HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-02-15; Planning Commission; Resolution 68605
^ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 6860
2
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
3 CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
ADOPTION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
4 AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING
PROGRAM AND ADDENDUM TO ALLOW FOR THE
SUBDIVISION OF A 43.58 ACRE SITE INTO 25 LOTS (19
6 RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND 6 OPENS SPACE LOTS) ON
PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED APPROXIMATELY
7 ONE HALF-MILE NORTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF
COLLEGE BOULEVARD AND EL CAMINO REAL, IN THE
SUNNY CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN (SP 191) AND LOCAL
9 FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 15.
CASE NAME: RANCHO MILAGRO
10 CASE NO.: GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/
HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
11
j2 WHEREAS, Warren C. Lyall, "Developer," has filed a verified application
13 with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by Lyall Enterprises, Inc., "Owner,'
14 described as:
Remainder Parcel "A" of Carlsbad Tract 96-02 according to
1^ map thereof No. 11242, filed in the office of the County
Recorder of San Diego County on October 27, 2000 all in the
17 City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, and
18 «K" Street Remainder Parcels ofCarlsbad Tract 00-18,
("the Property"); and
WHEREAS, a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program and Addendum were prepared in conjunction with said project; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on February 15, 2012, hold a duly
24 noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
25 WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the information submitted by staff, and
considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission considered all factors
relating to the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program and Addendum.
20
21
22
23
27
28
10
11
12
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission as follows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning
Commission hereby RECOMMENDS ADOPTION of the Mitigated Negative
6 Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and
Addendum, Exhibit "MND," according to Exhibits "Notice of Intent (NOI)," and
7 "Environmental Impact Assessment Form - Initial Study (EIA)," and
Addendum, Exhibit "ADDM" attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on
the following findings:
Findings:
1. The Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad does hereby find:
it has reviewed, analyzed, and considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration and
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and Addendum for Rancho
13 Milagro - GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUF 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01, the
environmental impacts therein identified for this project and any comments thereon
14 prior to RECOMMENDING APPROVAL ofthe project; and
b. the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
J g Program and Addendum have been prepared in accordance with requirements of
the Califomia Environmental Quality Act, the State Guidelines and the
17 Environmental Protection Procedures of the City of Carlsbad; and
18 c. it reflects the independent judgment of the Planning Commission of the City of
Carlsbad; and
19
20 d. based on the EIA and comments thereon, there is no substantial evidence the project
will have a significant effect on the environment.
21
The Planning Commission has reviewed each of the exactions imposed on the Developer
22 contained in this resolution, and hereby finds, in this case, that the exactions are imposed
22 to mitigate impacts caused by or reasonably related to the project, and the extent and the
degree of the exaction is in rough proportionality to the impact caused by the project.
24 "
25
26
27
28
PC RESO NO. 6860 -2-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
MICHAEL SCHUM:^CHER, Chairperson'
13 CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, Califomia, held on February 15, 2012, by the following
vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Schumacher, Commissioners Amold, Black,
L'Heureux, Nygaard, Scully and Siekmann
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
14
15
16
17
DON NEU
18 City Planner
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PC RESO NO. 6860 -3-
^'i^ CITY OF
VICARLSBAD
Community 6c Economic Development wv^w.carlsbadca.gov
NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
CASE NAME: Rancho Milagro
CASE NO: GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-Oa/HMP 09-01
PROJECT LOCATION: The proposed project is located approximately one half-mile northeast of the
intersection of College Boulevard and El Camino Real, within the northeast quadrant of the city of
Carlsbad, county of San Diego, state of California, Assessor's Parcel Number 209-060-61 and a portion
of 209-060-23.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed project consists of subdividing a 43.58-acre parcel into nineteen
(19) minimum half-acre single-family residential lots, four (4) open space conservation lots, and two (2)
homeowner's association maintained open space lots. The proposal is a large-lot rural estate
subdivision for future development of custom single-family residences. The project involves a General
Plan Amendment (GPA), Zone Change (ZC), Tentative Subdivision Map (CT), Floodplain Special Use
Permit (SUP), Hillside Development Permit (HDP), and Habitat Management Plan (HMP) Permit.
PROPOSED DETERMINATION: The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the
above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of
said review, the initial study (EIA Part 2) identified potentially significant effects on the environment,
but (1) revisions in the project plans or proposals made by, or agreed to by, the applicant before the
proposed negative declaration and initial study are released for public review would avoid the effects or
mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment would occur, and
(2) there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record before the City that the project "as
revised" may have a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, a Mitigated Negative
Declaration will be recommended for adoption by the City of Carlsbad Planning Commission.
A copy of the initial study (EIA Part 2) documenting reasons to support the proposed Mitigated Negative
Declaration is on file in the Planning Division, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008.
Comments from the public are invited. Pursuant to Section 15204 of the CEQA Guidelines, in reviewing
Mitigated Negative Declarations, persons and public agencies should focus on the proposed finding that
the project will not have a significant effect on the environment. If persons and public agencies believe
that the project may have a significant effect, they should: (1) identify the specific effect; (2) explain
why they believe the effect would occur; and (3) explain why they believe the effect would be
significant. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Division within 30 days of the date of
this notice.
The proposed project and Mitigated Negative Declaration are subject to review and approval/adoption
by the City of Carlsbad Planning Commission. Additional pubtic notices will be issued when those public
hearings are scheduled. If you have any questions, please call Jason Goff in the Planning Division at
(760) 602-4643.
PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD August 25. 2011 - September 26, 2011
PUBLISH DATE August 25, 2011
Planning Division
1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 T 760-602-4600 F 760-602-8559 ®
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
CASE NAME: RANCHO MILAGRO
CASE NO: GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
PROJECT LOCATION: Approximately one half-mile northeast of the intersection of College Boulevard
and El Camino Real, within the northeast quadrant ofthe citv ofCarlsbad. countv of San Diego, state of
California, Assessor's Parcel Number 209-060-61 and a portion of 209-060-23.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed project consists of subdividing a 43.58-acre parcel into nineteen
(19) minimum half-acre single-family residential lots, four (4) open space conservation lots, and two (2)
homeowner's association maintained open space lots. The proposal is a large-lot rural estate
subdivision for future development of custom single-family residences. The project involves a General
Plan Amendment (GPA), Zone Change (ZC), Tentative Subdivision Map (CT), Floodplain Special Use
Permit (SUP), Hillside Development Permit (HDP), and Habitat Management Plan (HMP) Permit.
DETERMINATION: The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described
project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act and
the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, the initial
study (EIA Part 2) identified potentially significant effects on the environment, and the City of Carlsbad
finds as follows:
^ Although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there wilt not
be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on the attached
sheet have been added to the project.
I I The proposed project MAY have "potentially significant impact(s)" on the environment, but at
least one potentially significant impact 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document
pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures
based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. (Mitigated Negative Declaration
applies only to the effects that remained to be addressed).
[ I Although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL
NOT be a significant effect In this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been
analyzed adequately in an earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated
pursuant to that earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION,
including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project.
Therefore, nothing further is required.
A copy of the initial study (EIA Part 2) documenting reasons to support the Negative Declaration is on
file in the Planning Division, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008.
ADOPTED: ICLICK HERE datel , pursuant to
ICLICK HERE Administrative Approval. PC/CC Resolution No., or CC Ordinance No.l
ATTEST:
DON NEU
City Planner
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - EVITIAL STUDY
(TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DIVISIGN)
CASE NO: GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
DATE: 07/18/2011
BACKGROUND
1. CASE NAME: Rancho Milagro
2. LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS: Citv ofCarlsbad
3. CONTACT PERSON AND PHONE NUMBER: Jason Goff, Associate Planner
4. PROJECT LOCATION: The project site is located approximately one half-mile northeast of the
intersection of College Boulevard and El Camino Real, within the northeast quadrant of the
city of Carlsbad, county of San Diego, state of California, Assessor's Parcel Number 209-
060-61 and a portion of 209-060-23.
5. PROJECT SPONSOR'S NAME AND ADDRESS; Jack Henthom & Associates. P.O. Box #237.
Carlsbad. CA 92018
6. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: RLM/OS/RH/C/O
7. ZONING: R-1-20.000/OS/L-C
8. OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES WHOSE APPROVAL IS REQUIRED (i.e., permits, financing
approval or participation agreements): United States Armv Corp of Engineers. San Diego
Water Quality Control Board
9. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND SURROUNDING LAND
USES:
The proposed project consists of subdividing a 43.58-acre parcel into nineteen (19) minimum
half-acre single-family residential lots, four (4) open space conservation lots, and two (2)
homeowner's association maintained open space lots. The proposal is a large-lot rural estate
subdivision for future development of custom single-family residences. The proiect involves a
General Plan Amendment (GPA), Zone Change (ZO. Tentative Subdivision Map (CT).
Floodplain Special Use Permit (SUP), Hillside Development Permit (HDP), and Habitat
Management Plan (HMP) Permit.
The project site is located in the northeast quadrant of the citv of Carlsbad, approximately one
half-mile northeast of the intersection of College Boulevard and El Camino Real, and is currently
accessed by a dirt road off of Sunny Creek Road. The site is within the Zone 15 Local Facilities
Management Plan and also the Sunny Creek Specific Plan. The Sunny Creek Specific Plan
establishes standards for the residential development of the area and is intended to promote a
rural estate atmosphere.
The existing environment of the subiect propertv can be generally characterized as rural. The
specific development area is situated on a previously disturbed portion of the property in the
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
northern boundary, which is presently used for agriculture. Upland and riparian/wetland habitats
surround this area within the northem quarter and southem half of the property. Topographically,
the property ranges from approximately 80 feet above mean sea level (MSL) in the southwesterly
portions of the property to approximately 200 feet above MSL in the northeasterly portions of the
property. Agua Hedionda Creek flows from east to west through the southem quarter of the
propertv and an unnamed tributary of Agua Hedionda Creek flows from east to west through the
property's northem quarter.
The surrounding environment can be generally characterized as raral. interspersed by agricultural
fields, native habitat, and scattered residential estate and ranch type properties. To the north is
the Cantarini property, which was previously developed in agriculture, but is presently fallow.
This propertv is entitled with an approved residential subdivision known as Cantarini Ranch (CT
00-18). and will eventually be developed with 105 single-familv residential lots (half-acre
minimum lot sizes), an 80 unit multiple-family residential apartment complex, and several open
space lots. To the south is an existing 172 small lot single-family residential development known
as the Terraces at Sunny Creek (CT 96-02). a multiple-family apartment complex, and the
Madonna Hill assisted living facilitv. To the east, the subject property is bounded by five large
parcels of land, three of which are estate/ranch tvpe properties with single-family residences, one
is developed in agriculture (northeast parcel, known as the Mandana property), and the other
(southeast parcel) is developed with a landscaping business (Brickman Landscaping) which takes
access off of Cougar Drive near its intersection with El Camino Real. To the west is a parcel of
land known as the Barlow property, which is developed with a single-family residence, several
small outbuildings, horse stables, and an outdoor equestrian riding facilitv.
The proposed development area has a General Plan Land Use designation of Residential Low-
Medium Densitv (RLM. 0-4 du/ac) and a Zoning designation of One-Family Residential (R-1-
20.000). The development area will consist of the nineteen (19) single-family residential lots, a
public street and cul-de-sac totaling approximately 14.28 acres, or 33% of the site. Residential
Lots 1-19 range in size from 21.780 square feet (0.5 acres) to 27.050 square feet (0.621 acres).
The project density (1.14 dwelling units per acre) and tvpe of development (one-family
residential on half-acre minimum lot sizes) are consistent with the General Plan and Zoning
designations and also the development standards of the Sunny Creek Specific Plan. Vehicle
access to the project site will be provided bv a proposed public street that will connect via the
proposed extension of College Boulevard through Streets "A" and "K" of the approved Cantarini
Ranch proiect, which is adjacent to the north.
The project proposal includes a total of six (6) open space lots. Open Space Lot 22 includes a
proposed bio-filtration detention basin for the project, is approximately 29.248 square feet in size,
and will be maintained bv a future homeowner's association. Open Space Lot 25 includes a
riparian overlook seating area, is approximately 5.023 square feet in size, and will also be
maintained by a future homeowner's association. Open Space Lots 20. 21. 23. and 24 total
approximately 29.3 acres, or 67% of the total propertv area, and will be conserved for natural
habitat in conformance with the City's HMP.
The General Plan Amendment is intended to re-configure the existing RLM General Plan Land
Use designation to clearly distinguish the proposed development area from the open space, and to
designate the proposed open space areas as Open Space (OS) on the General Plan Land Use Map
and Official Open Space & Conservation Map. It is also intended to correct two (2) small
remnant RH/C/O General Plan Land Use designations along the southem boundary of the
property, which will be re-designated as OS.
Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
The Zone Change is intended to re-configure the existing R-1-20,0Q0 Zoning designation to
clearly distinguish the proposed development area from the open space, and to designate the
proposed open space areas as Open Space (OS) on the City of Carlsbad's Zoning Map. To
implement the half-acre minimum lot size requirement of the Sunny Creek Specific Plan, the
Zone Change includes re-designating the existing R-1-20.000 to R-l-Q.5-0. The Qualified
Development Overlav Zone ("0" Overlav) is intended to be applied to properties with unique
circumstances such as those proposed to be developed as hillside development or other physically
sensitive areas. The "O" Overlay supplements the underlying zoning by providing additional
regulations for development and will insure that the future development is compatible with the
Sunny Creek Specific Plan. Also included in the proposed Zone Change is a remnant L-C Zoning
designation along the southem boundary of the property, which will be re-designated as OS.
A Floodplain Special Use Permit (SUP) is required to excavate and install a new sewer line on
the north side of Agua Hedionda Creek in a portion of a special flood hazard area (i.e., 100 year
flood zone).
Part of the Rancho Milagro project includes constmcting the extension of a sewer line across
Agua Hedionda Creek, in accordance with the approved South Agua Hedionda Interceptor Sewer
(SAHT IE Phase ID project (Improvement Plans DWG No. 361-6E). That project has been
previously analyzed bv EIA 97-05 and approved by Citv of Carlsbad Resolution No. 2000-106
(April 4. 2000). Impacts attributable to the South Agua Hedionda Interceptor Sewer (SAHT IE
Phase ID project have already been assessed and mitigated and therefore are not being re-
analyzed as part of the Rancho Milagro project.
Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The summary of environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project,
involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact," or "Potentially Significant Impact
Unless Mitigation Incorporated" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
I I Aesthetics
[ I Agricultural and Forestry
Resources
I I Air Quality
|X| Biological Resources
X Cultural Resources
X Geology/Soils
I I Greenhouse Gas Emissions Q Population and Housing
1^ Hazards/Hazardous Materials Q Public Services
I I Hydrology/Water Quality
I I Land Use and Planning
I I Mineral Resources
I I Noise
I I Recreation
|~] Transportation/Traffic
I I Utilities & Service Systems
Mandatory Findings of
Significance
Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
DETERMINATION.
(To be completed by the Lead Agency)
I I I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not
be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have
been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I I I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I I I find that the proposed project MAY have "potentially significant impact(s)" on the environment, but at
least one potentially significant impact 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to
applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis
as described on attached sheets. A Negative Declaration is required, but it must analyze only the effects
that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL
NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed
adequately in an earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION
pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or
mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Therefore, nothing further is required.
Date
7-/?-//
City Planner's Signature Date
Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, Section 15063 requires that the City conduct an Environmental
Impact Assessment (EIA) to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the environment. The
Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following pages in the form, of a checklist. This checklist
identifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be impacted by the proposed project and provides
the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR),
Negative Declaration, or to rely on a previously approved EIR or Negative Declaration.
• A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported
by an information source cited in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is
adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to
projects like the one involved. A "No Impact" answer should be explained when there is no source
document to refer to, or it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards.
• "Less Than Significant Impact" applies where there is supporting evidence that the potential impact is not
significantly adverse, and the impact does not exceed adopted general standards and policies.
• "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" appHes where the incorporation of mitigation
measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact."
The developer must agree to the mitigation, and the City must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly
explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant levei.
• "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substamial evidence that an effect is significantly
adverse.
• Based on an "EIA-Initial Study", if a proposed project could have a potentially significant adverse effect on
the environment, but aU potentially significant adverse effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an
earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided
or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration, including revisions or
mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, and none of the circumstances requiring a
supplement to or supplemental EIR are present and all the mitigation measures required by the prior
environmental document have been incorporated into this project, then no additional environmental
document is required.
• When "Potentially Significant Impact" is checked the project is not necessarily required to prepare an EIR
if the significant adverse effect has been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable
standards and the effect will be mitigated, or a "Statement of Overriding Considerations" has been made
pursuant to that earlier EIR.
• A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the project or
any of its aspects may cause a significant adverse effect on the environment.
• If there are one or more potentially significant adverse effects, the City may avoid preparing an EIR if there
are mitigation measures to clearly reduce adverse impacts to less than significant, and those mitigation
measures are agreed to by the developer prior to public review. In this case, the appropriate "Potentially
Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated" may be checked and a Mitigated Negative Declaration
may be prepared.
• An EIR must be prepared if "Potentially Significant Impact" is checked, and including but not hmited to
the following circumstances: (1) the potentially significant adverse effect has not been discussed or
mitigated in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and the developer does not agree to mitigation
measures that reduce the adverse impact to less than significant; (2) a "Statement of Overriding
Considerations" for the significant adverse impact has not been made pursuant to an earlier EIR; (3)
proposed mitigation measures do not reduce the adverse impact to less than significant; or (4) through the
Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
EIA-Initial Study analysis it is not possible to determine the level of significance for a potentially adverse
effect, or determine the effectiveness of a mitigation measure in reducing a potentially significant effect to
below a level of significance.
A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears after each related set of questions.
Particular attention should be given to discussing mitigation for impacts, which would otherwise be determined
significant.
Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
• • • X
• • • X
• • • m
• • X •
I. AESTHETICS - Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including but
not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a State scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or
quality ofthe site and its surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial light and glare,
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views
in the area?
a-c) No Impact The subject property is located within the Sunny Creek Specific Plan Area (SP 191), which was
adopted by the City of Carlsbad in 1985. The existing environment of the subject property can be generally
characterized as rural. The proposed development area of the property is largely in agricultural use with upland and
riparian/wetland habitats located within the northern quarter and southern half of the property. The proposed project
is situated on a hill which offers valley views in the northwesterly direction towards the Robertson Ranch and
Calavera Hills development areas. Agua Hedionda Creek flows from east to west along southern quarter of the
property, and an unnamed tributary of Agua Hedionda Creek flows fi'om east to west within the northern quarter of
the property.
The Sunny Creek Specific Plan (SP 191) establishes guidelines and development standards that promote a rural
estate atmosphere and which serve to preserve the unique environmental resources within the area. The plan
includes development standards, design criteria, and density patterns that are intended to preserve the residential
estate-type character of the Sunny Creek area. The density pattern of the Specific Plan allows for single-family
development with half-acre minimum lot sizes.
The project is designed to be consistent with the Sunny Creek Specific Plan. Through its compliance with the
Specific Plan, the project will not substantially damage any scenic resources, and no substantial degradation of the
existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings will occur. Since the project site is not listed as
including any scenic vistas in either the City's General Plan or the Sunny Creek Specific Plan, no substantial adverse
effect on any scenic vistas is assessed. Since the existing project site does not include any buildings on-site, the
proposed project will not have any effect on historic buildings. Lastly, the proposed development area is not located
within the view shed of a State scenic highway or any State highway that is designated by the California Department
of Transportation as eligible for listing as a scenic highway. Therefore, no aesthetic impacts are assessed.
d) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed single-family residential subdivision will introduce new stieet
lights and eventually residential lighting to an area which is presently characterized as rural. The existing Terraces
at Sunny Creek project and the multiple-family residential apartment complex located adjacent to the south, already
includes street lights, parking lot lights, and residentiai outdoor lighting, as does the El Camino Real corridor located
just beyond. The approved Cantarini Ranch project, which is located adjacent to the north and is expected to
develop ahead of this project, will also include similar street lights and outdoor residential lighting conditions.
While the proposed project is anticipated to generate new sources of light, which will slightly increase ambient
lighting conditions in the area, it is not expected that the project will contribute a significant amount of light or glare.
Therefore, a less than significant impact is assessed.
Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
II. AGRICULTURAL AND FOREST RESOURCES (In
determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are
significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer
to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site
Assessment Model-1997 prepared by the Califomia
Department of Conservation as an optional model to use
in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In
determining whether impacts to forest resources,
including timberland, are significant environmental
effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled
by the California Department of Forestry and Fire
Protection regarding the state's inventory of forest land,
including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and
the Forest Legacy Assessment Project; and forest carbon
measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols
adopted by the California Air Resources Board.) Would
the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
Califomia Resources Agency, to non-agricultural
use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or
a WiUiamson Act contract?
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning
of, forest land (as defined in Pubhc Resources Code
section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public
Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined by Government
Code section 51104(g))?
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of
forest land to non-forest use?
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment,
which, due to their location or nature, could result in
conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
• •
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
K •
•
•
•
•
a) Less Than Significant Impact. The Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) is implemented by
the California Department of Conservation (CDC), Division of Land Resource Protection and recognizes the
suitability of land for agricultural production. The FMMP is non-regulatory and was developed to inventory land
and provide categorical definitions of important farmlands to provide consistent and impartial data to decision
makers for use in assessing present status, reviewing trends, and planning for the future of Califomia's agricultural
land resources.
Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
The most recent mapping prepared for the project site (RECON Number 3889^1B, November 19, 2010) is based on
the California Resource Agency mapping prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. It
indicates that the site contains a totid of approximately 12 acres of Unique Farmland; 23 acres of Locally Important
Farmland; and 0.25 acres of Statewide Important Farmland. There is also 8.26 acres of "Other Land" present in the
southem part of the site, which is of a lower tier that typically does not have any agricultural value. These comprise
the lower tier assigned to agricultural land. An additional 0.37 acre of land within the study area is identified as
"Built Up" and "Urban Land." This occurs in an off-site sewer easement area located on the adjacent parcel (APN
209-060-23) within an existing road, and does not support any agricultiffal value. Of the two top tiers, no Prime
Farmland is present on the site, and 0.25 acres of Statewide Important Farmland is identified along the northeastern
periphery of the property.
The project proposes to convert 10 acres of Unique farmland which is defined as having lesser quality soils (no
prime soils or soils constituting statewide importance) being used in the production of the State's leading
agricultural crops. In addition, 2 acres of Locally Important Farmland, and 0.21 acres of Statewide Important
Farmland would be affected.
The definition of Locally limportant Farmland is delegated to the County. This land is defined by the County as
land that meets all of the characteristics of Prime and Statewide with the exception of irrigation. Lands not meeting
this definition can be included if they show a good history of production of locally adapted truck crops and orchard
crops.
The project proposes to cluster development within the central portion of the site, and the remainder, approximately
67% of the site, would be preserved in open space. The development proposal will preserve almost 100% of the
Locally Important Farmland and a portion of the Statewide Important Farmland.
The pohcy of the City of Carlsbad through its General Plan is to accommodate conversion of agricultural lands to
uses consistent with the policies of the General Plan. These policies can be found in the Land Use Element of the
General Plan (amended September 14, 2010) and the Open Space and Conservation Element of the General Plan
(amended November 7, 2006).
The conversion of these areas is consistent with the City of Carlsbad's General Plan and Habitat Management Plan
(see Biology Resources Section IV). Therefore, impacts are considered less than significant.
b) No Impact. The subject site is not encumbered by any WiUiamson Act contracts. Therefore, no impact is
assessed.
c-d) No Impact The subject site does not contain any timberland or forest land. Therefore, no impact is assessed.
e) Less Than Significant Impact. The properties located on the northern and western boundaries of the subject site
have already been approved for or are currently in the process of converting from agriculture to a residential use
consistent with the City's General Plan. The properties to the south (i.e.. The Teiraces at Sunny Creek and Multiple-
family apartment complex) are already developed with residential uses with portions restricted to open space. The
adjacent properties to the east are designated by the General Plan for residential uses and are subject to the same
conversion pohcies as the subject site. Therefore, changes in the existing environment through facility extension
would have a less than significant impact on decisions related to conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses.
10 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
III. AIR QUALITY - (Where available, the significance
criteria established by the applicable air quality
management or air pollution contiol district may be relied
upon to make the following determinations.) Would the
project:
a) Conflict with or obsttuct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air quaiity
violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of
any criteria pollutant for which the project region is
in non-attainment under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard (including releasing
emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for
ozone preciffsors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial
number of people?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
•
•
•
•
• S
• •
m •
•
• • • K
• • M •
a) No Impact The project site is located in the San Diego Air Basin which is a state non-attainment area for ozone
(O3) and for particulate matter less than or equal to 10 microns in diameter (PMio). The periodic violations of
national Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS) in the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB), particularly for ozone in
inland foothill areas, requires that a plan be developed oufiining the pollution contiols that will be undertaken to
improve air quality. In San Diego County, this attainment planning process is embodied in the Regional Air Quality
Strategies (RAQS) developed Jointly by the Air Pollution Control District (APCD) and the San Diego Association of
Governments (SANDAG).
A Plan to meet the federal standard for ozone was developed in 1994 during the process of updating the 1991 state-
mandated plan. This local plan was combined with plans from all other California non-attainment areas having
serious ozone problems and used to create the Califomia State Implementation Plan (SIP). The SIP was adopted by
the Air Resources Board (ARB) after public hearings on November 9* through 10* in 1994, and was forwarded to
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for approval. After considerable analysis and debate, particularly
regarding airsheds with the worst smog problems, EPA approved the SIP in mid-1996.
The proposed project relates to the SIP and/or RAQS through the land use and growth assumptions that are
incorporated into the air quality planning document. These growth assumptions are based on each City's and the
County's General Plan. If a proposed project is consistent with its applicable General Plan, then the project
presumably has been anticipated with the regional air quality planning process. Such consistency would ensure that
the project would not have an adverse regional air quality impact.
Section 15125(d) of the State of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines contains specific
reference to the need to evaluate any inconsistencies between the proposed project and the applicable air quality
management plan. Transportation Controi Measures (TCMs) are part of the RAQS. The RAQS and TCM plan set
11 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
forth the steps needed to accomplish attainment of state and federal ambient air quality standards. The California
Air Resources Board provides criteria for determining whether a project conforms witii the RAQS, which include
the following:
• Is a regional air quality plan being implemented in the project area?
• Is the project consistent with the growth assumptions in the regional air quality plan?
The project area is located in the San Diego Air Basin, and as such, is located in an area where a RAQS is being
implemented. The project is consistent with the growth assumptions in the regional air quaiity plan and will in no
way conflict with or obstruct implementation of the regional plan.
b) Less Than Significant Impact The closest air quality monitoring station to the project site is at Camp
Pendleton. Data available for this monitoring site from 2000 through December 2004 indicate that the most recent
air quality violations recorded were for the state one hour standard for ozone (a total of 10 days during the 5-year
period). No other violations of any air quality standards have been recorded during the 5-year time period. The
project would involve minimal short-term emissions associated with grading and construction. Such emissions
would be minimized through standard constiuction measures such as the use of properly tuned equipment and
watering the site for dust control. Long-term emissions associated with tiavel to and from the project will be
minimal. Although air pollutant emissions would be associated with the project, they would neither result in the
violation of any air quality standard (comprising only an incremental contribution to overall air basin quality
readings), nor conttibute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. Any impact is assessed as
less than significant.
c) Less Than Significant Impact. The air basin is currentiy in a state non-attainment zone for ozone and suspended
fine particulates. The proposed project would represent a contribution to a cumulatively considerable potential net
increase in emissions throughout the air basin. As described above, however, emissions associated with the
proposed project would be minimal. Given the limited emissions potentially associated with the proposed project,
air quality would be essentially the same whether or not the proposed project is implemented. According to the
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(h)(3), the proposed project's incremental contiibution to the cumulative effect is
not cumulatively considerable. Any impact is assessed as less than significant.
d) No impact. As noted above, the proposed would not result in substantial pollutant emissions or concentrations.
In addition, there are no sensitive receptors (e.g., schools or hospitals) located in the vicinity of the project. No
impact is assessed.
e) Less Than Significant Impact. The constiuction of the proposed project could generate fumes from the
operation of constmction equipment, which may be considered objectionable by some people. Such exposure would
be short-term or transient. In addition, the number of people exposed to such tiansient impacts is not considered
substantial. Any impact is assessed as less than significant.
12 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directiy or
through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status
species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by California Department of Fish and
Game or U.S. Fish and Wildhfe Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian,
aquatic or wetland habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional plans,
pohcies, or regulations or by California Department
of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetiands as defined by Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (including but not limited to marsh,
vernal pool, coastal; etc.) through direct removal,
filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species
or with established native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native
wildhfe nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state
habitat conservation plan?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
•
•
•
•
•
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
•
•
No
Impact
• •
• S • •
S • •
• •
•
•
a-f) Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. The City of Carlsbad has an adopted Habitat
Management Plan (HMP), which is a comprehensive, citywide, program to identify how the City, in cooperation
with the federal and state wildlife agencies, can preserve the diversity of habitat and protect sensitive biological
resoiu-ces within the City while allowing for additional development consistent with the City's General Plan and its
Growth Management Plan. In so doing, the Plan is intended to lead to citywide permits and authorization for the
incidental take of sensitive species in conjunction with private development projects, pubhc projects, and other
activities, which are consistent with the Plan. As discussed in the subsequent passages, the project does not conflict
with the provisions of the HMP.
The HMP identifies the subject property as a Standards Area (Zone 15); is located adjacent to and south of an
Existing Hardline Preserve Area; and includes a small fmger shaped portion of Core Area 5 covering its southern
half (which mns east/west following Agua Hedionda Creek). The HMP conservation goals for Zone 15 require
developments to establish, enhance, and maintain a viable habitat linkage across Linkage Area C (located to the
northeast) to ensure connectivity for gnatcatchers and other HMP species between Core Area 3 (located to the north)
13 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
and Core Area 5 (located south and southeast of Linkage Area C); and that they conserve the majority of sensitive
habitats in or contiguous with biological core and linkage areas, including a no-net-loss of wetiand habitats and
coastal sage scrub within Core Area 3 and Linkage Area C. Protection of coastal sage scrub (CSS) is of particular
importance in the Standards Areas, and therefore 67% of the CSS is required to be conserved. Table 11 (Pg. D-113)
of the HMP identifies mitigation ratios for impacts to habitat types identified as sensitive in the HMP, and
furthermore allows for impacts to agriculture, eucalyptus, and disturbed lands to be mitigated through the payment
of an in-lieu mitigation fee.
A Biological Technical Report for the Rancho Milagro Study Area was prepared by RECON Environmental Inc.
(dated April 27, 2011) and summary letter dated May 4, 2011, for which eleven vegetation communities were
indentified within the study area. In addifion, a Wetland Delineation Study was also prepared by RECON
Environmental Inc. (dated April 24, 2009), which identified jurisdictional areas belonging to both the United States
Army Corp of Engineers (USAGE) and the Cahfomia Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). Tables No. 1 and 2
below summarize the vegetation communities, jiuisdictional areas, and project related impacts, while Table No. 3
summarizes the proposed mitigation.
TABLE 1: VEGETATION COMMUNITIES AND PROJECT IMPACTS
Vegetation
Communities
-Fresh Water Marsh
Existing Conditions
Rancho
Milagro
0.21
Terraces
Mitigation
Area*
Off-site
Sewer
Total
Study
Area
0.21
Total
Project
Impacts^
Mitigation
Ratio
3:1
Required
Mitigation
Available
Mitigation
Areas On-
site^
0.21
Southern Willow
Scrub 0.90 1.68 2.58 0.05 3:1 0.15 0.85
-Mule Fat Scrub 0.04 0.04 3:1 0.04
• Sycamore/Oak
Woodland 0.11 9.34 9.45 0.02 3:1 0.06 0.09
•Diegan Coastal Sage
Scmb/Disturbed
Diegan Coastal Sage
Scmb''
7.46 1.05 8.51 2.56
1:1
(no net
loss)
2.56 5.95'
• Coast Live Oak
Woodland 1.05 2.36 3.41 0.02 3:1 0.06 1.03
- Non-native Grassland 4.40 0.96 5.36 2.50' 0.5:1 1.25 1.90
-Eucalyptus Woodland 0.06 0.06 In-Lieu
Fee
In-Lieu
Fee 0.06
- Agricultural Land 12.06 12.06 11.83' In-Lieu
Fee
In-Lieu
Fee 0.23
- Developed Land 0.98 0.91 0.06 1.95 1.18 N/A N/A 0.77
TOTAL ACRES: 27.27 16.30 0.06 43.63 18.16 11.13
' The 'Terraces Mitigation Area" colunm refers to a portion of the study area that was previously dedicated as open space
for the purpose of wetland mitigation associated with the mitigation for impacts to an off-site project known as the Terraces
at Sunny Creek.
^otal impacts include impacts from proposed restoration when it consists of conversion from one mapped vegetation
community to coastal sage scrub or riparian scrab.
'Acres remaining within study area available for mitigation after excluding the development impact area and the area
previously dedicated as open space for wetland mitigation from the development of the Terraces at Sunny Creek.
Acreage is based on all coastal sage scrab present with the total study area.
14 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
TABLE 2: JURISDICTIONAL AREAS AND PROJECT IMPACTS
Existing Conditions Total
Project
Impacts^
Jurisdictional Areas^ Rancho
Milagro
Terraces
Mitigation
Area*
Off-site
Sewer
Total
Study
Area
Total
Project
Impacts^
Mitigation
Ratio
Required
Mitigation
- Wetland 1.06 0.13 1.19 0.05 3:1 0.15
- Non-wetland
Jurisdictional Waters
0.07 1.59 ~ 1.66 0.001 1:1 0.001
TOTAL ACRES: 1.13 L72 2.85 0.051 0.151
iiHiiiiilIBB^;;=i PII fi?i=iiiilii
- Riparian 1.20 — — 1.20 0.07 3:1 0.21
- Streambed 0.07 — — 0.07 0.001 1:1 0.001
- Terraces at Sunny
Creek Mitigation Site'
~ 11.01 11.01
TOTAL ACRES: 1.27 11.01 12.28 0.071 0.211
Isolated Drainage^ 0.06 0.47 0.53 0.04
the purpose of wetland mitigation associated with the mitigation for impacts to an off-site project known as the Terraces at
Sunny Creek.
^otal impacts include impacts from proposed restoration when it consists of conversion from one mapped vegetation
community to coastal sage scrub or riparian scmb.
'Does not include jurisdictional areas in the open space dedicated for wetland impacts on the off-site Terraces at Sunny
Creek, nor does it include drainages delineated as isolated.
''Acreage overlaps and includes USACE jurisdictional drainage.
^This drainage has been delineated in the report and does not appear to fall under the jurisdiction of either USACE or
CDFG.
TABLE 3: PROPOSED PROJECT MITIGATION
Wetland/Riparian:
- Fresh Water Marsh
- Southern Willow Scrab
- Mule Fat Scrub
- Sycamore/Oak Woodland
The project related Wetland/Riparian community impacts are being mitigated
as described below in the Jurisdictional Areas section of this table (please see
below).
Upland:
- Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub/
Disturbed Diegan Coastal Sage
Scrub
The project is required to restore/create at least 2.56 acres of CSS to achieve a
no-net-loss of this vegetation community. The project is creating a total of
2.94 acres of CSS on-site through the conversion of 1.50 acres of agricultural
land, 0.04 acres of developed land, and 1.40 acres of non-native grasslands
within the northern open space lots (Lots 23 and 24). The proposed 2.94 acre
restoration will result in a net gain of total CSS.
- Coast Live Oak Woodland Through on-site preservation, the project is preserving 0.06 acres of Coast
Live Oak Woodland in Open Space Lots 21, 23, and 24.
- Non-native Grassland Through on-site preservation, the project is preserving 1.25 acres of Non-
native Grassland in Open Space Lots 21 and 23.
- Eucalyptus Woodland Through on-site preservation, the project is preserving 0.06 acres of
eucalyptus woodland in Open Space Lot 21.
- Agricultural Land Payment of an in-lieu mitigation fee = 11.83 acres of Group F habitat type.
15 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
TABLE 3: PROPOSED PROJECT MITIGATION (CONTINUED)
Biological Resource
USACE Jurisdiction:
- Wetiand
- Non-wetiand Jurisdictional
Waters
CDFG Jurisdiction:
- Riparian
- Stteambed
Proposed Mitigation
Impacts to wetland communities, including southern willow scrub and
sycamore/oak woodland shail be mitigated at a 3:1 ratio, with a minimum 1:1
creation component that achieves the "no net loss" standard. The project is
proposing to mitigate impacts to 0.05 acres of southem willow scrab through
the on-site creation of 0.15 acres of southern willow scrub in preserved open
space. The project is proposing to mitigate impacts to 0.02 acres of
sycamore/oak woodland through the on-site creation of 0.06 acres of
sycamore/oak woodland in preserved open space. A conceptual restoration
plan has been prepared as part of project biotechnical report, which is
proposing to convert a minimum of 0.21 acres of agricultural fields located in
Open Space Lot 23 adjacent to the northern drainage to suitable
wetiand/riparian habitat. The creation of 0.07 acres, representing a 1:1
mitigation ratio, will be accomplished outside of the 100-foot wetland habitat
buffer. The remaining 0.14 acre (2:1 mitigation ratio) will be located within
the buffer and will serve to connect the restoration outside of the buffer to the
existing drainage. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, and/or the clearing of
any habitat on-site, a final wetlands/riparian restoration plan shail be approved
by the City of Carlsbad Planning Department (with concurrence by the
USFWS, USACE, and CDFG) to mitigate for the above impacts.
In addition, impacts to USACE (Jurisdictional Wetiands and Non-Wetland
Waters of the U.S.) and CDFG (Riparian and Stieambed) jurisdictional areas
will require a Section 404 nationwide permit from the USACE, a 1602
Streambed Alteration Agreement from the CDFG, and a 401 State Water
Quality Certification from the Regional Water Quality Control Board, all of
which must be obtained prior to the issuance of a grading permit and/or the
clearing of any habitat on-site.
Sensitive Plant Species
According to the biological technical report, three sensitive plant species were observed within the study area;
California adolphia, spiny rush, and Nuttall's scrab oak. Of these, spiny rush and Nuttall's scmb oak are not
impacted by the project. However, the project does propose direct impacts on approximately 15 individual
Califomia adolphia plants, a California Native Plant Society (CNPS) List 2 species, which are located in the
northern half of the study area. To mitigate this impact, a minimum of 30 individual Califomia adolphia plants will
be included in the plant palette of the proposed Diegan CSS restoration. Seeds will be collected from plants on-site
and propagated in an appropriate nursery facility until they are of a sufficient size for planting. Inclusion of this
species within the upland restoration that is proposed for the open space areas on-site will reduce impacts to a less
than significant level. The remaining species of California adolphia identified in the report will be preserved in open
space.
Sensitive Wildlife Species
According to the biological technical report, five sensitive bird species were observed within the study area:
Cooper's hawk, northern harrier, white-tailed kite, yellow warbler, and yellow-breasted chat.
Several other sensitive species were identified in the report as either being known to occur in the vicinity of the
project or having a potential to be present within the study area. Of those having a potential to be present in the
study area, five are state/or federally Usted species: arroyo toad, western yellow-billed cuckoo, least Bell's vireo,
southwestern willow flycatcher, and coastal California gnatcatcher. Due the rarity of these species and lack of
historical records in the area, the biological technical report lists the arroyo toad and westem yellow-billed cuckoo
16 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
as not expected to occur within the study area, and thus no focused protocol surveys were required. Individual
focused protocol surveys were prepared for the least Bell's vireo, southwestern willow flycatcher, and coastal
California gnatcatcher. None of the surveys detected or observed any of these species within the study area.
However, given the habitat types within the study area and vicinity, the report does identify a potential, ranging from
low to moderate, that one or all of these species could be present on-site during the breeding season. Therefore, the
project was designed to avoid and minimize impacts to the habitat on-site to the greatest extent possible, and
mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project that reduce the potential direct and indirect impacts to
these species, if present. Measures include removing vegetation that is critical to these species outside of the
breeding season to avoid direct impact to nests and establishing a protocol of surveying and monitoring to avoid
indirect impacts to nests within 500 feet of construction activity.
Both the yellow warbler and yellow-breasted chat were identified within the riparian habitat during the focused
protocol surveys for least Bell's vireo and southwestem willow flycatcher. Implementation of the mitigation
measures for the least Bell's vireo and southwestern willow flycatcher will mitigate impacts to these two species to a
less than significant level.
The entire riparian area along Agua Hedionda Creek contains hundreds of tiees and therefore is considered a
suitable raptor nesting area. To avoid any potential direct impacts to nesting raptors, mitigation is included that
requires the removal of any tiees to be outside of the breeding season (September I^' to January 31") of local raptor
species. If it is detennined that tree removal must be conducted during the breeding season (February l" to August
30'*'), a raptor nest survey will need to be conducted by a qualified biologist prior to any removal of tiees. to
determine if raptor nests are present. If active nests are discovered, a 500 foot minimum buffer will be required to
be established around the tree until the young are independent of the nest site, and no constmction activity will be
allowed to occur within the buffer area until a qualified biologist determines that the fledglings are independent of
the nest.
Wetlands
The proposed project involves impacts to both USFWS and CDFG jurisdictional areas and wetiand/riparian
vegetation conomunities as illustiated above in Tables I and 2 with proposed mitigation illustrated in Table 3.
According to the HMP, all projects that would affect HMP Type A Habitats (riparian and wetland habitats, including
vernal pools), must demonstiate that the impacts 1) cannot be avoided by a feasible alternative, 2) have been
minimized to maximum extent possible, and 3) will be mitigated in ways that assure no net loss of habitat value or
function.
In regards to the first finding, the project proposes a single road crossing of the northern drainage area with
associated wedand habitat. This crossing is necessary to assure access to the property, as the only developable
portion of the site is landlocked between two drainages supporting riparian and wetiand vegetation. The location of
the crossing is designed to coordinate with the circulation system of the adjacent approved project to the north
(Cantarini Ranch). Primary access to the site will be provided through the extension of "K" Street through this
residential development to the north. Currently, the primary access to the site is from the south along a small dirt
road (Sunny Creek Road) in the southwestern portion of the site. This will be converted to a utility easement and
pedestrian access area, as conversion of this road to a primary access that conforms to City standards would result in
larger impacts to hillsides and the southern drainage (Agua Hedionda Creek), which supports a larger and higher
functioning riparian corridor.
