HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-06-05; Planning Commission; Resolution 6981
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION OF THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT FOR THE WESTFIELD CARLSBAD
SPECIFIC PLAN/SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN PROJECT, EIR
09-02, AND RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF THE
CANDIDATE FINDINGS OF FACT AND A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE
DEVELOPMENT OF A SPECIFIC PLAN; DEMOLITION,
RECONFIGURATION, AND/OR RECONSTRUCTION OF
APPROXIMATELY 225,631 SQUARE FEET OF EXISTING
GROSS LEASABLE AREA; AND THE POTENTIAL FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF APPROXIMATELY 35,417 SQUARE
FEET OF NET NEW GROSS LEASABLE AREA FOR A
TOTAL OF APPROXIMATELY 1,186,509 GROSS LEASABLE
AREA OF REGIONAL SHOPPING CENTER USES WITHIN
THE EXISTING PLAZA CAMINO REAL SHOPPING CENTER GENERALLY LOCATED WEST OF EL CAMINO REAL AND
BISECTED BY MARRON ROAD IN LOCAL FACILITIES
MANAGEMENT ZONE 1.
CASE NAME: WESTFIELD CARLSBAD
CASE NO.: EIR 09-02
WHEREAS, City of Carlsbad, Plaza Camino Real, LP, and CMF
PCR, LLC has initiated application for an Environmental Impact Report regarding
property described as
Lots 1 to 27, inclusive, of Carlsbad Tract No. CT 76-18 (Plaza
Camino Real Shopping Center) in the City of Carlsbad,
County of San Diego, State of California, according to map thereof no. 8956, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, August 11, 1978
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, a Project Environmental Impact Report (EIR 09-02) was
prepared in conjunction with said project; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on June 5, 2013, hold a duly noticed
public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, examining the Project EIR, Candidate Findings of Fact, and Mitigation
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 6981
PC RESO NO. 6981 -2-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Monitoring and Reporting Program, analyzing the information submitted by staff, and
considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission considered all factors
relating to the Project EIR.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission as follows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B) That the Final Project Environmental Impact Report consists of the Final Project
Environmental Impact Report, EIR 09-02, dated June 5, 2013, appendices, written comments, and responses to comments, as amended to include the
comments and documents of those testifying at the public hearing and responses
thereto is hereby found to be in good faith and reason by incorporating a copy of
the minutes of said public hearing into the report, all on file in the Planning
Division incorporated by this reference, and collectively referred to as the “Report.”
C) That the Environmental Impact Report, EIR 09-02, as so amended and evaluated
is recommended for acceptance and certification as the final Environmental
Impact Report and that the final Environmental Impact Report as recommended is adequate and provides reasonable information on the project and all reasonable
and feasible alternatives thereto, including no project.
D) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning
Commission hereby RECOMMENDS CERTIFICATION of the Environmental Impact Report for WESTFIELD CARLSBAD SPECIFIC PLAN/SITE
DEVELOPMENT PLAN PROJECT, EIR 09-02 and RECOMMENDS
ADOPTION of the Candidate Findings of Fact (“CEQA Findings”), attached
hereto marked as “Exhibit A” and incorporated by this reference and of the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (“Program”), attached hereto marked as “Exhibit B” and incorporated by this reference; based on the following findings and subject to the following condition.
Findings:
1. The Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad does hereby find that the Final
Project EIR 09-02, the Candidate Findings of Fact, and the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program, have been prepared in accordance with requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act, the State EIR Guidelines, and the Environmental
Review Procedures of the City of Carlsbad.
2. The Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad has reviewed, analyzed, and
considered Final Project EIR 09-02, the environmental impacts therein identified for
this project; the Candidate Findings of Fact (“Findings” or “CEQA Findings”) attached
hereto as “Exhibit A,” and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
PC RESO NO. 6981 -3-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
(“Program”) attached hereto as “Exhibit B,” prior to RECOMMENDING APPROVAL
of this project.
3. The Planning Commission finds that Final EIR 09-02 reflects the independent judgment of the City of Carlsbad Planning Commission.
4. The Planning Commission does accept as its own, incorporate as if set forth in full
herein, and make each and every one of the findings contained in the CEQA Findings (“Exhibit A”), including feasibility of mitigation measures pursuant to Public Resources Code 21081 and CEQA Guidelines 15091, and infeasibility of project alternatives.
5. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the Program (“Exhibit B”) is designed to
ensure that during project implementation, the Developer and any other responsible
parties implement the project components and comply with the feasible mitigation measures identified in the CEQA Findings and the Program.
6. The Record of Proceedings for this project consists of the Report, CEQA Findings, and
Program; all reports, applications, memoranda, maps, letters and other planning
documents prepared by the planning consultant, the environmental consultant, and the City of Carlsbad that are before the decision makers as determined by the City Clerk; all documents submitted by members of the public and public agencies in connection with the Project EIR; minutes of all public meetings and public
hearings; and matters of common knowledge to the City of Carlsbad, which they
may consider, including but not limited to, the Carlsbad General Plan, Carlsbad Zoning Ordinance, Westfield Carlsbad Specific Plan, and Local Facilities Management Plan which may be found at 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive in the custody
of the City Clerk, and 1635 Faraday Avenue in the custody of the City Planner.
Condition:
1. The Developer/Owner shall implement the mitigation measures described in “Exhibit B,” the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, for the mitigation
measures and monitoring programs applicable to development of the Westfield
Carlsbad Specific Plan/Site Development Plan project. . . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on June 5, 2013, by the following vote, to
wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Commissioners Anderson, Black, L'Heureux, Schumacher, Scully
and Segall
Chairperson Siekmann
KERRY K. SIEKMANN, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
DONNED
18 City Planner
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PC RESO NO. 6981 -4-
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 1 January 2013
CANDIDATE CEQA FINDINGS OF FACT REGARDING THE
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
FOR
WESTFIELD CARLSBAD SPECIFIC PLAN / SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN PROJECT
EIR 09-02; SP 09-01; SDP 09-04
SCH No. 2010011004
City Council Resolution No. __________; Approved on ___________
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The City of Carlsbad (City) proposes to approve development plans for the Westfield Carlsbad
Specific Plan / Site Development Plan (project). The Westfield Carlsbad project entails the proposed adoption of a Specific Plan (SP) to guide future redevelopment of the shopping center and a Site Development Plan (SDP) for the proposed removal, renovation, and/or
redevelopment of portions of the east end of the existing mall structure and associated
out-buildings. The project applicant also is requesting approval of a Ground Lease(s) and/or
amendments to various real estate documents between the City as property owner, and the applicant. All uses proposed within the SP would be consistent with the existing General Commercial (C-2) zone identified in the City’s Zoning Ordinance (Carlsbad Municipal Code
Chapter 21.28) and the Regional Commercial (R) land use designation identified in the
City’s General Plan.
A Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for the Westfield Carlsbad SP / SDP (project), which included analysis of the proposed project and alternatives to the project that
would meet the most basic project objectives. The Draft EIR was available for public review
and comment for a period of 50 days (August 31, 2012 through October 19, 2012). Responses to
comments and concerns provided during public review are addressed in the Final EIR, and modifications to the Draft EIR resulting from the comments made were incorporated into the Final EIR text.
The Final EIR identifies no significant and unmitigated project-specific and/or cumulatively
significant and unmitigated impacts. 1.1 Project Summary
Project Location
The SP area is located in the northwest quadrant of the City, along the City’s boundary with the City of Oceanside. The SP area encompasses approximately 77.5 acres of the Westfield
Carlsbad Shopping Center’s 96.7 total acres, including the entire shopping center and the
majority of the center’s surface parking. The SP area is generally located south of Buena Vista
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 2 January 2013
Creek and State Route 78 (SR-78), west of El Camino Real, north of Marron Road, and east of
an unnamed private loop road that is the northerly extension of Monroe Street. A 2.9-acre
portion of the SP area is located across Marron Road from the rest of the SP area, at the
southwest corner of the intersection of El Camino Real and Marron Road.
Project Description
The proposed project involves the demolition, reconfiguration, and/or reconstruction of existing
commercial/retail space within the existing shopping center. The existing Westfield Carlsbad Shopping Center totals approximately 1,151,100 square feet of gross leasable area (GLA). The
project includes demolition or removal and reconfiguration of existing shopping center space
(e.g., former Robinsons-May building), and the addition of new internally and externally
oriented retail space, including specialty shops, restaurants, a movie theater, a gym, a grocery
store, and other commercial uses within the shopping center. In total, the project would involve the demolition, reconfiguration and/or reconstruction of approximately 225,631 square feet of
existing commercial/retail space, and construction of approximately 261,048 square feet of GLA,
for a net increase of 35,417 square feet of new GLA. Upon completion of the proposed project,
the Westfield Carlsbad Shopping Center would total approximately 1,186,509 square feet (GLA)
of commercial space.
Discretionary Actions
Regulatory discretionary actions considered by the City Council in conjunction with the
proposed project are provided below.
• Final EIR certification;
• SP approval;
• SDP approval;
• Approvals by the City as property owner, of the Ground Lease(s), a Sale and Purchase
agreement for a portion of the parking lot; and
• Amendment to the Parking Lot Maintenance Agreement and other pertinent documents, as necessary.
Subsequent approvals would be required to implement the future improvements under the SP.
These subsequent approvals for use and architecture (discretionary) include approval of related
implementing actions including, but not limited to, future CEQA review, future SDPs, and grading and building permits.
The following approval would be required by other agencies:
• National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Permit
approval from the RWQCB
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 3 January 2013
1.2 Project Objectives
Key objectives of the project are to:
• Develop a Specific Plan that guides the modernization and revitalization of Westfield
Carlsbad into a contemporary, vibrant, dynamic, convenient, and competitive shopping
center that attracts visitors from the surrounding community and the larger market area.
• Codify development standards to address landscaping, parking, uses, signage, and
maintain building design criteria to ensure future redevelopment in the Specific Plan area
is compatible with the proposed Westfield Carlsbad Specific Plan and in conformance
with the Carlsbad General Plan and its associated policies and goals.
• Develop updated, expanded, flexible, and enhanced retail, dining, commercial, and
entertainment spaces in a cohesive and economically feasible manner to enable tenants to
be competitive in a changing marketplace.
• Establish Westfield Carlsbad as a prominent regional retail center that is attractive to a
wide variety of high-quality retailers and provides a wide range of shopping and dining
choices to the surrounding community and on a regional scale.
• Establish Westfield Carlsbad as a safe location for visitors through enhanced lighting and security standards that optimize public safety.
• Incorporate attractive outdoor gathering places into Westfield Carlsbad and create a pedestrian-friendly site through creation of enhanced pedestrian connections between
on-site uses.
• Enhance employment opportunities in the City through the creation of construction- and commercial-related jobs that are fully integrated into the community.
• Create improved street presence for Westfield Carlsbad along El Camino Real that
provides visual identity, a visual gateway into the northern portion of the City, and pedestrian gateways from the public sidewalks into the shopping center.
• Expand and enhance the utilization and safety of pedestrian linkages to and from
Westfield Carlsbad and the surrounding community through improved streetscape, lighting, and security standards.
• Revitalize the property in a sustainable manner through re-use of existing buildings and
infrastructure where feasible and implementation of various environmentally sensitive
project design features.
• Improve the water quality in and downstream of the Specific Plan area through low
impact development design features, such as vegetated strips (bioswales) and pervious
pavement.
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 4 January 2013
• Fuel economic growth in the City and strengthen the City’s tax base through sales and
property taxes.
1.3 Regulatory Framework
State Public Resources Code Section 21081 and State California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) Guidelines Section 15091 provide that a project may not be approved or carried out
until the public agency makes written findings supported by substantial evidence in the administrative record regarding each of the significant effects. Three possible findings are specified in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a) as follows:
1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which
avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR.
2. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public
agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such
other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. 3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including
provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the
mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR.
State CEQA Guidelines Section 15092(b) provides that no agency shall approve a project for which an EIR was prepared unless either:
1. The project approved will not have a significant effect on the environment, or
2. The agency has:
a. Eliminated or substantially lessened all significant effects where feasible as shown in
the findings under Section 15091; and,
b. Determined that any remaining significant effects on the environment found to be unavoidable under Section 15091 are acceptable due to overriding concerns as described in Section 15093.
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 5 January 2013
2.0 FINDINGS OF IMPACTS, MITIGATION MEASURES, AND SUPPORTING FACTS
The City, having reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final EIR, finds pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(1) and State CEQA Guidelines
Section 15091(a)(1) that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the
project which would mitigate, avoid, or substantially lessen to below a level of significance the
following potential significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR.
2.1 Aesthetics
2.1.1 Building Height(s)
A. Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would allow for a maximum building height for the main mall of 75 feet above the finished floor elevation of the lower level, and 105.30 feet above mean sea level (AMSL).
B. Facts in Support of Finding. With regard to building height, the northern portion of the SP
area, including the northern side of the shopping center and adjacent parking lots, is at a lower grade than the southern portion. The grade separation results in the mall’s division into lower and upper levels, with the upper level located at an elevation approximately 15 feet above the lower level. The
existing Robinson’s-May store, which is the subject of the proposed SDP, is approximately 38
feet above the grade of the upper level and approximately 71 feet above the lower level of the
site. Based on the SP, the maximum height for the main mall building would be limited to 75 feet above the finished floor elevation of the lower level (30.3 feet AMSL) or a maximum of 105.30 feet AMSL. Increased building heights in and around the existing Robinson’s-May store would
modify the roof structure and provide visual interest to the shopping center that does not exist
today; however, the increase in building height (of less than 5 feet above the finished floor
elevation of the lower level) would not be substantial relative to the height of the existing structure. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts
associated with building height have been identified.
2.1.2 Signage
A. Less Than Significant Impact. The SP contains signage parameters and regulations that
would augment and, in several cases, supersede Chapter 21.41 of the Municipal Code, and
proposes several new and replacement signs. B. Facts in Support of Finding. City approval of a detailed sign program would occur prior
to construction of any new signs at Westfield Carlsbad. In addition to demonstrating how the
signs would integrate with the rest of the site architecture and landscaping, the sign program also
would include specific locations for each proposed sign and be consistent with the sign parameters (quantities, heights, maximum areas) given above and in the SP document. Upon
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 6 January 2013
approval, where there are conflicts between the Municipal Code and the SP, the SP would
prevail. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts associated with signage have been identified.
