Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-01-19; Planning Commission; Resolution 67431 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 6743 2 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE 3 CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, CONSIDERING A SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT 4 PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED BY THE CITY OF OCEANSIDE, ADOPTION OF RESPONSIBLE AGENCY ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS AND ADOPTION OF A STATEMENT OF 6 OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS AND A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PREPARED 7 FOR THE AMENDED RECLAMATION PLAN FOR THE FORMER SOUTH COAST MATERIALS QUARRY 8 GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 78 AND 9 WEST OF COLLEGE BOULEVARD IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 25. 10 CASE NAME: SOUTH COAST MATERIALS QUARRY CASE NO.: SUP 07-03/HDP 07-Q1/HMP 07-06 11 WHEREAS, Hanson Aggregates Pacific Southwest, "Developer," and "Owner," has j 3 filed a verified application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property described as 14 A portion of Rancho Agua Hedionda, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according to ^ Partition Map 823, filed in the Office of the County Recorder , /- of San Diego County, November 16,1896 and also identified as Assessor's Parcel Number 167-040-21-00 17 ("the Property"); and 18 WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and 2Q the State CEQA Guidelines, the City of Carlsbad is a responsible agency for the Amended 21 Reclamation Plan for the Former South Coast Materials Quarry ("Project") project; and 22 WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, the City of 0 ^Oceanside is the lead agency for the Project; and 24 WHEREAS, in compliance with CEQA, the City of Oceanside prepared a Draft 25 Subsequent Environmental Impact Report ("SEIR") (SCH No. 2005111124) to analyze the26 27 potential environmental effects of the Project; and 28 WHEREAS, all actions required to be taken by applicable law related to the preparation, circulation and review of the Draft SEIR have been taken; and 1 WHEREAS, on July 26, 2009, the City of Oceanside certified the SEIR, adopted 2 Environmental Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and approved a 3 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project pursuant to CEQA by City of 4 <• Oceanside Planning Commission Resolution 2010-15P 6 WHEREAS, the City of Carlsbad has reviewed and determined that the SEIR 7 adequately disclosed and evaluated the impacts of the Project and imposed adequate mitigation Q measures to the extent feasible; and 9 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on January 19, 2011, hold a duly 10 noticed public hearing as prescribed by law, considering the SEIR, Environmental Findings, 11 Statement of Overriding Consideration, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and 13 after evaluating the environmental impacts associated with the Project, has concluded that the 14 SEIR complies with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines; and ^ WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, analyzing the information submitted by staff, and considering any written 17 comments received, the Planning Commission considered all factors relating to the SEIR. 18 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning 20 Commission as follows: 21 A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. 22 Findings: 23 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad does hereby find: 24 a. that the City of Carlsbad has a limited role as the responsible agency under CEQA, 25 and the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in the SEIR, Environmental Findings, Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, supporting documentation, and as a 27 whole the record of proceedings. Based on this review, the Planning Commission finds that, as to those potential environmental impacts within the City's powers and 28 authorities as a responsible agency, that the SEIR contains a complete, objective, and accurate reporting of those potential impacts, and that these findings reflect the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. The Environmental PC RESO NO. 6743 -2- Findings and the Statement of Overriding Considerations and the Mitigation 2 Monitoring and Reporting Program, as contained within City of Oceanside Planning Commission Resolution 2010-P-15, are attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and are 3 incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein; b. in its role as a responsible agency under CEQA, the Planning Commission finds that <- there are no feasible alternatives to the proposed project which would avoid or substantially lessen the Project's potentially significant environmental impacts but 5 still achieve most of the Project's objectives. The Planning Commission further finds that there are no additional feasible mitigation measures within the City's authority 7 which would eliminate or reduce the Project's potentially significant impacts to a level of less than significant. The Planning Commission further finds that the Statement of Overriding Considerations adopted by the City of Oceanside is supported by substantial evidence, that each Overriding Consideration outweighs the Project's potentially significant impacts, and that, in light of this, that the significant 10 and unavoidable impacts are acceptable. As such the Planning Commission concurs with the environmental Findings and the Statement of Overriding Considerations made by the City of Oceanside and therefore the Planning Commission adopts those Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations as its own and incorporates them herein; 13 c. the Planning Commission hereby adopts, as a condition of approval of the Project, the 14 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program attached to this Resolution as Exhibit ''A."; 15 ,, d. it reflects the independent judgment of the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad. 17 Conditions: 18 1. Developer shall implement, or cause the implementation of, the Former South Coast Materials Quarry Amended Reclamation Plan Final Subsequent EIR Mitigation 20 Monitoring and Reporting Program. 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PC RESO NO. 6743 -3- 1 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning 2 Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on January 19, 2011, by the following 3 vote, to wit: 4 <- AYES: Chairperson L'Heureux, Commissioners Baker, Dominguez, Montgomery, Nygaard and Schumacher 6 NOES: 7 ABSENT:8 9 ABSTAIN: 10 11 12 STEPHEN "liAP" L'HEUREUX, Chairperson j 3 CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION 14 „ATTEST: 15 16 17 DON NEU 18 Planning Director 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PC RESO NO. 6743 -4- 1 2 3 4 5 Exhibit "A' PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2010-P15 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF OCEANSIDE, CALIFORNIA CERTIFYING THE FINAL SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE FORMER SOUTH COAST QUARRY AMENDED RECLAMATION PLAN PROJECT ON CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY IN THE CITY OF OCEANSIDE APPLICATION NO: APPLICANT: LOCATION: RMA-1-01, REVISION 05 Hanson Aggregates Pacific Southwest, Inc. / South of Highway 78, west of College Boulevard, on site of former Rock Quarry 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF OCEANSIDE, CALIFORNIA DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, an Environmental Impact Report was prepared and circulated for public and agency review and proper notification was given in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after giving the required notice, did on the 26th day of July 2010, conduct a duly advertised public hearing on the content of the Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report; and WHEREAS, studies and investigations made by this Commission and in its behalf reveal the following facts: For the Final Environmental Impact Report: 1. The Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report was completed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). There are certain significant environmental effects detailed in the Environmental Impact Report which have been avoided or substantially lessened by the establishment of measures which are detailed in Exhibit "A" Environmental Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Former South Coast Quarry Amended Reclamation Plan Project. The Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report and Mitigation and Monitoring and . Reporting Programs for the project (included in the Final EIR) and were presented to the Planning Commission, and the Planning Commission reviewed and considered the information contained in these documents prior to making a decision on the revised 2. 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 reclamation plan. The Final Environmental Impact Report and Mitigation and Monitoring and Reporting Program for the amended reclamation plan have been determined to be accurate and adequate documents, which reflect the independent judgment of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission does hereby certify the Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report for the former South Coast Quarry Amended Reclamation Plan Project RMA-1-00 Revision 05, subject to the following recommendations and conditions: ••• / 1. Pursuant to Public resources Code Section 21081.6 the Planning Commission adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the project and finds and determines that said programs are designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. 2. Notice is HEREBY GIVEN that the time within which judicial review must be sought on this decision is governed by the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act. PASSED AND ADOPTED Resolution No. 2010-P15 on July 26, 2010 by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Neal, Troisi, Balma, Rosales, Bertheaud and Scrivener NAYS: Martinek ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ATTEST: Bob Neal, Chairperson Oceanside Planning Commission Jerry Hittl^fnan, Secretary /II, JERRY HITTLEMAN, Secretary of the Oceanside Planning Commission, hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of Resolution No. 2010-P15. Dated:July 26.2010 EXHIBIT "A" QUARRY EIR FINDINGS FINDINGS OF FACT FOR THE FORMER SOUTH COAST QUARRY AMENDED RECLAMATION PLAN FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH No. 2005111124) April 2010 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Findings of Fact .• j The California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Section 21000-21178 ("CEQA") and State CEQA Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Cal. Code Regs. Title 14, Sections 15000-15387 ("CEQA Guidelines") are "intended to assist public agencies in systematically identifying both the significant effects of proposed projects and the feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures which will avoid or substantially lessen such significant effects." (Cal. Pub. Res. Code Section 21002 (emphasis added).) CEQA's mandate and principles are implemented, in part, through the requirement that agencies adopt findings before approving projects for which EIRs are required. (See Pub. Res. Code Section 21081(a).) For each significant environmental effect identified in any EIR for a proposed project, the approving agency must issue a written finding reaching one or more of three permissible conclusions. The first permissible finding is that "[c]hanges or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoids or substantially lessens the significant environmental effect as identified in the final EIR." (CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(l).) The second permissible finding is that "[sjuch changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency." (CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(2).) The third potential conclusion is that "[sjpecific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR." (CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(3).) Section 21061.1 of CEQA defines "feasible" to mean "capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, social and technological factors." Section 15364 of the CEQA Guidelines adds another factor: "legal" considerations. See also Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors ("Goleta II"). 52 Cal.Sd 553, 565, 276 Cal.Rptr. 419 (1990). The concept of "feasibility" also encompasses the question of whether a particular alternative or mitigation measure promotes the underlying goals and objectives of a project. (City of Del Marv. City of San Diego, 133 Cal .App.3d410,417,183 Cal.Rptr. 898 (1982) .)"[F]easibility under CEQA encompasses 'desirability to the extent that desirability is based on a reasonable balancing of the relevant economic, social and technological factors." (Id.; see also Sequovah Hills Homeowners Ass'nv. City of Oakland. 23 Cal.App.4th 704, 715, 29 Cal.Rptr.2d 182 (1993).) The CEQA Guidelines do not define the difference between "avoiding" a significant environmental effect and merely "substantially lessening" such an effect. The City must therefore glean the meaning of these terms from the other contexts in which the terms are used. Section 21081 of CEQA, on Former South Coast Quarry . City of Oceanside Amended Reclamation Plan CF-1 April 2010 Findings of Fact ; DRAFT which CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 is based, uses the term "mitigate" rather than "substantially lessen." Such an understanding of the statutory term is consistent with the policies underlying CEQA, which include the policy that "public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which will substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such projects." (Pub. Res. Code Section 21002.) For purposes of these findings, the term "avoid" refers to the effectiveness of one or more mitigation measures to reduce an otherwise significant effect to a less than significant level. In contrast, the term "substantially lessen" refers to the effectiveness of such measure or measures to substantially reduce the severity of a significant effect, but not to reduce that effect to a less than significant level. , These interpretations are consistent with the holding in Laurel Hills Homeowners Ass'n v. City ' Council. 83 Cal.App.3d 515,519-527,147Cal.Rptr. 842 (1978), in which the Court of Appeal held that an agency had satisfied its obligation to substantially lessen or avoid significant effects by adopting numerous mitigation measures, not all of which rendered the significant impacts in question (e.g., the "loss of biological resources") to a less than significant level. Although CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 requires only that approving agencies specify that a particular significant effect is "avoid[ed] or substantially lessen[ed]," these Findings, for purposes of clarity, in each, case will specify whether the effect in question has been reduced to a less than significant level, or has simply been substantially lessened but remains significant. The following Findings of Fact ("Findings") are made relative to the conclusions of the Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report for the Former South Coast Quarry Amended Reclamation Plan (SCH No. 2005111124) ("FEIR"). As used herein, the term "Project" refers to the Refined Alternative 3 described in Section I (D) of the Final EIR. 1.2 Document Format These Findings have been organized into the following sections: a) Section 1 provides an introduction to these Findings. b) Section 2 provides a summary of the Project and overview of the discretionary actions required for approval of the Project and a statement of the Project's objectives. c) Section 3 provides a summary of public participation in the environmental review, an overview of the administrative record that has been developed for the Project, as well as findings regarding the Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (MlvIRP) and general findings regarding the Project and CEQA compliance. d) Section 4 sets forth findings regarding those environmental impacts which were determined during the notice of preparation period either not to be relevant to the Project or which were determined to clearly not manifest at levels which were deemed to be significant for consideration at the Project-specific level. e) Section 5 sets forth findings regarding significant or potentially significant environmental impacts identified in the Final EIR which the City has determined are either not significant or can be substantially lessened or reduced to a less-than-significant level through the implementation of mitigation measures included in the MMRP for the Project. Former South Coast Quarry City of Oceanside Amended Reclamation Plan . CF-2 April 2010 Findings of Fact DRAFT f) Section 6 sets forth findings regarding alternatives to the Project which were analyzed in the Final EIR. As further discussed herein, the Refined Alternative 3 was identified as being environmentally preferable to the project proposed in the Draft EIR, and is therefore being carried forward as the "Project". Other alternatives discussed in the Draft EER. were determined to have greater impacts or less desirable design features, and therefore were rejected by the City. g) Section 7 sets forth the finding regarding growth inducing impacts. 