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