2.1.3 Light and Glare
A. Less Than Significant Impact. Proposed new outdoor lighting and signage throughout the SP area would not result in significant light and glare impacts to the surrounding community, Buena Vista Creek, or nearby roadways. Proposed new signs would not significantly increase
the amount of night-time light and glare in the project area. The SP standards would permit
parking lot lighting to a maximum of 35 feet in height, and pedestrian-scaled lighting up to
15 feet in height and/or bollard-style lighting throughout the premises. B. Facts in Support of Finding. As the proposed project would redevelop an area that is
already a source of light and glare and the SP area is topographically below any nearby
residential uses and partially screened by existing landscaping, any increase in light and glare
from implementation of the SP and SDP would be less than significant. In addition, the project would be required to comply with City standards regarding lighting, as well as architectural design criteria for planned commercial uses, to avoid impacting residential land uses (sensitive
land uses) surrounding the site. Outdoor lighting would be subject to maximum height limits,
would be designed and directed to minimize glare away from Highway 78, Buena Vista Creek
and adjacent properties, and would be on from dusk until dawn. In the event that the new monument sign along El Camino Real is allowed to be fully electronic (i.e., LED or LCD) or have an electronic component to the display, the signage would have to comply with the
Conditional Use Permit required for digital signs and could be conditioned so as not to feature
excessively bright illumination or moving images that could be distracting to drivers. Proposed
light standards would be relatively limited in height, lighting would largely be directed downward to prevent spillover into adjacent areas, and the project would comply with most of the City standards regarding lighting, as well as architectural design criteria for planned
commercial uses and the SP development standards. Further, the SP provides that an exterior
lighting plan be provided for any SDP that proposes new exterior lighting. Therefore, impacts
associated with future lighting would be less than significant under the SP and proposed SDP. C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts
associated with lighting or glare have been identified.
2.1.4 Grading
A. Less Than Significant Impact. Grading activities would result in a temporary aesthetic
impact on site and, in particular, in the eastern portion of the site.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. The SP area would be visually disrupted during the construction phase of SDP implementation. Demolition, construction, landscaping and other
construction-related work would result in a temporary aesthetic impact on site and, in particular,
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 7 January 2013
in the eastern portion of the site. Overall, the aesthetic impact as a result of ground-disturbing
activities would be minimal, as much of the site is already developed and the surrounding area is
a generally developed environment. The entire SP area has been previously graded, and
substantial cut and fill areas are not required for the current development. The SP indicates that the topography of the SP area would be retained throughout current and future SP development,
and that grading would not be permitted to create new elevated development along El Camino
Real or Marron Road. The expected grading quantities for the current SDP proposal include
approximately 8,000 cubic yards (cy) of cut, 12,000 cy of fill and 8,000 cy remedial grading;
approximately 4,000 cy of fill material would be imported. Within the limits of work for the current SDP proposal, re-grading would occur only in limited areas. Finished grades would
closely mimic existing grades, and only subtle topographic changes are proposed (such as minor
topographic mounding for landscape screening). Therefore, a less than significant impact would
occur.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts
associated with aesthetics have been identified.
2.1.5 Scenic Vistas or Corridors
A. Less Than Significant Impact. The SP area is located along a designated scenic corridor, the frontage of El Camino Real, and the SR-78/El Camino Real interchange which is considered
the northern “gateway” to the City. The project would result in new and reconfigured
commercial development, and a number of new wall signs would be installed along the façade of
the revitalized shopping center. B. Facts in Support of Finding. New signs, structures, and landscaping would not be
located within a line-of-sight corridor that could impact traffic circulation, and would be
contemporary and complementary to the revitalized shopping center. A detailed signage
program, in accordance with the SP guidelines (which supersede the S-P Overlay Zone) and the Scenic Corridor Guidelines, would be prepared and approved by the City Planner prior to the construction of any new signs. Beyond the scenic corridor, new and reconfigured commercial
development would be externally focused and feature more architectural articulation and glazing
than currently exists. The proposed improvements would be consistent with the commercial
character of the corridor and would serve to enliven the eastern façade of the shopping center by visually opening the site up to the road through the use of large expanses of glazing, among other new materials. The SP and SDP would not conform to the following sections of the Sign
Ordinance in the Municipal Code: Sections 21.41.050 (Application Permits and Procedures),
21.41.080 (Sign Design Standards), 21.41.095 (Permitted Permanent Signs), and 21.41.130
(Nonconforming Signs). However, because the SP would supersede these sections of the Zone Code upon its adoption and would not adversely impact the character and quality of the shopping center, this “non-conformance” does not result in a significant impact. As shown in the
conceptual project simulations, the scenic character of the corridor would be enhanced by
implementation of the current SDP and future SDPs for the out-buildings. Based on the
foregoing, significant impacts to scenic vistas and corridors associated with proposed architecture, landscaping, and signage would not occur.
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 8 January 2013
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts
associated with scenic vistas or corridors have been identified.
2.1.6 Scenic Resources
A. Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed SP and SDP would not involve the removal
of mature trees, rock outcroppings or historic buildings within a state scenic highway.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. The proposed SP and SDP would not impact any scenic resources because it would not involve the removal of mature trees, rock outcroppings or historic
buildings within a state scenic highway. Therefore, less-than-significant impacts to scenic
resources would occur upon SP and SDP implementation.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts associated with scenic resources have been identified.
2.1.7 Visual Character/Quality of Site and Surroundings
2.1.7.1 Short-Term Effects
A. Less Than Significant Impact. Demolition, construction, landscaping and other
construction-related work would result in a temporary on-site aesthetic impact, in particular, in
the eastern portion of the site.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. The aesthetic impact as a result of ground-disturbing
activities would be minimal, as much of the site is already developed and the surrounding area is
a generally developed environment. No significant impact during project demolition, grading or
construction is anticipated to occur because of the temporary nature of such activities.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts
associated with short-term visual quality or character of the site have been identified.
2.1.7.2 Long-Term Effects
A. Less Than Significant Impact. Implementation of the SP would allow for increases in
building heights, enhancements in architectural detail, updates in landscaping, and modifications
to signage across the entire SP area encompassing the Westfield Carlsbad Shopping Center.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. The existing character of the site would change through the reconfiguration of the former Robinsons-May building; construction of new specialty retail
spaces along the exterior of the former department store; construction of three new commercial
pads along El Camino Real; expanded landscape treatments along El Camino Real and Marron
Road; and demolition/reconfiguration/enhancement of surface parking areas. Because the SP
area is developed and urban in character, redevelopment and revitalization of the shopping center through the current SDP proposal would serve to complement and modernize, and not adversely
alter, the existing commercial character of the project site and its surroundings. The SP and SDP
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 9 January 2013
would not conform to the following sections of Chapter 21.41, Sign Ordinance, of the Municipal
Code: 21.41.050 (Application Permits and Procedures), 21.41.080 (Sign Design Standards),
21.41.095 (Permitted Permanent Signs), and 21.41.130 (Nonconforming Signs). However,
because the SP would supersede these sections of the Municipal Code upon its adoption and the character and quality of the shopping center would improve, this “non-conformance” does not
result in a significant impact.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts
associated with long-term visual quality or character of the site have been identified.
2.2 Air Quality
2.2.1 Air Quality Management Plan
A. Less Than Significant Impact. The project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the San Diego Regional Air Quality Strategy (RAQS).
B. Facts in Support of Finding. The Air Pollution Control District (APCD) relies, to a
certain degree, on land use designations contained in general plan documents applicable to its jurisdiction. The APCD refers to the contents of approved general plans in order to forecast, inventory and allocate regional emissions from land use and development-related sources. These
emissions budgets are used in statewide air quality attainment planning efforts. The SP would
implement the General Plan’s Regional Commercial (R) land use designation for the SP area, in
conjunction with the General Commercial (C-2) district established in the Zoning Ordinance. Additionally, the project would involve the provision of additional employment-generating uses within the North County area that could reduce vehicle miles traveled in the region through the
provision of employment-generating uses closer to residential land uses. The proposed project
would be consistent with the RAQS and the impact would be less than significant.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts associated with air quality management plan conflicts or obstructions have been identified.
2.2.2 Criteria Pollutant Emission Impacts
2.2.2.1 Short-Term Construction-Phase Impacts
A. Less Than Significant Impact. Project construction activities and operation of heavy
equipment would generate short-term ozone precursor emissions (i.e., ROG and NOx), diesel
emissions, and emissions of dust during demolition, grading/excavation, building construction, architectural coating, and paving. Project construction phase activities would not result in
emissions exceeding City’s emission-specific screening-level thresholds.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. An Air Quality and Climate Change Technical Report was
prepared for the proposed project (Final EIR Appendix B). Emissions from the construction phase of the project were estimated through the use of the CalEEMod model version 2001.1, a
computer model developed for the California Air Resources Board (CARB) by estimating the
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 10 January 2013
types and number of pieces of equipment that would be used to demolish existing structures,
grade the project site, construct the proposed development, and plant new landscaping within the
project site. Modeling demonstrated emissions of all criteria pollutants related to project
construction would be below the significance thresholds. Furthermore, due to the fact that the construction is short-term in nature, construction would not result in emissions that would violate
any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation.
Therefore, a less than significant impact related to construction-phase criteria pollutant emissions
would occur.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts
associated with construction-phase air quality emissions have been identified.
2.2.2.2 Long-Term Operational-Phase Impacts
A. Less Than Significant Impact. The project would result in operational-phase emissions
related to vehicular traffic, as well as area sources such as energy use, landscaping, consumer
products use, and architectural coatings use. The project’s operational phase emissions would
not exceed City’s emission-specific screening-level thresholds.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. An Air Quality and Climate Change Technical Report was
prepared for the proposed project. The total net operational impacts associated with area sources
including energy use, landscaping, consumer products use, hearth emissions, and architectural
coatings use for maintenance purposes were estimated using the CalEEMod model, version
2011.1. Modeling demonstrated net operational emissions associated with the proposed SDP are anticipated to be below the significance criteria and would therefore be less than significant.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts
associated with operational-phase air quality emissions have been identified.
2.2.3 Sensitive Receptors/CO “Hot Spots”
A. Less Than Significant Impact. The SDP would not cause or contribute to a violation of
the Carbon Monoxide (CO) standard or a CO “hot spot” due to project-generated traffic.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. As a part of the project’s Air Quality and Climate Change
Technical Report, a screening evaluation of the potential for CO “hot spots” was conducted,
utilized level of service (LOS) data evaluated in the project’s Transportation Study. The
Transportation Study evaluated whether or not there would be a decrease in the level of service
(LOS) at the roadways and/or intersections affected by the proposed SDP. The Caltrans Transportation Project-Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol was followed to determine whether a
CO “hot spot” is likely to form due to project-generated traffic. The screening evaluation
determined that based on the Transportation Study, project-generated traffic would not cause a
significant degradation to LOS E or worse for any of the intersections analyzed. Therefore, no
CO “hotspot” modeling analysis is required. A less than significant CO “hotspot” impact would occur.
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 11 January 2013
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts
associated with CO “hotspots” have been identified.
2.2.4 Exposure of Sensitive Receptors to Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs)
2.2.4.1 Short-Term Construction-Phase Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) Impacts
A. Less Than Significant Impact. Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM), recognized by the state
of California as carcinogenic compounds, would be emitted from heavy equipment used in the project construction process.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. The risks associated with exposure to substances with
carcinogenic effects are typically evaluated based on a lifetime of chronic exposure. The
anticipated SDP construction period of just over 20 months would be much less than the 70-year period used for risk determination. Because of the short-term nature of project construction and
the fact that heavy equipment exhaust emissions are not significant, exposure to diesel exhaust
emissions during construction would not be significant.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant construction-phase impacts associated with DPM emissions have been identified.
2.2.4.2 Operational-Phase Mobile and Area Toxic Air Contaminant (TAC) Sources
A. Less Than Significant Impact. Project operations associated with retail stores and food service establishments may result in DPM emissions from heavy-duty diesel trucks at loading
docks, organic gas emissions from the cooking of animal fats and oils, and TAC emissions from
the use of transportation refrigeration storage units (TRUs) to deliver cold-stored food items.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. Delivery trucks would be limited to an idle time not to exceed five minutes for entering or exiting a truck delivery well, in accordance with California
State Legislation. Emissions from each restaurant would be controlled through an exhaust hood
connected to a roof-top vent. It is not anticipated that the future retail establishments would
experience high truck volumes delivering materials on a frequent basis (i.e., greater than
100 commercial trucks per day or 40 TRU-equipped trucks per day as defined by CARB as the screening level). Therefore, on-site or off-site sensitive receptors would not be exposed to
substantial TAC concentrations from these sources, and a less than significant impact would
occur.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant operational-phase impacts associated with TACs have been identified.
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 12 January 2013
2.2.5 Objectionable Odors
2.2.5.1 Short-Term Construction-Phase Objectionable Odors Impacts
A. Less Than Significant Impact. Construction-phase emissions of potentially odorous
exhaust from diesel equipment and haul trucks would not result in a significant impact to
sensitive receptors.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. The expected construction period of less than two years (approximately 20 months) would be much less than the 70-year period used for odor risk
determination. Thus, the temporary use of off-road heavy-duty diesel equipment in combination
with the highly dispersive properties of DPM would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial
construction-related odor generation. Based on the distance to the nearest sensitive receptor
from the source of odiferous emissions and the small number of diesel-powered vehicles on site, potential construction-phase odor impacts are expected to be less than significant.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant
construction-phase objectionable odor impacts have been identified.