In regards to the second finding, the HMP states that road projects which "cross a wetiand must demonstrate that the
crossing will occur at the narrowest and/or least sensitive location and that all feasible minimization measures have
been employed." Consistent with this requirement, the road has been aligned to cross the narrowest section of the
southern willow scrub. In addition, the proposed crossing will consist of a Con-Span or similar three-sided 12-foot-
by-5-foot product that will span the creek, while maintaining a soft soil bottom that will allow for natural flow of the
creek beneath the crossing. The buffer between the proposed lots and the jurisdictional areas in the northwestern
portion of the site measures a minimum 100 feet in width along the entire interface in compliance with the HMP
Planning Standards for Zone 15. This site design demonstrates that all feasible minimization measures were
employed to reduce impacts to jurisdictional areas in the northern portion of the study area and to meet the planning
standards as identified in the HMP.
17 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
Additionally, the jack-and-bore method will be used to install the sewer pipeline beneath Agua Hedionda Creek in
accordance with the mitigation measure established as part of the approved South Agua Hedionda Interceptor Sewer
(SAHT IE, Phase II) project, resulting in no impacts to this jurisdictional resource. This method however has a
potential to sometimes results in what is known as a "frac-out," which is when subsurface fractures conduct
bentonite drilling fluid to the surface, creating localized surface seepage. In the event of a "frac-out" or any other
unexpected impact as a result of the jack-and-bore method, the extent of the resultant impact will be assessed,
measured, and mitigated. Work will cease immediately and measures taken to contain any resultant slurry within as
small of an area as possible will occur. A qualified biologist will assess impacts to the natural resources and contact
the City and appropriate resource agencies within 24 hours of the event. Additional mitigation for impacts would be
required at a ratio of at least 3:1. The location and composition of this mitigation would be determined at the time of
the impact, once the scope and nature of the impact, can be determined.
Lastly, in regards to the third finding, the wetiand habitats present on-site are not unique (e.g., vernal pool), but are
considered rare simply for the fact that they are wetlands which are a declining habitat type. Both the northern and
the southern drainages support sensitive riparian species, such as yellow warbler and yellow-breasted chat, though
neither federal nor state-listed species have been observed within either drainage. The proportion of native to exotic
plant species in the two drainages is high, indicating that there are lower levels of non-native invasive species. The
existing levels of disturbance within the drainages are low; though the adjacent upland areas are predominately
agricultural, disturbed, or developed as residential. The northern drainage carries flow from upstream riparian areas
and ultimately connects to the Agua Hedionda watershed; however, the drainage ends at a culvert at the western
boundary of the property and is diverted across the adjacent property, and thus there is no direct continuation of the
riparian vegetation along the northern boundary. The southern drainage (Agua Hedionda Creek) supports a
continuous riparian corridor that rans east to west through the southern quarter of the property.
In order to maintain the current functions and values of the wetland and riparian habitats on-site, the impacts
associated with the road crossing will be mitigated on-site through restoration of an approximately 0.21-acre area. A
conceptual restoration plan was prepared and is provided in Attachment 3 of the biological technical report. A total
of 0.21 acre of riparian habitat is proposed to be restored in the northern portion ofthe site through the conversion of
a 0.19 acre area of agricultural fields and a 0.02 acre area of non-native grassland. This would mitigate the project
impacts within the drainage.
Based on the above, the project was designed to minimize the total impact to the weUand habitats on-site and to
maintain the functions and values of the riparian and wetiand areas.
Indirect Impacts
The proposed project is located adjacent to and south of an existing HMP Hardline Preserve Area and is proposing
additional open space areas, which will ultimately become new hardline preserve areas. In order to minimize edge
effects, the project has incorporated project features to comply with the HMP Adjacency Standards. This includes
the following topics: fire management; erosion control; landscaping; fencing, signs, and hghting; and predator and
exotic species control.
1. Fire Management: A Fire Protection Plan has been included as part of the project design. All fire management
activities will occur completely within the development boundaries and will not occur within any of the HMP
open space conservation areas. Landscaping on these adjacent slopes will include low-fuel native species in
compliance with the HMP.
2. Erosion control: Mechanical and biological methods will be implemented to control potential erosion,
including engineering the manufactured slopes to maximize slope stability; choosing appropriate plants for the
slopes to reduce the level of erosion of the slopes; implementing post-consfruction best management practices
(BMPs) that will ensure ran-off is appropriately freated to minimize the potential for erosion; and implementing
constmction-level BMPs to prevent any silt from entering any of the HMP open space conservation areas.
3. Landscaping: Landscaping plans for the brash management zones and along development slopes adjacent to
the HMP conservation areas require the use of a native plant palette consistent with the adjacent native
vegetation communities, prohibit the use of ornamental invasive species, and limit the use of fertilizers to
18 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
prevent excess mn-off from entering the open space. Irrigation should only be installed temporarily in order to
ensure the estabhshment of plants and shall be confroUed to prevent runoff from spreading into the HMP
conservation areas. In addition, the use of cultivars of native species shall be prohibited to avoid genetic
contamination of the native plant species in the preserve.
4. Fencing, signs, and hghting: Fencing will be installed along the perimeter of the development to discourage the
access of humans and limit domestic pets into the HMP open space conservation areas. Fencing placed at the
property lines between the residential lots and the HMP open space conservation areas will consist of a
minimum 5-foot-high black vinyl coated chain-link. Fencing separating the HMP open space conservation
areas from the project boundaries along Stieet "K", Stieet "X", and the riparian overlook seating area (Lot 25)
will consist of a ininimum 42 inch high 3 rail composite wood ranch-style fence. Signage wiU be placed at
consistent intervals along the fence lines to inform the public about the presence and function of the HMP open
space preserve. Lighting in the residential yards and along the project boundaries located adjacent to the HMP
open space conservation areas shall be of a minimum necessary for safety and security and shall be shielded or
directed away from the HMP open space conservation areas to the maximum extent practicable so as to avoid
increasing the nighttime light input into the open space preserve.
5. Predator and exotic species control: The perimeter fence separating residential lots located adjacent to the HMP
open space conservation areas will consist of a minimum 5-foot-high black vinyl coated chain-link designed to
Umit access of domestic and feral animals to the HMP open space conservation areas. Project CC&R's shall
include text to educate homeowners regarding responsible pet ownership (e.g., keeping pets indoors,
spaying/neutering pets, prohibiting the release of pets into the wild, etc.). Any long-term management on-site
may also include development of a cowbird trapping program, native predator program, and exotic plant control
program.
HMP Planning Standards:
Project compliance with the HMP Planning Standards are included below. The planning standard is identified in
boldface type followed by an explanation of how the project compUes.
1. 67 % of coastal sage scrub shall be conserved overaU (emphasis added) within the Standards Areas, as well
as 75 % of gnatcatchers. Some zones may conserve more or less than these percentages due to parcel size,
location, resources, or long-term conservation potential (HMP, Standards Area, pg. D-73).
This is a citywide preservation standard and applies to many other properties than just the subject property. Upon
final preserve assembly, the City is responsible for ensuring that there was 67% preservation of CSS within all
Standards Areas. The Rancho Milagro project is proposing impacts to 2.56 acres (30%) of the existing 8.51 acres of
unoccupied Diegan coastal sage scrub/ Disturbed Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub on-site, resulting in 5.95 acres (70%)
remaining to be preserved in open space. In compliance with this requirement, the proposed project has been
designed to preserve 70% of the existing coastal sage scrub on-site and; therefore, contributes its fair share of CSS
preservation to the overall citywide standard.
In addition, the project is mitigating its 2.56 acre impact as discussed above at a 1:1 ratio through on-site creation of
2.94 acres of CSS, which wiU occur through the conversion of 1.50 acres of agricultural land, 0.04 acres of
developed land, and 1.40 acres of non-native grasslands within the northern open space lots (Lots 23 and 24). The
proposed 2.94 acre restoration when added to the 5.95 acres being preserved will result in a net gain of total CSS on-
site.
2. Maintain and enhance a habitat linkage across Linkage Area C and adjoining portions of Core Areas 3
and 5 that average between 500 and 1,000 feet wide, with a minimum width of no less than 500 feet
Emphasis should be on improving gnatcatcher habitat within the tinkage (HMP, Zone 15 Planning
Standards, pg. D-79).
This standard is not applicable to the Rancho Milagro project, since the project site is not within Linkage Area C,
nor is it within the adjoining portions of Core Areas 3 and 5.
19 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
As additional information, there is a finger shaped portion of Core Area 5 present within the southem half of the
project site that primarily encompasses the Agua Hedionda Creek riparian corridor. This is not directiy a part of the
habitat linkage between Core Area 3, Linkage Area C, and Core Area 5, but does serve to increase the open space
protection of Core Area 5. With the exception of approximately 1.9 acres that are clustered on the northern and
western edges of the portion of Core Area 5, the project proposes to maintain all of this as preserved open space. In
fact, the southem 16.3 acres of this area is predominately riparian habitat and was previously dedicated as open
space to mitigate for wetiand/riparian impacts from the adjacent Terraces at Sunny Creek project. The additional
open space that will be added from the proposed project within Core Area 5 includes 3.67 acres of coastal sage
scrab, which would increase the amount of potential gnatcatcher habitat within this core area. In addition to the
portion of the site within Core Area 5, the northeastern comer of the site abuts Linkage Area C. This northem area
will be maintained as open space, including 1.21 acres of existing coastal sage scrab, and will be restored to include
an additional 2.94 acres of coastal sage scrab and 0.21 acre of riparian habitat, which further connects the Linkage
Area C through hardline open space to Cantarini Ranch to the north.
3. Areas of upland habitat outside of the designated Linkage Area C may be taken in exchange for
restoration and enhancement inside the linkage, as long as the result is no net loss of coastal sage scrub
and the associated gnatcatcher population within the southern portion of the zone (HMP, Zone 15
Planning Standards, pg. D-79).
The project site is not within Linkage Area C and thus impacts to coastal sage scrub are mitigated on-site as to meet
the no-net-loss standard. Impacts to 2.56 acres of coastal sage scrab will be mitigated through the preservation of
5.95 acres of coastal sage scrub within the total project ownership and the conversion of 2.94 acres of agricultural
fields, developed land, and non-native grassland to coastal sage scrab within the northern open space lots.
As additional information, the northern portion of the project is proposed as an open space area that is connected to
Linkage Area C via a designated hardline area on the property to the north (Cantarini Ranch). The vegetation
communities within the open space lot include both riparian and upland areas with a few small patches of Diegan
coastal sage scrub. In addition, the southern open space lots (Lots 20, 21, and a portion of 23) includes several
patches of coastal sage scrub to be preserved for a total of 8.89 acres of coastal sage scmb in preserved open space.
These areas are located within Core Area 5, which connects to Linkage Area C.
4. Creation of linkage should utitize patches of existing habitat to the maximum extent practicable.
Creation of the linkage must utilize patches of existing habitat vdthin the identified linkage alignment
(HMP, Zone 15 Planning Standards, pg. 0-79).
The northern portion of the project is proposed as an open space area (Lots 23 and 24), which are connected to
Linkage Area C via a designated hardline area on the property to the north (Cantarini Ranch). This open space area
includes a wetland/riparian corridor and patches of native coastal sage scrub and coast live oak woodland. The
hardline open space area on Cantarini Ranch includes an upstream portion of this drainage that is connected to the
drainage in Linkage Area C. Preservation of this portion of the Rancho Milagro site as open space wiU increase the
protection for this drainage system. In addition, restoration is proposed for the northern open space lots that will
convert the majority of the agricultural fields and non-native grassland to coastal sage scrub and riparian habitats.
The linkages created by the project utilize patches of existing habitat to the maximum extent practicable within the
identified linkage alignment. Based on die evidence above, the project is consistent with this standard.
5. Maintain and enhance the wildlife movement potential between core areas using sensitive design of any
road or utiUty crossings of Linkage C (HMP, Zone 15 Planning Standards, pg. D-79).
This standard is not applicable to the project, since the project site is not within Linkage Area C and thus has no road
or utility crossings.
For additional information, please see above findings for discussion of proposed open space and how it relates to
Linkage Area C.
20 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
6. Conserve all riparian habitats on-site, and prohibit fill or development within the existing floodplain
except where required for Circulation Element roads, Drainage Master Plan facilities, or other essential
infrastructure (HMP, Zone 15 Planning Standards, pg. D-79).
All on-site riparian habitat and floodplains are preserved, except where impacts are required in order to provide for
essential infrastructure, such as the extension of "K" Stieet into the site and the 16 ft. wide bridge maintenance
access road. To minimize impacts, the proposed extension of "K" Stieet has been shifted to the narrowest portion of
the riparian habitat/floodplain. The project preserves nearly aU of the riparian habitat/floodplain, and project
impacts on the riparian habitat/floodplain are minimal.
The project conserves all riparian habitats and prohibits fill or development within the existing floodplain on-site
except where required for Drainage Master Plan facilities and other essential access roads and infrastiucture. Based
on the evidence above, the project is consistent with this standard.
7. Conserve any Narrow Endemic plant populations identified during planning (HMP, Zone 15 Planning
Standards, pg. D-79),
Pursuant to the biological technical report that was prepared for the project, no Narrow Endemic plant populations
have been identified on the project site.
8. When conversion of agricultural lands to other uses is proposed, set back all development impacts at least
100 feet from existing wetland habitats and require habitat restoration or enhancement in the riparian
and buffer areas (HMP, Zone 15 Planning Standards, pg. D-79).
On the south side of the project site, adjacent to Agua Hedionda Creek, the average setback from the wetiand is
approximately 300 feet. The exception to this is the proposed bio-filtration detention area on the western edge of the
property. The stormceptor collector system associated with this bio-filtration detention area is designed to handle
the 85''' percentile storms and will remove the majority of any storm-related sediment associated with those storms.
This bio-filtration detention area wiU be inspected annually, but maintenance is not expected to be needed as trash
and sediment will be caught and removed at the stormceptor collector. This bio-filtration detention area will have an
earthen berm and bottom to allow for growth of natural vegetation as identified in the HMP.
On the north side of the project site, adjacent to the unnamed ttibutary, the project has been designed so that the
setback from the wetland is a minimum of 100 feet except for storm outfalls and a small (16 ft. wide) emergency all-
weather access road for bridge maintenance. In addition, the project proposes to create, restore, and enhance
wetiand/riparian habitat within the open space lots on-site to achieve no net loss of wetland/riparian habitat. This is
proposed on tiie west end of the project nortii of the drainage. The creation of 0.07 acres, representing a 1:1
mitigation ratio, wiU be accompUshed outside of the 100-foot wetland habitat buffer. The remaining 0.14 acre (2:1
mitigation ratio) will be conducted within the buffer and will serve to connect the restoration outside of the buffer to
the existing drainage.
The setback for all development impacts is at least 100 feet from existing wetiand habitats. In addition, restoration
of wetland and riparian impacts will occur on-site within the riparian and buffer areas. Based on the evidence
above, the project is consistent with this standard.
21 Rev. 06/29/10
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Wouid tiie project:
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
Potentially
Sigmficant
PotentiaUy Unless Less "Dian
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the [ [ ^ [ | | [
significance of a historical resource as defined in
§15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the signifi- | | j | | |
cance of an archeological resource pursuant to
§15064.5?
c) Directly or indirectiy destroy a unique pale j | ^ | | [ |
ontological resource or site or unique geologic
feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred I I \? I j I 1
outside of formal cemeteries?
a, b & d) Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated. A Cultural Resources Survey Report
for the Rancho Milagro study area was conducted by RECON and detailed in a report dated October 27, 2010
(RECON Number 3889.1A). The results of the survey indicate that within a 0.5-mile radius of the project site there
are five previously recorded sites (CA-SDI-9092, CA-SDI-9698, CA-SDI-9699, CA-SDI-9701(SDM-W-601), and
CA-SDI-14339H). Of these five previously recorded sites, three (CA-SDI-9698, CA-SDI-9699, and CA-SDI-
9701(SDM-W-601)) are located within the Rancho Milagro Study Area. A pedestrian survey of the area was
conducted on August 2, 2010 by RECON archeologists, whereby the three previously recorded sites were located
again in the field. CA-SDI-9698 and CA-SDI-9699 are described as shell middens, and CA-SDI-9701 is described
as a possible village site. As currentiy designed, the proposed project will impact aU of CA-SDI-9698 and CA-SDI-
9699, and part of CA-SDI-9701, thereby significantiy impacting historical resources as defined within Section
15064.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines. Under CEQA, the preferred mitigation for impacts is to redesign the project
to avoid the three sites. However, because of other project constraints, avoidance is not possible. Therefore, in
order to reduce impacts to a less than significant level, a mitigation program, which involves a data recovery
program for CA-SDI-9698, CA-SDI-9699, and for tiie portion of CA-SDI-9701 located witiiin the project impact
area is required, all of which is to be completed under the direction of a qualified archeologist.
In accordance with the Tribal Consultation Guidelines for tiie State of Cahfomia (Cahfomia State Senate Bill 18,
Chapter 905, Statutes of 2004), and as recommended by the Native American Heritage Commission in a letter dated
December 9, 2010, the City of Carlsbad sent formal requests for consultation to the Mesa Grande Band of Mission
Indians, San Pasqual Band of Mission Indians, Kwaaymii Laguna Band of Mission Indians, San Luis Rey Band of
Mission Indians, Ewilaapaayp Tribal Office, Rincon Band of Mission Indians, Sycuan Band of the Kumeyaay
Nation, La Jolla Band of Mission Indians, Barona Group of the Capitan Grande, Pauma & Yuima, Lipay Nation of
Santa Ysabel, and the Inaja Band of Mission Indians. Of those listed, the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians
requested a formal consultation with the City of Carlsbad, which was held at the project site on April 6, 2011. No
additional information regarding knowledge of any known archeological or cultural resources within the project
study area was provided to staff from the representatives of the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians during the
meeting, other than a request that the developer enter into a formal pre-excavation agreement prior to issuance of a
grading permit and use of tribal monitors in addition to archeological monitoring during grading activities to address
any cultural resources that may be discovered given the Band's fraditional territory.
Therefore, through implementation of the required mitigation measures identified in the Cultural Resources Survey
Report for the Rancho Milagro study area, along with the requirements of tribal monitoring and a formal pre-
22 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
excavation agreement with the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians, impacts to cultural resources are reduced to a
less than significant level.
c) Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. A Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation was
conducted by Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. for the proposed project on April 5, 2005 and was later updated on
April 27, 2009 (Job No. 04-8849). The results of the report indicate that the subject property is located in an area
underlain by the undifferentiated Eocene-age Del Mar/Torrey/Santiago Formations. According to the Master
Environmental Impact Report (MEIR 93-01, March 1994) covering the last General Plan update for the city, these
formations have a high potential for containing significant fossil resources. In some areas, the project proposes to
excavate up to 15 to 20 feet to develop level pads and improvement, which may involve disturbance of these
Eocene-age formations. Destmction of any fossils that may exist in these formations would represent a significant
impact. A mitigation program, which involves the review of the grading plans and full time attendance of a
qualified paleontologist during grading operations, with the authority to direct grading in order to salvage and curate
resources, will mitigate impacts to a less than significant level.
23 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
VL GEOLOGY AND SOILS - Would the project:
a) Expose people or stmctures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or
death involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special
Pubhcation 42.
u. Sti-ong seismic ground shaking?
iu. Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
iv. Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable,
or that would become unstable as a resuh of the
project, and potentially result in on- or off-site
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction,
or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soils, as defined in Section
1802.3.2 of the CaUfornia Building Code (2007),
creating substantial risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the
use of septic tanks or altemative wastewater disposal
systems where sewers are not available for the
disposal of wastewater?
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless
Significant Mitigation
Impact Incorporated
• •
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
• •
•
Less Tlian
Significant No
Impact Impact
m •
•
•
•
•
•
• •
• m
a.i.-a.iii., and c) Less Than Significant Impact A Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation was conducted by
Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. for the proposed project (April 27, 2009, Job No. 04-8849) in order to provide
subsurface information and geotechnical recommendations specific to the proposed project. According to this
report, the subject site is not located within any Earthquake Fault Zones as created by the Alquist-Priolo Act, nor are
there any known major or active faults on, or within, the immediate vicinity of the site. Because of the lack of
known active faults on the site, the potential for surface rapture at the site is considered remote. While considered
remote, the main seismic hazard that may affect the site is ground shaking from one of the active regional faults,
with the nearest known active fault being the Rose Canyon Fault Zone located approximately eight miles west and
southwest of the site. Since no submerged loose sand or silt conditions exist at the site, risk of seismic-related
ground failure or Hquefaction is not a significant concem and impacts are considered to be less than significant.
24 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
a.iv.) No Impact According to the Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation (Geotechnical Exploration, Inc., April
27, 2009, Job No. 04-8849) that was prepared for the project, there are no known or suspected ancient landsUdes
located on the site. Therefore, no impact is assessed.
b) No Impact During finish grading, exposure of soils could lead to an increased chance for the erosion of soils
from the site. However, the project's compUance with the standards outiined in the City's Excavation and Grading
Ordinance, which prevent the erosion of soil through slope planting and instaUation of temporary erosion control
measures, will avoid substantial soil erosion impacts. Therefore, no impact is assessed.
d) Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated. The Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation
(Geotechnical Exploration, Inc., April 27, 2009, Job No. 04-8849) that was prepared for the project revealed
surficial soils of varying compaction and of very high expansion potential underlying the property to depths ranging
from less than one foot to approximately five feet in some areas. According to the report, in their present condition,
the surficial fill soils, cultivated and in-place topsoils, slopewash/colluviums and alluvium will not provide a stable
soil base for future residential sfructures and improvements. However, the report indicates that when properly
prepared, moisture conditioned, and compacted, these soils will have good load-bearing properties. As such, the
Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation recommends that these materials be removed and re-compacted as part of
the site preparation work prior to the addition of any new fill or stractural improvements. Through this measure and
the implementation of the geotechnical design recommendations outUned within the report, development of the site
is considered feasible and impacts from expansive soils are considered to be less than significant.
e) No Impact. The project does not propose any septic tanks and will instead utilize the public sewer system.