2. PROJECT SUMMARY 2.1 Background / :' The hard rock quarry operated on the site between 1961 and 1995 by South Coast Material Company and its subsequent owners. Since 1991, the property has been owned and operated by Hanson Aggregates. The on-site operations associated with the quarry included three types of activities: 1) quarrying of the hard rock material from the site; 2) the manufacturing of asphalt and concrete products; and 3) site reclamation work. All mining on the site is complete. Quarry activities in the City of Carlsbad operated under a Conditional Use Permit (CUP #9) issued by the City in '1961 and this CUP is still in effect. Beginning in 1977, the quarry operated subject to the provisions of City of Oceanside Conditional Use Permit C-2-77. Following the adoption of a reclamation plan for this quarry in 1991, the City of Oceanside City Council granted CUP C-9-92 to continue quarrying operations which has since expired. The quarry operated under this permit until 1995. Other on-site uses included a rock plant, a concrete batch plant and an asphalt products facility, along with concrete recycling, shop building, scale house and associated office areas. The rock plant and asphalt plant have been dismantled and removed from the site. The concrete batch plant was closed in March 2005 and dismantled in December 2005, with all plant remnants completely removed from the site by September 2006. The office building was demolished and removed from the site in June 2006. The recycling operation is continuing on site and is anticipated to remain in operation through completion of the reclamation grading. The termination of these uses and removal of the remaining shop building and scale house structures are included as part of the final phase of this Amended Reclamation Plan. During removal of fuel tanks on the site in 1997, diesel and gasoline impacted soil was detected and an ongoing program of environmental investigation and remediation was begun by 1998. The source area excavation and current soil and groundwater remediation effort began in 2005. None of the remediation actions are a part of the proposed project but are being conducted under separate regulatory requirements. The site remediation activities are overseen by the San Diego County Department of Environmental Health (DEH) under the Local oversight Program, Case Number H02509-001, and are also subject to Regional Water Quality Control Board (Water Board) Order No. R9-2002-0342 (the "Water Board Order"). The remediation' activities are not themselves discretionary actions subject to CEQA. It should be noted that the remediation activities will, and . are required to, proceed under the DEH regulations and to comply with the Water Board Order irrespective of any action on the Reclamation Plan or the proposed project. The original reclamation plan property consisted of a total of 162.2 acres, with 62.1 acres located within the current boundaries of the City of Oceanside and 100.1 acres within the City of Carlsbad. Former South Coast Quarry City of Oceanside Amended Reclamation Plan CF-3 April 2010 Findings of Fact DRAFT In compliance with the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975 (SMARA), the first Reclamation Plan (RMA-2-88) for the South Coast Materials quarry site was adopted by the State Mining and Geology Board in September 1991. Under SMARA, all mining operations are required to have an adopted reclamation plan to reclaim the land to a usable condition that is readily adaptable to alternative land uses, and which is consistent with the local zoning and General Plan designation for the property. The City of Oceanside is the lead agency for approval of the reclamation plan for the entire mining site because the City adopted a mining ordinance in 1986 (ordinance 86-32) in compliance with SMARA. The City of Carlsbad does not have a local reclamation ordinance and recognizes the City of Oceanside as the state-designated lead agency for the purpose of reclamation under SMARA. • > I In"2001, a Final EIR (State Clearinghouse No. 2000041003) was certified for the Quarry Creek Project, which included an amended reclamation plan for the Former South Coast Materials Company quarry, construction and operation of the Quarry Creek Shopping Center, and the widening of College Boulevard. Within the Quarry Creek EIR, Phases 1 and 2A of the mine reclamation program (located within the City of Oceanside) were addressed at a project level. Phases 2B, 3 and 4 of the mine reclamation were addressed at a program level of detail within the Quarry Creek EIR and included all 100.1 acres of the mine property within the City of Carlsbad, as well as 4.1 acres within the City of Oceanside. Restoration of Buena Vista Creek was included within Phase 3. The Quarry Creek EIR addressed the realignment of Buena Vista Creek to the north within the mine property as approved in the 1991 Reclamation Plan and an alternative that would leave the creek in place. The City of Oceanside approved the 2001 Reclamation Plan with the condition that the creek be retained within in its current alignment, including the preservation of the remnants of the El Salto Falls. Phases 1 and 2A of the 2001 Reclamation Plan were approved and have been implemented. Public circulation of the Draft Supplemental EIR (hereinafter referred to as "Draft EIR") occurred between September 22 and November 21,2008. The Draft EIR acknowledged that either Alternative IB (Reduced Footprint with Balanced Grading) or Alternative 3 (Modified Structural Creek Alternative within Reduced Footprint) would be acceptable to the project applicant as preferred alternatives to the Draft EIR proposed project, and that they are prepared to implement either alternative in place of the project included in the 2007 Amended Reclamation Plan. Based on the comments received during public circulation of the Draft EIR, it was evident that Alternative 3 was the preferred alternative. Nonetheless, Alternative 3 presented certain agencies with a number of concerns that were received in the written comments received on the Draft EIR. As a result, Alternative 3 has been further refined for inclusion in the Final EIR as "Refined Alternative 3" based on comments received from the Wildlife Agencies, the Corps and the City of Carlsbad and was carried forward as the preferred alternative in the Final EIR. 2.2 Project Description Refined Alternative 3 is similar to Draft EIR Alternative 3 (Modified Structural Creek Alternative 'within Reduced Footprint), but would include refinements to the graded area by avoiding all areas that were not previously disturbed by mining activities and to the Buena Vista Creek channel design. These refinements would result in the preservation of more of the existing on-site habitat and wetlands than the Draft EIR proposed project and alternatives analyzed in the Draft EIR. This alternative also has been refined to include additional bio-engineering techniques in the channel and Former South Coast Quarry City of Oceanside Amended Reclamation Plan CF-4 April 2010 Findings of Fact DRAFT provide greater water quality treatment for runoffpassing through the site and other refinements to the water quality features. Proposed grades under Refined Alternative 3 would remain in a similar range of elevations across the site to the Draft EIR proposed project and alternatives. Final elevations of the graded area north of the creek would range from approximately 100 to 116 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) and the finished grade of the larger area south of the creek would range from approximately 104 to 114 feet AMSL. The smaller pad in the southeastern portion of the site would range in elevation from approximately 132 to 140 feet AMSL. Slopes within the Phase 2B area would range from approximately 110 to ISOfeetAMSL. The channel's elevation would range from approximately 71 to 100 feet AMSL. Grading associated with Refined Alternative 3 would require approximately 274,000 cubic yards (cy) of cut material and 274,000 cy of fill, resulting in no need for soil import or export. The on-site portion of Buena Vista Creek is currently highly degraded and is a relatively steep-sloped incised channel. The historic width of the channel within the project site was less than 100 feet in width (generally 50 to 80 feet). Refined Alternative 3 provides an overall channel width (bottom width and overbank terraces) of 194 feet. As with the Draft EIR proposed project and alternatives, Refined Alternative 3 would provide a wider creek channel compared to what has historically existed on the project site. Under the Refined Alternative 3, the proposed Buena Vista Creek channel would include a 150-foot-wide bottom and 2.5:1 (horizontal to vertical) side slopes. In addition, overbank terraces would be added to both sides of the channel, resulting in an overall channel width of approximately 194 feet. Refined Alternative 3 proposes to grade the channel at less than a 0.2-percent longitudinal gradient to avoid erosive flow velocities. Refined Alternative 3 provides for a minimum of seven feet of freeboard in the proposed channel above the 100-year flow rates, which is well in excess of the standard one foot of freeboard typically required. A thalweg (the line defining the lowest points along the length of a river bed) would be established along the channel bed with a gentle curvature, and meandering benches would be constructed along the channel banks. The bench widths would vary along the length of the channel, but the total width of both benches (one on either side of the channel) at any given point would be 24 feet. The benches would be constructed approximately four feet above the channel bed to allow inundation during low to moderate storm events. The total width subject to inundation during these events is approximately 194 feet just above the benches. The total channel cross-section would include a low-flow channel, an expanded channel including the riparian zone, an overbank terrace, a transition zone and an upland zone. Seven natural rock drop structures ranging from one to three feet in height would be constructed at irregular intervals along the channel. Each structure would extend across the channel bottom and up the adjacent banks to at least one foot above the 100-year water surface elevations. The structures would behave as rock riffles that form a stepped channel bed profile. The stepped profile would allow the 100-year flow velocities to be maintained below an erosive threshold throughout much of the proposed channel. The locations and heights of each structure vary and were selected to allow portions of the existing channel bed to remain undisturbed. The drop structures would be constructed with rocks of varying gradation including emergent boulders in order to create a channel with step-pool-step profile. The step-pool-step would consist of Former South Coast Quarry City of Oceanside Amended Reclamation Plan CF-5 April 2010 Findings of Fact ., DRAFT level reaches separated by the drop structures (step). The area immediately upstream of a step can contain a pool, which is sometimes referred to as a pool riffle. Pool riffles would be created upstream of some structures. The structures would be constructed with naturally occurring on-site rock to the extent available. The rocks would be of varying gradation and emergent boulders would be incorporated to mimic more naturally occurring rock riffles. A filter material would be placed under the structures to prevent piping and maintain stability. Grouting only would be used where necessary to maintain the integrity of the structures under high-flow events. The design would allow the creek to flow uninterrupted during normal- and low-flow periods. Some portions of the channel both upstream and downstream of the rock riffles would experience 4 erosive velocities during the 100-year design storm. In these areas, a buried riprap revetment would < be 'constructed behind the channel bank. The revetment would contain the lateral erosion that can occur at a bank. 2.3 Statement of Project Objectives The overall objectives of the Amended Reclamation Plan include the following: a Reclaim the remaining unreclaimed 104.2 acres of the site to a safe, usable condition that is readily adaptable for future land uses in accordance with SMARA. » Retain the existing Buena Vista Creek alignment through the site, preserve the El Salto Falls, and enhance the habitat values of the creek, while meeting requirements for control of erosion and sedimentation, and accommodating current hydrological conditions of the creek. • Establish time frames, procedures and performance standards for measuring the completion of reclamation activities. • Achieve complete and final reclamation of the site as required by SMARA and eliminate SMARA-related barriers to alternative land uses. 3. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 3.1 Public Input There have been numerous opportunities for public review and comment, including but not limited to the public forums set forth below: EIR Notice of Preparation, November 21, 2005 - December 20, 2005 Public Scoping Meeting on January 31, 2006 Additional Public Meeting on March 22, 2006 Draft EIR Public Review, September 22, 2008 -November 21, 2008 3.2 Record of Proceedings » The Notice of Preparation and all other public notices issued by the City in conjunction with the Project; Former South Coast Quarry City of Oceanside Amended Reclamation Plan CF-6 April 2010 Findings of Fact DRAFT • The Draft EIR; • The Final EIR; • All written comments and verbal public testimony presented during the public comment period on the Draft EIR; The MMRP; « All findings, ordinances, and resolutions adopted by the City in connection with the Project, and all documents incorporated by reference therein; ' ; • All final reports, studies, memoranda, maps, staff reports, or other planning documents relating to the Project prepared by the City, consultants to the City, or responsible or trustee agencies with respect to the City's compliance with the requirements of CEQA and with respect to the City's actions on the Project; • All documents submitted to the City by other public agencies or members of the public in connection with the Project; » Minutes and/or verbatim transcripts of all public information sessions, public meetings, and public hearings held by the City in connection with the Project; • Any documentary or other evidence submitted to the City at such information sessions, public meetings, and public hearings; • Matters of common knowledge to the City, including, but not limited to federal, state, and local laws and regulations; • The City's General Plan, Municipal Code, and Draft Subarea Plan/Habitat Conservation Plan ("HCP"); » Any documents expressly cited in these Findings, in addition to those cited above; and • Any other materials required to be in the record of proceedings by Section 21167.6 (e) of CEQA. The custodian of the documents comprising the record of proceedings is the City Clerk, whose office is located at 300 North Coast Highway, Oceanside, CA 92054. At all relevant times, all these documents, which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the City's decision is based, have been available upon request at the offices of the City. The City has relied on all of the documents listed above in reaching its decision on the Project, even if not every document was formally presented to the City or City Staff as part of the City files generated in connection with the Project. Without exception, any documents set forth above not found in the Project files fall into one of two categories. First, many of them reflect prior planning or . legislative decisions of which the City was aware in approving the Project. (See City of Santa Cruz v. Local Agency Formation Commission. 76 Cal.App.3d 381, 391-392, 142 Cal.Rptr. 873 (1978); Former South Coast Quarry City of Oceanside Amended Reclamation Plan - CF-7 April 2010 Findings of Fact DRAFT Domineyv. Department of Personnel Administration. 205 Cal.App.3d 729, 738, n.6,252 Cal.Rptr. 620 (1988).) Second, other of the documents influenced the expert advice provided to City Staffer consultants, who then provided advice to the City. For that reason, such documents form part of the underlying factual basis for the City's decisions relating to the adoption of the Project. (See Pub. Res. Code Section 21 167.6fe)(10): Browning-Ferris Industries v. City Council of City of San Jose. 181 Cal.App.3d 852, 866, 226 Cal.Rptr. 575 (1986); Stanislaus Audubon Society. Inc. v. County of Stanislaus. 