2.2.5.2 Long-Term-Operational-Phase Objectionable Odors Impacts
A. Less Than Significant Impact. Proposed land uses associated with long-term project
operations are not anticipated to result in emissions of objectionable or nuisance odors.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. During the operational phase, the proposed commercial
retail and restaurant land uses are not anticipated to be substantial sources of nuisance odors. In
addition, the majority of uses surrounding the site are commercial in nature, although residential
development is situated near the El Camino Real/Marron Road intersection, above the proposed
building site. Because a considerable number of receptors would not be affected by the project, the potential for odor impacts associated with project operations are expected to be less than
significant.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant operational-
phase objectionable odor impacts have been identified.
2.3 Cultural Resources
2.3.1 Historic and Pre-Historic Cultural Materials
A. Significant Impact. Destruction of cultural materials or physical disturbance of human
remains could occur during project earthwork activities such as excavation and grading that cut
into subsurface areas within which cultural material is buried. No operational-phase impacts to
cultural resources are anticipated.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. A Cultural Resources Study prepared for the proposed
project in accordance with the City’s Cultural Resource Guidelines (Final EIR Appendix I). The
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 13 January 2013
study found low probability for human remains or other historic or prehistoric cultural materials
to be encountered during the proposed ground-disturbing activities. Nonetheless, there is the
potential for accidental disturbance of unknown buried cultural resources during excavation or
ground-breaking activity. Potentially significant impacts to such resources, should they occur, would be mitigated to below a level of significance upon implementation of Mitigation Measures
C-1 through C-4.
C. Mitigation Measures. The following measure shall be implemented to reduce project
impacts to cultural resources to below a level of significance.
C-1 For the current SDP proposal and any future SDPs involving grading, archaeologist and
Native American monitor(s) shall be on site during initial ground disturbance and grading
operations in the event that unknown archaeological resources are encountered during
construction.
C-2 If archaeological resources are discovered during project construction, all work in the
area of the find shall cease, and a qualified archaeologist shall be retained by the City to
investigate the find, and to make recommendations on its disposition. The archaeologist
shall consult with a representative from the Pala Band of Mission Indians regarding the significance of the discovery. The City shall donate the resource to the appropriate
interested party and/or museum for recordation and/or curation.
C-3 If human remains are discovered during project construction, all work shall cease and the
San Diego County Coroner’s Office shall be contacted pursuant to procedures set forth in Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code. The City shall follow the
recommendations of the San Diego County Coroner’s Office and document the
subsequent management of the remains in the project file.
C-4 If human remains are discovered and the San Diego County Coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the Native American Heritage Commission shall be
contacted and shall identify the “most likely descendant.” Their treatment shall comply
with procedures consistent with Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 et al.
2.4. Energy
2.4.1 Energy Demand
2.4.1.1 Construction-Phase Energy Demand
A. Less Than Significant Impact. Increases in fossil fuel use resulting from project construction are not expected to have an appreciable impact on energy resources.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. An Air Quality and Climate Change Technical Report
(Final EIR Appendix B) prepared for the project included analysis of the project’s likely construction-phase energy demand. An estimate of the energy that would be consumed for construction proposed under the project alternatives was made by applying the estimated
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 14 January 2013
construction data used in the CalEEMod model. Project construction would require
approximately 31.6 billion British thermal units (BTUs) energy consumption through
completion, consisting of the use of gasoline, oil, and other possible fuel sources to operate
gasoline- and diesel-powered mobile construction equipment, and to operate automobiles to transport workers to and from the project site. In addition, construction of the project would
incorporate on-site energy conservation and demand-side management features, including
limiting trucks and construction equipment idle times to reduce fuel consumption and pollutant
emissions. The following practices would be implemented during the project construction to
reduce waste and energy consumption:
• Development of a construction waste management plan;
• Establish and maintain a recycling program through the waste management company for construction debris;
• Commitment to recycle or reuse at least 50 percent of demolition and construction waste;
• Use of non-toxic cleaning supplies bottled in recycled or recyclable containers;
• Implement a recycling program in the office trailer for paper, newspaper, cardboard, aluminum cans, glass, etc.;
• Utilize permanent power for the office trailer as long as possible in lieu of running a less
efficient generator;
• Use rechargeable batteries where practicable;
• Use on-site electricity to power equipment, where feasible;
• Follow maintenance schedules to maintain equipment in optimal working order and rated energy efficiency, which include, but not be limited to, regular replacement of filters, cleaning of compressor coils, burner tune-ups, lubrication of pumps and motors, proper
vehicle maintenance, etc.;
• Review construction and demolition materials to identify which may be reused or
recycled on site;
• Reduce on-site vehicle idling; and
• Recycle waste and solvents, and use biodegradable lubricants and hydraulic fluids.
Increased construction-phase fuel consumption would be temporary, and would not have a residual requirement for additional energy input. Upon implementation of the proposed energy-
saving practices, the project’s construction-phase impacts related to unnecessary consumption of
energy would be less than significant.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts associated with construction-phase energy consumption have been identified.
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 15 January 2013
2.4.1.2 Long-Term Operational-Phase Energy Demand
A. Less Than Significant Impact. The conversion of retail space and introduction of new
GLA would result in continued use of energy resources on site.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. An Air Quality and Climate Change Technical Report
(Final EIR Appendix B) prepared for the project included analysis of the project’s likely
operational-phase energy demand, inclusive of electric energy demand, natural gas energy
demand, water (including wastewater) energy demand, and transportation energy demand. Development would not require the use of new sources of energy, and would not conflict with
any adopted energy conservation plans. The conversion of retail space and introduction of new
commercial space would result in continued use of energy resources on the project site during
ongoing operational activities. The project proposes energy-conserving sustainable design
features and energy efficiency measures utilizing 2008 Title 24 California Building Code (CBC) and 2010 California Green Building Code (CALGreen) standards. Energy conservation
design features would be integrated into the proposed SDP to minimize the unnecessary loss of
energy. Vehicles used and vehicle trips associated with the proposed SDP would be subject to
state and federal regulatory requirements addressing fuel efficiency, which would be expected to
increase fuel efficiency over time as older, less fuel-efficient vehicles are retired. Therefore, the project’s vehicle–fuel related impacts to energy would be less than significant. Like all projects
within the City, the project would be required to comply with applicable city, state, and federal
energy conservation measures during the operational phase. In summary, upon implementation
of the proposed energy-conserving sustainable design features and energy efficiency measures,
the project would reduce its energy demand in compliance with local, state, and federal regulations. Therefore, operational impacts related to energy conservation would be less than
significant.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts
associated with operational-phase energy demand have been identified.
2.4.2 Regulatory Compliance
A. Less Than Significant Impact. The project would comply with the 2008 Title 24 CBC,
2010 CalGreen GBC standards, and all other city, state, and federal energy conservation measures during the construction phase and throughout operational activities.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. The proposed project, like all projects within the City,
would be required to comply with 2008 Title 24 CBC, 2010 CalGreen GBC standards, and all
other city, state, and federal energy conservation measures during the construction phase and throughout operational activities. Verification of regulatory compliance is built into the City’s
plan check and engineering process. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a
conflict with the applicable energy-related regulations, and no impact would occur.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts associated with regulatory compliance have been identified.
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 16 January 2013
2.5 Geology and Soils
2.5.1 Seismic Hazards
2.5.1.1 Ground Rupture
A. Less Than Significant Impact. The project is not anticipated to result in impacts related to
seismically-induced ground rupture.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. A Geologic Reconnaissance Report and Addendum prepared for the project determined no known active or potentially active faults (or Earthquake
Fault Zones) are located within or adjacent to the site (Final EIR Appendix C). While the
potential for effects related to seismic ground rupture cannot be totally discounted (unknown
faults could potentially occur on site, for example), the probability for seismically-induced ground rupture or related effects within the SP area is considered low.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts
associated with ground rupture have been identified.
2.5.1.2 Ground Acceleration (Ground Shaking)
A. Significant Impact. The estimated peak ground acceleration level identified for the site
(0.34g) could potentially result in significant impacts to proposed structures and related facilities
(e.g., pavement, footings and utilities), as well as associated public safety. B. Facts in Support of Finding. Based on the noted seismic conditions and required
conformance with applicable regulatory/industry standards such as the International Building
Code (IBC), seismic design criteria that would likely be incorporated into the project design
include pertinent ground acceleration values, as well as parameters related to the seismic zone, subsurface profile types, seismic and near-source coefficients for acceleration and velocity, and the seismic source. Potentially significant impacts, should they occur, would be mitigated to
below a level of significance upon implementation of Mitigation Measure GS-1.
C. Mitigation Measures. The following measure shall be implemented to reduce project impacts to geology and soils to below a level of significance.
GS-1 Prior to issuance of a project grading permit, a detailed geotechnical investigation report
shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval. This investigation shall
address all geotechnical concerns identified in the Geotechnical Reconnaissance Report prepared for the proposed project by GEOCON (2010), as well as other applicable issues, and shall conform to all pertinent requirements of the City’s Technical Guidelines for
Geotechnical Reports. Specifically, the detailed project geotechnical investigation shall
review and update recommendations in the Geotechnical Reconnaissance Report for
issues including seismically-induced ground shaking and liquefaction/dynamic settlement, as well as compressible/expansive soils, shallow groundwater drainage, oversize materials, and foundation/footing/pavement/retaining wall design. Project
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 17 January 2013
design, construction and maintenance shall implement and comply with all
recommendations/requirements identified in the approved detailed geotechnical
investigation report, as well as any other applicable requirements identified by the City
Engineer.
2.5.1.3 Liquefaction/Dynamic Settlement and Lateral Spreading
A. Significant Impact. The northern portion of the SP area is within a high-risk liquefaction
zone, and a number of alluvial deposits mapped within the site are also identified as exhibiting moderate to high liquefaction potential.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. The potential for dynamic settlement or lateral spreading
impacts at the project site would be evaluated as part of the detailed geotechnical investigation
required to be prepared under Mitigation Measure GS-1. Specific design measures related to dynamic settlement would be identified as part of that analysis if appropriate, and may include
standard industry practices such as removal and replacement of settlement-prone materials with
engineered fill, use of deep foundation structures, design of proposed facilities to accommodate
estimated settlement, or the use of ground improvement techniques such as vibrocompaction or
compaction grouting. Potentially significant impacts, should they occur, would be mitigated to below a level of significance upon implementation of Mitigation Measure GS-1.
C. Mitigation Measures. Implementation of Mitigation Measure GS-1 would reduce
potentially significant liquefaction impacts to a level of less than significant.
2.5.1.4 Tsunamis and Seiches
A. Less Than Significant Impact. The potential for tsunamis to affect the project site is
considered low, and no seiche-related impacts are anticipated to occur.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. The project Geotechnical Reconnaissance Report concludes
that the potential for tsunamis to affect the site is low, based on the relative elevation of the SP
area compared to sea level, the distance to the Pacific Ocean, and the fact that the site is not
within any mapped tsunami hazard areas. Accordingly, no significant impacts related to
tsunamis would be associated with project implementation. The SP area is also not located adjacent to or in close proximity to any large upstream water bodies, and is not within any
mapped seiche hazard areas. Accordingly, no significant impacts related to seiches would be
associated with project implementation.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts associated with tsunamis or seiches have been identified.
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 18 January 2013
2.5.2 Non-seismic Hazards
2.5.2.1 Soil Erosion/Loss of Soils
A. Significant Impact. Implementation of the proposed project may require grading and
excavation that potentially could cause erosion and loss of soils at an accelerated rate during
storm events.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. The amount and rate of potential construction-related erosion would vary depending on a number of factors, including the time of year, the amount and
intensity of rainfall, and the amount of natural and/or artificial fill. Recommendations for
grading/earthwork and other pertinent geotechnical design considerations would be formulated in
the final geotechnical report required by Mitigation Measure GS-1, and would be included in the
final grading and building plans for the current SDP. The project would also comply with the state and City regulations related to erosion and soil loss both during and after construction, and
would also implement construction-related BMPs. Potentially significant impacts, should they be
identified, would be mitigated to below a level of significance upon implementation of
Mitigation Measure GS-1.
C. Mitigation Measures. Implementation of Mitigation Measure GS-1 would reduce
potentially significant soil erosion impacts to a level of less than significant.
2.5.2.2 Landslides/Slope Stability
A. Less Than Significant Impact. No significant impacts relating to landslides are
anticipated to occur.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. The project Geotechnical Reconnaissance Report concludes
that “No evidence of landsliding was noted during the reconnaissance or previous investigation, and no landslides are known to exist on the property or at a location that would impact the
proposed development.” Based on this conclusion and the fact that the site is generally level as a
result of previous development, no significant impacts related to landslides would occur in
association with project implementation.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts
associated with landslides have been identified.
2.5.2.3 Compressible/Expansive Soils
A. Significant Impact. There is potential for compressible and expansive alluvial materials
to occur onsite. Portions of the Santiago Formation typically posses a medium to high expansion
potential.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. Potential impacts associated with compressible and expansive soils would be evaluated as part of the detailed geotechnical investigation required by
Mitigation Measure GS-1, and would be included in the final grading and building plans for the
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 19 January 2013
current SDP. Specific related design measures would be identified as part of that analysis if
appropriate, and may include standard industry practices such as removal and replacement of
unsuitable materials with engineered fill, capping or burial of expansive soils in deeper fills, and
surcharging/monitoring of compressible deposits prior to development. Potentially significant impacts, should they occur, would be mitigated to below a level of significance upon
implementation of Mitigation Measure GS-1.
C. Mitigation Measures. Implementation of Mitigation Measure GS-1 would reduce
potentially significant compressible/expansive soils impacts to a level of less than significant.
2.5.2.4 Shallow Groundwater/Drainage
A. Significant Impact. Shallow groundwater anticipated to occur in the SP area at
approximate depths of 13 to 15 feet could require temporary dewatering to allow access by construction equipment and/or personnel, and could potentially affect the stability of proposed
excavations (e.g., trench walls). There is potential for compressible and expansive alluvial
materials to occur onsite. Uncontrolled or improperly designed surface or subsurface drainage
could result in adverse impacts to proposed development through effects such as ponding,
saturation of surficial deposits, or erosion. The Santiago Formation typically has a high to moderate potential to transmit seepage along impervious layers within the formation
B. Facts in Support of Finding. Dewatering activities would require conformance with
applicable National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit requirements.