Therefore, tiiere will be no impacts involving soils that support the use of septic tanks or altemative wastewater
disposal systems.
25 Rev. 06/29/10
vn. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS - Would the
project:
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or |^ ^ |^
indirectiy, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
b) Conflict with an appUcable plan, poUcy or regulation |^ ^ | j
adopted for the purposes of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
a) Less Than Significant Impact The project is expected to generate GHG emissions in the short-term as a result
of constmction emissions and in the long-term as a result of automobile trips and energy consumption. Based on the
GHG emission calculations contained within the Greenhouse Gas Screening Assessment prepared for the project by
Ldn Consulting, Inc., October 25, 2010, the proposed project is expected to generate a total of 371.90 metric tons of
carbon dioxide equivalent emissions (C02e). Of this, automobile trips would represent 250.46 metric tons of C02e
emissions, energy consumption would represent 116.1 metric tons of C02e emissions, and project related
constraction emissions would represent 5.34 metric tons of C02e emissions averaged over a 30 year period. The
California Air Pollution Contiol Officers Association (CAPCOA) pubUshed a white paper with a suggested
significance screening threshold criteria of 900 metric tons of GHGs. While the proposed project is expected to
generate some short-term and long-term GHG emissions that could contribute directiy and indirectiy to the
environment, the total GHG emissions (371.90 C02e) generated by the project, combined with the state and federal
reduction measures discussed in the Section "b" below, are not considered significant. Therefore, impacts from
GHG emissions on the environment are considered to be less than significant.
b) Less Than Significant Impact In recognition of the adverse effects of global warming, GHG legislation has
been adopted on both the state and federal levels.
At the federal level, the federal Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standard determines the fuel efficiency of
certain vehicle classes in the United States. In 2007, as part of the Energy and Security Act of 2007, CAFE
standards were increased for new light-duty vehicles to 35 miles per gallon by 2020. In May 2009, plans were
announced to increase CAFE standards to require Ught duty vehicles to meet an average fuel economy of 35.5 miles
per gallons by 2016.
At the state level. Executive Order (EO) S-3-05 calls for a reduction in GHG emissions in California to year 1990
levels by the year 2020 and for an 80-percent reduction in GHG emissions by the year 2050.
AB 32 was passed by the state legislature to provide guidance on implementation of EO S-3-05. Under SB 32, the
CaUfornia Air Resources Board (CARB) is charged with the primary responsibiUty for determining how to achieve
the reductions to 1990 levels by the year 2020. In order to quantify the goal, the CARB has established the year
1990 level of GHG emissions at 427 MMT C02e (CARB 2007b). The CARB estimates that a reduction of 173
MMT net COje emissions below the "business as usual" (BAU) condition, defined as no change in current ttends or
policies, would be required by the year 2020 to meet the 1990 levels. The BAU condition is determined by the
GHG levels that would occur by the year 2020 without additional actions taken to reduce GHG emissions. A
reduction of 173 MMT net C02e emissions represents a 15 percent reduction from today's levels and a 30-percent
reduction from projected BAU levels in the year 2020. Thus, future development must reduce its GHG emissions
by at least 30 percent over the BAU condition to achieve the goal of EO S-3-05 to reduce emissions to 1990 levels
by the year 2020.
26 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
The CARB has adopted tiie Scoping Plan (CARB 2008) as directed by AB 32. The Scoping Plan proposes a set of
actions designed to reduce overall GHG emissions in CaUfornia to the levels required by AB 32. The measures in
the Scoping Plan approved by the Board wiil be in place by the year 2012, with further implementation details and
regulations to be developed, followed by the mlemaking process to meet the 2012 deadline. Measures appUcable to
development projects include the foUowing:
• Maximum energy efficiency building and appliance standards, including more sfringent building codes and
appliance efficiency standards, and solar water heating;
• Use of renewable sources for elecfricity generation, such as photovoltaic solar associated with the MiUion
Solar Roofs program;
• Regional transportation targets, including integration of development patterns and the transportation
network to reduce vehicle tiavel, as identified in SB 375; and
• Green Building strategy, including siting near transit or mixed use areas; zero-net-energy buildings;
"beyond-code" building efficiency requirements; and the use of the CECs Tier II Energy Efficiency goal.
Relative to tiansportation, the Scoping Plan includes nine measures or recommended actions. One of these is
measure T-3, Regional Transportation-related GHG Targets, which reUes on SB 375 implementation to reduce GHG
emissions from passenger vehicles through reducing vehicle miles traveled. The otiier measures are related to
vehicle GHG, fuel, and efficiency measures and would be implemented statewide rather than on a project-by-project
basis.
The Pavely vehicle emissions standards (AB 1493) requires the CARB to set GHG emission standards for passenger
vehicles, light duty tracks, and other vehicles determined to be vehicles whose primary use is non-commercial
personal transportation in the state, manufactured in 2009 or later. When fully phased in, the near-term (years 2009
to 2012) standards would result in a reduction of approximately 22 percent in GHG emissions compared to the
emissions from the year 2002 fleet, while the mid-term (2013 to 2016) standards would result in a reduction of
approximately 30 percent.
AB 75 mandates that state agencies develop and implement an integrated waste management plan to reduce GHG
emissions related to solid waste disposal. The bill requires diversion of at least 50 percent of the solid waste from
landfills and transformation facilities.
SB 1368 requires the Public UtiUties Commission (PUC) to develop and adopt a "GHGs emission performance
standard". The PUC adopted an interim standard on January 25, 2007, but has formally requested a delay for the
local publicly owned electric utiUties under ils regulation. These standards apply to all long-term financial
commitments entered into by electiic utilities.
Executive Order S-01-07 directs that a statewide goal be estabUshed to reduce the carbon intensity of Califomia's
transportation fuels by at least 10 percent by 2020. It orders that a Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) for
tiansportation fuels be established for California, and directs the CARB to determine if a LCFS can be adopted as a
discrete early action measure pursuant to AB 32. The CARB approved the LCFS as a discrete early action item with
a regulation adopted and implemented in 2010.
Based on the San Diego County Greenhouse Gas Inventory (SDCGHGI), the percent reductions in GHG emissions
can be reduced by 15 percent through implementation of the Federal CAI^ standard, 11 percent through LCFS, 6.6
percent through Pavley standard, and 4 percent by the light/heavy vehicle aerodynamic efficiency/hybridization
standard. GHG emissions from vehicles would, therefore, be reduced by as much as 36.6 percent as a result of state
and federal programs by the year 2020. Furthermore, compUance with the California Green Building Standards
(effective January 1, 2011) wiU ensure additional reductions in GHG emissions.
The combined reductions from state and federal programs formed to target a reduction in GHG emissions would
exceed the BAU threshold of 33 percent. Therefore, the project would not conflict with state or federal policies
aimed at reducing GHG emissions.
27 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
VIU. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS -
Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine tiansport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or
environment?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless Less Than
Mitigation Significant No
Incorporated Impact Impact
•
•
•
•
• •
• •
•
•
M •
K •
• m
• m
•
•
•
• • s e) For a project within an airport land use plan, or | |
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two
miles of a public airport or public use airport, would
the project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, | |
would the project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area?
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with | |
an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of | |
loss, injury or death involving wildland fires,
including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized
areas or where residences are intermixed with
wildlands?
a-b) Less Than Significant Impact. The initial phase of the project consists of grading and preparation of land for
single-family residential lots, pubUc roads, and drainage improvements. Future development wiU include the
consttuction of individual homes on nineteen (19) half-acre minimum lot sizes. During both the grading and
consfruction phases ofthe project, heavy equipment and materials (i.e. petroleum products, paint, oils, and solvents)
typically associated with land development may be transported and used on-site. Upon completion of consfruction,
some use of hazardous cleaning products on the site may occur. Other than during this initial consfruction phase, the
project will not routinely utilize hazardous substances or materials. All fransport, handling, use, and disposal of any
cleaning substances will comply with all federal, state, and local laws regulating the management and use of such
•
28 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
materials. No extraordinary risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances is anticipated with
construction, development, and implementation or operation of the proposed project. It is concluded that the
minimal amount of hazardous materials utilized during the constiuction period is not significant, and therefore the
impact to the public or the environment through the routine tiansport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials is
considered to be less than significant.
c) No Impact. The site is not located within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. Therefore, no
impact is assessed.
d) No Impact A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment was prepared for the project by Geotechnical Exploration,
Inc. (April 5, 2005, Job No. 04-8849). Soil samples for agricultural chemicals were collected from the site with the
results pubUshed in a follow-up letter dated April 15, 2005. According to the findings, no detectable quantities of
agricultural chemical residue were found in the soil samples taken from the site. AdditionaUy, the California
Environmental Protection Agency's listing of sites containing hazardous waste and substances (a.k.a. the Cortese
List) was searched via the State's website on October 6, 2010. The results revealed that the project is not located on
a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5. Therefore, the project will not create a significant hazard to the public or environment and no impact is
assessed.
e) No Impact The subject site is located approximately one mile north of the McClellan-Palomar Airport and is
subject to the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP). The project was submitted to tiie San Diego County
Regional Airport Authority (SDCRAA) on December 9, 2010 for an ALUCP Consistency Determination. A
consistency determination was received from the SDCRAA in a letter dated March 16, 2011. In their letter, the
SDCRAA determined the project to be "conditionally compatible". The SDCRAA identifies the project site as
being located within Safety Zone 6, is within an overflight notification area, is outside of the 60 db CNEL noise
contour, and is in compliance with the ALUCP airspace protection surfaces. The ALUCP identifies residential uses
located within Safety Zone 6 and outside of the 60 db CNEL noise contour as being compatible with airport uses.
However, because the proposed project is located within an overflight notification area, the ALUCP requires as a
condition of approval that an overflight notification be recorded with the County Recorder for new residential land
uses. A condition to that effect wiU be appUed to the project. As such, it is concluded that the project site will not
cause a safety hazard for people residing or woridng within the project area. Therefore, no impact is assessed.
f) No Impact The project site is not in the vicinity of a private airstrip. Therefore, no impact is assessed.
g) No Impact The project site is located in close proximity to El Camino Real, which is one of five primary
arterials designated in the General Plan as an emergency access or emergency evacuation route to move people
during emergencies. A signalized intersection located at the future extension of College Boulevard (Reach A) and
Stieet "A" of the approved Cantarini Ranch tentative map (CT 00-18) wiU provide primary access to the project site.
This access will serve to provide emergency evacuation onto College Boulevard and ultimately El Camino Real if
necessary. The City of Carlsbad's Ffre Department wiU provide all basic fire and emergency medical services to the
project site. Specifically, the project wUl be served by Fire Station No. 3 located at 3701 CataUna Drive, and Fire
Station No. 5 located at 2540 Orion Way. The project site is within a five minute response time for these fire
stations. AdditionaUy, the City of Carlsbad's Fire Department has agreements with other agencies, such as the
County of San Diego, to provide additional services, including hazardous materials incident response. In the event
of a large scale incident, the City of Carlsbad will activate its Emergency Operations Center (EOC) and provide
details to residents. The proposed project will not impact the abiUty to provide emergency services to the project
site, nor will it physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.
Therefore, no impact is assessed.
h) Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated. The existing environment of the subject
property can be generally characterized as rural. The development area of the property is largely developed in
agriculture with upland and riparian/wetiand habitats located along the northernmost and southern periphery of the
property. An approximately 60-foot high, north-facing hiUside slope exists within the northem half of the property,
and an approximately 70-foot high, south facing hillside slope exists within the southern half of the property.
Canyon centeriines cross the southeast and northeast to northwest comers of the property. The Agua Hedionda
Creek bed flows from east to west along southern portion of the property, and an unnamed tributary of Agua
29 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
Hedionda Creek flows from east to west along the northern portion of the property, both of which contain dense
native habitat. The project proposes grading of residential pads with some uphill and downhill perimeter slopes
located adjacent to natural habitat. A Fire Suppression Plan is included as part of the project exhibits, which
includes the requirement of a 60 foot wide Fire Suppression Zone (FPZ) consistent with the City of Carlsbad's
Landscape Manual and Fire Department standards. Reduced fire buffers have been approved by the City's Fire
Marshal on Lots 4, 7, and 19. Where this has occurred, constiuction of a six (6) foot tall soUd masonry waU, and/or
a modified FPZ regulation has been required in place of the 60 foot wide FPZ to mitigate impacts to a less than
significant level.
30 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY - Would the
project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer
volume or a lowering of the local ground water table
level (i.e., the production rate of pre-existing nearby
wells would drop to a level which would not support
existing land uses or planned uses for which permits
have been granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattem of the
site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a sfream or river, in a manner, which would
result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-
site?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattem of the
site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, or substantially increase
the flow rate or amount (volume) of surface ranoff in
a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off-
site?
e) Create or confribute runoff water, which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm
water drainage systems or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff?
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as
mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or
Flood Insurance Rate Map or other fiood delineation
map?
h) Place within 100-year flood hazard area stractures,
which would impede or redirect flood flows?
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
loss, injury or death involving flooding, including
flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
•
•
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
•
•
• •
• •
No
Impact Impact
S •
• K
m •
m •
• • K •
•
•
•
•
• K •
• •
•
•
• K
• m
• • • s
31 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
a) Less Than Significant Impact. The project is required by law to comply with all federal, state and local water
quality regulations, including the Clean Water Act, California Administtative Code Titie 23, specific basin plan
objectives identified in the "Water Quality Conurol Plan for San Diego Basin" (WQCP), and the city's Standard
Urban Storm Water Management Plan (SUSMP). The WQCP contains specific objectives for die Carlsbad
Hydrologic Unit, which includes the requirement to comply with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) and the use of Best Management Practices (BMPs). Constmction activities for this project are covered
under state-wide constraction permit Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ issued by the State Water Resource Control Board
Permit. As part of the permit requfrements, the applicant will prepare and submit a Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for the project. Through each phase of constraction, the SWPPP wil! identify specific
erosion contiol and storm water pollution prevention plan practices that will be implemented to protect downsfream
water quality. Post-development activities for this project are covered under Order No. R9-2007-0001 issued by the
CaUfornia Regional Water Quality Control Board San Diego Region. As part of these requirements, the applicant
must prepare and submit a Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) addressing what tieatment Best Management
Practices (BMP's) will be constructed to tieat the post-development runoff from the project. The SWMP wiU
address how pollutants from this project will be reduced, captured, filtered, and/or treated prior to discharge from
the project site. Through this process, the project will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements and impacts are therefore considered to be less than significant.
b) No Impact The project does not propose to dfrectiy draw any groundwater. Instead, the project will be served
by public water distiibution lines that wiU be extended to the site. Therefore, no impact is assessed.
c-e) Less Than Significant Impact. A preliminary Hydrology & Hydraulics Study (March 11, 2009) and a
preliminary Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) (March 9, 2009, JN 1674) were prepared for the project by
Manitou Engineering to address hydrology and water quaiity. According to these reports, existing mnoff from the
project's south facing slope flows directiy towards Agua Hedionda Creek, while the remainder drains towards a
northerly intermittent watercourse that flows westerly into a small pond on the adjacent property before draining
into Agua Hedionda Creek. Once in Agua Hedionda Creek, drainage flows west towards Agua Hedionda Lagoon
and ultimately the Pacific Ocean. The drainage pattern on the site is being altered by the development and grading
associated with the proposed project. However, while storm water discharge points will divert mnoff from the
existing condition, the ultimate discharge points will remain relatively the same. After being filtered through bio-
swales located on individual Lots 4-8 and 10-13, and a bio-filfration detention basin located on Lot 22, the majority
of the anticipated ranoff will be dfrected towards several locations within the open space areas in an effort to reduce
the locations of concentrated flow and to maintain and promote growth of the natural vegetation and wetland
habitats. Additionally, project development includes spanning the northerly intermittent watercourse with the
development of "K" Sfreet. Flow at this crossing will be maintained via a soft-bottomed bridge structure that will
span a 12 foot section of the watercourse at its narrowest section. The soft-bottom sttucture is designed to more
closely replicate natural drainage flows than a standard culvert design used for drainage crossings. Through the
implementation of a storm water conveyance system, individual bio-swales, and also a bio-filtration detention basin,
the ranoff rate exiting the site will be slightiy reduced when compared to the existing condition and therefore will
not cause erosion or flooding. To address water quality for the project. Best Management Practices (BMP's) will be
implemented during constiuction activities and post-constraction development. PoUutants of concern are being
addressed through site design, source control, and treatment contiol BMP's. Landscaping of slopes will be utiUzed
to reduce erosion. Riprap placed in locations of storm drain outfalls will be used to reduce velocities. Treatment
contiol BMP's, such as landscaping, bio-filtration swales and bio-filtiation detention basins will address water
quaUty. Through these efforts, the project will not violate any water quality standards, or otherwise substantially
degrade water quaUty; will not substantially alter existing drainage patterns causing substantial erosion, siltation, or
flooding; and will not significantly impact the capacity of storm water drainage systems. Therefore, impacts are
considered to be less than significant.
f) Less Than Significant Impact. Construction of the proposed project improvements is requfred by law to comply
with all federal, state and local water quality regulations, including the Clean Water Act and associated NPDES
regulations. As mentioned above, the project includes a preliminary SWMP, and temporary impacts associated with
constmction operation will be mitigated to a less than significant level. The project will not result in permanent or
long term degradation of water quality as a result of the proposed pollution control program.
32 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
g-h) No Impact. The 43.58-acre project site is located within a 100-year flood hazard area according to Flood
Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) No. 060773C0769F. June 19. 1997 (LOMR August 29. 2002). The boundary of this
flood hazard area follows Agua Hedionda Creek, which is located in the southern portion of the property and outside
of the development area of the project. Therefore, the project does not place any housing or stractures that could
impede or redirect flood flows within the l(X)-year flood hazard area. No impact is assessed.
i) No Impact. According to the City of Carlsbad Geotechnical Hazards Analysis and Mapping Study. Catastrophic
Dam FaUure Inundation. Tsunami, and Seiche Hazard Zone Maps (September 1992). the southern portion of 43.58-
acre project site located along Agua Hedionda Creek is within a Catastrophic Dam Failure Inundation Zone for
Squfres Dam and Reservofr. However, no portion of the proposed development area is located within this hazards
area. Therefore, the project wUl not expose people or stiuctures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death
involving flooding. No impact is assessed.
j) No Impact. According to the City of Carlsbad Geotechnical Hazards Analvsis and Mapping Studv. Catasfrophic
Dam Failure Inundation. Tsunami, and Seiche Hazard Zone Maps (September 1992). the subject property is not
located within a Tsunami and Seiche Hazard Zone. Therefore, the project would not be impacted or inundated by
seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. No impact is assessed.
33 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
X. LANDUSE AND PLANNING - Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community? | [ | | [ j
b) Conflict with any appUcable land use plan, policy, or | [ | j [ |
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including but not limited to the general plan,
specific pian, local coastal program, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an envfronmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation |^ | |
plan or natural community conservation plan?
a) No Impact Development of the proposed project will not physically divide an established community.
Therefore, no impact is assessed.
b-c) Less Than Significant Impact The 43.58-acre Rancho MUagro project site is located within the Sunny Creek
Specific Plan Area (SP 191), which was adopted by fhe City of Carlsbad in 1985. The existing environment of the
subject property can be generally characterized as rural. The specific development area is situated on a previously
disturbed portion of the property in the northern boundary, which is presentiy used for agriculture. Upland and
riparian/wetiand habitats surround this area within the northern quarter and southern half of the property.
Topographically, the property ranges from approximately 80 feet above mean sea level (MSL) in the southwesterly
portions of the property to approximately 200 feet above MSL in the northeasterly portions of the property. Agua
Hedionda Creek flows from east to west through the southern quarter of the property and an unnamed fributary of
Agua Hedionda Creek flows from east to west through the property's northem quarter.
The surrounding envfronment can be generally characterized as raral, interspersed by agricultural fields, native
habitat, and scattered residential estate and ranch type properties. To the north is the Cantarini property, which was
previously developed in agriculture, but is presently fallow. This property is entitied with an approved residential
subdivision known as Cantarini Ranch (CT 00-18), and will eventually be developed with 105 single-family
residential lots (half-acre minimum lot sizes), an 80 unit multiple-family residential apartment complex, and several
open space lots. To the south is an existing 172 small lot single-family residential development known as the
Terraces at Sunny Creek (CT 96-02), a multiple-family apartment complex, and the Madonna Hill assisted living
facility. To the east, the subject property is bounded by five large parcels of land, three of which are estate/ranch
type properties with single-family residences, one is developed in agriculture (northeast parcel, known as the
Mandana property), and the other (southeast parcel) is developed with a landscaping business (Brickman
Landscaping) which takes access off of Cougar Drive near its intersection with El Camino Real. To the west is a
parcel of land known as the Barlow property, which is developed with a single-family residence, several small
outbuildings, horse stables, and an outdoor equestrian riding facility.