33 Cal.App.4th 144, 153, 155, 39 Cal.Rptr.2d 54 (1985).) The Final EER was completed in compliance with CEQA, and reflects the City's independent judgment. The City believes that its decision on the Project is one which must be made after a hearing required by law at which evidence is required and discretion in the determination of facts is ' vested in the City. As a result, any judicial review of the City's decision will be governed by Section 21168 of CEQA. Regardless of the standard of review that is applicable, the City has considered evidence and arguments presented to the City prior to or at the public hearings on this matter. In determining whether the Project has a significant effect on the environment, and in adopting Findings pursuant to Section 21081 of CEQA, the City has complied with CEQA Sections 21081.5 and 21082.2. 3.3 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program CEQA requires the Lead Agency approving a project adopt a MMRP for the changes to the project that it has adopted or made a condition of proj ect approval in order to ensure compliance with project implementation. A MMRP has been defined and serves that function for the Final EIR. The MMRP designates responsibility and anticipated timing for the implementation of mitigation. The City will serve as the overall MMRP Coordinator. A MMRP has been prepared-for the Project and has been adopted concurrently with these Findings. (See Pub. Res. Code Section 21081 -6(a)(l).) The City will use the MMRP to track compliance with all mitigation measures. 3.4 General Findings The City hereby finds as follows: a) The foregoing statements are true and correct; b) The City is the "Lead Agency" for the Project evaluated in the Final EIR and independently reviewed and analyzed the Draft EIR and Final EIR for the Project; c) The Notice of Preparation of the Draft EIR was circulated for public review between November 21,2005 and December 20,2005. It requested that responsible agencies respond as to the scope and content of the environmental information germane to that agency's specific responsibilities; d) The public review period for the Draft EIR was between September 22, 2008 and November 21,2008. The Draft EIR and appendices were available for public review during that time. A Notice of Completion along with 15 copies of the Draft EIR were sent to the State Clearinghouse, and notices of availability of the Draft EIR were published in the local newspaper. The Draft EIR was available for review at the City of Oceanside Planning Department and at the City libraries; Former South Coast Quarry City of Oceanside Amended Reclamation Plan CF-8 April 2010 Findings of Fact DRAFT e) The Draft EIR and Final EIR were completed in compliance with CEQA; f) The Final EIR reflects the City's independent judgment; g) The City evaluated comments on environmental issues received from persons who reviewed the Draft EIR. In accordance with CEQA, the City prepared written responses describing the disposition of significant environmental issues raised. The Final EIR provides adequate, good faith and reasoned responses to the comments. The City reviewed the comments received and responses thereto and has determined that neither the comments received nor the responses to such comments add significant new information to the Draft EIR regarding environmental impacts. The Lead Agency has based its actions on full appraisal of all viewpoints, including all comments received up to the ' date of adoption of these Findings, concerning the environmental impacts identified and analyzed in the Final EIR; h) The City finds that the Final EIR provides objective information to assist the decision- makers and the public at large in their consideration of the environmental consequences of the Project. The public review period provided all interested jurisdictions, agencies, private organizations, and individuals the opportunity to submit comments regarding the Draft EIR.The Final EIR was prepared after the review period and responses to comments made during the public review period in compliance with CEQA; i) The Final EIR evaluated the following direct and cumulative impacts: Land Use and Planning, Soils, Geology and Paleontology, Hydrology and Water Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Aesthetics, Traffic and Circulation, Noise, Air Quality and Hazards/Hazardous Materials. All of the significant impacts of the Project were identified/in the Final EIR. j) CEQA requires the Lead Agency approving a project to adopt a MMRP for the changes to the project which it has adopted or made a condition of project approval in order to ensure compliance with project implementation. The MMRP included in the Final EIR as certified by the City serves that function. The MMRP includes all of the mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR and has been designed to ensure compliance during implementation of the proposed development. In accordance with CEQA, the MMRP provides the measures to ensure that the mitigation measures are fully enforceable; k) The MMRP designates responsibility and anticipated timing for the implementation of mitigation; the City will serve as the overall MMRP Coordinator in conjunction with the City of Carlsbad (where relevant). 1) In determining whether the Project may have a significant impact on the environment, and in adopting Findings pursuant to Section 21081 of CEQA, the City has complied with CEQA Sections 21081.5 and 21082.2; m) The impacts of the proposed Project have been analyzed to the extent feasible at the time of certification of the Final EIR. n) Copies of all the documents incorporated by reference in the Final EIR have been available upon request at all times at the offices of the City Clerk and/or Planning Department; the custodians of record for such documents or other materials; Former South Coast Quarry City of Oceanside Amended Reclamation Plan CF-9 April 2010 Findings of Fact DRAFT o) Textual refinements and errata were compiled and presented to the decision-makers for review and consideration. The City staff has made every effort to notify the decision-makers and the interested public/agencies of each textual change in the various documents associated with the review of the Project. These textual refinements arose for a variety of reasons. First, it is inevitable that draft documents will contain errors and will require clarifications and corrections. Second, textual clarifications were necessitated in order to describe refinements suggested as part of the public participation process; p) The responses to the comments on the Draft EIR, which are contained in the Final EIR, clarify and amplify the analysis in the Draft EIR. q) Having reviewed the information contained in the Draft EIR and Final EIR and in the administrative record as a whole, as well as the requirements of CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines regarding recirculating of Draft EIRs, and having analyzed the changes in the Draft EIR which have occurred since the close of the public review period, the City finds that there is no ne.w significant information regarding adverse environmental impacts of the Project in the Final EIR and finds that recirculating of the Draft EIR is not required; and r) Having received, reviewed, and considered all information and documents in the Final EIR, as well as all other information in the record of proceedings on this matter, the following Findings are hereby adopted by the City in its capacity as the CEQA Lead Agency. These Findings set forth the environmental basis for current and subsequent discretionary actions to be undertaken by the City and responsible agencies for the implementation of the Project. 4. Environmental Issues Determined Not to be Potentially Affected by the Project Based on the responses to the Project's Notice of Preparation, the following environmental issues were determined by the City to be either inapplicable to the Project based upon the nature of the proposed development and/or the absence of any potential impact related to that issue or because the issue was potentially impacted to a degree deemed to be less than significant, and therefore did not warrant further consideration in the Final EIR other than as set forth in Section HI of the Final EER. No substantial evidence has been presented to or identified by the City which would modify or otherwise alter the City's less-than-significant determination for each of the following environmental issues: (1) Agricultural Resources, (2) Mineral Resources, (3) Population/Housing, (4) Public Services, (5) Utilities and Service Systems, and (6) Recreation. 5. Findings Regarding Potentially Significant Environmental Effects Which Are Determined Not to be Significant or Which Can Be Substantially Lessened or Avoided Through Feasible Mitigation Measures. The City has determined, based on the threshold criteria for significance presented in the Final EIR, that the following environmental effects of the Project will not manifest at levels which have been determined by the City to be significant or, if significant, feasible mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR and adopted by the City as conditions of approval will result in the avoidance or substantial reduction of those effects. Some of the environmental effects related to the Project were found to be less than significant, including hydrology and water quality; aesthetics; traffic and circulation; and hazards/hazardous Former South Coast Quarry City of.Oceanside Amended Reclamation Plan CF-10 April 2010 Findings of Fact DRAFT materials. Effects related to soils, geology and paleontology; biological resources; cultural resources; noise; and air quality (PMio construction emission impacts only), while potentially significant, are mitigated to below a level of significance. 5.1 Soils, Geology and Paleontology Environmental Impacts: The Project could potentially result in significant adverse impacts related to settlement concerns in alluvial materials near the Buena Vista Creek crossing, and the loss of or damage to sensitive paleontological resources associated with Quaternary river terrace deposits and the Tertiary Santiago Formation. / ! Finding: Pursuant to CEQA Section 2108 l(a)(l) and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(l), the City finds that conditions, changes, or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which will reduce the significant environmental effect on biological soils, geology and paleontological resources identified in the Final EIR to below a level of significance. Mitigation Measures: The following mitigation measures, which are set forth below, as well as the Final EIR, are feasible and made binding through the Project's MMRP, which will ensure implementation of the mitigation measures, and will mitigate the potential direct and indirect Soils/Geology and Paleontology impacts to below a level of significance. SGP-1 A settlement monument shall be installed near the completion of project grading at the specific location identified on the ground by the project geotechnical engineer. The described monument shall incorporate the design parameters described in the Geotechnical Report (Attachment C in Volume II of the Final EIR) or other specific design elements identified by the project geotechnical engineer, and shall be surveyed Weekly for a period of one month after installation (and prior to construction of any subsequently proposed structures). All monitoring data shall be provided to the project geotechnical engineer for review and analysis, and to determine if additional monitoringis required (i.e., if settlement is ongoing). Once it is determined by the project geotechnical engineer that significant settlement is no longer occurring, any subsequently proposed construction in the identified area may commence. SGP-2 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall provide verification to City staff that a qualified paleontologist and paleontological monitor have been retained to implement a paleontological resources monitoring program. A qualified paleontologist is defined as an individual with a Ph.D. or M.S. degree in paleontology or geology who is a recognized expert in the application of paleontological procedures and techniques. A qualified paleontological monitor is defined as an individual who has experience in the collection and salvage of fossil materials and who is working under the supervision of a qualified paleontologist. SGP-3 The qualified paleontologist or paleontological monitor shall attend any preconstruction meetings to discuss grading plans with the grading and excavation contractor. The requirement for paleontological monitoring shall be noted on the project construction drawings. Former South Coast Quarry City of Oceanside Amended Reclamation Plan CF-11 April 2010 Findings of Fact DRAFT SGP-4 The paleontologist or paleontological monitor shall be on site full-time during the initial cutting of previously undisturbed areas of Quaternary river terrace deposits and the Santiago Formation to inspect for well-preserved fossils. Monitoring may be increased or decreased at the discretion of the qualified paleontologist in consultation with City of Oceanside staff, and shall occur only when excavation activities affect the noted geologic units. SGP-5 In the event that well-preserved fossils are found, the paleontologist shall have the authority to direct the project engineer to divert, direct, or temporarily halt construction activities in the area of discovery to allow evaluation and recovery of fossil remains in a timely fashion. Becausei.pf the potential for recovery of fossil remains, it may be necessary to set up a screen-washing operation on site. Cities of Oceanside and Carlsbad staff shall respond to the > finding within 48 hours and shall approve salvaging procedures to be performed before construction activities in the subject area(s) are allowed to resume. City staff shall respond to the finding within 48 hours and shall approve salvaging procedures to be performed before construction activities in the subject area(s) are allowed to resume. SGP-6 Fossil remains shall be cleaned, sorted, catalogued, and then deposited in a scientific institution that houses paleontological collections (such as the San Diego Natural History Museum). The qualified paleontologist shall be responsible for preparation of fossils to a point of identification, and shall submit a copy of a letter of acceptance from a local qualified curation facility to the cities of Oceanside and Carlsbad staff. A qualified curation facility is defined as a research institution with a permanent commitment to long-term care of paleontological collections. Such an institution shall have professional curatorial staff. If the fossil collection is not accepted by a local qualified facility for reasons other than inadequate preparation of specimens, the project paleontologist shall contact the cities of Oceanside .and Carlsbad staff to suggest an alternative disposition of the collection. SGP-7 A monitoring results report, with appropriate graphics, summarizing the results, analyses and conclusions of the paleontological resources monitoring program, even if negative, shall be submitted to cities of Oceanside and Carlsbad staff for approval within three months following the termination of the paleontological monitoringprogram. Any discovered fossil sites shall be recorded at the San Diego Natural History Museum by the qualified paleontologist. Facts in Support of Findings: Implementation of the above described mitigation measure (SGP-1) for geological resources would avoid or reduce potentially significant impacts associated with settlement concerns in alluvial materials near the Buena Vista Creek crossing to less than significant levels. The mitigation measure requires a settlement monument to insure that no settlement is occurring in alluvial materials near the Buena Vista Creek crossing prior to the commencement of future construction activities. Implementation of the above described mitigation measures (SGP-2 through SGP-7) for paleontological resources would avoid or reduce potentially significant impacts associated with the loss of or damage to sensitive paleontological resources associated with Quaternary river terrace deposits and the Tertiary Santiago Formation to less than significant levels. Grading for the Project may uncover fossil material of the Quaternary river terrace deposits and the Tertiary Santiago Formation of high scientific value, which may contain significant paleontological resources. The Former South Coast Quarry City of Oceanside Amended Reclamation Plan CF-12 April 2010 Findings of Fact DRAFT mitigation measures require a monitoring program and approved qualified paleontological monitor, working under the direction of a qualified paleontologist, to be present during pre-grading meetings and during grading operations affecting previously undisturbed sediments of Quaternary river terrace deposits and the Tertiary Santiago Formation, with authority to halt grading if resources are uncovered or evident. If identified, the paleontologist will coordinate and implement