Potential impacts associated with shallow groundwater would be evaluated as part of the detailed geotechnical investigation required by Mitigation Measure GS-1. Specific related design
measures would be identified as part of that analysis if appropriate, and would likely include
conformance with applicable Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and
California Division of OSHA (CAL/OSHA) standards (e.g., 29 Code of Federal Regulations
[CFR] Part 1926, Occupational Health Standards-Excavations). Specifically, this could include the use of appropriate shoring to stabilize temporary excavations. Potentially significant shallow
groundwater impacts, should they occur, would be mitigated to below a level of significance
upon implementation of Mitigation Measure GS-1.
Potential impacts associated with surface or subsurface drainage would be evaluated as part of the detailed geotechnical investigation required by Mitigation Measure GS-1. Specific design
measures would be identified as part of that analysis if appropriate, and may include standard
industry techniques such as the use of positive drainage (i.e., grading/construction to direct
surface flows away from structures and into designated drainage facilities), and/or subdrains to
avoid subsurface saturation in applicable areas. Potentially significant surface or subsurface drainage impacts, should they occur, would be mitigated to below a level of significance upon
implementation of Mitigation Measure GS-1.
C. Mitigation Measures. Implementation of Mitigation Measure GS-1 would reduce
potentially significant shallow groundwater impacts, and potentially significant surface and subsurface drainage impacts, to a level of less than significant.
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 20 January 2013
2.5.2.5 Remedial Grading
A. Significant Impact. The project may require development of remedial grading
requirements in association with potentially significant impacts from conditions such as liquefiable or expansive soils. In addition, Santiago Formation often exhibits highly cemented
zones that may result in significant impacts related to the generation and use of oversize
materials. Specifically, the presence of oversize materials in engineered fill can result in effects
such as differential compaction and settlement, with related adverse effects to overlying
pavement, utilities, or drainage improvements.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. Potential requirements would be evaluated as part of the
detailed geotechnical investigation required by Mitigation Measure GS-1, with typical remedial
measures including the removal and replacement of unsuitable materials with engineered fill,
restricting the placement of materials between 12 inches and four feet in maximum dimension to areas at least 15 horizontal feet away from slope faces, five feet below finish grade, or three feet
below the deepest utility, whichever is deeper; and requiring site-specific evaluation by the
project geotechnical engineer for use of oversize materials greater than four feet in maximum
dimension. Potentially significant impacts requiring remedial grading, should they occur, would
be mitigated to below a level of significance upon implementation of Mitigation Measure GS-1.
C. Mitigation Measures. Implementation of Mitigation Measure GS-1 would reduce
potentially significant remedial grading impacts, to a level of less than significant.
2.5.2.6 Foundation/Footing/Pavement/Retaining Wall Design
A. Significant Impact. Project-related foundations, footings, pavement, and/or retaining
walls may be subject to significant impacts from potential effects associated with seismic
loading, liquefaction, compressible/expansive soils, and/or surface/subsurface drainage.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. The proposed design of project facilities would be
evaluated as part of the detailed geotechnical investigation required by Mitigation Measure
GS-1, with typical remedial measures including appropriate structure design/location, earthwork,
and drainage considerations. Potentially significant foundation, footing, pavement, or retaining
wall design impacts, should they occur, would be mitigated to below a level of significance upon implementation of Mitigation Measure GS-1.
C. Mitigation Measures. Implementation of Mitigation Measure GS-1 would reduce
potentially significant foundation, footing, pavement, or retaining wall design impacts to a level
of less than significant.
2.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
2.6.1 Construction Greenhouse Gas Emissions
A. Less Than Significant Impact. Construction of the proposed SDP would result in less
than significant GHG emissions associated with the use of heavy equipment and vehicle trips.
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 21 January 2013
B. Facts in Support of Finding. An Air Quality and Climate Change Technical Report
prepared for the project utilized the CalEEMod model to estimate GHG emissions associated
with proposed project development and construction activities. The report determined that
amortized over 30 years, construction equipment would contribute 118.19 metric tons per year of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) emissions to the project’s total. The construction phase of the
project would be short-term and temporary, with no long-term potential to emit annual GHG
pollutants from construction-related sources. Temporary, construction-phase GHG emissions
associated with the use of heavy equipment and vehicle trips would have a negligible effect on
any increase in regional, state, national and global GHG emissions. Therefore, a less than significant impact related to construction-phase GHG emissions would occur.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant short-term
GHG emissions impacts have been identified.
2.6.2 Operational Greenhouse Gas Emissions
A. Less Than Significant Impact. Operation of the proposed SDP would result in less than
significant direct GHG emissions associated with natural gas combustion (furnace and water
heaters), use of other fuel-consuming equipment (lawn care equipment), etc., and in less than significant indirect GHG emissions associated with electrical generation, water consumption and
vehicle trips.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. An Air Quality and Climate Change Technical Report
prepared for the project utilized the CalEEMod program to estimate GHG emissions associated with proposed project operational activities. Project-level GHG emissions are calculated in
terms of CO2e. Project-related operational GHG emissions would be 843.24 metric tons of
CO2e emissions per year, thus producing less GHG emissions than the screening threshold of
900 metric tons per year. Therefore, the operational GHG impacts associated with the proposed
SDP would be less than significant and the project would not conflict with the California CARB’s Scoping Plan and year 2020 “business as usual” forecast model. No GHG reduction
measures would be required; however, the project would feature a number of sustainable design
features that would minimize emissions of GHG as described in the Final EIR Project
Description.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant project-
level operational GHG emissions impacts have been identified.
2.7 Hazards/Hazardous Materials
2.7.1 Construction-Phase Release of Hazardous Materials
A. Significant Impact. Use and/or storage of hazardous materials such as fuels, lubricants,
solvents, concrete, paint, and portable septic system wastes during project construction would
not represent a significant safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area. Potential disturbance or removal of asbestos-containing materials (ACMs) and/or lead-based
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 22 January 2013
paint (LBP) would represent a potentially significant safety hazard for people residing or
working in the project area.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) was
prepared for the proposed project. The Phase I ESA noted that the location of material storage and construction staging areas would be dictated by the project Stormwater Pollution Prevention
Plan (SWPPP), which includes such measures as regular maintenance of construction equipment,
and storage criteria for oil, gasoline, and other potential contaminants that commonly occur
during construction activities.
Any disturbance should be preceded by an asbestos and lead survey by qualified professionals.
If asbestos- and/or lead-containing materials are encountered during construction, proper
removal and disposal techniques should be used, in accordance with the applicable regulations.
If the required measures to control and properly remove ACM and LBP from the site are followed,
asbestos-related impacts to air quality during construction would not be significant. However, the potential for ACM and LBP in on-site structures means that their disturbance could result in a
potentially significant impact if proper removal procedures are not followed. Upon implementation
of Mitigation Measure Haz-1, a less than significant construction-phase impact related to ACM
and LBP would occur.
C. Mitigation Measures. The following measure shall be implemented to reduce project
impacts from construction-phase hazardous materials to below a level of significance.
Haz-1 Contract specifications shall require that any building materials found to contain asbestos
containing-materials (ACMs) or lead-based paint (LBP) shall be handled using proper Health and Safety precautions and the materials shall be properly disposed as hazardous
waste according to federal, state and local regulations. ACMs shall be removed by a
licensed asbestos abatement contactor. A certified asbestos consultant shall conduct
abatement planning, monitoring (as needed), oversight, and reporting to ensure its proper
removal and disposal.
2.7.2 Operational-Phase Release of Hazardous Materials
A. Less Than Significant Impact. The handling and transport of chemicals for routine
maintenance and operation of the project would not represent a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. The Phase I ESA prepared for the proposed project
determined that any routine use and handling of hazardous material would be regulated by local,
state, and federal standards associated with the handling of hazardous materials, including California Occupational Health and Safety Administration (CalOSHA) requirements. Based on
compliance with these regulatory requirements, potential exposure of people to impacts from on-
site hazardous materials would be less than significant.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts associated with operational-phase hazardous materials have been identified.
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 23 January 2013
2.8 Hydrology and Water Quality
2.8.1 Drainage Alteration
A. Less Than Significant Impact. Project construction activities including demolition,
grading and excavation may result in minor alteration of on-site drainage patterns, but are not
anticipated to result in significant impacts to on-site drainage patterns.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. Proposed modifications would be predominantly temporary
(construction-related) and/or minor in nature, with the overall existing drainage patterns and
directions to remain essentially unchanged. Specifically, all post-development flow from the SP
area would continue to enter Buena Vista Creek and Lagoon via existing and/or modified storm drain facilities within the site and along Marron Road. Based on the described retention of the
principal on- and off-site drainage characteristics, project implementation would not
substantially alter on- or off-site drainage patterns/directions, generate substantial on- or off-site
erosion/siltation related to the project, or result in substantial changes to runoff rates/amounts
and associated flooding hazards. Accordingly, no significant impacts related to drainage alteration would result from implementation of the current SDP proposal.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts
associated with drainage alteration have been identified.
2.8.2 Runoff Rates/Amounts
A. Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would result in a net reduction of
runoff rates and amounts from the SDP area, and would therefore not generate any significant
impacts related to runoff rates or amounts.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. Project implementation would result in a net decrease of
impervious surfaces, due to the proposed installation of large swaths of pervious pavement,
vegetated swales and enhanced landscaping. Impervious surfaces within the noted 18.03-acre
revitalization area would be reduced from 15.91 to 13.33 acres (88 to 74 percent), with a
corresponding reduction in on-site runoff rates and amounts. Based on these conditions, implementation of the proposed project would not result in any significant impacts related to
increases in the rate or amount of runoff within or from the site.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts
associated with runoff rates or amounts have been identified.
2.8.3 Storm Drain Capacity/Additional Sources of Polluted Runoff
A. Less Than Significant Impact. No significant impacts related to the capacity of on- or
off-site storm drain facilities, or the generation of additional sources of polluted runoff, would occur from project implementation.
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 24 January 2013
B. Facts in Support of Finding. The proposed project would not result in an increase in the
rate or amount of runoff within or from the site. Accordingly, the project Drainage Report
concludes that “[t]he inlet capacities of the storm drain system are sufficient to convey runoff
from a 100-year storm event…” and “…100-year runoff generated from the proposed development will not adversely impact the downstream facilities any more than what has
previously been constructed.”
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts
associated with storm drain capacity or generation of polluted runoff have been identified.
2.8.4 Groundwater
A. Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would not involve the extraction of
groundwater for purposes such as consumption or irrigation, and no associated impacts to aquifer levels or recharge capacity would occur.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. Implementation of the current SDP proposal would entail a
net reduction of on-site impervious surfaces as previously described, with a corresponding
increase in infiltration and recharge capacity. Shallow groundwater is anticipated to occur on site, and may require extraction and disposal to accommodate proposed development. Based on
the temporary nature of potential construction dewatering and the fact that associated discharge
would likely be within local groundwater recharge areas (e.g., Buena Vista Creek), no significant
impacts related to issues such as aquifer drawdown or depletion are anticipated. Construction
dewatering, if required, would also be subject to applicable NPDES requirements related to water quality concerns.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts
associated with groundwater levels or recharge capacity have been identified.
2.8.5 Flooding/Floodplains
A. No Impact. As the project is not located within the 100-year floodplain, no
flooding/floodplain impact would occur.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. The SP area is not located within any mapped 100-year
floodplain boundaries. Accordingly, no associated potential impacts related to flood hazards or
the potential to impede or redirect flood waters would result from implementation of the current
SDP proposal.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no impacts associated
with flooding or floodplains have been identified.
2.8.6 Water Quality
2.8.6.1 Construction-Phase Groundwater Quality Impacts
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 25 January 2013
A. Less Than Significant Impact. Construction-phase activities would not contribute to
potential groundwater quality degradation.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. Project-related activities would not result in any direct
effects to groundwater quality through activities such as underground storage of hazardous materials (e.g., fuels). Accordingly, potential impacts to groundwater quality would be limited to
the normal percolation of surface runoff containing urban contaminates generated within the SP
area, and would be less than significant. Surface flows within the site would either be treated via
vegetated swales or trench drain filter inserts before being discharged into the storm drain
system, or would be infiltrated through pervious pavement. Such infiltration provides water quality treatment for percolating runoff before it reaches the groundwater table, with pervious
pavement recognized as an effective treatment BMP. As a result, all surface runoff within and
from the site would be treated before potentially reaching local aquifers, and would not
contribute to potential groundwater quality degradation.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts
associated with construction-phase groundwater quality have been identified.
2.8.6.2 Construction-Phase Surface Water Quality Impacts
A. Significant Impact. Potential water quality impacts related to project construction include
erosion/siltation (sedimentation), the on-site use and storage of construction-related hazardous
materials (e.g., fuels, etc.), generation of debris from demolition activities, and disposal of
extracted groundwater (if required).
B. Facts in Support of Finding. Short-term surface water quality impacts would be
addressed through conformance with the NPDES Construction General Permit and City Storm
Water Standards Manual, including the implementation of an authorized SWPPP. In addition,
implementation of Mitigation Measures WQ-1 and WQ-2 would avoid or reduce potentially
significant construction-phase surface water quality impacts below a level of significance.
C. Mitigation Measures. The following measure shall be implemented to reduce project
impacts from construction-phase water quality to below a level of significance.
WQ-1 Prior to issuance of a project grading permit, a SWPPP shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval. The project SWPPP shall include adequate best
management practices (BMPs), to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, to demonstrate
conformance with the NPDES Construction General Permit (Order No. 2009-0009-
DWQ) and related City requirements for the issues of erosion/sedimentation,
construction-related hazardous materials, and demolition-related debris generation. While final BMPs would be determined as part of the noted SWPPP process based on
site-specific parameters, they would likely include standard measures from the NPDES
Permit text and City Storm Water Standards, as outlined below.
Erosion/Sedimentation
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 26 January 2013
• Use phased grading schedules to limit the area subject to erosion at any given
time.
