that these requirements are not inconsistent with any policies of the LCP. 24 Rev. 10/02/09 SUP 09-06 Tu Casa Revetment APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATION MEASURES THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASURES AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT. 0 Date Signature 25 Rev. 10/02/09 Addendum to EIA part II - SUP 09-06 - TU CASA REVETMENT The California Department of Fish and Game Department have submitted comments on the Mitigated Negative Declaration and requests that all construction work be conducted only during the avian non-breeding season (August through mid February). Section IV.d (page 10), Biological Resources, of the initial study is revised as follows: Agua Hedionda Lagoon supports or has the potential to support a number of sensitive bird species, and there is concern that the indirect impacts from increased general activity, and particularly the presence of heavy equipment with its visual and noise impacts, could indirectly impact breeding and foraging birds using the lagoon and all construction work shall be conducted only during the avian non-breeding season (August through mid February). There is native salt marsh habitat along the lagoon shoreline just east of the Project's access point to the beach at the end of Bayshore Drive. This habitat has the potential to support breeding and/or foraging light-footed clapper rails (Rallus longirostris ssp. levipes - State and Federal Endangered), and Belding's savannah sparrows (Passerculus sandwichensis ssp. beldingi - and State Endangered). In addition, the California least tern (Sterna antillarum ssp. browni - State and Federal Endangered) may also forage in the lagoon during the breeding season, and could be indirectly impacted by Project activities. Add the following mitigation measure to the list of mitigation measures: 9. All construction work shall be conducted only during the avian non-breeding season (August through mid February). Add the following mitigation measure to the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for SUP 09-06 - Tu Casa Revetment 9. All construction work shall be conducted only during the avian non-breeding season (August through mid February). Project Engineering No In light of the whole record, the additional information does not revise the project description and none of the conditions described in Title 14 CCR §15162, calling for the preparation of a subsequent MND, have occurred. The expanded information is neither the result of new significant environmental effects nor the increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. o co V|—o 0)en05 Q_ '-t— » 0;u (0o1o>o Q. 3 OT .2"coCO*— •"E o ^— 'L_0 •^^ ^O c •*-•o0 '2*Q. W Jz *-* 0 **— "ro 1 Q_ CO ^DC < LU 'S i °S: c Z> .2z iLU c_l OE 0m 4.1 C 0 £0>0£ (Q PROJECT NAME: Tu Cas-i— » Q-I-J •oa 2o2- 8 2>05 w01— CO CD 0£ c.0 ^-JCDD) 1 CD =>0)0- E w 4—* 4— «CO £ w SCOo T3C 0L_ 3 C/)CO0E co ^-^COD) '•4— • E .coCO0 i~ £ 'co so0^zo "S0 CO '(/) T3C CO T3 0 -^-»0Q.£ 8 < 8 §«= 'cen 'w _C "o "01 APPROVAL DATE:The following environmentalenvironmental impacts to a*•— •" 0oo co m>, !Q 0v><n< o.*— •^— iQ 0 f^u_W9? .C i J2 0E E'3(T 2 COc:'L_ O*J co E V) >b0^^+-• _w ^5 T> CD T3" S"c0 0 o ^^u CD JC*- • 5 •D measure has been compliex—vCD OOO Resources Code Section 21 1CO_*:L_ (DE0Oi co'•«-»•o <S .3> c«= 0 0 E<, CD^ j=a E c 0 «,1 s5 —OQ. W -*-•CO CC 0 'S E2 t 'E S0 £5 5"= Q COc: '£ a>O Q.i^r0H s Mitigation Measureo"Z. CO "C00c- 'coc LU t>0 'o" rx g-£^ o-g"°0 |£ = o § CD 5 0^^^ _£- 0 £ tD .0) O £ *j •>. (/) PCD CO -^ CO $ *3*S!NIlllif! JJiHiJ> .- CO O 0 ^o £ fe w jQ w E :1 ? | 8 «D » 2-gra-J co:££ -S 8 to J-g o § UllfP "IfefelSc c £ o .c -0 -o S rom-S-5 0^ .|g> ST.gf ^ &-i?£i!sLU T3 CO 0 5 W 1/5 ^~ o~z. CO T"00c 'coc LU tS0 'o" aL Designate no-fueling zones a minimum distance of 10meters (33 feet) from all drainages and away from firesensitive areas. For the proposed work, equipmentfueling shall not occur on the beach or within 10meters of lagoon waters and adjacent wetlands.c\i o"Z. CO *^~ 00c 'cocLU •B0 'o" Q.The footprint of disturbance shall be minimized to theextent feasible and shall be specified in theconstruction plans. All employees shall be instructedthat their activities, vehicles, equipment, andconstruction materials are restricted to the proposedproject footprint, designated staging areas, and routesof travel. Construction limits shall be delineated withPVC stakes along the lower edge of the existingrubble beach and not less than 10 feet from existingeelgrass. Staking shall be maintained until thecompletion of all construction activities. Access willonly be taken from Bayshore Drive and no equipmentwork shall be conducted from the upland areas abovethe project work site.CO "S "(5•Q T) (0•o £"Sl3 % ~{/> TO cnj T3 — 0) 73 0) EI-°_ CO =o -o 'i Si»lS f:l 1 I P •- "o oC <U 0 t=on of Headings:eject, ongoing, cumulative,ig Dept. = Department, or Agency, responsible for monitoring a particulaii Plans = When mitigation measure is shown on plans, this column will bnplementation = When mitigation measure has been implemented, this= Area for describing status of ongoing mitigation measure, or for other iisndixP.'•5 61 •§ 5 ^ <« S. % " S 1 1 1 <— - Q) Z > **— f ,Q 8. 5 o •= E 'X >, ° JC 0) 0) OUJ H S OT > K EC. CO "5 CN CD O)CO Q. COE 0a: g <l § 0 E -Q. E c 0 mc c OK CO •*-•O) cc 0 'c Ep t'c ro0 05 Q O) '£ <"S a = £"o Mitigation Measureo z O)c 00c 'enc LLJ •50 'o" rx A water pollution control plan shall be developed thatdescribes turbidity, sediment, and hazardous materialcontrol, fueling and equipment managementpractices. The plan shall include designated areas forequipment fueling and maintenance, inspections forleaks that occur not less than twice each workday,and spill prevention and clean-up preparations. Thecontractor shall maintain a waterborne petroleum spillclean-up kit on site during all work.* o 2 O)c 00c O) LU •{j 0'2" 0_Erodible fill material shall not be deposited intowatercourses. Sediment control shall be performed ina manner that sediments are not pushed or allowed toflow down shore into adjacent eelgrass beds. Thismeans minimizing beach sediment disturbance, andnot creating stockpiles of sediments where they aresubject to tides and wave action between workperiods. Temporary sediment stockpiles shall beminimized in scale and protected against erosion.Sediment/erosion control measures shall becontinued at the project site until such time as therevetment has been completed to provide a stableshore condition.IT) o z c O) UJ Cn O) •— .E 0 C 0c03 a •s0'o' a A post construction survey of the eelgrass beds shallbe performed by a qualified marine biologist todetermine if there was any excessive displacement ofshoreline sands or sediments which resulted in theburial of adjacent eelgrass beds. A post constructionreport shall be provided to the City of Carlsbad,California Department of Fish and Game, NationalMarine Fisheries, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service forreview no more than 30 calendar days after thecompletion of the project. If disturbed, mitigation inthe form of restoration at a 1.2:1 replacement ratio inaccordance with the Southern California EelgrassMitigation Policy (SCEMP) (National Marine FisheriesService 1991, revision 11, adopted by federal andCD •b +-i -a TOcro . . .Q> 13 •*£ '&CO nj c Q) -n <D E C-D c ^ C•£z Q) —ro nj p "Ja 1 1 1 1 ation of Headings:Project, ongoing, cumulative.•ing Dept. = Department, or Agency, responsible for monitoring a particularon Plans = When mitigation measure is shown on plans, this column will b1 Implementation = When mitigation measure has been implemented, this;s = Area for describing status of ongoing mitigation measure, or for other irpendix P.E „ jj c S •£ £ I a= ol E 'x >; ° £ a> a> Quj H S (n > a ct oo "o CO (D D)03 Q_ COE0)cc c C ^ c«= CD » E "c E c0 </>C c 5 J5 CO O) CC. 03•d £ 4_J ^ 'IF Cl1 $2 Q c '"- (D0 C._ >, 0 ^Mitigation Measurestate resource agencies dated July 31, 1991) ofeelgrass habitat shall be provided. The eelgrassmitigation shall be implemented in the inner basin ofAgua Hedionda Lagoon and be overseen by aqualified biologist experienced in eelgrass restoration.All required eelgrass mitigation shall be implementedwithin 4 months after the eelgrass impacts occurred.o D)c CDQ) C 'o> LU ts g^ CL CO T3 C0) —>< 0 ±i-Q CO 3 'f= Q. m £) E ° ^ "c £ Q) P Q) .-t; B c ww CD c •£ C CD g J20 •- C Q. w ^1 & *• <£. o~ co ._ ^ o 0)c 0)0c 'ro LU •s .0^ L_ Q.Project shall be in compliance with measures for thecontrol of urban runoff flow rates and velocities, urbanpollutants, erosion and sedimentation in accordancewith: (1) the requirements of the city's gradingordinance, storm water ordinance, standard urbanstorm water mitigation plan (SUSMP) dated April2003 and as amended, and the City of CarlsbadDrainage Master Plan, as those documents arecertified as part of the city's LCP; (2) the city'sjurisdictional urban runoff management program(JURMP) and the San Diego County HydrologyManual to the extent that these requirements are notinconsistent with any policies of the LCP.CO 0z 05 ^*^_ 0)CDC 'o>c LU .<_»OCD CL All construction work shall be conducted onlyHduring the avian non-breeding season (Augustthrough mid February).CT> roT3 T3Cre•D• o> 1S1<n ro cro T3 — ro ci= fc o>8 E •2 c « om o ro "43•¥ r- J= ro•s I s S'§5 g E ; e-5c o>.9 5 m3 "CO 0) CO o^"5>o> u „ °£ct3 £ 2 ® E * Q) ^ Q_ Q. "•*• T3 ? _ T3 Jt o ; o ^ z o Q5 w > a: u.