a salvage program. Through this process, and the cleaning, storage and contribution of any fossil remains to the San Diego Natural History Museum or other scientific institution (with the applicant's permission), any significant paleontological resources that may be present on the Project site will be protected. These procedures combined with a final summary report from the monitor describing the mitigation program have proven to be an effective program for preservation and recovery of ,; paleontological resources. > 5.2 Biological Resources Environmental Impacts: The Project would result in direct and indirect impacts to sensitive habitat. a) The Project would result in impacts to wetland habitats, including 0.05 acre of southern cottonwood-willow riparian forest, 0.85 acre of southern willow scrub and 0.06 acre of freshwater marsh. b) The Project would result in impacts to 1.99 acres of Diegan coastal sage scrub. c) The Project would result in impacts to 34.26 acres of disturbed habitat. d) The Project would result in permanent impacts to 0.30 acre and temporary impacts to 0.40 acre of Corps jurisdictional areas, including 0.05 acre of southern cottonwood-willow riparian forest, 0.59 acre of southern willow scrub and 0.06 acre of freshwater marsh. In addition, the Project would result in permanent impacts to 0.56 acre and temporary impacts to 0.4 acre of CDFG jurisdictional areas, including 0.05 acre of southern cottonwood-willow riparian forest, 0.85 acre of southern willow scrub and 0.06 acre of freshwater marsh. e) The Project would result in direct removal of habitat in which two coastal California gnatcatchers were observed. f) The Proj ect would result in direct removal of habitat in which one yellow warbler was observed. g) Noise impacts to nesting least Bell's vireos, coastal California gnatcatchers or raptors in excess of 60 dB would be significant. Finding: Pursuant to CEQA Section 21081(a)(l) and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(l), the City finds that conditions, changes, or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which will reduce the significant environmental effect on biological resources identified in the Final EIR to a below a level of significance. Former South Coast Quarry City of Oceanside Amended Reel amation PI an CF-13 April 2010 Findings of Fact DRAFT Mitigation Measure: The following mitigation measures, which are set forth below, as well as in the Final EIR, are feasible and are made binding, through the Project's MMRP, which will ensure implementation of the mitigation measures, and will mitigate the potential direct and indirect Biological Resources impacts to below a level of significance. BR-1 Impacts to southern cottonwood willow riparian forest, southern willow scrub and freshwater marsh shall be mitigated at a 3:1 ratio with a minimum 1:1 creation ratio. In total, impacts to riparian-vegetation communities shall require 2.88 acres of mitigation, including a minimum of 0.96;acre of riparian creation. The Project shall include 1.45 acres of riparian creation, and the remaining 1.43 acres mitigation shall occur with enhancement of preserved wetlands on site.5 An additional 11.05 acres of riparian vegetation shall be avoided on site. • ' BR-2 Impacts to 1.99 acres of Diegan coastal sage scrub shall be mitigated at a 2:1 ratio (3.98 acres). The Project shall include 3.68 acres of Diegan coastal sage scrub creation along a number of slopes on site, as well as 0.30 acre of preservation of existing Diegan coastal sage scrub. BR-3 Impacts to 34.26 acres of disturbed habitat shall be mitigated at a 0.1:1 ratio with payment of a Habitat and Development Fee to the jurisdiction in which it occurs of an amount corresponding to 3.43 acres. BR-4 The Project would cause impacts to 0.70 acre of Corps jurisdictional areas and 0.96 acres of CDFG jurisdictional areas. Impacts to Corps jurisdictional areas shall require 2.10 acres of mitigation, including at least 0.70 acre of creation; impacts to CDFG jurisdictional areas shall require 2.88 acres of mitigation, including at least 0.96 acre of creation. The mitigation program to offset impacts shall include creation of 0.96 acre of riparian habitat within the expanded channel, of which at least 0.70 acre must be Corps jurisdictional. The remaining mitigation requirement (1.92 acres) shall be met by creation of additional habitat and enhancement of existing riparian habitat. In addition, all the remaining jurisdictional areas on site, including southern cottonwood-willow riparian forest, southern willow scrub, freshwater marsh, jurisdictional non-wetland waters/streambeds, and open water, shall be avoided. BR-5 Impacts to coastal California gnatcatchers shall be mitigated by the on-site preservation and creation of Diegan coastal sage scrub totaling 3.98 acres. BR-6 Impacts to the yellow warbler shall be mitigated by the preservation of created and restored riparian habitat. BR-7 If project grading (other than clearing and grubbing of sensitive habitats) is necessary adjacent to preserved on-site habitat during the bird breeding season (February 15 through September 15), a qualified biologist shall conduct pre-construction surveys in the adjacent habitat for the coastal California gnatcatcher, least Bell's vireo, southwestern willow flycatcher and nesting raptors. The survey should begin not more than three clays prior to the beginning of grading activities. The Wildlife Agencies shall be notified if any of these species are observed nesting within 500 feet of proposed grading activities. No activities which would result in noise levels exceeding 60 dBA hourly L^ within this 500-foot buffer Former South Coast Quarry City of Oceanside Amended Reclamation Plan CF-14 April 2010 Findings of Fact DRAFT shall be allowed. Background noise (e.g., SR 78) shall be excluded from the 60 dBA calculation. If grading activities are not completed prior to the breeding season and any of these species are present, and noise levels exceed this threshold, noise barriers should be erected to reduce noise impacts to occupied habitat to below 60 dBA hourly L«, and/or the activities shall be suspended. Impacts resulting from noise for non-listed species other than raptors are not considered significant, and mitigation is not warranted. Facts in Support of Findings: a) Implementation of the above-described mitigation measure will reduce direct impacts to wetland habitat to a level less than significant. Direct impacts to wetlands will be mitigated in ! accordance with measures acceptable to the ACOE, CDFG, Oceanside Draft Subarea Plan and Carlsbad HMP to ensure a no-net loss of wetlands. Mitigation for the loss of jurisdictional waters will be conditions of the permits issued by the ACOE and CDFG. The proposed mitigation plan also includes a 5-year monitoring program that includes regular monitoring visits, an annual report on the success of the restoration effort and the need for any remedial actions, and a final report at the end of the 5-year program. These measures ensure the viability of wetlands and have proven effective in avoiding potential impacts to sensitive wetland habitat. As such, potentially significant direct impacts associated with wetlands would be reduced to less than significant with implementation of this mitigation measure. b) Implementation of the above-described mitigation measure will also reduce direct impacts to sensitive upland habitat to a less than significant level. The mitigation ratios prescribed by this mitigation measure are in accordance with the habitat mitigation requirements of the City of Oceanside's Draft Subarea Plan. It should be noted that mitigation requirements for the Oceanside Draft Subarea Plan are equal to or greater than those of the Carlsbad HMP. These measures ensure that adequate mitigation for upland habitat is implemented, before impacts occur, in a manner acceptable to the cities of Oceanside and Carlsbad and the resource agencies. As such, implementation of this mitigation measure ensures that impacts to upland habitat are reduced to a less than significant level. c) Implementation of the above-described mitigation measures will reduce indirect impacts to sensitive wetland and upland habitat to a less than significant level. The mitigation measure prohibits use of invasive non-native plants in project landscaping which can reduce habitat values, increase fire risk, change ground and surface water levels, and adversely affect wildlife dependent on native habitat. It also requires that if project grading (other than clearing and grubbing of sensitive habitats) is necessary adjacent to preserved on-site habitat during the bird breeding season (February 15-September 15), a qualified biologist shall conduct pre-construction surveys in the adjacent habitat for the coastal California gnatcatclier, least Bell's vireo, southwestern willow flycatcher, and nesting raptors. The survey shall begin not more than 3 days prior to the beginning of grading activities. The Wildlife Agencies shall be notified if any of these species are observed nesting within 500 feet of proposed grading activities. No activities which would result in noise levels exceeding 60 dBA hourly Leq within this 500-foot buffer shall be allowed. Background noise (e.g., SR 78) shall be excluded from the 60 dBA calculation. If grading activities are not completed prior to the breeding season, and any of these species are present, and noise levels exceed this threshold, noise barriers shall be erected to reduce noise impacts to occupied habitat to below 60 dBA hourly Leq and/or the activities shall be suspended. There is also requirement for a biological Former South Coast Quarry ' City of Oceanside Amended Reclamation Plan CF-15 April 2010 Findings of Fact DRAFT monitor to attend preconstruction meetings and be present during grading and construction in close proximity to preserve areas to ensure that appropriate precautions are taken to protect sensitive biological resources on- and off-site. These measures have proven effective in avoiding potential indirect impacts to sensitive wildlife species during construction of a project. 5.3 Cultural Resources Environmental Impacts: Although the project site has been subject to a great deal of disturbance from decades of quarry activity, there remains some potential for previously unidentified subsurface cultural resources within the project site. Impacts to such resources would be significant. j Finding: Pursuant to CEQA Section 21081(a)(l) and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(l), the City finds that conditions, changes, or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which will reduce the significant environmental effect identified in the Final EIR to below a level of significance. Mitigation Measures: The following mitigation measures, which are set forth below, as well as in the Final EIR, are feasible and are made binding, through the Project's MMRP, which will ensure implementation of the mitigation measures, and will mitigate the potential direct and indirect Cultural and Paleontological Resources impacts to below a level of significance. CR-1 Prior to implementation of the monitoring, a pre-excavation agreement shall be developed between the San Luis Rey Band of Luiseno Mission Indians and the applicant. CR-2 The qualified archaeologist and the Native American representative shall attend apre-grading meeting with the contractors to explain the requirements of the program. CR-3 An archaeologist and a Native American monitor shall be on site during all grading, trenching, and other ground-disturbing activities. CR-4 If archaeological artifact deposits or cultural features are discovered, grading activities shall be directed away from these deposits to allow a determination of potential importance. Isolates and clearly non-significant deposits will be minimally documented in the field, and grading shall proceed. For any potentially significant artifact deposits, an adequate artifact sample to address research avenues previously identified for sites along the Buena Vista Creek watershed will be collected using professional archaeological collection methods. CR-5 If any human remains are discovered, the County Coroner shall be contacted. In the event that the remains are determined to be of Native American origin, the Most Likely Descendant, as identified by the Native American Heritage Commission., shall be contacted in order to determine proper treatment and disposition of the remains. CR-6 Recovered artifactual materials shall be cataloged and analyzed. CR-7 A report shall be completed describing the methods and results of the monitoring and data recovery program. Former South Coast Quarry City of Oceanside Amended Reclamation Plan CF-16 . April 2010 Findings of Fact DRAFT CR-8 Artifacts shall be curated with accompanying catalog to current professional repository standards at an appropriate curatorial facility, such as the San Diego Archaeological Center, or the collection will be repatriated to the San Luis Rey Band, as specified in the pre- excavation agreement. Facts in Support of Findings: Implementation of the above-described mitigation measure would reduce the potentially significant impact of disturbance of human remains or cultural artifacts during grading activities to a less than significant level. The mitigation measures require that a qualified archeologist be retained to carry out a mitigation program before issuance of a grading permit. The mitigation measure further requires development and implementation of a archeological monitoring program that would require a pre-excavation agreement with the appropriate San Luis Rey Band or" ' Luiseno Mission Indians or other Native Americans as determined by the City, coordination with and supervision of an archeologist and an invited Native American monitor who will be present during the preconstruction meeting as well as initial grading, trenching or other ground-disturbing activities of existing soils. The archeological monitoring program will address how to analyze any cultural material found, the curation or repatriation of any cultural material collected, and the preparation of a report documenting the methods and results of the monitoring program. The monitoring and potential data recovery programs as well as pre-excavation coordination with the Luiseno people is being required at the request of the Luiseno people and has proven to be effective in avoiding impacts from grading on archeological resources. 5.4 Noise Environmental Impacts: Significant impacts to sensitive biological resources may occur if grading activities are conducted during the breeding season. Finding: Pursuant to CEQA Section 21081(a)(l) and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(l), the City finds that conditions, changes, or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which will reduce the significant environmental effect identified in the Final EIR to below a level of significance. Mitigation Measures: The following measure discussed above under Biological Resources would reduce potential construction noise impacts to the least Bell's vireo and coastal California gnatcatcher to below a level of significance. N-l If project grading (other than clearing and grubbing of sensitive habitats) is necessary adjacent to preserved on-site habitat during the bird breeding season (February 15 through September 15), a qualified biologist shall conduct pre-construction surveys in the adjacent habitat for the coastal California gnatcatcher, least Bell's vireo, southwestern willow flycatcher and nesting raptors. The survey should begin not more than three days prior to the beginning of grading activities. The Wildlife Agencies shall be notified if any of these species are observed nesting within 500 feet of proposed grading activities. No activities which would result in noise levels exceeding 60 dBA hourly L«, within this 500-foot buffer shall be allowed. Background noise (e.g., SB. 78) shall be excluded from the 60 dBA calculation. If grading activities are not completed prior to the breeding season and any of these species are present, and noise levels exceed this threshold, noise barriers should be . erected to reduce noise impacts to occupied habitat to below 60 dBA hourly L^ and/or the Former South Coast Quarry City of Oceanside Amended Reclamation Plan CF-17 April 2010 Findings of Fact DRAFT activities shall be suspended. Impacts resulting from noise for non-listed species other than raptors are not considered significant, and mitigation is not warranted. Facts in Support of Findings: Implementation of the above-described mitigation measure will reduce potentially significant impacts associated with construction noise to a less than significant level. This mitigation measure would require pre-construction surveys by a qualified biologist if project grading (other than clearing and grubbing of sensitive habitats) is necessary adjacent to preserved on-site habitat during the bird breeding season (February 15 through September 15). If grading activities are not completed prior to the breeding season and any of these species are present, and noise levels exceed this threshold, noise barriers should be erected to reduce noise impacts to occupied habitat to below 60 dBA hourly Leq and/or the activities shall be suspended. This mitigation measure will reduce significant construction noise impacts to less than significant. 