• Prepare and implement a CSMP to ensure appropriate monitoring, testing, BMP effectiveness, and conformance with applicable discharge requirements.
• Prepare and implement a REAP, if applicable (i.e., depending on risk level), to
ensure that active construction areas/activities have adequate erosion and
sediment controls in place within 48 hours of the onset of any likely precipitation event (i.e., 50 percent or greater probability of producing precipitation, per
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration projections).
• Properly manage storm water and non-storm water flows to minimize runoff.
• Use erosion control/stabilizing measures such as geotextiles, mulching, mats, plastic sheets/tarps, fiber rolls, soil binders, compost blankets, soil roughening, or
temporary hydroseeding (or other plantings) in appropriate areas (e.g., graded
areas).
• Use appropriate sediment controls to protect the construction site perimeter and prevent off-site sediment transport, potentially including measures such as
temporary inlet filters, silt fences, fiber rolls, silt dikes, biofilter bags, gravel bags,
compost socks/berms, temporary sediment basins, check dams, street
sweeping/vacuuming, ATS, energy dissipators, stabilized construction access
points/sediment stockpiles, and properly fitted covers for sediment transport vehicles.
• Store BMP materials on-site to provide “standby” capacity adequate for the
complete protection of exposed areas and to prevent off-site sediment transport.
• Provide full erosion control for disturbed areas not actively worked for seven (7) or more consecutive calendar days during the rainy season (October 1 to
April 30), or 14 or more consecutive calendar days during the non-rainy season.
• Provide appropriate training for personnel responsible for BMP installation and maintenance.
• Use solid waste management efforts such as street sweeping, and proper
containment and disposal of construction debris.
• Comply with local dust control requirements.
• Install permanent landscaping, with emphasis on native and/or drought-tolerant varieties, as soon as feasible during or after construction.
• Implement appropriate monitoring and maintenance efforts (e.g., prior to, during
and after storm events) to ensure proper BMP function and efficiency.
• Implement sampling/analysis, monitoring/reporting and post-construction
management programs per NPDES and/or City requirements.
• Restrict paving operations during wet weather and use sediment control devices downstream of paving activities.
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 27 January 2013
• Implement additional BMPs as necessary to ensure adequate erosion and sediment
control. Construction-related Hazardous Materials
• Minimize the amount of hazardous materials on-site, and restrict storage/use
locations to areas at least 50 feet from storm drains and surface waters.
• Use raised (e.g., on pallets), covered, and/or enclosed storage facilities for all hazardous materials, and maintain accurate and up-to-date written inventories and
labels.
• Use berms, ditches, and/or impervious liners (or other applicable methods) in
material storage and vehicle/equipment maintenance and fueling areas to provide a containment volume of 1.5 times the volume of stored/used materials and prevent discharge in the event of a spill.
• Place warning signs in areas of hazardous material use or storage and near storm
drains (or other appropriate locations) to avoid inadvertent disposal.
• Properly maintain all construction equipment and vehicles.
• Properly contain and dispose of wastes and/or slurry from sources including
concrete, finishing compounds, dry wall, and paint, by using methods such as
providing properly designed and contained washout areas, avoiding overuse, and protecting storm drain inlets.
• Use appropriate measure to control non-storm water wastes, such as containment
and treatment.
• Provide training for applicable employees in the proper use, handling, and disposal of hazardous materials, as well as appropriate action to take in the event
of a spill.
• Store absorbent and clean-up materials in readily accessible locations.
• Properly locate, maintain, and contain wastewater facilities.
• Use recycled or less hazardous materials wherever feasible.
• Post regulatory agency telephone numbers and a summary guide of clean-up
procedures in a conspicuous location.
• Regularly (at least weekly) monitor and maintain hazardous material use/storage
facilities and operations to ensure proper working order.
• Restrict construction debris storage areas to appropriate locations at least 50 feet from storm drain inlets and water courses.
• Use appropriate storage facilities for construction debris, including adequately
sized watertight dumpsters, covers to preclude rain from contacting waste
materials, impervious liners, and surface containment features such as berms, dikes or ditches to prevent run-on and runoff.
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 28 January 2013
• Employ a licensed waste disposal operator to regularly (at least once a week)
remove and dispose of construction debris at an authorized off-site location.
Demolition-related Debris Generation
• Recycle appropriate (i.e., non-hazardous) construction debris for on- or off-site
use whenever feasible.
• Restrict construction debris storage areas to appropriate locations at least 50 feet from storm drain inlets.
• Use appropriate storage facilities for applicable construction debris, including
adequately sized watertight dumpsters, covers to preclude rain from contacting waste materials, impervious liners and surface containment features such as berms, dikes or ditches to prevent run-on, runoff and infiltration.
• Employ a licensed waste disposal operator to regularly remove and dispose of
construction debris in an authorized off-site location.
• Implement appropriate controls for concrete sawing or grinding activities, such as slurry and debris containment.
• Use dust-control measures such as watering to reduce particulate generation for
pertinent locations/activities (e.g., concrete removal).
• Use appropriate erosion and sediment control measures downstream of all
demolition activities.
• Conform to applicable requirements related to the removal, handling, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials generated during demolition, including efforts such as implementing appropriate sampling and monitoring procedures; proper
containment of contaminated materials during construction; providing protective
gear for workers handling hazardous materials; ensuring acceptable exposure
levels; and ensuring safe and appropriate handling, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials generated during project construction.
WQ-2 The extraction and disposal of groundwater associated with project construction activities
shall conform to all applicable requirements of the NPDES Groundwater Permit
(R9-2008-0002). While final BMPs would be determined as part of the NPDES Permit process based on site-specific parameters, they would likely include standard measures from the NPDES Permit text, with typical requirements outlined below.
• Use erosion/sedimentation controls similar to those described above in Mitigation
Measure WQ-1.
• Test extracted groundwater for appropriate contaminants prior to discharge.
• Treat extracted groundwater prior to discharge, if required, to provide
conformance with applicable discharge criteria (e.g., through methods such as
filtration, aeration, adsorption, disinfection, and/or conveyance to a municipal wastewater treatment plant).
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 29 January 2013
2.8.6.2 Long-term Surface Water Quality Impacts
A. Significant Impact. The proposed project is identified as a “Significant Redevelopment”
and “pollutant-generating redevelopment project” under City guidelines, and as a “Priority
Project” under NPDES guidelines, due to the inclusion of proposed development categories such
as commercial development, parking areas, and potential new restaurants. Anticipated and potential operational-phase surface water contaminants associated with project operations
include sediment, nutrients, heavy metals, organic compounds, trash and debris, oxygen
demanding substances, oil and grease, bacteria and viruses, and pesticides.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. The proposed project would be required to conform to
applicable NPDES and City storm water standards, with such conformance to include the use of appropriate post-construction site design/LID, source control, priority project, and treatment
control BMPs. In addition, implementation of Mitigation Measure WQ-3 would avoid or reduce
potentially significant operational and maintenance-related water quality impacts below a level
of significance.
C. Mitigation Measures. The following measure shall be implemented to reduce project
impacts to long-term water quality to below a level of significance.
WQ-3 Long-term project operation and maintenance shall conform to all applicable
requirements of the NPDES Municipal Permit (Order No. R9-2007-0001) and related City standards, including the Grading Ordinance (Carlsbad Code of Ordinances, Title 15,
Chapter 15.16); the Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance
(Carlsbad Code or Ordinances, Title 15, Chapter 15.12); Engineering Standards Volume
4, Storm Water Standards Manual; and Engineering Standards Volume 1, General Design
Standards. The project Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) has identified a number of LID site design, source control, priority project, and treatment control BMPs to
provide conformance to the noted requirements. These measures and associated
maintenance efforts are summarized below and shall be implemented to the satisfaction
of the City Engineer.
LID Site Design BMPs – LID site design BMPs are intended to control post-development
runoff, erosion potential, and contaminant generation by mimicking the natural
hydrologic regime to the maximum extent practicable (MEP), and capturing, filtering,
storing, evaporating, detaining, and/or infiltrating runoff close to its source. Specific LID
site design BMPs identified in the project SWMP include the following:
• Limit the extent of impervious surfaces to the MEP by maximizing building
density with a multi-story design (per City build height limitations), designing
buildings and circulation facilities to minimize roof and pavement areas, and maintaining associated access roads and parking lots at the minimum allowable width of 24 feet.
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 30 January 2013
• Preserve existing vegetation wherever feasible; maximize the use of native and/or
drought-tolerant landscaping; use pervious surfaces (turf, gravel or pervious
pavement) wherever feasible; and direct site drainage from parking areas and rooftops into pervious areas, (e.g., vegetated swales and pervious pavement) to the MEP.
• Drain impervious areas (parking lots and rooftops) to engineered treatment
control BMPs or Integrated Management Practices (IMPs). The described LID site design BMPs would help reduce long-term contaminant
generation by retaining pervious areas and limiting increases in site runoff rates/amounts,
increasing filtering and infiltration potential, and minimizing chemical applications
(i.e., pesticides, herbicides and fertilizers).
Source Control BMPs - Source control BMPs are intended to avoid or minimize the introduction of contaminants into storm drains and natural drainages by reducing on-site
contaminant generation and off-site contaminant transport to the MEP. Specific source
control BMPs identified in the project SWMP include the following:
• Design trash storage area to include impervious (concrete) bases, slopes to prevent run-on/runoff to/from adjacent areas; walls and gates to prevent trash
dispersal; and covers and attached receptacle lids to minimize direct precipitation
contact.
• Employ efficient irrigation systems consistent with the City Landscape Manual to reduce/control associated flows and runoff, including measures such as the use of
automated and tailored watering schedules (i.e., to avoid over-watering), and
installing moisture/pressure sensors and shutoff valves to reduce or terminate
irrigation under appropriate conditions (e.g., during/after precipitation events or in the event of broken pipes or sprinkler heads).
• Install “no dumping” stencils, tiles, and/or signs (per current City guidelines) at
all proposed on-site storm drain inlets and catch basins to discourage illicit
contaminant discharge.
• Provide storm water pollution educational materials to site owners, lessees and operators.
The described source control BMPs would help improve long-term water quality within
and downstream of the site by avoiding or minimizing runoff, contaminant generation, and exposure of potential contaminants to storm flows at the source.
Priority Project BMPs - Priority project BMPs are intended to provide additional or
enhanced control for facilities or uses that encompass specific targeted contaminants,
and/or that exhibit increased potential for contaminant discharge. Specific priority project BMPs identified in the project SWMP include the following:
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 31 January 2013
• Although two of the three would not be covered, proposed loading docks shall be
sloped away from the driveways, with trench drains located at the backs of the
loading areas. Trench drain filter inserts shall be installed to provide treatment prior to discharge to the storm drain.
• Equipment wash areas at restaurants (or other applicable sites) shall be indoors to
prevent direct precipitation contact, and linked to the sanitary sewer system to
preclude discharge into the storm drain system. Condensate drain lines shall discharge to landscaped areas if the flow is small enough that runoff will not occur.
The described priority project BMPs would help improve long-term water quality within
and downstream of the SP area by avoiding or minimizing the introduction of related contaminants into the project storm drain system.
Treatment Control BMPs - Treatment control (or structural) BMPs are designed to
remove pollutants from runoff to the MEP through means such as filtering, treatment or
infiltration. The described use of LID site design, source control, and priority project BMPs is intended to reduce treatment requirements by preserving existing hydrologic conditions and preventing pollutants from entering storm water runoff to the MEP.
Treatment control BMPs would be required for the project, however, with specific
proposed measures in the project SWMP including the installation of approximately
0.44 acre of vegetated swales, and 0.69 acre of pervious pavement, and the use of FloGard® LoPro trench drain filter inserts (or other equivalent units approved by the City Engineer) at loading docks. Summary descriptions of the proposed treatment BMPs are
provided below, with additional information included in the project SWMP (refer to the
Drainage Management Areas Figure of the SWMP for specific locations of the proposed
vegetated swales, pervious pavement areas, and loading docks). Vegetated swales typically function by slowing runoff velocities and allowing sediment
and other pollutants to settle, and also provide some infiltration capacity. Targeted
pollutants include sediment, metals, and hydrocarbons (high removal efficiency); trash
and organic materials (medium removal efficiency); and nutrients and pathogens (low removal efficiency). Ten-foot wide vegetated swales would be installed along the southern (Marron Road) and eastern (El Camino Real) SDP perimeters. Smaller areas of
five-foot wide vegetated swales would be installed in the parking lot north of the
expanded portion of the mall building.
Pervious pavement typically includes a high-permeability concrete layer underlain with materials such as crushed rock, sand, gravel, filter fabric, and appropriately permeable
soil. Pervious pavement typically exhibits moderate to high removal efficiencies for
pollutants including nutrients and heavy metals, and also provides some capacity for
infiltration and runoff control. Pervious pavement would be installed along the southern and eastern perimeter of the parking areas, generally alongside the vegetated swales and in the reconfigured parking lot.
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 32 January 2013
The identified FloGard® LoPro trench drain filter inserts consist of multi-modal facilities
designed to collect silt, trash and debris, and petroleum hydrocarbons (oil and grease)
from surface water runoff. They typically include a polypropylene filter element and a
Fossil Rock™ filter medium for hydrocarbon retention. Such media filtration systems generally exhibit high removal efficiencies for sediment, trash and debris, metals and hydrocarbons, and a medium removal efficiency for bacteria. Trench drain filter inserts
would be installed at the loading docks since these areas would not be covered, and
would treat runoff from the loading areas before it is released into the storm drain system.
Based on the described treatment BMPs identified in the project SWMP, the following measures are applicable to the proposed project:
• Approximately 0.44 acre of vegetated swales shall be incorporated into the SP area drainage system as shown on the Drainage Management Areas figure of the project SWMP, with runoff from surface parking areas and rooftops to be directed
into the on-site vegetated swales to the MEP.
• Approximately 0.69 acre of pervious pavement shall be incorporated into the SP area drainage system as shown on the Drainage Management Areas Figure of the project SWMP, with runoff from surface parking areas and rooftops to be directed
into the on-site pervious pavement to the MEP.