The northerly portion of the subject property, where the residential development is proposed, has a General Plan
Land Use designation of Residential Low-Medium Density (RLM). The remaining portion of the property, located
in the general vicinity of the Agua Hedionda Creek, has a General Plan Land Use designation of Open Space (OS)
over its majority, however, there are two narrow bands of property located between the Agua Hedionda Creek
channel and the Terraces at Simny Creek development that have a combination General Plan Land Use designation
of Residential High Density, Commercial, and Office (RH/C/O). This RH/C/O General Plan Land Use designation
is a remnant land use designation from a previously approved project (Sycamore Specific Plan, 1984), which never
developed and was eventually replaced by the Terraces at Sunny Creek project. A General Plan Amendment is
included with the proposal to change the existing designations of the property from RLM/OS/RH/C/O to RLM/OS
in order to 1) correct a mapping error, 2) to adjust the General Plan Land Use boundaries to coincide with the Sunny
34 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
Creek Specific Plan land use type and density pattern, and 3) preserve Open Space land in a configuration that
coincides with the City of Carisbad Habitat Management Plan (HMP) requfrements. The General Plan Amendment
will include amending the Official Open Space & Conservation Maps to reflect the newly expanded open space
areas. The OS designation will be applied to open space lots (Lots 20-25) and the RLM designation will be appUed
to the boundaries of tiie residential lots (Lots 1-19). The RLM General Plan Land Use designation anticipates
single-family residential dwellings at 0 to 4 dwelling units per acre with a Growth Management Confrol Point
(GMCP) of 3.2 dwelUng units per acre. The project site has a net developable area of 16.62 acreages. At the
GMCP, the site yields 53 dwelling units. Given the requfrement to develop half-acre minimum lot sizes per the
Sunny Creek Specific Plan and the preservation requfrements of the HMP, the project site can yield no more than 19
single-family residential lots. The 19 lot subdivision resuhs in a density of 1.14 dwelling units per acre, which is
within the RLM density range of 0 to 4 dwelUng units per acre and is therefore consistent with the General Plan.
The project is compatible with the City of Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan in that the site is designated as a
Standards Area and the site does not contain any significant natural resources that cannot be mitigated (see Section
IV, Biological Resources). The project is in compUance with the Afrport Land Use CompatibUity Plan (see Section
VIII, e-f) for which an Airport Land Use Commission Consistency Determination has been granted by the San
Diego County Regional Afrport Authority in a letter dated March 16, 2011. Therefore, impacts are considered to be
less than significant.
35 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
XI. MINERAL RESOURCES - Would tiie project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of future value to the region
and the residents of the State?
b) Result in the loss of availabiUty of a locaUy
important mineral resource recovery site delineated
on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land
use plan?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
• • •
No
Impact
• • • S
a-b) No Impact. There is no indication that the subject property contains any known mineral resources that would
be of future value to the region or the residents of the state. Therefore, no impact is assessed.
36 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
xn. NOISE - Would tiie project resuh in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels
in excess of standards established in the local general
plan or noise ordinance or applicable standards of
other agencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
groundboume vibration or groundboume noise
levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan
or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2
miles of a public afrport or public use airport, would
the project expose people residing or working in the
project area to excessive noise levels?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise levels?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
• • • K
• • K •
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
• • • m
a) No Impact. The project will not result in exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of
standards established in the General Plan or the City of Carlsbad Noise Guidelines Manual. The proposed project is
located a distance greater than 500 feet from a General Plan Cfrculation Element Roadway (i.e., El Camino Real,
and the future extension of CoUege Boulevard (Reach-A)), is outside of the 60 dB(A) CNEL noise contour as
indicated in the City of Carlsbad's General Plan Noise Element and Noise Guidelines Manual (Carlsbad Future
Noise Exposure Contours Map, forecast year 2010), and is outside of the 60 dB(A) CNEL noise contour as indicated
in Exhibit III-l of the McClellan-Palomar Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP). Therefore, no impact is
assessed.
b & d) Less than Significant Impact. The anticipated grading operations associated with the proposed project will
result in a temporary and minor increase in groundborne vibration and ambient noise levels. Following the
completion of grading, ambient noise level and vibrations are expected to return to pre-existing levels. Therefore,
impacts are considered to be less than significant.
c) No Impact The Rancho Milagro project consists of 19 single-family residential lots with half-acre minimum lot
sizes. The proposal is a large-lot rural estate subdivision for the development of future custom single-family homes.
Surrounding the project to the north is the approved, but not yet built Cantarini Ranch residential subdivision
consisting of 105 half-acre sized single-family residential lots and an 80-unit multiple-family residential apartment
complex. To the south are die Terraces at Sunny Creek residential subdivision, consisting of 172 small lot single-
family homes, and also a multiple-family residential apartment complex. The proposed project design is consistent
with the Sunny Creek Specific Plan, which establishes standards for the residential development of the area and is
37 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06'04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
intended to promote a raral estate atmosphere. The proposed project is consistent in land use and intensity with the
surrounding residential development and therefore wili not result in sustained ambient noise levels that would
exceed the established standards. Therefore, no impact is assessed.
e) No Impact. The subject site is located approximately one mile north of the McClellan-Palomar Airport and is
subject to the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP). The project was submitted to the San Diego County
Regional Airport Authority (SDCRAA) on December 9, 2010 for an ALUCP Consistency Determination. A
consistency determination was received from the SDCRAA in a letter dated March 16, 2011. In thefr letter, the
SDCRAA determined the project to be "conditionally compatible". The SDCRAA identifies the project site as
being located within Safety Zone 6, is within an overflight notification area, is outside of the 60 db CNEL noise
contour, and is in comphance with the ALUCP airspace protection surfaces. The ALUCP identifies residential uses
located within Safety Zone 6 and outside of the 60 db CNEL noise contour as being compatible with airport uses.
However, because the proposed project is located within an overflight notification area, the ALUCP requfres as a
condition of approval that an overflight notification be recorded with the County Recorder for new residential land
uses. A condition to that effect wiU be applied to the project. As such, it is concluded that the project site will not
expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. Therefore, no impact is assessed.
f) No Impact. The project site is not within the vicinity of a private airstrip, and therefore will not expose people
residing or working in the project vicinity to excessive noise levels. Therefore, no impact is assessed.
38 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
XUh POPULATION AND HOUSING - Would the project:
a) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly
(for example, by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectiy (for example, through
extension of roads or other infrastracture)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating
the constraction of replacement housing elsewhere?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
• • • K
• • • S
• • •
a-c) No Impact The project site is located within the boundaries of the City of Carlsbad's Zone 15 Local Facilities
Management Plan (LFMP). Existing land uses include agriculture mixed with upland and riparian/wetland habitats.
The Zone 15 LFMP was prepared pursuant to the City's Growth Management Program, as outiined in Chapter 21.90
of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. Based on the underlying Zoning and General Plan Land Use designations, the
Zone 15 LFMP anticipates that the project site (area RLM-Il) would be developed with single-famUy residential
units. Using the residential build out projections, the Zone 15 LFMP identifies the necessary amount of
infrastructure and services (i.e., water, sewer, park, libraries, drainage facilities, ffre, open space, school, and
circulation elements) that wili be required for each development. According to the Zone 15 LFMP, the anticipated
number of residential dwelling units for the project site was 88 dwelling units. The proposed residential unit count
for the proposed project is 19 dwelling units, representing a 78% reduction from the 88 units originaUy anticipated
by the approved Zone 15 LFMP. Implementation of the proposed project will result in a reduction in the number of
residential units and population from that anticipated by the Zone 15 LFMP. PubUc Services and UtiUties
implementation of the project would not adversely impact planned or current levels of service for pubhc facilities
such as sewer, water, open space, parks, libraries, fire, and police due to the reduction in the number of units
anticipated for the site. As a resuh, the proposed project is not anticipated to have a significant adverse impact to
planned residential unit count, population, or growth patterns in the area; and furthermore, the proposed project does
not displace existing housing or people. Therefore, no impact is assessed.
39 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant No
Impact Impact
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse
physical impacts associated with the provision of
new or physically altered government facilities, a
need for new or physically altered government
faciUties, the constiuction of which could cause
significant envfronmental impacts, in order to
maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or
other performance objectives for any of the public
services:
i) Ffre protection? • • • X
U) PoUce protection? • • • X
iii) Schools? • • • X
iv) Parks? • • • X
v) Other public faciUties? • • • X
a.i. - a.v.) No Impact. The project's size, consisting of 19 single-family residential lots at a density of 1.14
dweUing units per acre, is consistent with the General Plan and Sunny Creek Specific Plan. Therefore, the project
will not affect the provision and availability of public facilities (ffre protection, police protection, schools, parks,
libraries, etc.). Furthermore, the proposed project shaU be subject to the conditions and factiity service level
requirements within the Zone 15 LFMP. As a result, no significant pubhc service impacts wiU occur as a result of
this project. Therefore, no impact is assessed.
40 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
XV. RECREATION
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would occur or be
accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the constiuction or expansion of recreational
facilities, which might have an adverse physical
effect on the environment?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
• • • K
• • • K
a-b) No Impact. As part of the City's Growth Management Program, a performance standard for parks was
adopted. The park performance standard requfres that three acres of Community Park and Special Use Area per
1,000 population within a park district be provided. The project site is located within Park District No. 2, which is
within the Northwest Quadrant of the city. All development within the Zone 15 LFMP is conditioned to pay a park-
in-lieu fee to satisfy the performance standard established by the City Growth Management Program. Furthermore,
the project does not include any recreational facilities, nor does it require the consfruction of expansion of existing
recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. Therefore, no impact is
assessed.
41 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
XVI. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC Would tiie project:
a) Conflict with an appUcable plan, ordinance or poUcy
establishing measures of effectiveness for the
performance of the cfrculation system, taking into
account all modes of transportation including mass
transit and non-motorized tiavel and relevant
components of the circulation system, including but
not limited to intersections, streets, highways and
freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass
fransit?
b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management
program, including, but not Umited to level of service
standards and travel demand measures, or other
standards established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or
highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in
location that resuhs in substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
e) Resuh in inadequate emergency access?
f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
regarding public tiansit, bicycle, or pedesttian
facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or
safety of such factiities?
Potentially
Sigmficant
Impact
•
•
•
•
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
No
Impact
• • K •
• • Kl •
a) Less Than Significant Impact The 19 lot single-family residential subdivision with minimum half-acre sized
lots will generate 228 Average Daily Trips (ADT). This ti-affic will utilize College Boulevard and El Camino Real
through the extension of the approved College Boulevard Reach A once constiuctedl While the increase in tiaffic
from the proposed project may be slightiy noticeable, the street system is designed and sized to accommodate traffic
from this project along with cumulative development within the city of Carlsbad. The proposed project will not
cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the stieet system.
Therefore, impacts from the proposed project are considered to be less than significant.
b) Less Than Significant Impact SANDAG acting as the County Congestion Management Agency has
designated three roads (Rancho Santa Fe Rd., El Camino Real, and Palomar Airport Rd.) and one highway segment
in Carlsbad as part of the regional circulation system. The existing LOS on these designated roads and highway in
Carlsbad are as follows:
42 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
LOS
Rancho Santa Fe Road "A-D"
El Camino Real "A-D"
Palomar Airport Road "A-D"
SR 78 "F"
The Congestion Management Program's (CMP) acceptable Level of Service (LOS) standard is "E", or LOS "F" if
tiiat was die LOS in the 1990 base year (e.g., SR 78 in Carlsbad was LOS "F" in 1990). Accordingly, aU designated
roads and Highway 78 is currentiy operating at or better than the acceptable standard LOS.
Achievement of the CMP acceptable Level of Service (LOS) "E" standard assumes implementation of the adopted
CMP strategies. Based on the design capacities of the designated roads and highway and implementation of the
CMP stiategies, they will function at acceptable level(s) of service in the short-term and at buUd-out.
c) No Impact The proposed project does not include any aviation components. The project is consistent with the
Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) for McClellan-Palomar Airport. It would not, therefore, result in a
change of afr traffic patterns or result in substantial safety risks. Therefore, no impact is assessed.
d) No Impact. All project circulation improvements will be designed and constracted to City standards; and,
therefore, would not result in design hazards. The proposed project is consistent with the City's General Pian and
Zoning. Therefore, it would not increase hazards due to an incompatible use. No impact is assessed.
e) No Impact. The proposed project has been designed to satisfy the emergency requfrements of the Fire and Police
Departments. Therefore, no impact is assessed.
f) No Impact. The project site is located approximately one half-mile northeast of the El Camino Real and College
Boulevard intersection. A signalized intersection located at the future extension of College Boulevard (Reach-A)
and Street "A" ofthe approved Cantarini Ranch tentative map (CT 00-18) will provide primary access to the project
site. The future extension of College Boulevard Reach-A will connect El Camino Real and Cannon Road. College
Boulevard, El Camino Real, and Cannon Road are each served by public transportation (North County Transit
Disfrict). College Boulevard Reach-A is designed and approved to include bus stops as weU. Bus routes from
around North County, as well as bus service to and from the Coaster and Sprinter stations are available. Therefore,
no impact is assessed.
43 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the
project:
a) Exceed wastewater freatment requirements of the
appUcable Regional Water Quality Confrol Board?
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction of which would
cause significant environmental effects?
c) Requfre or result in the constiuction of new storm
water drainage facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, tiie constraction of which could cause
significant envfronmental effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the
project from existing entitiements and resources, or
are new or expanded entitiements needed?
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater
tieatment provider, which serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity to serve the
project's projected demand in addition to the
provider's existing commitments?
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted
capacity to accommodate the project's soUd waste
disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
•
•
•
•
•
•
PotentiaUy
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
• •
•
•
• •
•
•
No
Impact
• K
• K
• • • K
• S
a-g) No Impact. The proposed residential development will be requfred to comply with all Regional Water Quality
Contiol Board requfrements. In addition, the Zone 15 LFMP anticipated that the subject project site would
eventuaUy be developed with residential uses at a higher density of 3.2 du/ac compared to 1.14 du/ac being
proposed, and therefore wastewater tteatment facilities were planned and designed to accommodate future
residential uses on this site. All public facilities, including water facilities, wastewater treatment facilities and
drainage facilities have been planned and designed to accommodate the growth projections for the City at build-out.
The proposed development is anticipated to increase the demand for these facilities; however, the proposed density
(1.14 du/ac) is less than what was originally anticipated (3.2 du/ac at the Growth Management Contiol Point) for
this site, and thus wiil not result in an overall increase in the City's growth projection in the northeast quadrant.
Therefore, the project does not create development that will result in a significant need to expand or constmct new
water facilities/supplies, wastewater tieatment, or storm water drainage facilities. No impact is assessed.
44 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
XVIIL MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildUfe species, cause a fish or
wildUfe population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the range
of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually
Umited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumula-
tively considerable" means that the incremental
effects of a project are considerable when viewed in
connection with the effects of past projects, the
effects of other current projects, and the effects of
probable future projects?)
c) Does the project have environmental effects, which
will cause the substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directiy or indirectiy?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Sigmficant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
• • •
• • •
• • • K
a) Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. The proposed project's requfred mitigation, as
outUned in the Biological Resources section of this report, will ensure that there is no degradation of the
environment or substantial reductions of habitat and wildlife species. Cumulative impacts to sensitive plant and
wildUfe species within the Multiple Habitat Conservation Plan (MHCP) Subarea would occur through the proposed
project, in absence of the implementation of the HMP, and specificaUy the adjacent preserve system. However, the
implementation of the HMP provides mitigation for these cumulative impacts because the plan has anticipated
region-wide impacts and has adopted a preserve system that mitigates for these impacts. The project is consistent
with the MCHP guidelines and the HMP regional planning efforts in the City of Carlsbad. Therefore, there will be
no cumulative impacts to sensitive upland or wetiand/riparian habitats, and/or fish and wildlife species.
Furthermore, the project's required mitigation as outlined in the Cultural Resources section of this report will
preclude any elimination of important examples of major periods of California history or prehistory, thus reducing
impacts to less than significant.
b) Less Than Significant Impact. The San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) projects regional
growth for the greater San Diego area, and local General Plan Land Use policies are incorporated into SANDAG
projections. Based upon those projections, region-wide standards, including storm water quaUty control, afr quality
standards, habitat conservation, congestion management standards, etc., are established to reduce the cumulative
impacts of development in the region. All ofthe City's development standards and regulations are consistent with
the region wide standards. The City's standards and regulations, including grading standards, water quality and
drainage standards, traffic standards, habitat and cultural resource protection regulations, and public facility
standards, ensure that development within the City wUl not result in a significant cumulatively considerable impact.
There are two regional issues that development within the City of Carlsbad has the potential to have a cumulatively
considerable impact on. Those issues are afr quality and regional circulation. As described above, the project would
contiibute to a cumulatively considerable potential net increase in emissions throughout the air basin. However, the
air quality would be essentiaUy the same whether or not the development is implemented.
45 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-Oi/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
Tlie County Congestion Management Agency (CMA) has designated three roads (Rancho Santa Fe Rd., El Camino
Real and Palomar Airport Rd.) and two highway segments in Carlsbad as part of the regional circulation system.
The CMA had determined, based on the City's growth projections in the General Plan, that these designated
roadways will function at acceptable levels of service in the short-term and at build-out. The project is consistent
with the City's growth projections, and therefore, the cumulative impacts from the project to the regional circulation
system are less than significant.
With regard to any other potential impacts associated with the project. City standards and regulations will ensure
that development of the site wiU not resuU in any significant cumulatively considerable impacts.
c) No Impact Based upon the residential nature of the project and that fiiture development ofthe site will comply
with City standards, the project will not result in any dfrect or indirect substantial adverse environmental effects on
human beings. No impact assessed.
46 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
XVm. EARLIER ANALYSES
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or
more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section
15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the foUowing on attached sheets:
a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are avaUable for review.
b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the
scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to appUcable legal standards,
and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier
analysis.
c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated,"
describe the mitigation measures, which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document
and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.
47 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
EARLIER ANALYSIS USED AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
The following documents were used in the analysis of this project and are on file in the City of Carlsbad Planning
Division located at 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California, 92008.
1. Final Master Environmental Impact Report for the City of Carlsbad General Plan Update (MEIR 93-01).
City of Carlsbad Planning Division. March 1994.
2. Carlsbad General Plan. City of Carlsbad Planning Division. March 1994.
3. City of Carlsbad Municipal Code, Titie 21 Zoning. City of Carlsbad Planning Division, as updated.
4. Habitat Management Plan for Natural Communities in the Citv of Carlsbad. City of Carlsbad Planning
Division. November 2004.
5. Biological Technical Report for the Rancho Milagro Studv Area. Carlsbad. California (RECON Number
3889.IB). RECON Environmental Inc. AprU 27, 2011.
6. Rancho MUagro Compliance with HMP Zone 15 Planning Standards Letter. RECON Envfronmental Inc.
May 4, 2011.
7. Wetiand DeUneation Report for the Rancho Milagro Studv Area. Carlsbad. California fRECQN Number
3889B). RECON Envfronmental Inc. AprU 24, 2009.
8. CaUfornia Envfronmental Protection Agency Website: "Cortese List Data Resources".
http://www.calepa.ca.gov/SiteCleanup/CorteseList/. Accessed October 6, 2010.
9. Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Rancho Milagro Study Area. Carlsbad. Califomia (RECON
Number 3889-1A). RECON Environmental Inc. October 27, 2010.
10. Rancho MUagro Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program Lands (RECON Number 3889-lB). RECON
Envfronmental Inc. November 19, 2010.
11. Rancho Milagro Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Screening Letter. Ldn Consulting, Inc. October 25, 2010.
12. Phase I Envfronmental Site Assessment. Rancho Milagro Development. Geotechnical Exploration, Inc.
April 5, 2005 (Job No. 04-8849).
13. Update Report of Geotechnical Investigation. Rancho MUagro Residential Development. Geotechnical
Exploration, Inc. April 27, 2009 (Job No. 04-8849).
14. Storm Water Management Plan for Citv of Carlsbad Tract No. 06-04. Rancho MUagro. Manitou
Engineering Company. March 9, 2009 (JN 1674).
15. Preliminary Hydrology & Hydraulics for City of Carlsbad Tract No. 06-04. Rancho Milagro. Manitou
Engineering Company. March 11, 2009.
16. Fiood Insurance Rate Map (HRM) No. 060773C0769F. June 19, 1997 (LOMR August 29, 2002).
17. City of Carlsbad Geotechnical Hazards Analysis and Mapping Study. Catastiophic Dam Failure
Inundation, Tsunami, and Seiche Hazard Zone Maps. City of Carlsbad Planning Division. September
1992.
18. Citv of Carlsbad Noise Guidelines Manual. City of Carlsbad Planning Division. September 1995.
48 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
19. McCleUan-Palomar Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Airport Land Use Commission, San Diego
County. March 4, 2010.
20. Airport Land Use Commission Consistency Determination - Rancho Milagro Tract. City of Carlsbad. San
Diego County Afrport Authority. March 16, 2011.
49 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
LIST OF MITIGATING MEASURES flF APPLICABLE)
1. To avoid any impacts to potentially active least Bell's vireo nests, all grading and vegetation clearing activities
within 500 feet of riparian habitat shaU be conducted outside of the breeding season (September 16 to March
14^). Indfrect noise impacts could occur if active nests are located within 500 feet of constiuction during the
breeding season. If this condition arises, a quaUfied biological monitor shall be required to be on-site during
constiuction activities.
2. To avoid any impacts to potentially active southwestern willow flycatcher nests, all grading and vegetation
clearing activities within 500 feet of riparian habitat shall be conducted outside of the breeding season
(September 16"* to April 31"). Indirect noise impacts could occur if active nests are located within 500 feet of
constiuction during the breeding season. If this condition arises, a qualified biological monitor shall be required
to be on-site during consfruction activities.