5.5 Air Quality Environmental Impacts: During project grading, the maximum daily PMio emissions would be above the significance criteria for the maximum, allowable daily emissions and would therefore pose a significant, but temporary, impact on the ambient air quality during the reclamation. Finding: Pursuant to CEQA Section 21081(a)(l) and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(l), the City finds that conditions, changes, or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which will reduce the significant environmental effect identified in the Final EIR to below a level of significance. Mitigation Measures: The following mitigation measures, which are set forth below, as well as in the Final EIR, are feasible and are made binding, through the Project's MMRP, which will ensure implementation of the mitigation measures, and will mitigate the potential air quality impacts for PMio emissions to below a level of significance. AQ-1 Multiple applications of water during grading between dozer/scraper passes - 34-68 percent reduction AQ-2 Paving, chip sealing or chemical stabilization of internal roadways after completion of grading — 92.5 percent reduction AO-3 Use of sweepers or water trucks to remove "track-out" at any point of public street access — 25-60 percent reduction AQ-4 Termination of grading if winds exceed 25 mph - reduction not quantified AQ-5 Stabilization of dirt storage piles by chemical binders, tarps, fencing or other erosion control - 30-65 percent reduction AQ-6 Hydroseeding of graded pads-3 0-65 percent reduction Former South Coast Quarry City of Oceanside Amended Reclamation Plan CF-18 April 2010 Findings of Fact DRAFT Facts in Support of Findings: Implementation of the above described mitigation measures for air quality during reclamation activities would reduce temporary PMjo emissions impacts to below a level of significance. 6. Findings Regarding Impacts that Cannot Be Mitigated to Below a Level of Significance The Final EER. identifies two subject areas in which the Project would result in an impact on the environment: (1) land use and planning, and (2) air quality which will have significant environmental effects, even after the application of all feasible mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR. The land use and planning impact is the same impact as the air quality impact. Specifically, during project grading, the maximum daily NOX emissions would be above the significance criteria, and would therefore result in a significant, but temporary, impact on the ambient air quality during reclamation. Because of this temporary significant effect on air quality, the Project would not be consistent with a policy within the City of Oceanside General Plan, which requires the mitigation of significant impacts. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15092(b)(2), the City shall not approve the Project unless it first finds under CEQA Section 21081 (a) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a) that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR, and also finds under CEQA Guidelines 15092(b)(2)(B) that the remaining significant effects are acceptable due to overriding considerations as described in CEQA Section 15093. 6.1 Land Use and Planning Environmental Impact: The Project would not be consistent with Policy 3.OB of the Land Use Element of the City of Oceanside General Plan, which requires the identification, evaluation and mitigation of significant impacts to the environment. (Temporary impacts associated with air quality would be significant and unmitigable.) Finding: Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(3), specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible certain mitigation measures and the project alternatives identified in the EIR. Mitigation Measures: The following mitigation measures, which are set forth below, as well as in the Final EIR, are feasible and are made binding, through the Project's MMRP, which will ensure implementation of the mitigation measures, and will mitigate some potential air quality impacts to below a level of significance, but not necessarily all impacts: AQ-7 Scheduling of construction truck trips during non-peak hours to reduce peak hour emissions. AQ-8 Use of ARB-certified Tier I or II construction equipment to 'the extent that such equipment is available for use. Facts in Support of Finding: While these mitigation measures are considered feasible, it is conservatively assumed that these measures would not reduce the emissions of NOX to below alevel of significance. Refer to the following Section 6.2 for additional discussion. Former South Coast Quarry City of Oceanside Amended Reclamation Plan CF-19 April 2010 Findings of Fact DRAFT 6.2 Air Quality Environmental Impact: During project grading, the maximum daily NOX emissions would be above the significance criteria for the maximum allowable daily emissions and would therefore pose a significant, but temporary, impact on the ambient air quality during the reclamation grading period. Finding: Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15091(a)(3), specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible certain mitigation measures and the project alternatives identified in the EEL '" ' ; Mitigation Measures: The following mitigation measures, which are set forth below, as well as in the Final EIR, are feasible and are made binding, through the Project's MMRP, which will ensure implementation of the mitigation measures, and will mitigate some potential air quality impacts-to below a level of significance, but not necessarily all impacts: AQ-7 Scheduling of construction truck trips during non-peak hours to reduce peakhour emissions. AQ-8 Use of ARB-certified Tier I or II construction equipment to the extent that such equipment is available for use. Facts in Support of Findings: While these two mitigation measures are considered feasible, specific emission reductions cannot be quantified at this time and it is therefore assumed these measures would not reduce the emissions of NOX to below a level of significance. Implementation of other measures would not be feasible in this application. For example, decreasing the length of the construction day or limiting use of equipment would lengthen the duration of construction, as well as construction impacts, but would not reduce overall NOX emissions associated with construction of the project. Constraining operating periods or extending the duration of construction could conflict with time parameters required to mitigate impacts on wildlife or avoid construction during the rainy season. Alternative fuels are not readily available in San Diego County, and would need to be shipped in from outside the local area for use in construction equipment. Shipping in of fuels would add NOX emissions rather than decrease NOX emissions and would not mitigate the impact. Substitution of gasoline-powered equipment is not feasible as the majority of heavy construction equipment available within the state of California is powered using diesel fuel. Similarly, electrified construction equipment is not readily available for use on construction projects in California. Add-on technologies, such as particulate filters, would not reduce emissions of NOX. Add-on controls have the potential to reduce equipment performance, as well as having safety concerns such as affecting line of sight, and are not considered feasible means of reducing NOX emissions. In summary, there are no other feasible mitigation measures to reduce temporary impacts associated with NOX emissions to less than significant levels. A Statement of Overriding Considerations has therefore been prepared. Former South Coast Quarry City of Oceanside Amended Reclamation Plan CF-20 April 2010 Findings of Fact DRAFT 7. Findings Regarding Alternatives Under CEQA, whenever a public agency considers approving a project for which the EIR concludes that notwithstanding the incorporated mitigation measures, there will nonetheless remain significant impacts that are not avoided or lessened below a level of significance, the public agency must consider and make findings regarding the feasibility of alternatives discussed in the EIR. As stated in CEQA §21002: "[It] is the policy of the State that public agencies should not approve / , projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or mitigation ' measures available which would substantially lessen the significant effects of such projects... The legislature further finds and declares that in the event specific economic, social, or other conditions make infeasible such proj ect alternatives or mitigation measures, individual project may be approved in spite of one or more significant effects thereof." The Final EIR concludes that after incorporation of the mitigation measures outlined in Section 5 above, the Project would still have significant and unmitigable environmental impacts on air quality duringproject grading, the maximum daily NOX emissions would be above the significance criteria, and would therefore result in a significant, but temporary, impact on the ambient air quality during reclamation. CEQA Guidelines §15091 states that the determination of the infeasibility of alternatives must evaluate any economic, social, or other considerations related to the alternatives and as compared to the projects as proposed in the EIR. "Feasible" is defined in CEQA Guidelines §15364 as "capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within areasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, legal, social, and technological factors." At the same lime, infeasibility is not equated with impossibility, and case law recognizes that an alternative or mitigation measure may also be infeasible if it is undesirable or impractical from a policy standpoint. In undertaking the comparative analysis called for under CEQA in considering the feasibility of project alternatives, it is also necessary to keep in mind the project objectives as expressed in the Final EIR. The project objectives are as follows: » Reclaim the remaining unreclaimed 104.2 acres of the site to a safe, usable condition that is readily adaptable for future land uses in accordance'with SMARA. » Retain the existing Buena Vista Creek alignment through the site, preserve the El Salto Falls, and enhance the habitat values of the creek, while meeting requirements for control of erosion and sedimentation, and accommodating current hydrological conditions of the creek. * Establish time frames, procedures and performance standards for measuring the completion of reclamation activities. » Achieve complete and final reclamation of the site as required by SMARA and eliminate SMARA-related barriers to alternative land uses. The Draft EIR for the project examined the following alternatives: Reduced Footprint Alternative Former South Coast Quarry City of Oceanside Amended Reclamation Plan CF-21 April 2010 Findings of Fact DRAFT (Alternative 1 A), Reduced Footprint Alternative with Balanced Grading (Alternative IB), Modified Structural Creek Alternative (Alternative 2), and Modified Structural Creek Alternative within Reduced Footprint (Alternative 3). As discussed above, the Project being carried forward for consideration is Refined Alternative 3. The Final EER. determined this to be the environmentally superior alternative to the proposed project described in the Draft EIR. The No Project Alternative was not carried forward for analysis in the Draft EIR since SMARA requires that the former quarry be reclaimed to a usable condition that is readily adaptable for alternate land uses and creates no danger to public health or safety. If the City of Oceanside, as the Lead Agency, adopted this "no project" alternative, the State Mining and Geology Board would be required to step in and ensure that reclamation of the properly be conducted in conformance with SMARA. Similar to the Draft EIR proposed project, Alternative 2 would include grading of the southwestern corner of the site to accommodate necessary fill for reclamation. Alternatives 1A, IB, and 3 would not require grading of the southwestern corner. Alternative 1A would require the import of fill, while the remaining alternatives would be balanced by on-site cut and fill. The Draft EIR proposed project and Alternative 1A would have one drop structure, Alternative IB would have two drop structures, and Alternatives 2 and 3 would each have eight drop structures. The Refined Alternative 3 Project would result in fewer impacts overall to the environment than any of the alternatives analyzed in the Draft EIR. Therefore, Refined Alternative 3 is the environmentally superior alternative. In rejecting the alternatives considered in the Draft EIR, the City has examined the objectives of the project and weighed the ability of the various alternatives to meet those objectives. The decision- makers believe that Refined Alternative 3, described and evaluated ha the Final EIR, conies closest to meeting these objectives, with the least environmental impact. 7.1 Refined Alternative 3 As stated under "Project Background," the Draft EIR acknowledged that either Alternative IB or Alternative 3 would be acceptable to the project applicant as preferred alternatives to the Draft EIR proposed project, and that they are prepared to implement either alternative in place of the project included in the 2007 Amended Reclamation Plan. Based on the comments received during public circulation of the Draft EIR, it was evident that Alternative 3 was the preferred alternative. Nonetheless, Alternative 3 presented certain agencies with a number of concerns that were received in the written comments received on the Draft EIR. As a result, Alternative 3 has been further refined for inclusion in the Final EIR as "Refined Alternative 3" based on comments received from the Wildlife Agencies, the Corps and the City of Carlsbad and is being carried forward as the Project. Potential Impacts: As with .the Draft EIR proposed project, Refined Alternative 3 (Project) would be in compliance with the City of Oceanside General Plan, City of Oceanside Zoning Ordinance, Carlsbad General Plan, City of Carlsbad Zoning Ordinance, and the MHCP (including the Oceanside Draft MHCP Subarea Plan and Carlsbad HMP) except for the following: (1) the Draft EIR proposed proj ect would not be consistent with Policy C. 12 within the Open Space and Conservation Element of the Carlsbad General Plan due to conflicts with the Hillside Development Regulations of the zoning ordinance associated with grading proposed on natural slopes over 40 percent and manufactured slopes in excess of 40 feet in height within the southwestern portion of the project site; Refined Alternative 3, however, would be consistent with this policy, as the southwestern portion of Former South Coast Quarry City of Oceanside Amended Reclamation Plan CF-22 . April 2010. Findings of Fact DRAFT the site would not be graded, and (2) Refined Alternative 3 and the Draft EIR proposed project would not be consistent with Policy 3.OB of the Land Use Element in the City of Oceanside General Plan, which requires the identification, evaluation and mitigation of significant impacts to the environment (as described below, the NOX emissions during reclamation activities would remain a significant temporary air quality impact). Potential impacts related to soils, geology and paleontological resources under Refined Alternative 3 would essentially be the same as those described for the Draft EIR proposed project, although the extent of such potential impacts would be reduced, because Refined Alternative 3 would not include grading in the southwestern portion of the site. The level of potential seismic and non-seismic impacts under this alternative also would be the same as those described for the Draft EIR proposed project, with all impacts except for potential settlement concluded to be less than significant with implementation of geotechnical recommendations and conformance with applicable regulatory and industry standards. Impacts to paleontological resources under Refined Alternative 3 would be significant but mitigable. Potential impacts related to hydrology and water quality under Refined Alternative 3 would generally be the same as those described for the Draft EIR proposed project, although the level and extent of such potential impacts would vary somewhat due to the modified creek configuration and the lack of proposed grading/excavation in the southwestern portion of the site. Specifically, potential impacts related to drainage alteration and erosion/sedimentation would apply to additional and/or different areas under this alternative due to the modified creek configuration, although the nature and level of associated potential impacts and regulatory requirements would not differ notably. All identified hydrology and water quality impacts under Refined Alternative 3 would be less than significant. Implementation of Refined Alternative 3 would result in fewer impacts to vegetation communities than the Draft EIR proposed project since the southwestern portion of the project site would not be graded. Specifically, direct impacts from implementation of Refined Alternative 3 would total approximately 41.45 acres, which would be 20.39 acres less than the Draft EIR proposed project. Refined Alternative 3 would also result in fewer impacts to Corps and CDFG jurisdictional areas compared to the Draft EIR proposed project. Specifically, Refined Alternative 3 would impact 0.70 acre of Corps jurisdictional areas (1.49 acres less than the Draft EIR proposed project). Impacts to CDFG jurisdictional areas would total 0.96 acre (1.66 acres less than the proposed project). Refined Alternative 3 would result in significant impacts to a small portion of habitat in which two coastal California gnatcatcher pairs and one yellow warbler were observed. Comparatively, the Draft EIR proposed project would result in significant impacts to habitat in which four coastal California gnatcatcher pairs, one yellow warbler, one white-tailed kite and two San Diego black-tailed jackrabbits were observed. The Draft EIR proposed project and Alternative 3 meet the objectives of the Hardline Preserve in this area by maintaining and restoring Buena Vista Creek and adjacent upland buffers within the existing creek channel location. Although the alternatives do not exactly match the boundaries of the Hardline Preserve Areas under the Carlsbad HMP, Refined Alternative 3, similar to the Draft EIR proposed project, is considered consistent with the Carlsbad HMP because it meets the goals and objectives of the HMP for this portion of the plan, providing equivalent type and quantity of habitat areas within the study area. Because the impacted portion of "the riparian corridor on site would be revegetated to maintain the current connection across the site, no permanent impacts to wildlife corridors would result from implementation of either Refined Alternative 3 or the Draft EIR proposed project. In fact, the existing riparian area on site would be Former South Coast Quarry . City of Oceanside Amended Reclamation Plan CF-23 April 2010 Findings of Fact DRAFT widened, which would improve the functions of Buena Vista Creek as a wildlife movement corridor. With regard to indirect impacts (i.e., edge effects), similar to the Draft EIR proposed project, Refined Alternative 3 would not result in significant impacts with the exception of noise, as noise levels throughout the site during reclamation may be in excess of 60 dB, which would be considered significant impacts to nesting least Bell's vireos and/or coastal California gnatcatchers. All. significant impacts to biological resources under Refined Alternative 3 would be mitigated to less than significant levels. Refined Alternative 3 would avoid potential impacts associated with the proposed grading in the southwestern portion of the site where two previous archaeological sites (CA-SDI-5601 and CA- SDI-5651) have been identified. No significant direct impacts to archaeological resources, i traditional cultural properties or cultural landscapes have been identified for this alternative. There remains, however, potential for previously unidentified subsurface cultural resources within the site. Similar to the Draft EIR proposed project, the potential for impacts to subsurface cultural resources would remain significant, as the site is located in a location where previous resources have been located. Significant impacts to cultural resources under Refined Alternative 3 would be mitigated to less than significant levels. Implementation of Refined Alternative 3 would result in less visual impacts that the Draft EIR proposed project. Refined Alternative 3 visual impacts would be reduced relative to the Draft EIR proposed proj ect since (1) grading in undisturbed (natural) areas of the site would be reduced, (2) the creek would be widened an additional 100 feet (which, in turn, would reduce bare, graded areas) and (3) multiple, non-uniform drop structures instead of one large drop structure would create a more natural creek appearance. Other visual impact aspects of Refined Alternative 3 would remain similar to the proposed project. Refined Alternative 3 would not introduce a new or substantially increased aesthetic impact. Refined Alternative 3 would result in decreased construction traffic compared to' the Draft EIR proposed project, as no import or export of fill associated with reclamation activities would be required since earthwork would be balanced on site. Therefore, Refined Alternative 3 would not cause a significant direct or cumulative impact to traffic or circulation. As with the Draft EIR proposed project, noise is anticipated to be generated by Refined Alternative 3 through grading and construction equipment, including trucks, graders, bulldozers, hoe ram and portable rock drills. The noise generated from this alternative is expected to be slightly lower in the southwestern portion of the site since grading of this area would not occur under Refined Alternative 3. As with the Draft EIR proposed proj ect, no significant noise impacts from grading are anticipated. As with the Draft EIR proposed project, Refined Alternative 3 would not exceed CO, ROC, SOX, PMio or PM2.5 daily and annual thresholds with the incorporation of standard mitigation measures. Similar to the Draft EIR proposed project, emissions of NOX from heavy equipment and trucks would be above the maximum daily significance thresholds, however the daily total would be less since there would be no import of soil required for reclamation activities. Thus, emissions of NOX would result in a significant but temporary impact on ambient air quality. This impact would remain significant in spite of implementation of proposed mitigation measures added to the Final EIR including: (1) scheduling of construction truck trips dxuing non-peak hours to reduce peak hour Former South Coast Quarry City of Oceanside Amended Reclamation Plan CF-24 April 2010 Findings of Fact DRAFT emissions, and (2) use of ARB-certified Tier I or II construction equipment to the extent that such equipment is availabIe.,Due to dissipation, NOX emissions would not affect sensitive noise receptors. Reclamation equipment and vehicles also would have the potential to emit greenhouse gases, namely, COi, NiO and CEU that arise due to combustion of fossil fuels. Refined Alternative 3 CO2 emissions would be lower than those associated with the Draft EIR proposed project. Impacts associated with hazards and hazardous materials would be similar under Refined Alternative 3 and the Draft EIR proposed project. The proposed transport, use, storage and disposal of hazardous materials are controlled by various local, state and federal agencies through numerous existing regulations arid procedures, and therefore no impact associated with hazardous materials is anticipated. Remediation of the project site would be completed prior to the commencement of /' reclamation activities. Therefore, implementation of Refined Alternative 3 would not result in a significant hazard to the public or the environment due to the release of hazardous materials into the environment. No significant impact from hazards or hazardous materials is anticipated. In summary, it is demonstrated that all impacts associated with Refined Alternative 3 would be less than or equal to that reported in the Draft EIR for the proposed project. Finding: The Planning Commission finds, pursuant to Public Resources Code 21081(a)(l), that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, Refined Alternative 3 which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR. Such changes have resulted in a project design that is superior to the Draft EIR proposed project and Alternatives 1A, IB, 2 and 3 that were presented and analyzed in the Draft EIR. Facts in Support of Findings: Refined Alternative 3 would meet the objectives of the project and reduce impacts associated with the Draft EIR proposed project and Draft EIR Alternatives 1 A, IB, 2 and 3 and is being carried forward as the recommended Project. 8. Findings Regarding Growth Inducing Impacts The City finds that the Project will not have growth inducing impacts. Implementation of the Amended Reclamation Plan would facilitate the future development of the remaining portions of the former quarry site in both the cities of Oceanside and Carlsbad; however, this future development is not a part of-the proposed project. While future development of that land would result in a range of environmental effects and increased demand for public services and facilities that are associated with "raw land" development, such development would occur in an area that is designated for light industrial in the City of Oceanside and low-medium density residential uses in the City of Carlsbad. The subject site is surrounded by existing urban land uses and major elements of the local and regional transportation network. Future development of the remaining quarry site would, therefore, represent infill development that would complete the community development plans for this area as shown in 'the Oceanside and Carlsbad General Plans. Because this proposed development would occur within the existing urban pattern in this part of northern San Diego County and would not require the development of major new infrastructure facilities (such as a wastewater treatment plant or water storage and distribution system) or any amendments to adopted land use plans and policies by the governing jurisdictions, no significant growth-inducing effects are associated with the Project. Former South Coast Quarry City of Oceanside Amended Reclamation Plan CF-25 April 2010 Findings of Fact DRAFT 9. Statement of Overriding Consideration As discussed in Section 6 of these Findings, the Final EIR concludes that the Project, even with incorporation of all feasible mitigation measures and consideration of alternatives, will nonetheless have significant impacts and unmitigable environmental impacts on air quality during project grading, the maximum daily NOX emissions would be above the significance criteria, and would therefore result in a significant, though temporary, impact on the ambient air quality during reclamation. Because of this temporary significant effect on air quality, the Project would not be consistent with a policy within the City of Oceanside General Plan, which requires the mitigation of significant impacts. ' The City has selected the environmentally preferable alternative as the recommended Project, and has adopted all feasible mitigation measures with respect to temporary daily NOX emission exceedances, which may have substantially lessened the impacts, but have not been successful in reducing them below a level of significance as specific emission reductions from the additional mitigation measures cannot be quantified at this time, and therefore it is assumed these measures would not be sufficient to reduce the emissions of NOX to below a level of significance.' . Under CEQA, before a project which is determined to have significant, unmitigated environmental effects can be approved, the public agency must consider and adopt a "statement of overriding considerations" pursuant to CEQA Guidelines 15043 and 15093. As the primary purpose of CEQA is to fully inform the decision makers and the public as to the environmental effects of a Project and to include feasible mitigation measures and alternatives to reduce any such adverse effects below a level of significance, CEQA nonetheless recognizes and authorizes the approval of projects where not all adverse impacts can be fully lessened or avoided. However, the agency must explain and justify its conclusion to approve such a project through the statement of overriding considerations setting forth the Project's general social, economic, policy or other public benefits which support the agency's informed conclusion to approve the Project. The City finds that the Project has the following substantial social, economic, policy and other public benefits justifying its approval and implementation, notwithstanding not all environmental impacts were fully reduced below a level of significance: 9.1 The Project would comply with the City's Reclamation Ordinance and fulfill the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) required standards, including, wildlife habitat, erosion control, site stability, water quality, and revegetation standards to complete the reclamation of this former quarry site. 9.2 Implementation of the Project would enhance the Buena Vista Creek channel through the site, including erosion control and revegetation of habitat within this former quarry site. The reclamation Project will also provide for permanent conservation easements to protect the sacred El Salto Falls and the Buena Vista Creek areas through the site. 9.3 The Project will include construction of detention basins and bio-filtration swales to improve water quality of storm water. 9.4 Implementation of the Project using a standard construction schedule would expedite the grading within the limits anticipated by City ordinances and therefore minimize the Former South Coast Quarry City of Oceanside .Amended Reclamation Plan CF-26 April 2010 Findings of Fact DRAFT length of time construction equipment would be operating on the project site thereby reducing potential nuisances to neighbors associated with grading activities such as dust and noise. 9.5 Implementation of the Project will create temporary, construction-related employment opportunities. The Project will implement General Plan policies relating to preservation of natural resources by providing on-site wildlife corridor improvements for the gnatcatcher and linkage to other wildlife corridors. 9.6 The Project will eliminate the remaining vestiges of the long-term quarry and industrial products activities at the site. ' ' Former South Coast Quarry City of Oceanside Amended Reclamation Plan CF-27 April 2010 Section F Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program F. MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM Introduction Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Programs (MMRPs) are required by CEQA Section 21081.6 to be incorporated into the Final EIR for projects having the potential to cause significant environmental impacts. The MMRP describes changes to the project or conditions of project approval that mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment. This Section F of the Final EIR Volume I provides the MMRP, addressing the current South Coast Quarry Amended Reclamation Plan Project proposed by Hanson Aggregates Pacific Southwest, Refined Alternative 3, which is the preferred alternative being carried forward for approval by the City of ,* Oceanside. Refined Alternative 3 is similar to Draft EIR Alternative 3 (Modified Structural ' Creek Alternative within Reduced Footprint), but would include refinements to the graded area by avoiding all areas that were not previously disturbed by mining activities and Buena Vista Creek channel design. These refinements would result in the preservation of more of the existing on-site habitat and wetlands than the Draft EIR proposed project and alternatives analyzed in the Draft EIR. This alternative also has been refined to include additional bio-engineering techniques in the channel and provide greater water quality treatment for runoff passing through the site and other refinements to the water quality features. Please refer to Section D of this Final EIR Volume I for a detailed discussion of the differences between Refined Alternative 3 and the Draft EIR proposed project. A brief description of Refined Alternative 3 is provided below. The project is located within both the cities of Oceanside and Carlsbad. The City of Oceanside is the lead agency for approval of the Amended Reclamation Plan because the City adopted a mining ordinance in 1986 (ordinance 86-32) in compliance with the Surface Mining and Recovery Act of 1975 (SMARA). The City of Carlsbad does not have a local reclamation ordinance and recognizes the City of Oceanside as the state-designated agency for the purpose of reclamation under SMARA. Project Description Summary Refined Alternative 3 would reclaim the remaining areas of the former quarry site that have been previously disturbed by mining activities to a condition that is readily adaptable for future land uses and would retain Buena Vista Creek in its current alignment. Proposed grades under the Refined Alternative 3 would remain in a similar range of elevations across the site to the Draft EIR proposed project and alternatives, ranging from approximately 100 to 150 feet above mean sea level (AMSL). The channel's elevation would range from approximately 71 to 100 feet AMSL. Grading associated with Refined Alternative 3 would require approximately 274,000 cubic yards (cy) of cut material and 274,000 cy of