• FloGard® LoPro trench drain filter inserts (or other equivalent units approved by
the City Engineer) shall be installed in the trench drains at the back of the loading dock areas, as described in the project SWMP and shown on the associated
Drainage Management Areas Figure.
BMP Maintenance - All project related BMPs shall be maintained in perpetuity by the
project owner/applicant (and/or property tenants as applicable). Specific requirements shall be identified in the final SWMP and in a maintenance agreement to be approved by
the City Engineer prior to issuance of any construction permits. Typical maintenance
requirements for the types of BMPs identified for the proposed project include regular
inspection, cleaning, and as-needed repair of applicable facilities (including pervious
pavement and trench drain filter inserts); mowing, trimming, and replacement of vegetation in landscaping and vegetated swales; and removal of standing water.
2.9 Land Use
2.9.1 Land Use Compatibility
2.9.1.1 On-site Land Use Compatibility
A. Less Than Significant Impact. Project implementation would not result in on-site land
use incompatibility, or divide an established on-site community.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. The SP proposes the continuation of regional commercial
uses on the project site, including retail, service, and entertainment and dining uses, and would
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 33 January 2013
allow for temporary parking lot events, such as demonstration events, tree lots, community
events, farmers markets and other one-time activities. The current SDP proposal would be
compatible with existing land use and zoning designations for the property. The area is currently
developed with a regional shopping center and this type of land use would continue under the proposed SP. The proposed SP incorporates land use objectives and development standards that
address architecture and building materials; setbacks; grading; landscape; loading, storage and
refuse collection; and parking. The proposed project would provide a positive impact to on-site
land uses by improving and expanding the existing commercial facilities, revitalizing the
shopping center to make it more modern so that it continues to be a vibrant regional activity center. Because of the consistency with existing uses and positive impacts of the proposed
project, no significant adverse effects related to division of an established on-site community or
land use incompatibility would occur.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts associated with division of an established on-site community or land use incompatibility have
been identified.
2.9.1.2 Off-site Land Use Compatibility
A. Less Than Significant Impact. Project implementation would not result in off-site land
use incompatibility, or divide an established off-site community.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. Land uses surrounding the SP area generally consist of open
space, commercial, and residential uses. The proposed SP and current SDP proposal would not create incompatibilities with the surrounding communities, as the SP area would remain
designated as C-2 with the same land uses in place. Potential environmental effects may include
noise, light, glare, aesthetics or visual, or other physical impacts to surrounding land uses from
the proposed project’s land uses. The project does not represent a change in land use character
or intensity that would have the effect of dividing or disrupting existing land uses within the surrounding community. As with on-site land uses, the proposed SP and SDP would potentially
provide a positive impact to off-site land uses. The SP would define land use objectives and
provide cohesive development standards for the proposed site additions and modifications.
The potential exists for indirect impacts associated with traffic and possible conflicts with other utilities during construction and future maintenance activities. However, potential conflicts with
utilities, including natural gas lines, electrical conduits, or overhead power transmission lines,
would be identified and addressed in the final design stage of any construction and maintenance
activities, including the current SDP proposal. The City requires that all construction and
maintenance activities be coordinated in the planning stage with other facilities that may be affected. There is also no indication project implementation would cause the long-term vacancy
or closure of other local commercial establishments, or otherwise result in related urban decay
effects in the Carlsbad area. Because of the consistency with existing uses and positive impacts
of the proposed project, no significant adverse effects related to division of an established
off-site community or land use incompatibility would occur.
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 34 January 2013
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts
associated with division of an established off-site community or land use incompatibility have
been identified.
2.9.1.3 Consistency with Existing Land Use Plans, Policies, and Regulations
City of Carlsbad General Plan
A. Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would not conflict with the City
General Plan.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. The existing General Plan designation of Regional Commercial (R) would be compatible with the SP, as it would allow for the expansion of the
existing commercial development within the shopping center. Westfield Carlsbad would retain
full-line department stores and a full range of specialty retail, restaurant, and entertainment uses.
Because the proposed SP is consistent with the existing General Plan and local facilities
management plan zones (LFMP) land use designations, a less than significant impact would occur. As the SP area is located outside the California Coastal Zone; no conflicts with Coastal
Act policies in the LCP would occur. In addition, policies in the Open Space and Conservation
Element are not applicable to the proposed project as there are no natural resources on site.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts associated with inconsistencies with the City’s General Plan have been identified.
City of Carlsbad Zoning Ordinance
A. Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would not result in a conflict with the City’s Zoning Ordinance.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. The proposed SDP is consistent with the Regional
Commercial (R) designation of the SP area and with the implementing zone of General
Commercial (C-2), and no zone change is proposed. In instances where the SP development regulations would vary from the General Commercial (C-2) Zoning Ordinance regulations, the SP
development standards and guidelines would prevail for development and redevelopment within
the SP area. Listed in the SP are the uses that would be permitted within the SP area following
adoption of the plan, and uses that could be allowed within the SP area if approved as part of a
Conditional Use Permit/Planning Commission Hearing process. The SP proposes variances from the development regulations of the C-2 Zone in the areas of building height, landscaping and
signage. As discussed in Section 4.1, Aesthetics, of the Final EIR, the long-term aesthetic
changes associated with the variances would update and improve the visual interest of the
shopping center through the use of new façade treatments, building articulations, increased
landscaping and other design elements. Increased building heights in and around the main mall would modify the roof structure and provide visual interest to the shopping center, but would not
be substantial relative to the height of the existing structure. Landscaped setbacks would be
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 35 January 2013
implemented along El Camino Real and Marron Road to provide visual relief from the expansive
parking areas that surround the shopping center. As such, upon City approval, the SP and
current SDP proposal would be consistent with the intent of the Carlsbad Zoning Ordinance.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts
associated with City Zoning Ordinance conflicts have been identified.
Growth Management Chapter of Municipal Code
A. Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would not conflict with the Growth Management Chapter of the City’s Municipal Code.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. The proposed SP contains an analysis of public facility
impacts potentially created by the proposed project. This analysis determined that all standards
of the Growth Management Ordinance have been met. Therefore, the SP and current SDP proposal would be consistent with the requirements of the Growth Management Chapter of the Carlsbad Zoning Ordinance.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts
associated with conflicts with the Growth Management Chapter of the City’s Municipal Code have been identified.
Zone 1 Local Facilities Management Plan
A. Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would not conflict with the Zone 1 LFMP.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. The LFMPs were adopted to ensure that growth occurs in
concert with public facilities and service systems. The SP is located within LFMP Zone 1, and
capacity planning conducted for the LFMP included the regional shopping center in its base calculations. The public facilities needed to service the LFMP are already in place.
Implementation of the proposed SDP would not result in the provision of additional residential
units or substantial employment opportunities that could be directly tied to additional growth.
Therefore, the project would not conflict with the standards or thresholds for City administrative
facilities, fire, schools, libraries, and park and recreation facilities.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts
associated with Zone 1 LFMP conflicts have been identified.
City Landscape Manual
A. Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would not conflict with the City’s
Landscape Manual.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. The City’s Landscape Manual applies to all public and private developments requiring discretionary permits. As such, the SP and current SDP proposal
must and would comply with the requirements, standards, and guidelines contained in the
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 36 January 2013
Landscape Manual. Therefore, no significant impact associated with the Landscape Manual
would occur.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts associated with inconsistencies with the City’s Landscape Manual have been identified.
Precise Plan (PP 24)
A. Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would not conflict with Precise Plan 24.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. The existing PP 24 and all subsequent amendments that
have been processed to govern additional development and changes to the shopping center since
its inception (e.g., PP 24[A] – PP 24[K]) would be superseded by the proposed SP. Therefore, any partial or total rehabilitation, reconstruction, or replacement of existing buildings within the Westfield Carlsbad SP area would be subject to the requirements contained within the SP and the
applicable Code provisions relating to non-conforming uses.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts
associated with inconsistencies with the PP 24 have been identified. El Camino Real Corridor Development Standards
A. Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would vary from the architectural
theme, sign standards, and landscape standards required by the El Camino Real Corridor Development Standards adopted in 1984. However, the proposed SP contains its own updated standards to the corridor that would supersede those adopted in 1984.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. The proposed Westfield Carlsbad SP includes corridor
standards and design guidelines that would supersede those contained in the El Camino Real Corridor Development Standards (City 1984). The development standards and design guidelines included in the SP would be in compliance with the standards for building height, grading, and
roadway setback detailed in the 1984 El Camino Real Corridor Development Standards. Future
out-buildings to be constructed within 300 feet of El Camino Real on the existing surface
parking lots in the eastern portion of the SP area may reach a maximum of 35 feet from pad grade. These buildings must be set back a minimum 15 feet from El Camino Real. Building heights within the main mall would not be subject to the El Camino Real Corridor Standards, as
it is located greater than 300 feet from the roadway ROW. Cut or fill exceeding 15 feet from
existing grade would not be permitted within the SP area, except if it is required for the
construction of an underground parking structure(s) (not currently proposed). A sign program is being processed concurrently with the SP to integrate signs with building, site, and landscape design to form a unified architectural statement. As described under Final EIR Section 4.1,
Aesthetics, the new monument and other signage proposed throughout the SDP area would be
contemporary and complementary to the revitalized shopping center and would not result in a
significant impact. Although the SP and current SDP proposal would feature certain building elements that would not strictly adhere to the to the design theme and signage materials
standards for El Camino Real Corridor, the proposed deviations would not result in a significant
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 37 January 2013
visual quality impact along the highway. Therefore, upon adoption of the SP, this
“nonconformance” would not result in a significant land use impact.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts associated with inconsistencies with the El Camino Real Corridor Development Standards have
been identified.
Habitat Management Plan for Natural Communities in the City of Carlsbad
A. Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would not conflict with the Habitat Management Plan for Natural Communities in the City.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. The Buena Vista Lagoon Ecological Reserve, which is
situated west of the project site, is listed within the HMP as a Hardline Preserve Area and Core
Area 1 major wildlife movement corridor. The SP area and Buena Vista Creek to the north are located within the planning area of the HMP, although neither is identified within the core habitat area. In addition, the SP area and vicinity are not designated as Hardline Preserve Areas.
As discussed in Final EIR Section 5.5.2, Biological Resources, the proposed SP and current SDP
proposal would not directly or indirectly impact resources protected by the HMP.
C. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts associated with inconsistencies with the Habitat Management Plan for Natural Communities in
the City have been identified.
City of Oceanside Draft Subarea Plan
A. Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would not conflict with the City of
Oceanside Draft Subarea Plan.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. As a developed site, the SP and current SDP proposal would not affect any Pre-approved Mitigation areas identified in the Draft Subarea Plan. No
significant indirect effects to riparian habitat or resources in Buena Vista Creek would occur as
discussed in Final EIR Section 5.5.2, Biological Resources. Thus, the proposed project would
not affect the City of Oceanside’s ability to accomplish the objectives in its Subarea Plan.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts
associated with inconsistencies with the City of Oceanside Draft Subarea Plan have been
identified.
San Diego Association of Governments Regional Comprehensive Plan
A. Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would not conflict with the San
Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) Regional Comprehensive Plan (RCP).
B. Facts in Support of Finding. SANDAG has developed a Smart Growth Concept Map illustrating the location of existing, planned, and potential smart growth areas in San Diego as
part of the RCP. The Westfield Carlsbad Shopping Center is designated on the map as a
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 38 January 2013
potential “Town Center” area. The SANDAG Smart Growth Concept Map Site Descriptions
(last updated January 27, 2012) state that potential development could add anywhere from 200
to 400 multi-family residential units and additional retail square footage to the 1.1 million square
feet of retail floor space existing within the Westfield Carlsbad Shopping Center. While no residential uses are being proposed as part of the SDP project, and such uses are not a reasonably
foreseeable phase of the SDP, the Westfield Carlsbad SP would permit the future development of
residential units on site, subject to further environmental review under CEQA and the City’s
approval of additional discretionary actions. In addition, the shopping center site would continue
to meet the minimum employment requirements of 30 employees per acre consistent with a Town Center, as described in Final EIR Section 4.9, Land Use. Furthermore, the Specific Plan
area is currently served with high-frequency local transportation service, and two existing rapid
bus transit stations are located in the eastern portion of the shopping center site, as noted in the
Smart Growth Concept Map Site Descriptions. Light/commuter rail service also exists at the
El Camino Real NCTD SPRINTER station at El Camino Real and Oceanside Boulevard, located approximately 1.5 miles north of the shopping center. Therefore, the SDP, which provides for
additional employment opportunities, would not alter the SANDAG’s identification of the site as
a potential Town Center and would be consistent with the RCP Smart Growth Concept Map.
Impacts to land use policy in the SANDAG RCP would be less than significant.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts
associated with inconsistencies with the SANDAG RCP have been identified.
2.10 Noise
2.10.1 Construction-Phase Noise Impacts
A. Less Than Significant Impact. Project construction activities would not result in a
significant noise impact.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. Noise produced by general construction activities would be
intermittent and would occur only during the hours and days specified in the City’s Municipal
Code. An Acoustical Analysis Report (Final EIR Appendix E) prepared for the proposed project
states that although it could be considered loud at times, construction would comply with
Carlsbad’s Construction Noise Ordinance, which has no noise limits for short-term construction activities. Therefore, general construction noise impacts would be considered less than
significant.
Demolition of the existing Robinsons-May building and parking lot areas would likely require
the use a variety of equipment, including a “breaker” to demolish concrete footings and concrete structures, portable rock/cement crusher to break up concrete and asphalt, small dozer, loader
skid-steer, and dump trucks. The Acoustical Analysis Report analyzed for noise conditions
where the crushing operation would be located in the current parking area at the eastern end of
the shopping center, near the former Robinsons-May building. Breaker noise levels were also
analyzed for a breaker being used for demolition of the Robinsons-May building. Noise levels at the receptor locations were calculated to range from 60.6 to 66.1 dBA (decibels with
A-weighting) LEQ (time-averaged noise levels of one hour) for crusher operations. The
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 39 January 2013
continuous use of a breaker for demolition of the mall structures would lead to noise levels
ranging from 34.7 to 63.6 dBA LEQ for breaker operations at the Robinsons-May building.