3. To avoid any impacts to potentially active coastal California gnatcatcher nests, all grading and vegetation
clearing activities within or adjacent to suitable habitat shall be conducted outside of the breeding season
(August 16* to Febmary 28'*'). Indirect noise impacts could occur if active nests are located within 500 feet of
constraction during the breeding season. If this condition arises, a qualified biological monitor shail be requfred
to be on-site during consttuction activities.
4. To avoid any impacts to potentially active raptor nests, trees shall be removed outside of the breeding season
(September 1" to January 31") of local raptor species. If it is determined that trees must be removed during the
breeding season (Febmary l" to August 30'''), a raptor nest survey shaU be conducted by a qualified biologist
prior to the removal of any tiees to determine if raptor nests are present. If active nests are discovered, a 500
foot minimum buffer shall be established around the tree until the young are independent of the nest site. No
constiuction activity shall be allowed to occur within the buffer area until a quaUfied biologist has determined
tiiat the fledgUngs are independent of the nest.
5. Impacts to wetiand communities, including southern willow scmb and sycamore/oak woodland shall be
mitigated at a 3:1 ratio, with a minimum 1:1 creation component that achieves the "no net loss" standard.
Impacts to 0.05 acres of southern willow scrub shaU be mitigated by the on-site creation of 0.15 acres of
southem wUlow scrub in preserved open space. Impacts to 0.02 acres of sycamore/oak woodland shall be
mitigated by the on-site creation of 0.06 acres of sycamore/oak woodland in preserved open space. A
conceptual restoration plan has been prepared as part of project biotechnical report, which is proposing to
convert a minimum of 0.21 acres of agricultural fields located in Open Space Lot 23 adjacent to the northern
drainage to suitable wetland/riparian habitat. The creation of 0.07 acres, representing a 1:1 mitigation ratio,
shaii be accompUshed outside of the 100-foot weUand habitat buffer. The remaining 0.14 acre (2:1 mitigation
ratio) shall be located within the buffer and shall serve to connect the restoration outside of the buffer to the
existing drainage. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, and/or the clearing of any habitat on-site, a final
wetlands/riparian restoration pian shall be approved by the City of Carlsbad Planning Department (with
concurrence by the USFWS, USACE, and CDFG) to mitigate for the above impacts.
Additionally, impacts to USACE (Jurisdictional Wetiands and Non-Wetiand Waters of the U.S.) and CDFG
(Riparian and Stieambed) jurisdictional areas shall requfre a Section 404 nationwide perinit from the USACE, a
1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement from the CDFG, and a 401 State Water Quality Certification from the
Regional Water QuaUty Control Board, which shall be obtained prior to the issuance of a grading permit and/or
the clearing of any habitat on-site.
6. To avoid any potential impacts to vegetation communities in the event of a "frac-out" (escape of bentonite
slmry into the environment) or any other unexpected impact as a result of the jack-and-bore process associated
with the installation of a sewer pipeUne beneath Agua Hedionda Creek, the project developer/conttactor shaU
submit an Emergency Frac-Out Containment Plan to the satisfaction of the Planning Dfrector and City Engineer
prior to the start of constiuction. The plan shall outiine actions to be taken in the event of a frac-out. The plan
shall include a requfrement to immediately notify a qualified biologist (to be named) who will assess impacts to
the natural resources and contact the City and appropriate resource agencies within 24 hours of the event. Any
mitigation for impacts shall be required at a ratio of at least 3'.1. The location and composition of this
50 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
mitigation shall be determined at the time of the impact, once the scope and nature of the impact can be
determined.
7. The project shall preserve a minimum 67% (5.70 acres) of existing coastal sage scrub in open space.
8. Direct impacts to 2.56 acres of unoccupied Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub/Disturbed Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub
(HMP Habitat Group D) shaU be mitigated at a 1:1 ratio. The impacts shaU resuh in no net loss of coastal sage
scrab as provided in the HMP. Impacts to 2.56 acres of unoccupied Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub/Disturbed
Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub shall be mitigated by the on-site creation of a minimum 2.56 acres of Diegan
Coastal Sage Scmb in preserved open space. A conceptual restoration plan has been prepared as part of project
biotechnical report, which proposes to convert 1.50 acres of agricultural lands, 0.04 acres of developed lands,
and 1.40 acres of non-native grassland to Diegan coastal sage scrab. The restoration wUl occur in Open Space
Lots 23 and 24. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, and/or the clearing of any habitat on-site, whichever
occurs first, a final restoration plan shall be approved by the City of Carlsbad Planning Department (with
concurrence by the USFWS and CDFG) to mitigate for the above impacts.
9. Impacts to 15 California adolphia (California Native Plant Society List 2 species) shall be mitigated through the
on-site creation of 30 California adolphia, which shaU be included in the plant palette of the required Diegan
coastal sage scmb restoration. Seeds shall be collected from the plants on-site and propagated in an appropriate
nursery facility untU they are of sufficient size for planting. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, and/or the
clearing of any habitat on-site, whichever occurs first, a final restoration plan shall be approved by the City of
Carlsbad Planning Department (with concurrence by the USFWS and CDFG) to mitigate for the above impacts.
10. Impacts to 2.50 acres of non-native grassland (HMP Habitat Group E) shall be mitigated at a ratio of 0.5:1
through the on-site preservation of 1.25 acres of non-native grassland.
11. Prior to issuance of a grading perniit, and/or the clearing of any habitat, whichever occurs ffrst, mitigation for
impacts to 11.83 acres of agricultural lands (HMP Habitat Group F) shall be mitigated through the payment of
an in-lieu mitigation fee.
12. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, and/or the clearing of any habitat on-site, whichever occurs first, the
Developer shall take the foUowing actions to the satisfaction of the Planning Dfrector in relation to Open Space
Lots 20, 21, 23, and 24, which are being conserved for natural habitat in conformance with the City's Habitat
Management Plan:
a. Select a conservation entity, subject to approval by the City, that possesses qualifications to manage the
open space lot(s) for conservation purposes.
b. Prepare a Property Analysis Record (PAR) or otiier method acceptable to the City for estimating the costs
of management and monitoring of the open space lot(s) in perpetuity in accordance with the requfrements
of the North County Multiple Habitats Conservation Pian and the City's Open Space Management Plan.
c. Based on the results of the PAR, provide a non-wasting endowment or other financial mechanism
acceptable to the Planning Dfrector and conservation entity, if any, in an amount sufficient for management
and monitoring of the open space lot(s) in perpetuity.
d. Record a Conservation Easement over the open space lot(s).
e. Prepare a Preserve Management Plan which will ensure adequate management of the open space lot(s) in
perpetuity.
13. Ffre Management: A Ffre Protection Plan has been included as part of tiie project design. AU fire management
activities shall occur completely within the development boundaries and shall not occur within any of the HMP
open space conservation areas. Landscaping on these adjacent slopes shall include low-fuel native species in
compliance with the HMP.
51 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
14. Erosion conti-ol: Prior to issuance of a grading permit. Developer shall obtain approval of an erosion control
plan. The plan shall identify areas susceptible to erosion on the property and immediately adjacent to the HMP
open space conservation areas. Mechanical and biological methods shall be implemented to controi any
potential erosion, including engineering the manufactured slopes to maximize slope stabUity; choosing
appropriate plants for the slopes to reduce the level of erosion of the slopes; implementing post-constmction
best management practices (BMPs) that shall ensure run-off is appropriately tieated to minimize the potential
ibr erosion; and implementing constraction-level BMPs to prevent any silt from entering any ofthe HMP open
Space conservation areas.
15. Landscaping Restiictions: The Final Landscape plans for the brush management zones and along development
slopes adjacent to the HMP open space conservation areas shall require the use of a native plant palette
consistent with the adjacent native vegetation communities, prohibit the use of ornamental invasive species, and
limit the use of fertilizers to prevent excess run-off from entering the HMP open space conservation areas. The
project shall conttol irrigation of landscaping adjacent to the HMP conservation areas so as to prevent mnoff
from spreading into the preserve. In addition, the use of cultivars of native species shaU be prohibited to avoid
genetic contamination of the native plant species in the preserve.
16. Fencing and Signs: Prior to the release of grading securities or the issuance of a building permit for any homes,
whichever occurs ffrst, fencing shall be installed along the perimeter of the development to discourage the
access of humans and limit domestic pets into the HMP open space conservation areas. Fencing placed at the
property line between the residential lots and the HMP open space conservation areas shall consist of a
minimum 5-foot-high black vinyl coated chain-Unk. Fencing separating the HMP open space conservation
areas from the project boundaries along Street "K", Stieet "X", and the riparian overlook seating area (Lot 25)
shall consist of a ininimum 42 inch high 3 rail composite wood ranch-style fence. Signage shall be placed at
consistent intervals along these fence lines to inform the public and individual homeowners about the presence
and function of the HMP open space conservation areas.
17. Lighting Resttictions: Exterior lighting in the residential yards and along the project boundaries located
adjacent to the HMP open space conservation areas shall be of a minimum necessary for safety and security and
shall be shielded or dfrected away from the HMP open space conservation areas to the maximum extent
practicable so as to avoid increasing the nighttime light input into the open space preserve. Project CC&Rs
shall include such Ughting restrictions.
18. Predator and exotic species control: The perimeter fence separating residential lots located adjacent to the HMP
open space conservation areas shall consist of a minimum 5-foot-high black vinyl coated chain-link designed to
limit access of domestic and feral animals to the open space areas. Project CC&Rs shall include text to educate
homeowners regarding responsible pet ownership (e.g., keeping pets indoors, spaying/neutering pets,
prohibiting the release of pets into the wUd, etc.). Any long-term management on-site may also include
development of a cowbird trapping program, native predator program, and exotic plant control program.
19. Archeological mitigation measures shall be implemented as follows:
a. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the owner/developer shall retain the services of a qualified
archeologist to oversee and implement the cultural resources mitigation measures as discussed herein.
Verification shall be documented by a letter from the developer and the archeologist to the City of Carlsbad
Planning Director.
b.' Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the collection and documentation of a vaUd sample of the
significant scientific data contained witiiin CA-SDI-9698, CA-SDI-9699, and tiie portion of CA-SDL970I
impacted by the project shall be performed. The coUection and documentation shaU involve the following
actions: 1) preparation of a research design; 2) excavation of a phased sample (the size of the samples shall
be sufficient to recover the scientific data for which the resources were determined significant); 3)
catalogue and report results of the field work; and 4) curation of all cultural materials, including original
maps, field notes, catalog information, and final report with an appropriate institution consistent with state
and federal standards. Al! work shall be completed under the dfrection of a qualified archeologist and to
the satisfaction of the City of Carlsbad Planning Dfrector.
52 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
c. Prior to commencement of grading, a qualified archeologist shall be present at the pre-construction meeting
to consuh with the grading and excavation contractors.
d. Prior to commencement of grading, the owner/developer shall enter into a pre-excavation agreement with a
representative of the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians. The purpose of this agreement wiU be to
establish the requirement of fribal monitoring and to formalize procedures for the treatment of Native
American human remains and burial, ceremonial, or cultural items that may be uncovered during any
ground disturbance activities.
e. In the event that any cultural resources, concentiation of artifacts, or culturally modified soil deposits are
discovered within the project area at any time during brushing, grading, and/or construction activities, the
archeologist shall be empowered to suspend work in the immediate area of the discovery until such time as
a data recovery plan can be developed and implemented.
f The discovery of any resource shall be reported to the City of Carlsbad Planning Director prior to any
evaluation testing.
g. If any deposits are evaluated as significant under CEQA, mitigation may be requfred as recommended by
the archeologist.
20. Paieontological mitigation measures shall be implemented as foUows:
a. The owner/deveioper shall conttact with a Qualified Paleontologist to be on-site at the time of the initiation
of project grading, and a report of the findings shail be submitted to the City of Carlsbad Planning Director
following completion of excavation.
b. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the owner/developer shall provide a letter stating that a Qualified
Paleontologist has been retained to implement the monitoring program described herein. A Qualified
Paleontologist is defined as any person holding an advanced degree in paleontology, or closely related
discipline such as geology or paleobiology, and also having at least four (4) years of experience with the
geological formations of San Diego County. The QuaUfied Paleontologist shall supervise Paieontological
Field Monitors to be utUized "during the project. Minimum qualifications for Paieontological Field
Monitors shaU be a Bachelors degree in paleontology, plus one (I) year of experience with the geological
formations of San Diego County.
c. All persons involved in the paieontological monitoring of this project shaU be approved by City staff prior
to the start of construction excavation. The owner/developer shall notify City staff of the start and end of
the construction.
d. The Qualified Paleontologist shall attend any preconstmction meeting to make comments and/or
suggestions concerning the monitoring program as it specifically relates to the construction plans and
schedule. All areas requiring monitoring shall be noted on the grading plans of the job foreman and the
Paieontological Field Monitor. It is the job foreman's responsibUity to notify the Qualified Paleontologist
24-hours prior to grading areas where monitoring is required.
e. The Qualified Paleontologist or Paieontological Field Monitor shall be present on-site full-time during
excavations in moderately or highly sensitive geological formations. In the event that fossils are
encountered, the Qualified Paleontologist or Paieontological Field Monitor shaU notify the job foreman and
shall have the authority to divert, re-direct, or temporarily stop ground disturbing activities in the area of
discovery to allow an initial assessment of the deposit as well as to recover samples. A fossil discovery
may be of a caliber that the Qualified Paleontologist must evaluate its significance to determine if a larger
salvaging program is requfred to mitigate adverse impacts. All discovered fossil sites shall be recorded at
the San Diego Natural History Museum in conformance with their standard procedures.
f If the Qualified Paleontologist determines that a discovery is significant, then he or she will prepare a
salvage plan that specifies techniques to be used for the recovery of fossils in a timely fashion. City staff
53 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
must review and approve the salvage plan prior to its implementation and prior to the resumption of
excavation anywhere near the discovery locale.
g. All fossil remains recovered during the monitoring program shall be cleaned, sorted, repaired, and
cataloged. SpeciaUzed studies such as palynology, grain-size, or radiomctiic analyses shall be conducted as
appropriate. Ultimately, aU recovered specimens, field notes, photographs, sketches, catalogs, special
studies, and related items will be prepared for curation in an appropriate institution. The owner/developer
shall curate all collections to the receiving institution and shall provide a copy of the letter of acceptance
from the quaUfied curation facility in an appendix to the final monitoring report.
h. The Qualified Paleontologist shall be responsible for preparing an appropriate technical report to fiilly
document the results of the monitoring program. MinimaUy, negative monitoring reports must briefly
describe the construction project, Ust the personnel utilized, and specify the dates monitoring was
performed. The field methods used must be identified and a summary of the observed stratigraphy shall
also be provided.
i. If fossils are encountered and coUected during the monitoring program, the monitoring report shal! include
some or all of the foUowing information as appropriate. The methods discussion shall include techniques
used in the salvage effort in addition to a complete description of the various laboratory methods used
including any special studies undertaken. The stratigraphy of each collecting locaUty shall be described
and a full description of all invertebrates, reptiles, birds and mammals collected or observed shall be
provided. The results of any speciai studies shall be presented along with a discussion of the importance of
the total collection to expanding knowledge of the prehistoric past.
21. Prior to the addition of any new fiU or structural improvements on-site, the developer shall remove and re-
compact expansive soils in accordance with the recommendations identified in the "Preliminary Geotechnical
Investigation" prepared by Geotechnical Exploration Inc. (April 27, 2009, Job No. 04-8849).
22. A portion of the northeasterly boundary of Lot 7, as shown on the conceptual landscape plans, shaU be restricted
by a modified 30-foot wide Fire Protection Zone A-1 standard, all to the satisfaction of the City of Carlsbad Fire
Marshall and Planning Dfrector.
23. A portion of the southeasterly boundary of Lot 4, as shown on the conceptual landscape plans, shall be
restricted by a modified 40-foot wide Ffre Protection Zone A-1 standard and a solid 6 foot high masonry fire
protection wall, all to the satisfaction of the City of Carlsbad Fire Marshall and Planning Director.
24. A portion of the northerly boundary of Lot 19, as shown on the conceptual landscape plans, shall be restricted
by a modified 40-foot wide Ffre Protection Zone A-1 standard and a soUd 6 foot high masonry fire protection
wall, all to the satisfaction of the City of Carlsbad Fire MarshaU and Planning Director.
54 Rev. 06/29/10
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
RANCHO MILAGRO
APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WTTH MITIGATION MEASURES
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASURES AND CONCUR
WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT.
Date
55 Rev. 06/29/10
Page 1 of 17
PROJECT NAME: Rancho Milagro
APPROVAL DATE: [Click Herel
FILE NUMBERS: GPA 06-03/ ZC 06-02/ CT 06-04/ SUP 06-05/ HDP 06-01/ HMP 09-01
The following environmental mitigation measures were incorporated into the Conditions of Approval for this project in order to mitigate
identified environmental impacts to a level of insignificance. A completed and signed checklist for each mitigation measure indicates that
this mitigation measure has been complied with and implemented, and fulfills the City's monitoring requirements with respect to Assembly
Bill 3180 (Public Resources Code Section 21081.6).
Mon||rtng Mpfiitorir^. :;;^ovyn on
tf^•'Pla^V''•^' Implementation
1. To avoid any impacts to potentially active least Bell's
vireo nests, all grading and vegetation clearing
activities within 500 feet of riparian habitat shall be
conducted outside of the breeding season (September
16"^ to March 14*"^). Indirect noise impacts could occur
if active nests are located within 500 feet of
construction during the breeding season. If this
condition arises, a qualified biological monitor shall be
required to be on-site during construction activities.
Prior to
issuance of a
grading
permit and
during
construction.
Planning and
Engineering
2. To avoid any impacts to potentially active southwestern
willow flycatcher nests, all grading and vegetation
clearing activities within 500 feet of riparian habitat
shall be conducted outside of the breeding season
(September 16*^ to April 31®^). Indirect noise impacts
could occur if active nests are located within 500 feet
of construction during the breeding season. If this
condition arises, a qualified biological monitor shall be
required to be on-site during construction activities.
Prior to
issuance of a
grading
permit and
during
construction.
Planning and
Engineering
Explanation of Headings:
Type = Project, ongoing, cumulative.
Monitoring Dept. = Department, or Agency, responsible for monitoring a particular mitigation measure.
Shown on Plans = When mitigation measure is shown on plans, this column will be initialed and dated.
Verified Implementation = When mitigation measure has been implemented, this column will be initialed and dated.
Remarks = Area for describing status of ongoing mitigation measure, or for other infomation.
RD-Appendix P.
Page 2 of 17
Mitigafloii Me^asure' Monitoring Mpn|djiir|g
Depaiftment > ^ F^Iari^^
Verified,
ImplementatiGR
Remarks
3. To avoid any Impacts to potentially active coastal
California gnatcatcher nests, all grading and vegetation
clearing activities within or adjacent to suitable habitat
shall be conducted outside of the breeding season
(August 16* to Febrtjary 28*^). Indirect noise impacts
could occur If active nests are located within 500 feet
of construction during the breeding season. If this
condition arises, a qualified biological monitor shall be
required to be on-site during construction activities.
Prior to
issuance of a
grading
permit and
during
construction.
Planning and
Engineering
4. To avoid any impacts to potentially active raptor nests,
trees shall be removed outside of the breeding season
(September 1^* to January 31^') of local raptor species.
If it Is determined that trees must be removed during
the breeding season (February 1^' to August 30*^), a
raptor nest survey shall be conducted by a qualified
biologist prior to the removal of any trees to determine
if raptor nests are present. If active nests are
discovered, a 500 foot minimum buffer shall be
established around the tree until the young are
independent of the nest site. No construction activity
shall be allowed to occur within the buffer area until a
qualified biologist has determined that the fiedglings
are independent ofthe nest.
Prior to
issuance of a
grading
permit and
during
construction.
Planning and
Engineering
Explanation of Headings:
Type = Project, ongoing, cumulative.
Monitoring Dept. = Department, or Agency, responsible for monitoring a particular mitigation measure.
Shown on Plans = When mitigation measure is shown on plans, this column will be initialed and dated.
Verified Implementation = When mitigation measure has been implemented, this column will be initialed and dated.
Remarks = Area for describing status of ongoing mitigation measure, or for other infonnation.
RD - Appendix P.
Page 3 of 17
Monitoring^ , Shown op
[to)ptementatron^
5. Impacts to wetland communities, including southern
willow scrub and sycamore/oak woodland shall be
mifigated at a 3:1 ratio, with a minimum 1:1 creation
component that achieves the "no net loss" standard.
Impacts to 0.05 acres of southern willow scrub shall be
mitigated by the on-site creation of 0.15 acres of
southern willow scrub in preserved open space.
Impacts to 0.02 acres of sycamore/oak woodland shall
be mitigated by the on-site creation of 0.06 acres of
sycamore/oak woodland in preserved open space. A
conceptual restoration plan has been prepared as part
of project biotechnical report, which is proposing to
convert a minimum of 0.21 acres of agricultural fields
located in Open Space Lot 23 adjacent to the northern
drainage to suitable wetland/riparian habitat. The
creation of 0.07 acres, representing a 1:1 mitigation
ratio, shall be accomplished outside of the 100-foot
wetland habitat buffer. The remaining 0.14 acre (2:1
mitigation ratio) shall be located within the buffer and
shall serve to connect the restoration outside of the
buffer to the existing drainage. Prior to issuance of a
grading permit, and/or the clearing of any habitat on-
site, a final wetlands/riparian restoration plan shall be
approved by the City of Carlsbad Planning Department
(with concurrence by the USFWS, USACE, and CDFG)
to mitigate for the above impacts.