fill, resulting in no need for soil import or export. The creek channel would be reconstructed to a greater width to better accommodate the current 100-year storm flows within the creek channel. Seven natural rock drop structures, ranging from one to three feet in height and including plantings such as willows, would be constructed at irregular intervals along the channel. These structures would flatten the longitudinal creek slope and reduce erosive flow velocities. Riprap would be buried in areas expected to experience erosive velocities during the 100-year storm. Boulders would be sporadically placed throughout all levels of the channel. North and south of the riparian buffer area would be hydroseeded for erosion control. Work within the channel would be coordinated such that existing channel habitat could be sustained. FOPMER SOUTH COAST QUARRY AMENDED RECLAMATION PUN F-1 FINAL SUBSEQUENT EIR: JULY 2010 Section F Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program A 100-foot biological buffer would be placed along each side of Buena Vista Creek, including 80 feet to be revegetated as part of the site reclamation and 20 feet to be revegetated upon final grading for a future end use. A 10-foot-wide planning buffer would be placed outside the biological buffer. MMRP Format and Implementation Mitigation measures that would reduce or eliminate potential environmental impacts of the Draft EIR proposed project were identified in the EIR; the mitigation measures identified for the Draft EIR proposed project would be applicable to Refined Alternative 3, although some have been' 4 slightly modified to address Refined Alternative 3. The project mitigation measures will become ' conditions of project approval if Refined Alternative 3 is approved. The City of Oceanside is required to verify that all adopted mitigation measures are implemented properly. To ensure compliance, this MMRP (including checklists) has been formulated. It shall be adopted, along with CEQA Findings, by the City of Oceanside as CEQA Lead Agency and must be administered by City of Oceanside personnel from the Planning and Community Service (Engineering) departments and City of Carlsbad staff, where applicable. Specific responsibilities are delineated for each project in the attached checklist tables. These responsibilities! may be delegated to qualified City staff or consultants. This service is provided on a full-cost recovery basis by the City. No authorization to commence any activity on site shall be granted except with the concurrence of the respective City departments. The checklist, which follows as Table F-l, is intended to be used by the applicant, grading/construction contractors, and personnel from the above-listed City Departments, as the appointed mitigation implementation and monitoring entities. Information contained within the checklist clearly identifies each mitigation measure, defines the conditions required to verify compliance and delineates the monitoring schedule. Following is an explanation of the four columns that constitute each MMRP checklist. Column 1 Mitigation Measures: An inventory of each mitigation measure is provided, with a brief description. Column 2 Type: Each mitigation measure is classified as either Construction-related Mitigation (CM) or Operational Mitigation (OM), based upon the following definitions: * Construction-related Mitigation - mitigation that requires monitoring during project construction (e.g., dust control, road improvements) » Operational Mitigation - mitigation that requires monitoring after the project becomes operational (e.g., landscape maintenance, lighting) Column 3 Monitor: Identifies the senior staff person at the City who is responsible for determining compliance with each mitigation measure and informing the Planning Department regarding compliance. This individual may assign specific monitoring tasks to City staff or consulting specialists (e.g., biological monitor, paleontological monitor). FOPMER SOOTH COAST QUARRY AMENDED RECLAMATION PLAN F-2 FINAL SUBSEQUENT EIR: JULY 2010 Section F Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Column 4 Schedule: As scheduling is dependent upon the progression of the overall project, specific dates are not used within the "Schedule" column. Instead, scheduling describes a logical succession of events (e.g., prior to occupancy, annually, etc.) and, if necessary, delineates a follow-up program. FORMER SOUTH COAST QUARRY AMENDED RECLAMATION PLAN F-2 FINAL SUBSEQUENT EIR: JULY2010 Section F Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Table F-l FORMER SOUTH COAST QUARRY AMENDED RECLAMATION PLAN MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST MITIGATION MEASURE TYPE MONITOR RESPONSIBLE CITY SCHEDULE LAND USE AND PLANNING Biological Resources - 1 through Biological Resources - 7 would reduce significant land use and planning impacts with respect to the Habitat Preservation and Management Requirements. . Biological Resources — 1 through Biological Resources - 7 would reduce significant land use and planning impacts with respect to the Oceanside Draft MHCP Subarea Plan. CM CM See Biological Resources - 1 through Biological Resources — 7 See Biological Resources - 1 through Biological Resources - 7 Oceanside and Carlsbad Oceanside and Carlsbad See Biological Resources - 1 through Biological Resources - 7 See Biological Resources - 1 through Biological Resources - 7 SOILS, GEOLOGY AND PALEONTOLOGY Soils, Geoloev and Paleontoloev - 1. A settlement monument shall be installed near the completion of project grading at the specific location identified on the ground by the project geotechnical engineer. The described monument shall incorporate the design parameters shown on Figure 7 of Appendix B (or other specific design elements identified by the project geotechnical engineer), and shall be surveyed weekly for a period of one month after installation (and prior to construction of any subsequently proposed structures). All monitoring data shall be provided to the project geotechnical engineer for review and analysis, and to determine if additional monitoring is required (i.e., if settlement is ongoing). Once it is determined by the project geotechnical engineer that significant settlement is no longer occurring, any subsequently proposed construction in the identified area may commence. ' Soils, Geoloerv and Paleontology -2. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall provide verification to City staff that a qualified paleontologist and paleontological monitor have been retained to implement a paleontological resources monitoring program. A qualified paleontologist is defined as an individual with a Ph.D. or M.S. degree in paleontology or geology who is a recognized expert in the application of paleontological procedures and techniques. A qualified paleontological monitor is defined as an individual who has experience in the collection and salvage of fossil materials and who is working under the supervision of a qualified paleontologist. CM CM City Engineer; Project Geotechnical Engineer City Environmental Planner Carlsbad Oceanside and Carlsbad After the completion of grading Prior to issuance of a grading permit. FORMER SOUTH COAST QUARRY AMENDED RECLAMATION PLAN FINAL SUBSEQUENT SIR: JULY 2010 F-4 Section F Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Table F-l (cont.) FORMER SOUTH COAST QUARRY AMENDED RECLAMATION PLAN MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST MITIGATION MEASURE Soils. Geology and Paleontology - 3. The qualified paleontologist or paleontological monitor shall attend any preconstruclion meetings to discuss grading plans with the grading and excavation contractor. The requirement for paleontological monitoring shall be noted on the project construction drawings. Soils, Geology and Paleontology - 4. The paleontologist or paleontological monitor shall be on site full-time during the initial cutting of previously undisturbed areas of Quaternary river terrace deposits and the Santiago Formation to inspect for well- preserved fossils. Monitoring may be increased or decreased at the discretion of the qualified paleontologist in consultation with City of Oceanside staff, and shall occur only when excavation activities affect the noted geologic units. Soils, Geology and Paleontology - 5. In the event that well-preserved fossils are found. the paleontologist shall have the authority to direct the project engineer to divert, direct, or temporarily halt construction activities in the area of discovery to allow evaluation and recovery of fossil remains in a timely fashion. Because of the potential for recovery of fossil remains, it may be necessary to set up a screen-washing operation on site. The paleontologist shall immediately notify City of Oceanside staff of such finding at the time of discovery. Cities of Oceanside and Carlsbad staff shall respond to the finding within 48 hours and shall approve salvaging procedures to be performed before construction activities in the subject area(s) are allowed to resume. Soils, Geology and Paleontology - 6. Fossil remains shall be cleaned, sorted. catalogued, and then deposited in^a scientific institution that houses paleontological collections (such as the San Diego Natural History Museum). The qualified paleontologist shall be responsible for preparation of fossils to a point of identification, and shall submit a copy of a letter of acceptance from a local qualified curation facility to the cities of Oceanside and Carlsbad staff. A qualified curation facility is defined as a research institution with a permanent commitment to long-term care of paleontological collections. Such an institution shall have professional curatorial staff. If the fossil collection is not accepted by a local qualified facility for reasons other than inadequate preparation of specimens, the project paleontologist shall contact cities of Oceanside and Carlsbad staff to suggest an alternative disposition of the collection. TYPE CM CM CM CM MONITOR City Environmenta 1 Planner City Environmenta 1 Planner City Environmenta 1 Planner City Environmenta 1 Planner RESPONSffiL ECITY Oceanside and Carlsbad Oceanside and Carlsbad Oceanside and Carlsbad Oceanside and Carlsbad SCHEDULE Prior to inception of grading. Periodic verification of compliance throughout grading. Periodic verification of compliance throughout grading. Periodic verification of compliance throughout grading. FOKMER SOUTH COAST QUARRY AMENDED RECLAMATION PLAN FINAL SUBSEQUENTEIR: JULY2010 F-5 ; Section F Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Table F-l (cont.) FORMER SOUTH COAST QUARRY AMENDED RECLAMATION PLAN MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST MITIGATION MEASURE Soils. Geoloev and Paleontology - 7. A monitoring results report, with appropriate graphics, summarizing the results, analyses and conclusions of the paleontological resources monitoring program, even if negative, shall be submitted to cities of Oceanside and Carlsbad staff for approval within three months following the termination of the paleontological monitoring program. Any discovered fossil sites shall be recorded at the San Diego Natural History Museum by the qualified paleontologist. TYPE CM MONITOR City Environmenta 1 Planner RESPONSIBL ECITY Oceanside and Carlsbad SCHEDULE Verify compliance within three months of completion of grading. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY No mitigation measures are necessary.N/A N/A N/A N/A BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Biological Resources - 1. Impacts to southern cottonwood willow riparian forest, southern willow scrub, and freshwater marsh shall be mitigated at a 3:1 ratio with a minimum 1 : 1 creation ratio. In total, impacts to riparian vegetation communities shall require 2.88 acres of mitigation, including a minimum of 0.96 acre of riparian creation. Refined Alternative 3 shall include 1.45 acres of riparian creation and the remaining 1 .40 acres of mitigation shall be met with restoration of 0.39 acre of impacted riparian habitat and a minimum of 1.04 acres of enhancement of preserved wetlands on site. An additional 10.87 acres of riparian vegetation shall be preserved on site. Biological Resources — 2. Impacts to 1.99 acres of Diegan coastal sage scrub shall be mitigated at a 2:1 ratio (3.98 acres). Alternative 3 shall include 3.68 acres of coastal sage scrub creation along a number of slopes on site as well as 0.3 acre of preservation. Approximately 80 feet of the 100-foot biological buffer will be revegetated as part of the Reclamation Plan. The balance of the biological buffer (approximately 20 feet) would be revegetated in conjunction with any future end use and upon any final grading for such future end use. Refer to Figure D-7 in the Final EIR for the proposed location of Diegan coastal sage scrub creation. Biological Resources — 3. Impacts to 34.26 acres of disturbed habitat shall be mitigated at a 0.1:1 ratio with payment of a Habitat and Development Fee in an amount corresponding to 3.43 acres. • . CM CM CM City Planner; City Engineer; Wildlife Agencies; Biological Monitor City Planner; City Engineer; Wildlife Agencies; Biological Monitor City Planner; City Engineer; Wildlife Agencies; Biological Monitor Oceanside and Carlsbad Oceanside and Carlsbad Oceanside and Carlsbad Plans to be approved prior to inception of grading. Plans to be approved prior to inception of grading. Payment shall be received prior to inception of grading. FoRtrt£R SOUTH COAST QUARRY AMENDED RECLAMATION PLAN FINAL SUBSEQUENT EIR: JULY 2010 F-6 Section F Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Table F-l (cont.) FORMER SOUTH COAST QUARRY AMENDED RECLAMATION PLAN MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST MITIGATION MEASURE Biological Resources'— 4. Impacts to Corps iurisdictional areas shall require 2.10 acres of mitigation, including at least 0.70 acre of creation; impacts to CDFG jurisdictional areas shall require 2.88 acres of mitigation, including at least 0.96 acre of creation. The mitigation program proposed to offset these impacts includes creation of 1 .45 acres of riparian habitat within the expanded channel, of which at least 0.70 acre must be Corps jurisdictional. The remaining mitigation requirement (1 .92 acres) shall be met by creation of additional habitat and enhancement of existing riparian habitat. In addition, all the remaining jurisdictional areas along Buena Vista Creek with the exception of a potential future road crossing, including southern cottonwood-willow riparian forest, southern willow scrub, freshwater marsh, jurisdictional non-wetland waters/streambeds, and open water, shall be preserved within open space Biological Resources - 5. Impacts to coastal California gnatcatchers shall be mitigated by the on-site preservation and creation of Diegan coastal sage scrub totaling 3.98 acres. Biological Resources .w. 6. Impacts to the yellow warbler shall be mitigated by the preservation of created and restored riparian habitat. Biological Resources - 7. If project grading (other than clearing and grubbing of sensitive habitats) is necessary adjacent to preserved on-site habitat during the bird breeding season (February 15 through September 15), a qualified biologist shall conduct pre-construction surveys in the adjacent, habitat for the coastal California gnatcatcher, least Bell's vireo, southwestern willow flycatcher and nesting raptors. The survey should begin not more than three days prior to the beginning of grading activities. The Wildlife Agencies shall be notified if any of these species are observed nesting within 500 feet of proposed grading activities. No activities which would result in noise levels TYPE CM CM CM CM MONITOR City Planner; City Engineer; Wildlife Agencies; Biological Monitor City Planner; City Engineer; Wildlife Agencies; Biological Monitor City Planner; City Engineer; Wildlife Agencies; Biological Monitor City Planner; City Engineer; Wildlife Agencies; Biological Monitor; Acoustician RESPONSD3L ECITY Oceanside and Carlsbad Oceanside and Carlsbad Oceanside and Carlsbad Oceanside and Carlsbad SCHEDULE Plans to be approved prior to inception of grading. Plans to be approved prior to initiation of grading. Plans to be approved prior to initiation of grading. Prior to grading. Periodic compliance verification during and after grading. FORMER SOUTH COAST QUARRY AMENDED RECLAMATION PLAN FIHAL SUBSEQUENTEIR: JULY2010 F-7 Section F Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Table F-l (cont.) FORMER SOUTH COAST QUARRY AMENDED RECLAMATION PLAN MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST MITIGATION MEASURE TYPE MONITOR RESPONSffiL ECITY SCHEDULE exceeding 60 dBA hourly Lcq within this 500-foot buffer shall be allowed. Background noise (e.g., SR 78) shall be excluded from the 60 dBA calculation. If grading activities are not completed prior to the breeding season and any of these species are present, and noise levels exceed this threshold, noise barriers should be erected to reduce noise impacts to occupied habitat to below 60 dBA hourly Lcq and/or the activities shall be