Other demolition operations, including demolition of the parking lot areas, would create
significantly lower noise impacts and would not significantly contribute to the ambient noise levels at the receiver locations since no construction noise limits exist in the City Noise
Ordinance.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts
associated with general or demolition-related construction noise have been identified.
2.10.2 Stationary Noise Impacts
A. Less Than Significant Impact. Project operations would not result in a significant
stationary-source noise impact.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. Proposed stationary noise sources are similar to the current
site noise sources, but include changes and additions to the building square footage, as well as
reduced parking areas. In addition to the reconstructed main mall area, the current SDP proposal
plans to construct three new commercial pads along El Camino Real, the future uses of which are
currently undetermined. The Acoustical Analysis Report prepared for the proposed project analyzed potential operational noise impacts in the event that one or more of the commercial
pads be developed with a restaurant use, potential changes in noise levels resulting from
proposed parking lot modifications, and likely noise sources related to loading dock activities.
Table 4.10-8 in the Final EIR, Combined Noise Impacts – Project vs. No Project Noise Levels,
provides the calculated noise levels at 20 analyzed receiver locations from all of the exterior stationary sources after the Westfield Carlsbad project is completed. The total stationary project
noise levels would range from 38.4 to 59.9 dBA LEQ at the receptor locations. The analysis
shows that future stationary noise levels at receptor locations R9 through R12 and R14 would
exceed the County Noise Ordinance limit of 57.5 dBA LEQ. However, as the existing noise
exposure at these receptor locations currently exceeds or is close to approaching this threshold, the project-generated increase would not be audible (i.e., under 3dBA). In addition, stationary
noise would be masked by the traffic noise from local roads and SR-78, further diminishing the
audible effects of the stationary sources. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts associated with stationary noise sources have been identified.
2.10.3 Transportation Noise Impacts
A. Less Than Significant Impact. Project operations would not result in a significant transportation-related noise impact.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. The Acoustical Analysis Report prepared for the proposed
project analyzed potential transportation-related noise impacts anticipated to occur as a result of
project implementation. Final EIR Tables 4.10-9, Existing Baseline Roadway Noise, thru 4.10-11, Buildout Roadway Noise, for the Existing Plus Project (Year 2010), and Near-Term
(Year 2020) and Buildout (Year 2030) present calculated noise levels under two conditions for
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 40 January 2013
each receptor location: the noise generated on only the local roadways (without noise from
SR-78 included) and the actual noise at the receptor with noise from SR-78 included (which is
essentially constant for each analyzed year without regard for project noise). The largest change
in noise levels for all analyzed traffic scenarios would be 1.7 dBA (where peak hour sound levels are equivalent to the CNEL), which occurs in the Existing Plus Project condition. This change
would be below the allowable change of 3 dBA CNEL increase in ambient noise above existing
noise levels. Accordingly, traffic noise impacts to the SP area and project-specific noise impacts
to off-site residences would be less than the City’s thresholds. Thus, impacts from transportation
noise sources would be less than significant.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts
associated with transportation noise have been identified.
2.10.4 Airport and Airstrip Noise Impacts
A. Less Than Significant Impact. Project implementation would not result in airport or airstrip-related noise impacts.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. The project is not located within two miles of a public or
private airport, and is not located within the boundaries of an airport land use plan. There are no
private airstrips in the vicinity of the SP area. As such, people working in the SP area would not be impacted by excessive noise generated by such sources.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts
associated with airport or airstrip-related noise have been identified.
2.11 Paleontological Resources
2.11.1 Paleontological Resource Impacts
A. Significant Impact. Excavation into the Santiago Formation could have a potentially significant impact on paleontological resources.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. The maximum depth of excavation associated with the SDP
would be 22 feet where the lower level would expand into the southern parking lot. The
remainder of the site would be excavated to a depth of no more than two to three feet. There would be no significant impact in portions of the SP area where excavation and grading would
occur within artificial fill, as these materials have no potential for paleontological resources.
However, ground-disturbing activities associated with the current SDP proposal could extend
into previously undisturbed areas of the Santiago Formation, which is assigned a high
paleontological resource sensitivity. Implementation of Mitigation Measure P-1 would reduce the impact associated with paleontological resources to a level less than significant.
C. Mitigation Measures. The following measure shall be implemented to reduce project
impacts to paleontological resources to below a level of significance.
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 41 January 2013
P-1 A Paleontological Mitigation Plan (PMP) shall be prepared prior to the start of
construction of the current SDP proposal and any future SDPs that involve excavation
into previously undisturbed areas of the Santiago Formation, as there is potential to
encounter highly sensitive paleontological resources within the limits of the SP area. The following elements shall be included in the PMP:
• As a condition of the grading permit, the developer shall comply with the following
measures:
− Prior to initiation of construction activities, the project developer shall retain a
qualified paleontologist to carry out the mitigation program outlined here. A
qualified paleontologist is defined as an individual with a M.S. or Ph.D. in
paleontology or geology who is familiar with paleontological procedures and techniques.
− A qualified paleontologist shall be at the preconstruction meeting to discuss
grading plans and consult with the grading and excavation contractors regarding
the potential location and nature of paleontological resources and associated monitoring/recovery operations.
− A paleontological monitor shall be on site at all times during grading/excavation
activities involving previously undisturbed deposits of high sensitivity formations (Santiago Formation) to inspect for well-preserved fossils. The paleontological monitor need not be on site during the original cutting of previously undisturbed
deposits of zero sensitivity formations (alluvium and compacted fill). A
paleontological monitor is defined as an individual who has experience in the
collection and salvage of fossil materials. The paleontological monitor shall work under the direction of a qualified paleontologist.
− In the event that well-preserved fossils or other unearthed paleontological
resources are discovered, the paleontologist (or paleontological monitor) shall
recover them. In most cases this fossil salvage can be completed in a short period of time. However, some fossil specimens (such as a complete large mammal
skeleton) may require an extended salvage period. In these instances the
paleontologist (or paleontological monitor) shall be allowed to temporarily direct,
divert, or halt grading to allow recovery of fossil remains in a timely manner.
Because of the potential for the recovering of small fossil remains, such as isolated mammal teeth, it may be necessary to set up a screen-washing operation
on the site.
− Fossil remains collected during the monitoring and salvage portion of the mitigation program shall be cleaned, repaired, sorted, and cataloged.
− Prepared fossils, along with copies of all pertinent field notes, photos, and maps
shall be deposited (as a donation) in a scientific institution with permanent paleontological collections such as the San Diego Natural History Museum.
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 42 January 2013
Donation of the fossils shall be accompanied by financial support for initial
specimen storage.
− A final summary report shall be completed and submitted to the Planning Division that outlines the results of the mitigation program. This report shall
include discussions of the methods used, stratigraphic sections exposed, fossils
collected, and significance of recovered fossils. Compliance with this mitigation
measure shall be verified by the City of Carlsbad’s Land Development Engineering Division.
2.12 Transportation/Traffic
2.12.1 Existing Plus Project Impacts
2.12.1.1 Street Segments
A. Less Than Significant Impact. Project implementation would not add enough traffic to
result in an increase in daily V/C of 0.02 or greater at street segments projected to operate at
LOS D or worse, or a decrease in peak hour speed of 1.0 mph or greater at street segments projected to operate at LOS E or F under Existing Plus Project conditions.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. The Transportation Study (Final EIR Appendix F) prepared
for the project evaluated potential impacts to 18 study area street segments under the Existing
Plus Project scenario. Ten of the study area segments are located in the Carlsbad, and the remaining eight are located in the City of Oceanside. As shown in Final EIR Table 4.12-6 and Table 20 of the Transportation Study, daily LOS at all 18 street segments would operate at
LOS D or better under the Existing Plus Project scenario. Existing Plus Project morning and
afternoon peak hour street segment analysis was conducted for all 10 street segments in the City,
plus the two segments in Oceanside that are projected to operate at LOS D. As summarized in Transportation Study Tables 21 and 22, all of the 10 street segments in the City of Carlsbad are projected to operate at LOS D or better, during both the morning and afternoon peak hours.
However, both of the analyzed street segments in the City of Oceanside, El Camino Real at Vista
Way and El Camino Real south of the SR 78 westbound ramps, would operate at LOS E or F
during at least one of the analyzed peak hours, below the City of Oceanside’s standard for an acceptable LOS for peak hour street segment operations (LOS D or better). However, the project would not result in a decrease in speed of 1.0 mph or more in the City of Oceanside street
segments projected to operate at LOS E or F during peak hours. While the project would result
in a decrease in speed of 1.0 mph at northbound El Camino Real south of Vista Way during the
morning peak hour, the segment is projected to operate at an acceptable LOS (i.e., LOS D). Therefore, the project would not result in direct significant peak hour impacts at any of the analyzed street segments during either peak hour.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts
associated with street segments under Existing Plus Project conditions have been identified. 2.12.1.2 Intersections
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 43 January 2013
A. Less Than Significant Impact. The project would not add enough traffic to result in an
increase in delay of 2.0 seconds or more at any of the analyzed intersections that are projected to
operate at LOS E or F during Existing Plus Project conditions.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. The Transportation Study (Final EIR Appendix F) prepared
for the project evaluated potential impacts to study area intersections under the Existing Plus
Project Condition scenario. As shown in Final EIR Table 4.12-7, all of the analyzed
intersections are projected to operate at an acceptable LOS (i.e., LOS D or better) with relatively
small increases in the V/C ratios and delay as a result of the project trips under the Existing Baseline Plus Project conditions. As such, the project would not add enough traffic to any of the
18 study intersections to result in a direct significant impact.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts
associated with intersections under Existing Plus Project conditions have been identified.
2.12.2 Near Term (Year 2020) Impacts
2.12.2.1 Street Segments
A. Less Than Significant Impact. Project implementation would not add enough traffic to result in an increase in daily V/C of 0.02 or greater at street segments projected to operate at
LOS D or worse, or a decrease in peak hour speed of 1.0 mph or greater at street segments
projected to operate at LOS E or F under Near Term (Year 2020) conditions.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. The Transportation Study (Final EIR Appendix F) prepared for the project evaluated potential impacts to study area street segments under the Near Term
(Year 2020) scenario. As shown in Final EIR Table 4.12-8 and Table 20 of the Transportation
Study, all 10 street segments in the City are projected to operate at LOS D or better during daily
conditions except on Jefferson Street north of Marron Road, which will operate at LOS E. However, project implementation would not result in an increase in daily V/C of 0.02 or more. As shown in Tables 28 and 29 of the Transportation Study, the City of Oceanside segment of
Jefferson Street south of Vista Way is projected to operate at LOS D during daily conditions, and
LOS B or C during both peak hours; thus, no significant impact would occur. The street
segments of El Camino Real south of Vista Way and south of the SR-78 westbound ramps are projected to operate at LOS E or F during both daily and peak hours, considered an unacceptable LOS. However, as the project would neither increase daily V/C by 0.02 or more, nor add enough
traffic to these segments to result in a decrease in speed of greater than or equal to 1.0 mph
(Oceanside’s significance criteria) during either peak hour, impacts would be less than
significant. As such, the project would not result in a direct significant daily or peak hour impact at any of the analyzed street segments during either peak hour, nor would the project add enough
traffic to any of the 18 street segments to result in a direct significant daily traffic impact.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts
associated with street segments during Near Term (Year 2020) conditions have been identified.
2.12.2.2 Intersections
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 44 January 2013
A. Less Than Significant Impact. The project would not add enough traffic to result in an
increase in delay of 2.0 seconds or more at any of the analyzed intersections that are projected to
operate at LOS E or F under Near Term (Year 2020) conditions.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. The Transportation Study (Final EIR Appendix F) prepared
for the project evaluated potential impacts to study area intersections under the Near Term (Year
2020) scenario. As shown in Table 26 of the Transportation Study, under the Near Term Plus
Project conditions, all of the analyzed intersections are projected to operate at an acceptable LOS (i.e., LOS D or better) during both the morning and afternoon peak hours, and no significant
impact would occur. The project is, therefore, not expected to result in any direct significant
impact at any of the analyzed intersections under Near Term conditions.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts associated with intersections under Near Term (2020) conditions have been identified.
2.12.3 Horizon Year (Year 2030) Impacts
2.12.3.1 Street Segments
A. Less Than Significant Impact. Project implementation would not add enough traffic to
result in an increase in daily V/C of 0.02 or greater at street segments projected to operate at
LOS D or worse, or a decrease in peak hour speed of 1.0 mph or greater at street segments
projected to operate at LOS E or F under Horizon Year (Year 2030) conditions.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. The Transportation Study (Final EIR Appendix F) prepared
for the project evaluated potential impacts to study area street segment under the Horizon Year
(2030) scenario. As shown in Final EIR Table 4.12-10 and Table 34 of the Transportation Study,
Horizon Year (Year 2030) Street Segment Daily Levels of Service, all 18 of the analyzed street segments are projected to operate at LOS D or better. As shown in Tables 35 and 36 of the
Transportation Study, during peak hours, the City of Oceanside segment of El Camino Real
south of Vista Way is projected to operate at LOS F in the southbound direction during the
afternoon peak hour, considered unacceptable LOS for peak hour segment operations. However,
the project does not result in a decrease in speed of greater than or equal to 1.0 mph (Oceanside’s significance criteria) during either peak hour at this street segment and impacts would be less
than significant. Therefore, the project would not result in a direct significant peak hour impact
at any of the analyzed street segments during either peak hour. Additionally, the project would
not add enough traffic to any of the 18 street segments to result in a direct significant impact.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts
associated with street segments under Horizon Year (Year 2030) conditions have been identified.