Additionally, impacts to USACE (Jurisdictional
Wetlands and Non-Wetland Waters of the U.S.) and
CDFG (Riparian and Streambed) jurisdictional areas
shall require a Section 404 nationwide permit from the
USACE, a 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement from
the CDFG, and a 401 State Water Quality Certification
from the Regional Water Quality Control Board, which
shall be obtained prior to the issuance of a grading
permit and/or the clearing of any habitat on-site.
Prior to
issuance of a
grading
permit,
and/or the
clearing of
any habitat
on-site.
Planning
Explanation of Headings:
Type = Project, ongoing, cumulative.
Monitoring Dept. = Department, or Agency, responsible for monitoring a particular mitigation measure.
Shown on Plans = When mitigation measure is shown on plans, this column will be initialed and dated.
Verified Implementation = When mitigation measure has been implemented, this column will be initialed and dated.
Remarks = Area for describing status of ongoing mitigation measure, or for other infomiation.
RD - Appendix P.
Page 4 of 17
Mftiy^^oRjMeiasuFe ^Monitoring M6nitorfii|f
DepaiirrM^^
Showipn
Plans
iRemarl^^
6. To avoid any potential impacts to vegetation
communities in the event of a "frac-out" (escape of
bentonite slurry into the environment) or any other
unexpected impact as a result of the jack-and-bore
process associated with the Installation of a sewer
pipeline beneath Agua Hedionda Creek, the project
developer/contractor shall submit an Emergency Frac-
Out Containment Plan to the satisfaction of the
Planning Director and City Engineer prior to the start of
construction. The plan shall outline actions to be taken
in the event of a frac-out. The plan shall include a
requirement to Immediately notify a qualified biologist
(to be named) who will assess Impacts to the natural
resources and contact the City and appropriate
resource agencies within 24 hours of the event. Any
mitigation for impacts shall be required at a ratio of at
least 3:1. The location and composition of this
mitigation shall be determined at the time of the
impact, once the scope and nature of the impact can
be determined.
Prior to the
start of
construction.
Planning and
Engineering
7. The project shall preserve a minimum 67% (5.70
acres) of existing coastal sage scrub In open space.
Prior to
Issuance of a
grading
permit,
and/or the
clearing of
any habitat
on-site.
Planning
Explanation of Headings:
Type = Project, ongoing, cumulative.
Monitoring Dept. = Department, or Agency, responsible for monitoring a particular mitigation measure.
Shown on Plans = When mitigation measure is shown on plans, this column will be initialed and dated.
Verified Implementation = When mitigation measure has been implemented, this column will be initialed and dated.
Remarks = Area for describing status of ongoing mitigation measure, or for other information.
RD - Appendix P.
Page 5 of 17
M^hitpring;^ Moriitoring
Department
Slilwii on
-Plans
Verified
Impleilients^Qrr
Remarll^S
8. Direct impacts to 2.56 acres of unoccupied Diegan
Coastal Sage Scrub/Disturbed Diegan Coastal Sage
Scrub (HMP Habitat Group D) shall be mitigated at a
1:1 ratio. The impacts shall result in no net loss of
coastal sage scrub as provided in the HMP. Impacts to
2.56 acres of unoccupied Diegan Coastal Sage
Scrub/Disturbed Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub shall be
mitigated by the on-site creation of a minimum 2.56
acres of Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub In preserved open
space. A conceptual restoration plan has been
prepared as part of project biotechnical report, which
proposes to convert 1.50 acres of agricultural lands,
0.04 acres of developed lands, and 1.40 acres of non-
native grassland to Diegan coastal sage scrub. The
restoration will occur in Open Space Lots 23 and 24.
Prior to issuance of a grading permit, and/or the
clearing of any habitat on-site, whichever occurs first, a
final restoration plan shall be approved by the City of
Carisbad Planning Department (with concurrence by
the USFWS and CDFG) to mitigate for the above
impacts.
Prior to
issuance of a
grading
permit,
and/or the
clearing of
any habitat
on-site.
Planning
9. Impacts to 15 California adolphia (California Native
Plant Society List 2 species) shall be mitigated through
the on-site creation of 30 California adolphia, which
shall be included In the plant palette of the required
Diegan coastal sage scrub restoration. Seeds shall be
collected from the plants on-site and propagated in an
appropriate nursery facility until they are of sufficient
size for planting. Prior to issuance of a grading permit,
and/or the clearing of any habitat on-site, whichever
occurs first, a final restoration plan shall be approved
by the City of Cartsbad Planning Department (with
concurrence by the USFWS and CDFG) to mitigate for
the above Impacts.
Prior to
issuance of a
grading
permit,
and/or the
clearing of
any habitat
on-site.
Planning
Explanation of Headings:
Type = Project, ongoing, cumulative.
Monitoring Dept. = Department, or Agency, responsible for monitoring a particular mitigation measure.
Shown on Plans = When mitigation measure is shown on plans, this column viiW be initialed and dated.
Verified Implementation = When mitigation measure has been implemented, this column will be initialed and dated.
Remarks = Area for describing status of ongoing mitigation measure, or for other infomiation.
RD-Appendix P.
Page 6 of 17
Monitoring /s
Type^ • -'-'W
^MbnitcittHg"
;Departna^tr
Shown bn
^^^f Plan^
Verified
^irnplementation-
10. Impacts to 2.50 acres of non-native grassland (HMP
Habitat Group E) shall be mitigated at a ratio of 0.5:1
through the on-site preservation of 1.25 acres of non-
native grassland.
Prior to
issuance of a
grading
permit,
and/or the
clearing of
any habitat
on-site.
Planning
tt. Prior to fssuance of a grading pemiit, and/or the
clearing of any habitat, whichever occurs first,
mitigation for impacts to 11.83 acres of agricultural
lands (HMP Habitat Group F) shall be mitigated
through the payment of an In-lieu mitigation fee.
Prior to
issuance of a
grading
permit,
and/or the
clearing of
any habitat
on-site.
Pianning
Explanation of Headings:
Type = Project, ongoing, cumulative.
Monitoring Dept. = Department, or Agency, responsible for monitoring a particular mitigation measure.
Shown on Plans = When mitigation measure is shown on plans, this column wiii be initiaied and dated.
Verified Implementation = When mitigation measure has been implemented, this column will be initialed and dated.
Remarks = Area for describing status of ongoing mitigation measure, or for other infomiation.
RD-Appendix P.
Page 7 of 17
Monitortfij
feipleniHentatiop
^Rerpark^
12. Prior to issuance of a grading permit,. and/or the
clearing of any habitat on-site, whichever occurs first,
the Developer shail take the following acUons to the
satisfaction of the Planning Director in relation to Open
Space Lots 20, 21, 23, and 24, which are being
conserved for natural habitat in conformance with the
City's Habitat Management Plan:
a. Select a conservation entity, subject to approval by
the City, that possesses qualifications to manage
the open space lot(s) for conservation purposes.
b. Prepare a Property Analysis Record (PAR) or other
method acceptable to the City for estimating the
costs of management and monitoring of the open
space !ot(s) in perpetuity in accordance with the
requirements of the North County Multiple Habitats
Conservation Plan and the City's Open Space
Management Plan.
c. Based on the results of the PAR, provide a non-
wasting endowment or other financial mechanism
acceptable to the Planning Director and
conservation entity, If any, in an amount sufficient
for management and monitoring of the open space
lot(s) in perpetuity.
d. Record a Conservation Easement over the open
space lot(s).
e. Prepare a Preserve Management Plan which will
ensure adequate management of the open space
lot(s) in perpetuity.
Prior to
issuance of a
grading
permit,
and/or the
clearing of
any habitat
on-site.
Planning
Explanation of Headings:
Type = Project, ongoing, cumulative.
Monitoring Dept. = Department, or Agency, responsible for monitoring a particular mitigation measure.
Shown on Plans = When mitigation measure is shown on plans, this column will be initialed and dated.
Verified Implementation = When mitigation measure has been implemented, this column will be initiaied and dated.
Remarks = Area for describing status of ongoing mitigation measure, or for other information,
RD - Appendix P.
Page 8 of 17
l^dnitoring
pepgrtment Plans ^
Verifiecfc Rema(
13^Fire Management: A Fire Protection Plan has been
included as part of the project design. Ali fire
management activities shall occur completely within
the development boundaries and shall not occur within
any of the HMP open space conservation areas.
Landscaping on these adjacent slopes shall include
low-fuel native species in compliance with the HMP.
Prior to
issuance of a
grading
permit.
Ongoing
condition.
Planning and
Fire
14. Erosion control: Prior to issuance of a grading permit,
Developer shall obtain approval of an erosion control
plan. The plan shall identify areas susceptible to
erosion on the property and immediately adjacent to
the HMP open space conservation areas. Mechanical
and biological methods shall be Implemented to control
any potential erosion, including engineering the
manufactured slopes to maximize slope stability;
choosing appropriate plants for the slopes to reduce
the level of erosion of the slopes; implementing post-
construction best management practices (BMPs) that
shall ensure run-off is appropriately treated to minimize
the potential for erosion; and implementing
construction-level BMPs to prevent any silt from
entering any of the HMP open space consen/ation
areas.
Prior to
issuance of a
grading
permit.
Ongoing
condition.
Planning and
Engineering
Explanation of Headings:
Type = Project, ongoing, cumulative.
Monitoring Dept. = Department, or Agency, responsible for monitoring a particular mitigation measure.
Shown on Plans = When mitigation measure is shown on plans, this column will be initialed and dated.
Verified Implementation = When mitigation measure has been implemented, this column will be initialed and dated.
Remarks = Area for describing status of ongoing mitigation measure, or for other infomiation.
RD - Appendix P.
Page 9 of 17
MonltoflngI Shown on
Plans
Reiisirksj;
fmplementatiin^^
15. Landscaping Restrictions: The Final Landscape plans
for the brush management zones and along
development slopes adjacent to the HMP open space
conservation areas shall require the use of a native
plant palette consistent with the adjacent native
vegetation communities, prohibit the use of ornamental
invasive species, and limit the use of fertilizers to
prevent excess run-off from entering the HMP open
space conservation areas. The project shall control
irrigation of landscaping adjacent to the HMP
conservation areas so as to prevent runoff from
spreading into the preserve. In addition, the use of
cultivars of native species shall be prohibited to avoid
genetic contamination ofthe native plant species in the
preserve.
Prior to
issuance of a
grading
permit.
Ongoing
condiUon.
Planning
16. Fencing and Signs: Prior to the release of grading
securities or the issuance of a building permit for any
homes, whichever occurs first, fencing shall be
installed along the perimeter of the development to
discourage the access of humans and limit domestic
pets into the HMP open space conservation areas.
Fencing placed at the property line between the
residential lots and the HMP open space conservation
areas shall consist of a minimum 5-foot-hlgh black vinyl
coated chain-link. Fencing separating the HMP open
space conservation areas from the project boundaries
along Street "K", Street "X", and the riparian overiook
seating area (Lot 25) shall consist of a minimum 42
inch high 3 rail composite wood ranch-style fence.
Signage shall be placed at consistent intervals along
these fence lines to inform the public and Individual
homeowners about the presence and function of the
HMP open space consen/ation areas.
Must be
installed prior
to the
release of
grading
securities or
the issuance
of a building
permit for
any homes,
whichever
occurs first.
On-going
condition.
Planning and
Engineering
Explanation of Headings:
Type = Project, ongoing, cumulative.
Monitoring Dept. = Department, or Agency, responsible for monitoring a particular mitigation measure.
Shown on Plans = When mitigation measure is shown on plans, this column will be initialed and dated.
Verified Implementation = When mitigation measure has been implemented, this column will be initialed and dated.
Remarks = Area for describing status of ongoing mitigation measure, or for other infonnation.
RD - Appendix P.
Page 10 of 17
:Mpnit0rii|ig|f
fSiiff
M^nitorijgi
De^airtiii^nt
Shown Oitl?"
Plans 5;f^^^fehtatlORr
vRernarksi-|r'S:'
17. Lighting Restrictions; Exterior lighting in the residential
yards and along the project boundaries located
adjacent to the HMP open space conservation areas
shall be of a minimum necessary for safety and
security and sha}} be shie}ded or directed away from
the HMP open space conservation areas to the
maximum extent practicable so as to avoid increasing
the nighttime light input into the open space preserve.
Project CC&Rs shall include such lighting restrictions.
Prior to final
map
approval.
Ongoing
Condition.
Planning
18. Predator and exotic species control: The perimeter
fence separating residential lots located adjacent to the
HMP open space consen/ation area shall consist of a
minimum 5-foot-high black vinyl coated chain-link
designed to limit access of domestic and feral animals
to the open space areas. Project CC&Rs shall include
text to educate homeowners regarding responsible pet
ownership (e.g., keeping pets indoors,
spaying/neutering pets, prohibiting the release of pets
into the wild, etc.). Any long-term management on-site
may also include development of a cowbird trapping
program, native predator program, and exotic plant
control program.
Prior to final
map
approval.
Ongoing
Condition.
Planning
19. Archeological mitigation measures shall be
implemented as follows:
a. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the
owner/developer shall retain the services of a
qualified archeologist to oversee and implement
the cultural resources mitigation measures as
discussed herein. Verification shall be documented
by a letter from the developer and the archeologist
to the City of Carisbad Planning Director.
Prior to the
issuance of a
grading
permit.
Monitoring
throughout
grading
activities.
Planning and
Engineering
Explanation of Headings:
Type = Project, ongoing, cumulative.
Monitoring Dept = Department, or Agency, responsible for monitoring a particular mitigation measure.
Shown on Plans = When mitigation measure is shown on plans, this column will be initialed and dated.
Verified Implementation = When mitigation measure has been implemented, this column will be initialed and dated.
Remarks = Area for describing status of ongoing mitigation measure, or for other infonnation.
RD - Appendix P.
Page 11 of 17
Mittg^fion Measure Monitoring 1
Department
ipn;-Remarkig^l?:
b. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the
collection and documentation of a valid sample of
the significant scientific data contained within CA-
SDI-9698, CA-SDI-9699, and the portion of CA-
SDI-9701 impacted by the project shall be
performed. The collection and documentation shall
involve the following actions: 1) preparation of a
research design; 2) excavation of a phased sample
(the size of the samples shall be sufficient to
recover the scientific data for which the resources
were determined significant); 3) catalogue and
report results of the field work; and 4) curation of all
cultural materials, including original maps, field
notes, catalog Information, and final report with an
appropriate institution consistent with state and
federal standards. All work shall be completed
under the direction of a qualified archeologist and
to the satisfaction of the City of Carisbad Planning
Director.
c. Prior to commencement of grading, a qualified
archeologist shall be present at the pre-
construction meeting to consult with the grading
and excavation contractors.
d. Prior to commencement of grading, the
owner/developer shall enter Into a pre-excavation
agreement with a representative of the San Luis
Rey Band of Mission Indians. The purpose of this
agreement will be to establish the requirement of
tribal monitoring and to formalize procedures for
the treatment of Native American human remains
and burial, ceremonial, or cultural items that may
be uncovered during any ground disturbance
activities.
Explanation of Headings:
Type = Project, ongoing, cumulative.
Monitoring Dept. = Department, or Agency, responsible for monitoring a particular mitigation measure.
Shown on Plans = When mitigation measure is shown on plans, this column wil! be initialed and dated.
Verified Implementation = When mitigation measure has been implemented, this column will be initialed and dated.
Remarks = Area for describing status of ongoing mitigation measure, or for other infomiation.
RD - Appendix P.
Page 12 of 17
Mitigation Measure Monitoring
Department
Shown on
Plans .
Verified
Implementation
Remark^;
g-
In the event that any cultural resources,
concentration of artifacts, or culturally modified soil
deposits are discovered within the project area at
any time during brushing, grading, and/or
construction activities, the archeologist shall be
empowered to suspend work in the immediate area
of the discovery until such time as a data recovery
plan can be developed and implemented.
The discovery of any resource shall be reported to
the City of Carisbad Planning Director prior to any
evaluation testing.
If any deposits are evaluated as significant under
CEQA, mitigation may be required as
recommended by the archeologist.
20. Paieontological mitigation
implemented as follows:
measures shall be
a. The owner/developer shall contract with a Qualified
Paleontologist to be on-site at the time of the
initiation of project grading, and a report of the
findings shall be submitted to the City of Carisbad
Planning Director following completion of
excavation.
Prior to the
issuance of a
grading
permit.
Monitoring
throughout
grading
activities.
Pianning
Explanation of Headings:
Type = Project, ongoing, cumulative.
Monitoring Dept. = Department, or Agency, responsible for monitoring a particular mitigation measure.
Shown on Plans = When mitigation measure is shown on plans, this column will be initialed and dated.
Verified Implementation = When mitigation measure has been implemented, this column will be initialed and dated.
Remarks = Area for describing status of ongoing mitigation measure, or for other information.
RD-Appendix P,
Page 13 of 17
:|o|tiMia#'iie Monitoring
Type •
Monitoring
Departmeilt
Shown on
Plans
Remarks
b. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the
owner/developer shall provide a letter stating that a
Qualified Paleontologist has been retained to
implement the monitoring program described
herein. A Qualified Paleontologist is defined as
any person holding an advanced degree In
paleontology, or closely related discipline such as
geology or paleobiology, and also having at least
four (4) years of experience with the geological
formations of San Diego Counly. The Qualified
Paleontologist shall supervise Paieontological Field
Monitors to be utilized during the project. Minimum
qualifications for Paieontological Field Monitors
shall be a Bachelors degree in paleontology, plus
one (1) year of experience with the geological
formations of San Diego County.
c. All persons involved in the paieontological
monitoring of this project shall be approved by City
staff prior to the start of construction excavation.
The owner/developer shall notify City staff of the
start and end ofthe construction.
d. The Qualified Paleontologist shall attend any
preconstruction meeting to make comments and/or
suggestions concerning the monitoring program as
it specifically relates to the construction plans and
schedule. All areas requiring monitoring shall be
noted on the grading plans of the job foreman and
the Paieontological Field Monitor. It is the job
foreman's responsibility to notify the Qualified
Paleontologist 24-hours prior to grading areas
where monitoring is required.
Explanation of Headings:
Type = Project, ongoing, cumulative.
Monitoring Dept. = Department, or Agency, responsible for monitoring a particular mitigation measure.
Shown on Plans = When mitigation measure is shown on plans, this column will be initialed and dated.
Verified Implementation = When mitigation measure has been implemented, this column wil) be initialed and dated.
Remarks = Area for describing status of ongoing mitigation measure, or for other infomiation.
RD - Appendix P.
Page 14 of 17
Mgation Measure Mpnitpring Monitoring
Departrnent
Remari^s
Implementation
e. The Qualified Paleontologist or Paieontological
Field Monitor shall be present on-site full-time
during excavations in moderately or highly
sensitive geological formations. In the event that
fossils are encountered, the Qualified
Paleontologist or Paieontological Field Monitor
shall notify the job foreman and shall have the
authority to divert, re-direct, or temporarily stop
ground disturbing activities in the area of discovery
to allow an initial assessment of the deposit as well
as to recover samples. A fossil discovery may be
of a caliber that the Qualified Paleontologist must
evaluate its significance to determine if a larger
salvaging program is required to mitigate adverse
impacts. All discovered fossil sites shall be
recorded at the San Diego Natural History Museum
in conformance with their standard procedures.
f If the Qualified Paleontologist determines that a
discovery is significant, then he or she will prepare
a salvage plan that specifies techniques to be used
for the recovery of fossils in a timely fashion. City
staff must review and approve the salvage plan
prior to Its implementation and prior to the
resumption of excavation anywhere near the
discovery locale.
Explanation of Headings:
Type = Project, ongoing, cumulative.
Monitoring Dept. = Department, or Agency, responsible for monitoring a particular mitigation measure.
Shown on Plans = When mitigation measure is shown on plans, this column will be initialed and dated.
Verified Implementafion = When mitigation measure has been implemented, this column will be initialed and dated.
Remarks = Area for describing status of ongoing mitigation measure, or for other information.
RD - Appendix P,
Page 15 of 17
RjlJtigation Measiuie Monitoring
Type
iitp|!fi|
:E)epa]rlTri^nt
Shown on
Plans
g. All fossil remains recovered during the monitoring
program shad be cleaned, sorted, repaired, and
cataloged. Specialized studies such as palynology,
grain-size, or radiometric analyses shall be
conducted as appropriate. Ultimately, all recovered
specimens, field notes, photographs, sketches,
catalogs, special studies, and related items will be
prepared for curation in an appropriate institution.
The owner/developer shall curate all collections to
the receiving institution and shall provide a copy of
the letter of acceptance from the qualified curafion
facility in an appendix to the final monitoring report.
h. The Qualified Paleontologist shall be responsible
for preparing an appropriate technical report to fully
document the results of the monitoring program.
Minimally, negative monitoring reports must briefly
describe the construction project, list the personnel
utilized, and specify the dates monitoring was
performed. The field methods used must be
identified and a summary of the observed
stratigraphy shall also be provided.
Explanation of Headings:
Type = Project, ongoing, cumulative.
Monitoring Dept. = Depar^ent, or Agency, responsible for monitoring a particular mitigation measure.
Shown on Plans = When mitigation measure is shown on plans, this column will be initialed and dated.
Verified Implementation = When mitigation measure has been implemented, this column will be initialed and dated.
Remarks = Area for describing status of ongoing mitigation measure, or for other information.
RD-Appendix P.