suspended. Impacts resulting from noise for non-listed species other than raptors are not considered significant, and mitigation is not warranted. Biological Resources Environmental Design Measures * Temporary fencing (with silt barriers) shall be installed at the limits of project impacts (including construction staging areas and access routes) to prevent additional sensitive habitat impacts and to prevent the spread of silt from the construction zone into adjacent habitats to be avoided. Fencing should be installed in a manner that does not impact habitats to be avoided. The applicant should submit to the cities of Carlsbad and Oceanside and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG; collectively "Resource Agencies") for approval, at least 30 days prior to initiating project impacts, the final plans for initial clearing and grubbing of sensitive habitat and project construction. These final plans should include photographs that show the fenced limits of impact and all areas (including riparian/wetland or coastal sage scrub) to be impacted or avoided. If work occurs beyond the fenced or demarcated limits of impact, all work should cease until the problem has" been remedied to the satisfaction1 of the cities of Carlsbad and Oceanside and the Resource Agencies. Any riparian/wetland or upland habitat impacts that occur beyond the approved fence should be mitigated at a minimum 5:1 ratio. Temporary construction fencing should be removed upon project completion. * Employees should strictly limit their activities, vehicles, equipment and construction materials to the fenced'project footprint. » To avoid attracting predators of the gnatcatcher, vireo and flycatcher, the project site should be kept as clean of debris as possible. All food-related trash items should be enclosed in sealed containers and regularly removed from the site. CM City Engineer Oceanside and Carlsbad Prior to grading; Periodic compliance verification during and after grading. FORMER SOUTH COAST QUARRY AMENDED RECLAMATION PLAN FINAL SUBSEQUENTEfK: JULY2010 F-8 Section F Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Table F-l (cont.) FORMER SOUTH COAST QUARRY AMENDED RECLAMATION PLAN MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST MITIGATION MEASURE TYPE MONITOR RESPONSIBL ECITY SCHEDULE * Pets of project personnel should not be allowed on the project site. » Disposal or temporary placement of excess fill, brush or other debris should not be allowed in Waters of the U.S. or their banks. * All equipment maintenance, staging, and dispensing of fuel, oil, coolant or any other such activities should occur in designated areas outside of Waters of the U.S. within the fenced project impact limits. These designated areas should be located in previously compacted and disturbed areas to the maximum extent practicable in such a manner as to prevent any runoff from entering Waters of the U.S., and shall be shown on the construction plans. Fueling of equipment should take place within existing paved areas • greater than 100 feet from Waters of the U.S. Contractor equipment should be checked for leaks prior to operation and repair as necessary. "No-fueling zones" should be designated on construction plans. A monitoring biologist approved by the Resource Agencies should be on site during clearing and grubbing of habitat that occurs within 200 feet of the grading limits. The monitoring biologist shall conduct weekly site visits during rough grading to ensure that the grading limits have been respected. The biologist must be knowledgeable of coastal California gnatcatcher, least Bell's vireo and southwestern willow flycatcher biology and ecology. The applicant shall submit the biologist's name, address, telephone number and work schedule on the project to the cities of Carlsbad and Oceanside and Resource Agencies at -least seven days prior to initiating project impacts. The monitoring biologist shall periodically monitor adjacent habitats for excessive amounts of dust, and shall recommend remedial measures to address dust control if necessary. The monitoring biologist shall implement a contractor training program to insure compliance with permit conditions. Any violations would be reported to the cities of Carlsbad and Oceanside, and USFWS and CDFG (collectively "Wildlife Agencies") within 24 hours. Weekly reports will be submitted during initial clearing and grubbing, and monthly reports shall be submitted throughout the remainder of the grading of the site. A final report shall be submitted to the cities CM City Environmenta 1 Planner Oceanside and Carlsbad Periodic compliance verification during and after grading. FORMER SOUTH COAST QUARRY AMENDED RECLAMATION PLAN FINAL SUBSEQUENTEIR: JULY2010 F-9 Section F Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Table F-l (cont.) FORMER SOUTH COAST QUARRY AMENDED RECLAMATION PLAN MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST MITIGATION MEASURE TYPE MONITOR RESPONSIBL ECITY SCHEDULE of Carlsbad and Oceanside and Wildlife Agencies within 60 days of project completion. The clearing and grubbing of sensitive habitats should occur outside of the bird breeding season (February 15 through September 15), unless a qualified biologist demonstrates to the satisfaction of the cities of Carlsbad and Oceanside and the Wildlife Agencies that all nesting is complete, : A conservation easement shall be placed over those portions of the property required to meet project mitigation obligations and shall include a distance of 100 feet from each side of the bottom of the widened Buena Vista Creek channel as a biological buffer. For those portions of the 100-foot biological buffer beyond the area restored as part of the Reclamation Plan mitigation, the conservation easement shall specify the requirements for planting of the balance of the 100-foot biological buffer in conjunction with the future end use when it has been evaluated and approved. CM City Environmenta 1 Planner Oceanside and Carlsbad Prior to grading; Periodic compliance verification during and after grading. FORMER SOUTH COAST QUARRY AMENDED RECLAMATION PLAN FINAL SUBSEQUENTEIR: JULY2010 F-10 Section F Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Table F-l (cont.) FORMER SOUTH COAST QUARRY AMENDED RECLAMATION PLAN MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST MITIGATION MEASURE TYPE MONITOR RESPONSIBL ECITY SCHEDULE The amount of created and enhanced habitat will exceed the amount required for mitigation, recognizing that a road crossing may be required in connection with future end use of the property. The conservation easement will include a provision recognizing this potential need for a future road crossing (though only if required by the future end use of the property). This provision shall limit mitigation obligations to standard mitigation ratios rather than doubling of mitigation ratios as is typically required for impacts to mitigation areas. The conservation easement shall also include provisions for the protection of cultural values associated with the El Salto Falls, a sacred site, and Buena Vista Creek. The specific easement language regarding cultural values shall be reviewed by and accepted by the San Luis Key Band of Luiseno Mission Indians and is anticipated to include provisions for controlled access by Native American tribe members for traditional gathering, ceremonial uses and similar activities into areas that may otherwise be off-limits for general public access, The final easement language may include general guidelines to be implemented by the open space/conservation manager and may detail permissions and restrictions associated with access to areas within the conservation easement, such as time, duration, frequency, seasonal limits due to nesting/breeding activities, types of uses, and notifications required, with final easement language approval resting with the Resource Agencies. . The applicant should prepare and implement a perpetual management, maintenance and monitoring plan for all on-site biological conservation easement areas. The applicant also should establish a non-wasting endowment for an amount approved by the cities of Carlsbad and Oceanside and Resource Agencies based on a Property Analysis Record (PAR; Center for Natural Lands Management 1998) or similar cost estimation method to secure the ongoing funding for the perpetual management, maintenance and monitoring of the biological conservation easement area by an agency, non-profit organization or other entity approved by the cities of Carlsbad and Oceanside and Resource Agencies. The applicant should submit a draft plan including: (1) a description of perpetual management, maintenance and jTionitoring actions and the PAR or other cost estimation results for the non-wasting CM/0 M City Environmenta 1 Planner Oceanside and Carlsbad Prior to grading; Periodic compliance verification during and after grading. FORMER SOUTH COASTQUARRYAMENDED RECLAMATION PLAN FINAL SUBSEQUENTEIR: JULY2010 F-ll ' Section F Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Table F-l (coat.) FORMER SO UTH COAST Q UARR Y AMENDED RECLAMATION PLAN MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST MITIGATION MEASURE endowment and (2) proposed land manager's name, qualifications, business address, and contact information to the Resource Agencies for approval at least 30 days prior to initiating project impacts. The applicant should submit the final plan to the cities of Carlsbad and Oceanside and Resource Agencies and a contract with the approved land manager, as well as transfer the funds for the non-wasting endowment to a non-profit conservation entity, within 60 days of receiving approval of the draft plan. » No species on the California Invasive Plant Council's (Cal-IPC's) "Invasive Plant Inventory List" shall be planted on the site, nor shall be included in any erosion control plan, revegetation or landscape plans for the site. * Under provisions of SMARA, ongoing financial assurances are required to be in place to cover implementation of the approved Amended Reclamation Plan. Based on the final approved plan, detailed cost estimates will be provided to the City of Oceanside based on all of the site improvements, including the mitigation implementation, maintenance and monitoring. Existing bonds in place as financial assurance for site reclamation will be updated based on the updated cost estimates. These bonds will meet the requirements for bonding by the Resource Agencies. * During and following reclamation activities, all exterior lighting adjacent to preserved habitat shall be of the lowest illumination allowed for human safety, selectively placed, shielded 'and ^directed away from preserved, habitat to the maximum extent practicable. TYPE MONITOR RESPONSffiL E CITY SCHEDULE CULTURAL RESOURCES Cultural Resources ~ 1 . Prior to implementation of the monitoring, a pre-excavation agreement shall be developed between the San Luis Rey Band of Luiseno Mission Indians and the applicant. Cultural Resources - 2. The qualified archaeologist and the Native American representative shall attend a pre-grading meeting with the contractors to explain the requirements of the program. Cultural Resources - 3. An archaeologist and a Native American monitor shall be on site dxiring all grading, trenching, and other ground-disturbing activities. CM CM CM City Environmenta 1 Planner City Environmenta 1 Planner City Environmenta Oceanside and Carlsbad Oceanside and Carlsbad Oceanside and Carlsbad Prior to grading. Prior to grading (preconstructio n meetings). Periodic verification of FORMER SOUTH COAST QUARRY AMENDED RECUMATION PLAN FINAL SUBSEQUENTEIR: JULY2010 F-12 Section F Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Table F-l (cont.) FORMER SOUTH COAST QUARRY AMENDED RECLAMATION PLAN MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST MITIGATION MEASURE Cultural Resources - 4. If archaeological artifact deposits or cultural features are discovered, grading activities shall be directed away from these deposits to allow a determination of potential importance. Isolates and clearly non-significant deposits will be minimally documented in the field, and grading shall proceed. For any potentially significant artifact deposits, an adequate artifact sample to address research avenues previously identified for sites along the Buena Vista Creek watershed will be collected using professional archaeological collection methods. Cultural Resources - 5. If any human remains are discovered, the County Coroner shall be contacted. In the event that the remains are determined to be of Native American origin, the Most Likely Descendant, as identified by the Native American Heritage Commission, shall be contacted in order to determine proper treatment and disposition of the remains. The deposition of the human remains would be included in the pre- excavation agreement. Cultural Resources - 6. Recovered artifactual materials shall be cataloged and analyzed. Cultural Resources - 7. A report shall be completed describing the methods and results of the monitoring and data recovery program. Cultural Resources — 8. Artifacts shall be curated with accompanying catalog to current professional repository standards at an appropriate curatorial facility, such as the San Diego Archaeological Center, or the collection will be repatriated to the San Luis Rey Band, as specified in the pre-excavation agreement. TYPE CM CM CM CM CM MONITOR 1 Planner City Environmenta 1 Planner City Environmenta 1 Planner; Qualified Archaeologist City Environmenta 1 Planner; Qualified Archaeologist City Environmenta 1 Planner; Qualified Archaeologist City Environmenta 1 Planner; Qualified Archaeologist RESPONSIBL ECITY Oceanside and Carlsbad Oceanside and Carlsbad Oceanside and Carlsbad Oceanside and Carlsbad Oceanside and Carlsbad SCHEDULE compliance throughout grading. Periodic verification of compliance throughout grading. Periodic verification of compliance throughout grading. Verify compliance within 6 months of completion of grading. Verify . compliance within 6 months of completion of grading. Periodic verification of compliance throughout grading. FOXIER SOUTH COAST QUARRY AMENDED RECLAMATION PLAN FIN A L SUBSEQUENT EIR; JUL Y2010 F-13 Section F Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Table F-l (cout.) FORMER SOUTH COAST QUARRY AMENDED RECLAMATION PLAN MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST MITIGATION MEASURE TYPE MONITOR RESPONSIBL E..-CITY SCHEDULE A-ESTI-IETICS No mitigation measures are necessary.N/A N/A N/A 1 N/A TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION No mitigation measures are necessary.N/A N/A N/A N/A NOISE No mitigation measures are necessary.N/A N/A N/A N/A AIR QUALITY Air Quality - 1. Multiple applications of water during grading between dozer/scraper passes - 34-68 percent reduction Air Quality - 2. Paving, chip sealing or chemical stabilization of internal roadways after completion of grading - 92.5 percent reduction Air Quality - 3. Use of sweepers or water trucks to remove "track-out" at any point of public street access - 25-60 percent reduction Air Quality - 4. Termination of grading if winds exceed 25 mph - reduction not quantified Air Quality - 5. Stabilization of dirt storage piles by chemical binders, tarps, fencing or other erosion control - 30-65 percent reduction CM CM CM CM CM City Environmenta 1 Planner; City Engineer City Environmenta 1 Planner; City Engineer City Environmenta 1 Planner; City Engineer City Environmenta 1 Planner; City Engineer City Environmenta 1 Planner; City Engineer Oceanside and Carlsbad Oceanside and Carlsbad Oceanside and Carlsbad Oceanside and Carlsbad Oceanside and Carlsbad Periodic verification of compliance throughout grading. Verification of compliance after grading. Periodic verification of compliance throughout grading. Periodic verification of compliance throughout grading. Periodic verification of compliance throughout grading. FORMER SOUTH COAST QUARRY AMENDED RECLAMATION PLAN FINAL SUBSEQUENTEIR: JULY2010 F-14 Section F Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Table F-l (cont.) FORMER SOUTH COAST QUARRY AMENDED RECLAMATION PLAN MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST MITIGATION MEASURE Air Quality - 6. Hydroseeding of graded pads - 30-65 percent reduction Air Quality - 7. Scheduling of construction truck trips during non-peak hours to reduce peak hour emissions. Air Quality™ 8. Use of ARJB-certified Tier I or II construction equipment to the extent that such equipment is available for use. TYPE CM CM CM MONITOR City Environmenta 1 Planner; City Engineer City Environmenta 1 Planner; City Engineer City Environmenta 1 Planner; City Engineer RESPONSIBL E CITY Oceanside and Carlsbad Oceanside and Carlsbad Oceanside and Carlsbad SCHEDULE Periodic verification of compliance throughout grading. Periodic verification of compliance throughout grading. Periodic verification of compliance throughout grading. HAZARDS/HAZARDOUS MATERIALS No mitigation measures are necessary.N/A N/A N/A N/A FOXIER SOUTH COAST QUARRY AMENDED RECLAMATION PLAN FINAL SUBSEQUENTEIR: JULY2010 F-l 5