Page 16 of 17
^yMonitoring
i#ype
Monitoring*:
Departmehf
Showffon
Plans
^'\^iij^ -'-^ i; :vv
IhFipl^mentatloriH
1. If fossils are encountered and collected during the
monitoring program, the monitoring report shall
include some or all of the following information as
appropriate. The methods discussion shall include
techniques used in the salvage effort in addition to
a complete description of the various laboratory
methods used including any special studies
undertaken. The stratigraphy of each collecting
locality shall be described and a full description of
all invertebrates, reptiles, birds and mammals
collected or observed shall be provided. The
results of any special studies shall be presented
along with a discussion of the importance of the
total collection to expanding knowledge of the
prehistoric past.
21. Prior to the addition of any new fill or structural
improvements on-site, the developer shall remove and
re-compact expansive soils in accordance with the
recommendations Identified in the "Preliminary
Geotechnical Investigation" prepared by Geotechnical
Exploration Inc. (April 27, 2009, Job No. 04-8849).
Prior to the
addition of
any new fill or
structural
improvements
on-site.
Planning and
Engineering
22. A portion of the northeasteriy boundary of Lot 7, as
shown on the conceptual landscape plans, shall be
restricted by a modified 30-foot wide Fire Protection
Zone A-1 standard, all to the satisfaction of the City of
Carisbad Fire Marshall and Planning Director.
Prior to the
issuance of a
grading
permit.
On-going
condition.
Planning and
Fire
Explanation of Headings:
Type = Project, ongoing, cumulative.
Monitoring Dept. = Department, or Agency, responsible for monitoring a particular mitigation measure.
Shown on Plans = When mitigation measure is shown on plans, this column will be initialed and dated.
Verified Implementation = When mitigation measure has been implemented, this column will be initialed and dated.
Remarks = Area for describing status of ongoing mitigation measure, or for other infomiation.
RD - Appendix P.
Page 17 of 17
W|0nitpring Monitoring
Department ^
•:;^pygt^Qn:,
Plai4r •
Verified',
ImplementatiQri^f
Remarks |5
23. A portion of the southeasteriy boundary of Lot 4, as
shown on the conceptual landscape plans, shall be
restricted by a modified 40-foot wide Fire Protection
Zone A-1 standard and a solid 6 foot high masonry fire
protection wall, all to the satisfacfion of the City of
Carisbad Fire Marshall and Planning Director.
Prior to the
issuance of a
grading
permit.
On-going
condition.
Planning and
Fire
24. A portion of the northeriy boundary of Lot 19, as shown
on the conceptual landscape plans, shall be restricted
by a modified 40-foot wide Fire Protection Zone A-1
standard and a solid 6 foot high masonry fire protection
wall, all to the satisfaction of the City of Carisbad Flre
Marshall and Planning Director.
Prior to the
issuance of a
grading
permit.
On-going
condition.
Planning and
Fire
Explanation of Headings:
Type = Project, ongoing, cumulative.
Monitoring Dept. = Department, or Agency, responsible for monitoring a particular mitigation measure.
Shown on Plans = When mitigation measure is shown on plans, this column will be initialed and dated.
Verified Implementation = When mitigation measure has been implemented, this column will be initialed and dated.
Remarks = Area for describing status of ongoing mitigation measure, or for other infomiation.
RD-Appendix P,
• f ILE COPY
CITY OF
V (CARLSBAD Planning Division www.carlsbadca.gov
February 1.2012
VIA E-MAIL AND U.S. MAIL
Preserve Calavera
Attn: Diane Nygaard
5020 Nighthawk Way
Oceanside, CA 92056
SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO PRESERVE CALAVERA COMMENTS REGARDING NOTICE
OF INTENT TO ADOPT A MitlGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE
RANCHO MILAGRO - PROJECT NO. GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-
05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
Dear Ms. Nygaard,
This letter replaces our January 5, 2012 response to comments letter, which has been revised
to reflect your meeting with the developer's representative Jack Henthorn of Jack Henthorn and
Associates. As previously noted, thank you for your comment letter dated September 26, 2011
responding to the Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the
Rancho Milagro project, which is proposed on a site generally located approximately one half-
mile northeast of the intersection of College Boulevard and E! Camino Real, within the northeast
quadrant of the City of Carisbad, County of San Diego, State of California, Assessor's Parcel
Number 209-060-61 and a portion of 209-060-23.
Staff has subdivided this response letter into the three issue areas (i.e., Biological Resources,
Hydrology, and Traffic) identifled in your letter. Each comment of yours is identifled below in
/fa//c text followed by staff response.
Biological Resources:
-The project has eliminated impacts to the wetlands and 100' buffer except for the single road
crossing which is consistent with the provisions of the HMP. However, the MND does not
specify that the buffer is being restored to acceptable conditions. Full HMP consistency
requires that this buffer is restored. We believe this should be to coastal sage scrub but other
habitat types could be considered in consultation with the wildlife agencies.
RESPONSE: The project is proposing to restore all of the wetland buffer area in
question by converting all of remaining agricultural lands and most of the non-native
grassland to coastal sage scrub In the 100 foot buffer area of the wetlands (i.e., Open Space
Lots 23 and 24). The only area not proposed for conversion is the western most area of
non-native grassland. This area contains the dirt access road that serves the adjacent
properties, and thus through discussions with the Wildlife Agencies, was not identified as a
reasonable site for restoration. Mitigation Measure No. 8 addresses this area of comment
concern.
-The road crossing over Agua Hedionda does not specify the height of the Conspan bridge.
1635 Faraday Avenue, Carisbad, CA 92008-7314 T 760-602-4600 F 760-602-8559 ®
RANCHO MILAGRO MND - PRESERVE CALEVEFV^ RESPONSE LETTER
February 1, 2012
Page 2
The Biological Resources technical study identified, and we confirm, the presence of deer in this
area. Adequate undercrossings for deer require 8' height. Please clarify the height of this
undercrossing and explain what additional measures will be used to assure this crossing
supports the movement of deer This should include consideration of appropriate fencing and
signage.
RESPONSE: Please be aware that in consultation with the Wildlife Agencies, the
applicant was advised that an openness factor (height x width/distance) of greater than 0.6
should be used for the design of the Con-span bridge crossing. The EIA states, and is
conflrmed by the plans, that the Con-span bridge crossing is 5 ft. in height and 12 ft. in
width, for a distance of 75 ft., resulting in an openness factor of 0.8 and exceeding the
minimum requirements recommended by the Wildlife Agencies.
Staff has confen^ed with the developer, and they have agreed that at final design they will
analyze any grading constraints and increase the height of the bridge opening as close to
eight (8) feet as is practical, but not less than five (5) feet in height or 12 feet in width. Also,
the 16 foot wide all weather maintenance access road leading down into the northern
drainage adjacent to the bridge will be gated in a manner to discourage pedestrian
encroachment into the preserve and furthermore to discourage wildlife movement onto or
across "K" Street. Conditions will be added to the project to reflect these revisions
-There is a small area of eucalyptus woodland that will be located within the southern hardline
preserve. Since eucalyptus do not support understory native plants, support very limited native
wildlife, and change soil chemistry we request that the PAR and management pian for the
hardline presen/e Include restoring this eucalyptus woodland to the appropriate native habitat
RESPONSE: Many factors go into the decision to remove eucalyptus within the
preserve area including cost/benefit, potential use of trees by raptors, and aesthetics.
These factors are considered by the biologist and future preserve manager when preparing
the Preserve Management Plan and PAR. Even if not removed, limiting the expansion of
the existing eucalyptus stand is always included in the management plan.
-The MND includes that the management plan will include monitoring for cowbirds, but there are
no provisions for trapping/removal when they are found to be present. They are already present
in the area and since this Is formally designated as an equestrian area it should be assumed
that they will continue to be present. Monitonng without a plan for trapping/removal is
meaningless. It also Is not possible to have an effective removal program that only addresses
the boundaries of this single project when cowbirds are present throughout the area. There
needs to be a broader area-wide program, not just for cowbird monitoring, but for trapping and
removal. The management endowment for all projects in the area needs to include a portion of
the costs needed for such a program.
RESPONSE: The long-term management plan still needs to be developed. The need
to trap cowbirds will be assessed and if warranted, trapping will be included in the Preserve
Management Plan and PAR. A condition will be added to the project requiring that during
the preparation of the Preserve Management Plan, the Preserve Manager will evaluate the
need for cowbird trapping within the Rancho Milagro preserve and any necessary
coordination with the City's Preserve Steward on any cowbird trapping activities in the
immediate vicinity.
-There is a 5' wide meandering trail through the project site that connects to Cantarini/Holly
springs on one end and to Mandana on the other. Our concern is that providing a section of trail
RANCHO MILAGRO MND - PRESERVE CALEVERA RESPONSE LETTER
February 1, 2012
Page 3
that ends In what Is currently open space on each end will encourage Increased public use of
these adjacent lands and nearby hardline preserves, potentially adding to ongoing problems of
habitat loss from unauthorized trail building use. This continues to be a significant problem in
the Calavera Highlands and Lake Calavera areas that connect to this area. There needs to be
specific provisions to limit public access at both ends of this trail until there is trail continuation
through the adjacent projects. This needs to include some reasonable level of monitoring and
enforcement to restrict unauthorized public access.
RESPONSE: The proposed project cannot be built unfil the circulation roads that
connect through Cantarini Ranch have been constructed. Thus the northern end of the
meandering 5-ft. trail would not end on unregulated open space. The eastern end of the trail
ending at the Mandana property will need to be physically closed (e.g. fenced) and/or signed
to warn of illegal trespass. While these factors will be considered by the biologist and future
preserve manager when preparing the Preserve Management Plan and PAR, a condition
will be added to the project requiring the installation of a fence at the subdivision boundary
adjacent to the Mandana property, which will be designed to discourage pedestrian access
onto private property.
-It is not clear what level/type of management will be provided on the two open space lots that
are designated as HOA lands. Please clarify what management will be done on those two lots
and include provisions that they will meet all edge effect conditions per the MHCP/HMP
including invasives removal, trash control, and night lighting.
RESPONSE: These issues will be addressed as provisions of the required project
Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) as normally required through the
conditions of project approval.
Hydrology:
-The MND specifies the process that will be used if there are additional impacts associated with
fracturing from the drilling for the sewer line under Agua Hedionda. Nowhere does this mention
any pubiic reporting or opportunity for the public to review the impacts and proposed mitigation if
this should occur. Please clarify how the public will be able to be involved for the mitigation for
any such future Impacts that are not known at this time. We would request that this specifically
include notification to Preserve Calavera and the Agua Hedionda Lagoon Foundation.
RESPONSE: The procedures for mitlgafing the impacts of fracturing as outlined in the
MND include an assessment by a qualified biologist who will notify the City and appropriate
agencies within 24 hours. Mitlgafion for any impacts will be performed at a ratio of not less
than 3:1 (mitigation to impact). All reports and plans will be available as public records
through the City of Carisbad.
-The mitigation measures (MM) specify there will be restrictions to limit the amount of fertilizer
used on the land adjacent to the hardline presen/e, but there are numerous common chemicals
used that should have similar restrictions, for example, herbicides, and insecticides. Please
modify the MM to include a broader range of chemicals.
RESPONSE: Per your request, we have revised Mifigation Measure No. 15 to address
your concern. An addendum to the MND will be prepared to reflect this revision and the
Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program will be revised accordingly. The change is
reflected below in underiined text:
RANCHO MILAGRO MND - PRESERVE CALEVERA RESPONSE LETTER
February 1,2012
Page 4
15. Landscaping Restrictions: The Final Landscape plans for the brush management zones
and along development slopes adjacent to the HMP open space conservation areas
shall require the use of a native plant palette consistent with the adjacent native
vegetation communities, prohibit the use of ornamental invasive species, and limit the
use of fertilizers, oesticides. and herbicides to prevent excess run-off from entering the
HMP open space conservation areas. The project shall control irrigation of landscaping
adjacent to the HMP conservation areas so as to prevent runoff from spreading into the
preserve. In addition, the use of cultivars of native species shall be prohibited to avoid
genetic contamination ofthe native plant species in the preserve.
Traffic:
-The settlement agreement between Preserve Calavera and the City of Carlsbad for the
Cantarini Ranch/Holly Springs Project includes a condition related to increasing traffic volumes
above 2,615 on "P" street. This project connects through Cantarini/Holly Springs and
presumably will result in a minor increase in traffic on the roads in this adjacent project.
However in addition to these minor increases the city is also processing an application for
another project that will increase traffic volumes through Cantarini/Holly Springs. Please clarify
how the city will determine these cumulative impacts on the proposed roads through
Cantarini/'HoHy Springs in order to verify if total traffic volumes remain below 2,615 ADT or, if
not, what further action wil! be taken to protect the secondary wildlife movement corridor through
this area.
RESPONSE: Traffic from Rancho Milagro is served by 'K' Street. 'A' Street and College
Avenue. 'P' Street is located on the opposite side of the development serving the Holly
Springs project (CT 00-21). Therefore, the Rancho Milagro project would not Impact traffic
to 'P' Street. In reviewing the traffic study prepared for the Cantarini/Holly Springs project
(EIR 02-02) certain development activity and land use assumptions were made for projects
within Zone 15. Land use assumptions for Rancho Milagro were drawn from the Local
Facilities Management Plan (Zone 15), which are projected at 88 dwelling units. Since this
project is constructing less than 88 dwelling units (19 proposed), the projected traffic from
the analysis is expected to be less than originally anticipated. Therefore, no further analysis
is required regarding this issue.
We thank you for taking the time to provide us with comments on the Rancho Milagro project
and hope that we have addressed all of your concerns. If you have any further questions,
please do not hesitate to contact me at (760) 602-4643, or via email at
iason.goff@carisbadca.gov.
Sincerely,
JASON GOFF
Associate Planner
c: Jack Henthorn & Associates, PO Box 237, Carisbad, CA 92018
Don Neu, City Planner
Chris DeCerbo, Principal Planner
Jeremy Riddle, Project Engineer
File copy
4^ CTY OF
V (CARLSBAD
j
Planning Division www.carlsbadca.gov
January 5, 2012
Tribal Legal Council
Attn: Merri Lopez-Keifer
San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians
1889 Sunset Drive
Vista, CA 92081
SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO COMMENT ON THE NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE RANCHO MILAGRO
PROJECT NO. - GPA 0B-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP D6-01/HMP
09-01
Dear Ms. Lopez-Keifer,
Thank you for your comment letter dated October 7, 2011 responding to the Notice of Intent to
Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the Rancho Milagro project, which is
proposed on a site generally located approximately one half-mile northeast of the intersection of
College Boulevard and El Camino Real, within the northeast quadrant of the City of Carisbad,
County of San Diego, State of California, Assessor's Parcel Number 209-060-61 and a portion
of 209-060-23:
Per your request, we have revised Cultural Resources Mitigation Measure No. 19a - 19f to
address the four items of concern raised in your comment letter. The changes are reflected
below in underiined text. An addendum to the MND will be prepared to reflect this revision and
the Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program will be revised to include the following measure:
19. Archeological mitigation measures shall be implemented as follows:
a. Prior to the issuance of grading permits and/or initiation of the data recovery orogram
discussed below, the owner/developer shail enter into a pre-excavation agreement with
a representative of the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians. Verification shall be
documented bv a letter from the property owner/developer and the San Luis Rev Band
of Mission Indians to the Citv of Carlsbad Citv Planner. The purpose of this agreement
will be to establish the requirement of tribal monitoring and to formalize procedures for
the treatment of Native American human remains and burial, ceremonial, or cultural
items that may be uncovered during any ground disturbance activities.
b. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the property owner/developer shall retain the
services of a qualified archeologist to oversee and implement the cultural resources
mitigation measures as discussed herein. Verification shall be documented by a ietter
from the propertv owner/developer and the archeologist to the City of Cartsbad City
Planner.
c. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the collection and documentation of a valid
sample of the significant scientific data contained within CA-SDI-9698, CA-SDI-9699,
1635 Faraday Avenue, Carisbad, CA 92008-7314 T 760-602-4600 F 760-602-8559 ®
RANCHO MILAGRO MND - SAN LUIS REY BAND OF MISSION INDIANS RESPONSE
LETTER
JANUARY 5, 2012
PAGE 2
and the portion of CA-SDI-9701 impacted by the project shall be performed. The
collection and documentation shall involve the following actions: 1) preparation of a
research design; 2) excavation of a phased sample (the size of the samples shall be
sufficient to recover the scientific data for which the resources were determined
significant); 3) catalogue and report results of the field work; and 4) curation of all
cultural materials, including original maps, field notes, catalog information, and final
report with an appropriate institution, or as mav be stipulated in the pre-excavation
agreement entered into with the San Luis Rev Band of Mission Indians, consistent with
state and federal standards. All work shall be completed under the direction of a
qualified archeologist and to the satisfaction of the City of Carisbad City Planner. A copy
of the final data recovery findings report shall be provided to the San Luis Rev Band of
Mission Indians.
d. Prior to commencement of grading, a qualified archeologist and Native American
Monitor and/or representative of the San Luis Rev Band of Mission Indians shall be
present at the pre-construction meeting to consult with the grading and excavation
contractors,
e. In the event that any cultural resources, concentration of artifacts, or culturally modified
soil deposits are discovered within the project area at any time during brushing, grading,
and/or construction activities, the archeologist shall be empowered to suspend work in
the immediate area of the discovery until such time as a data recovery plan can be
developed and implemented.
f. The discovery of any resource shall be reported to the City of Carisbad City Planner
prior to any evaluation testing.
g. If any deposits are evaluated as significant under CEQA, mitigation may be required as
recommended by the archeologist in coordination with the Native American Monitor.
We thank you for taking the time to provide us with comments on the Rancho Milagro project
and hope that we have addressed all of your concerns. If you have any further questions,
please do not hesitate to contact me at (760) 602-4643, or via email at
jason.goff@carisbadca.gov.
Sincerely,
JASON GOFF
Associate Planner
c: Jack Henthorn & Associates, PO Box 237, Carisbad, CA 92018
Don Neu, City Planner
Chris DeCerbo, Principal Planner
File copy
EXHIBIT "ADDM"
ADDENDUM TO THE
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR
RANCHO MILAGRO
GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01
The purpose of this Addendum to the Mitigated Negative Declaration is to describe revisions to the Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program associated with the Rancho Milagro project, and to state the detennination that
this revision does not create any new significant environmental effects, that none of the conditions contained in
Section 15162 of the Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) have occurred, and that a subsequent Mitigated
Negative Declaration is not required.
The revisions contained in this addendum revise Mitigation Measures No. 15 and No. 19a-f of the Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program. The revised mitigation measures shall apply as follows:
75, Landscapifis Restrictions: Tfie Final Landscape plans for the brush management zones and along development
slopes adjacent to the HMP open space conservation areas shall require the use of a native plant palette
consistent with the adjacent native vegetation communities, prohibit the use of omamental invasive species, and
limit the use of fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides to prevent excess run-offfrom entering the HMP open
space conservation areas. The project shall control irrigation of landscaping adjacent to the HMP
conservation areas so as to prevent runojffrom spreading into the preserve. In addition, the use of cultivars of
native species shall be prohibited to avoid genetic contamination of the native plant species in the preserve.
19. Archeological mitigation measures shall be implemented as follows:
a. Prior to the issuance of grading permits and/or initiation of the data recovery program discussed below,
the owner/developer shall enter into a pre-excavation agreement with a representative of the San Luis Rey
Band of Mission Indians. Verification shall be documented by a letter from the property owner/developer
and the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians to the City of Carlsbad City Planner. The purpose of this
agreerrient will be to establish the requirement of tribal monitoring and to formalize procedures for the
treatment of Native American human remains and burial, ceremonial, or cultural items that may be
uncovered during any ground disturbance activities.
b. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the property owner/developer shall retain the services of a
qualified archeologist to oversee and implement the cultural resources mitigation measures as discussed
herein. Verification shall be documented by a letter from the property owner/developer and the
archeologist to the City of Carlsbad City Planner.
c. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the collection and documentation of a valid sample of the
significant scientific data contained within CA-SDI-9698. CA-SDI-9699. and the portion of CA-SDI-9701
impacted by the project shall be performed. The collection and documentation shall involve the following
actions: I) preparation of a research design; 2) excavation of a phased sample (the size of the samples
shall be sufficient to recover the scientific data for which the resources were determined significant): 3)
catalogue and report results of the field work; and 4) curation of all cultural materials, including original
maps, field notes, catalog information, and final report with an appropriate institution, or as may be
stipulated in the pre-excavation agreement entered into with the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians,
consistent with state and federal standards. All work shall be completed under the direction of a qualified
archeologist and to the satisfaction of the City of Carlsbad City Planner. A copy of the final data recovery
findings report shall be provided to the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians.
d. Prior to commencement of grading, a qualified archeologist and Native American Monitor and/or
representative of the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians shall be present at the pre-construction meeting
to consult with the grading and excavation contractors.
EXHIBIT "ADDM"
e. In the event that any cultural resources, concentration of artifacts, or culturally modified soil deposits are
discovered within the project area at any time during brushing, grading, and/or construction activities, the
archeologist shall be empowered to suspend work in the immediate area of the discovery until such time as
a data recovery plan can be developed and implemented.
f. The discovery of any resource shall be reported to the City of Carlsbad City Planner prior to any
evaluation testing.
g. If any deposits are evaluated as significant under CEQA, mitigation may be required as recommended by
the archeologist in coordination with the Native American Monitor.
These revisions are not considered substantial or significant as it relates to the environmental effects associated with
the project, or the conditions contained in Section 15162 of CEQA, and a subsequent Mitigated Negative
Declaration is not required.
Date: Don Neu
City Plaimer
2^