2.12.3.2 Intersections
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 45 January 2013
A. Less Than Significant Impact. The project would not add enough traffic to result in an
increase in delay of 2.0 seconds or more at any of the analyzed intersections that are projected to
operate at LOS E or F during Horizon Year (Year 2030) conditions.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. The Transportation Study (Final EIR Appendix F) prepared
for the project evaluated potential impacts to study area intersections under the Horizon Year
(2030) scenario. As shown in Final EIR Table 4.12-11and Table 33 of the Transportation Study,
all intersections are projected to operate at LOS D or better, except at the intersection of
Jefferson Street and the SR 78 westbound ramps, which is projected to operate at LOS E in the afternoon peak hour. However, the project-generated traffic does not result in an increase in
delay of 2.0 seconds or more at this intersection under Horizon Year Plus Project conditions;
therefore, project-related impacts would be less than significant. The project is, therefore, not
expected to result in any direct significant impact at any of the analyzed intersections under
Horizon Year (Year 2030) conditions.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts
associated with intersections under Horizon Year (Year 2030) conditions have been identified.
2.12.4 Alternative Transportation Impacts
A. Less Than Significant Impact. The project would not interfere with existing or future
alternative transportation, and would be consistent with Circulation Element policies of the
City’s General Plan that promote the use of alternative transportation methods.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. The SP and SDP would not change the location or capacity
of the Westfield Carlsbad Transit Center or any bus turnouts. Future employees and patrons of
the expanded and renovated shopping center would be able to access the project via alternative
transit. The project would be consistent with Circulation Element policies of the City General
Plan that promote the use of alternative transportation methods such as walking, bicycling and public transportation. Therefore, no significant impact would occur.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts
associated with alternative transportation systems or policies have been identified.
2.12.5 Cumulative Transportation Impacts
A. Significant Impact. Project implementation would result in indirect cumulative impacts
to roadway segments at Vista Way (west of El Camino Real), Jefferson Street (south of Vista
Way) and El Camino Real (south of Vista Way) within the City of Oceanside. B. Facts in Support of Finding. The Transportation Study (Final EIR Appendix F) prepared
for the project evaluated the project’s contribution to indirect cumulative impacts. Project
contribution to indirect cumulative impacts identified at Vista Way (west of El Camino Real),
Jefferson Street (south of Vista Way) and El Camino Real (south of Vista Way) in the City of Oceanside will be mitigated to less than significant levels through the implementation of Mitigation Measure T-1.
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 46 January 2013
C. Mitigation Measures. The following measure shall be implemented to reduce cumulative
traffic impacts to below a level of significance.
T-1 Prior to issuance of building or grading permit (whichever comes first) for the current
SDP proposal, the project applicant shall provide written documentation from the City of
Oceanside the applicant has paid their fair-share contribution toward adaptive-responsive
signals along the segments of Vista Way (west of El Camino Real), Jefferson Street
(south of Vista Way) and El Camino Real (south of Vista Way), to the satisfaction of the Carlsbad City Engineer.
2.13 Utilities and Service Systems
2.13.1 Water Supply and Infrastructure Impacts
A. Less Than Significant Impact. Implementation of the proposed project would not result
in a significant impact related to water supply or infrastructure.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. A 2008 Water Study and updated 2010 Water Study prepared for the project calculated existing and future water demand to be generated by the
proposed project (Final EIR Appendix G). The studies each concluded that impacts to water
services and supplies would be less than significant. The existing on- and off-site water
distribution system was found to be capable of delivering maximum day demands and a
6,000-gpm fire flow with a minimum residual on-site pressure of 49.4 psi (nearly 40 psi more than required). As such, the existing system could accommodate the water demands of the
proposed SDP and the three existing connections would be maintained. The existing
infrastructure is adequate and no additional infrastructure would be required to meet the demand
and the fire flow requirements associated with the current SDP proposal.
The City’s Water Reclamation Master Plan recommends the provision of recycled water to the
Westfield Carlsbad site with the future construction of Phase IV of the recycled water
distribution system. Expansion of the recycled water system would reduce the per-capita
quantity of potable water required from the SDCWA as the CMWD approaches ultimate
(buildout) demands. Although water to the SP area would initially be supplied solely by the existing potable water system, recycled water irrigation piping would be installed during
proposed SDP construction as part of the anticipated expansion of reclaimed water pipelines,
thereby eliminating the need to retrofit piping once recycled water is available in the SP area
vicinity. Based on the foregoing, impacts to water supply and distribution are anticipated to be
less than significant.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts
associated with water supply or water infrastructure have been identified.
2.13.2 Sewer and Wastewater Treatment Facilities Impacts
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 47 January 2013
A. Less Than Significant Impact. Implementation of the proposed project would not result
in a significant impact related to sewer infrastructure or wastewater treatment facilities.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. A Sewer Study prepared for the project calculated sewer and wastewater demand to be generated by the proposed project (Final EIR Appendix G). As
described in the Sewer Study, the net increases in wastewater flows would be accommodated by
the existing sewer infrastructure, including the described sewer lines, the Buena Vista Pump
Station, and associated force main and gravity sewer system. No further upgrades to the existing
wastewater infrastructure system in other portions of the SP area would be required as a result of implementation of the current SDP.
The Carlsbad Municipal Water District (CMWD) has approximately 3.4 million gallons per day
(mgd) of excess capacity rights at the Encina Water Pollution Control Facilities (EWPCF).
Accordingly, the increases in wastewater generated by the current SDP proposal would not result in a capacity deficiency or overwhelm the treatment facilities at the EWPCF. Based on the
described conditions, the existing, adequate conveyance and treatment capacity is available to
accommodate the proposed project and related impacts would be less than significant.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts associated with sewer infrastructure or wastewater treatment facilities have been identified.
2.13.3 Storm Water/Drainage Impacts
A. Less Than Significant Impact. The current SDP proposal would not require construction of additional storm drain facilities; modifications would be made.
B. Facts in Support of Finding. A preliminary Drainage Report and a preliminary Storm
Water Management Plan (SWMP) prepared for the proposed project found the existing
capacities of the inlets and overall on- and off-site storm drain system to be adequate to support the proposed project (Final EIR Appendix D). Furthermore, incorporation of low-impact
development (LID) features such as porous concrete and bioswales would increase the amount of
pervious surfaces on site, as would the addition of proposed landscape improvements, thereby
enabling the site to handle project-related runoff more efficiently than in the existing condition.
No impacts to storm water or drainage facilities would occur.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts
associated with storm drain facilities have been identified.
2.13.4 Solid Waste Disposal Impacts
A. Less Than Significant Impact. During the construction and demolition phases,
construction-related waste would be generated, ranging from construction worker personal
waste, to demolition waste from the interiors and buildings that would be demolished, to
hazardous materials associated with architectural coatings. During the project’s operational phase, the solid waste generation at Westfield Carlsbad would increase by approximately
8,854 pounds per day, or 1,616 tons per year.
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 48 January 2013
B. Facts in Support of Finding. Based on the project’s construction-phase efforts to recycle
or reuse at least 50 percent of demolition and construction waste, develop a waste management
plan, and use recycled materials where feasible, the amount of construction-related waste that would be generated is not considered significant. The construction contractor would be
responsible for recycling of the demolition and construction materials, while Waste
Management, the solid waste service provider at the Westfield Carlsbad Shopping Center, would
provide containers necessary for all types of collection needs.
Operational solid waste diversions are anticipated to increase from the shopping center as the
City enhances its recycling programs for commercial uses in accordance with AB 341.
Participation in the City’s commercial recycling programs would further reduce Westfield
Carlsbad’s long-term disposal needs occurring from the operation of the expanded shopping
center.
Although the proposed project would increase demand for solid waste collection and increase the
quantity of solid waste being hauled to existing landfills, adequate landfill capacity is currently
available in the region and would continue to be available in the future for the solid waste
disposal needs of the current SDP proposal. Therefore, less than significant impacts associated with solid waste disposal capacity are identified.
C. Mitigation Measures. No mitigation measures are proposed as no significant impacts
associated with solid waste disposal have been identified.
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 49 January 2013
3.0 EFFECTS FOUND NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT
The City finds, based on the substantial evidence appearing in Section 5.0, subsection 5.5 of the
Final EIR, that the following impacts on the following resources would not be significant:
• Agriculture and Forest Resources (project-level and cumulative)
• Biological Resources (project-level and cumulative)
• Mineral Resources (project-level and cumulative)
• Population and Housing (project-level and cumulative)
• Public Services (project-level and cumulative)
• Recreation (project-level and cumulative)
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 50 January 2013
4.0 FINDINGS REGARDING FEASIBLE ALTERNATIVES
Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(a), EIRs must “describe a range of
reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of
the significant effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives.” No
significant and unmitigable impacts are identified in the Final EIR.
The Final EIR considers a reasonable range of alternatives. The alternatives to the Project are evaluated in Section 6.0 of the Final EIR in terms of their ability to meet the basic objectives of
the Project, and eliminate or further reduce its significant environmental effects. Based on these
parameters, the following alternatives were considered:
• No Project Alternative
• Alternative 2 – Reduced Project: Main Mall Renovations Only (No Out-Buildings), and
• Alternative 3 – Reduced Project: Re-Tenant Main Mall Plus Out-Buildings
The three alternatives listed above were thoroughly analyzed in the Final EIR, and constitute a
reasonable range of alternatives necessary to permit a reasoned choice among the options
available to the City. The City finds that a good faith effort was made to evaluate all alternatives
in the Final EIR that are reasonable alternatives to the project and could feasibly attain the basic
objectives of the project, and as a result, the scope of alternatives analyzed in the Final EIR is not unduly limited or narrow, and that all reasonable alternatives were reviewed, analyzed and
discussed in the review process of the Final EIR and ultimate decision on the project.
4.1 No Project Alternative
The No Project Alternative assumes that the proposed SP would not be adopted, the current SDP
proposal would not be implemented, and no expansion of the existing Westfield Carlsbad
shopping center would occur. Revitalization of the shopping center through the reconstruction of
the former Robinsons-May department store and construction of new out-buildings proposed as
part of the current SDP proposal would not occur. Any signage improvements would be implemented in accordance with the Carlsbad Municipal Code with no deviations. Under the No
Project Alternative, the former Robinsons-May department store would be re-occupied with
commercial/retail tenant(s). Interior tenant improvements would be permitted but no
construction of new buildings or square footage or increase in building heights would occur. No
façade treatments would be implemented around the exterior of the vacant department store. The landscaping along the El Camino Real corridor and Marron Road would not be widened under
this alternative.
4.1.1 Findings in Support of Fact
Under the No Project Alternative, potentially significant impacts to cultural resources, geologic
hazards, hydrology and water quality, paleontological resources on site would be avoided since
new construction would be limited to interior tenant improvements. Similar to the proposed
project, less than significant impacts would occur for air quality, aesthetics, energy, land use and
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 51 January 2013
planning, noise, and utilities/service systems for this alternative. Hazards and hazardous waste
impacts caused by asbestos-containing materials and/or lead-based paint would still occur under
this alternative due to on-going shopping center renovations. The traffic associated with this
alternative would contribute to indirect cumulative impacts to three roadway segments in the City of Oceanside in the future, although the contribution would not be considerable. The No
Project Alternative would not meet most of the basic project objectives identified in Section 3.0
of the Final EIR. For instance, the No Project Alternative would not modernize or expand the
shopping center into a contemporary facility since only the existing, internally-focused structure
would be used for new commercial retail. No new standards for landscaping, parking, uses, signage or building design would be implemented. No new or enhanced dining or entertainment
experiences or outdoor gathering places or pedestrian-friendly site design or connections would
be created. Less construction and commercial jobs, shopping opportunities and sales tax base
would be generated by the No Project Alternative since no new commercial space would be
constructed on site. An improved street presence would not be realized, including an enhanced streetscape for El Camino Real, a visual “gateway” into the City. Although some sustainability
features could be integrated into the existing shopping center, the potential to decrease the
shopping center’s existing GHG emissions would be lower under the No Project Alternative.
Improvements in long-term water quality would not be realized since treatment control measures
would not be constructed. The No Project Alternative, while Environmentally Superior under CEQA, is therefore not recommended for approval.
4.2 Alternative 2 – Reduced Project: Main Mall Renovations Only (No Out-Buildings)
Under Alternative 2, substantial renovations to the 148,159-sf former Robinsons-May department store and adjacent 77,472 sf of retail shops, including new commercial construction
along the façade of the structure, would be implemented under a SDP. However, the pads for the
three out-buildings (26,300 sf) would not be constructed as proposed. As such, Alternative 2
would result in a net 9,117-sf increase in the amount of new GLA proposed on the Westfield
Carlsbad property (in contrast to the 35,417 net sf of new retail space proposed under the project) (as shown in Table 3-1). None of the parking area would be reconfigured under this alternative.
The development standards, design criteria and guidelines and implementation procedures
contained in the Westfield Carlsbad SP would be adopted. Similar to the proposed project,
future SDPs would have to comply with the provisions and procedures in the SP.
4.2.1 Findings in Support of Fact
Under Alternative 2, potentially significant impacts to cultural resources, geologic hazards,
hydrology and water quality, hazards and hazardous materials and paleontological resources on
site would be similar to but slightly less than anticipated with the proposed project. Similar to the proposed project, less than significant impacts would occur for air quality, aesthetics, energy, land use and planning, noise, and utilities/service systems for this alternative. The additional
traffic associated with new commercial space would not result in significant direct impacts but
would contribute to indirect cumulative impacts to three roadway segments in the City of
Oceanside in the future. In all cases, the same mitigation required of the proposed project would address the impacts anticipated under this alternative. Alternative 2 would meet some of the basic project objectives outlined in Section 3.0 of the Final EIR, but not to the extent of the
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 52 January 2013
proposed project. Specifically, this alternative would modernize and expand the shopping center
into a contemporary facility. New standards for landscaping, parking, uses, signage and building
design would be implemented under the SP. New outdoor gathering places would be created
along the edge of the main mall; however, the pedestrian-friendly gateways between the outer edges of the center and the mall would not be implemented since the out-buildings would not be
constructed at this time. Fewer construction and commercial jobs and shopping opportunities,
and a reduced sales tax base, would be generated by Alternative 2 since 26,300 less sf of
commercial space would be constructed on site. Extensive sustainability measures would be
integrated into the design, thus reducing existing energy and GHG emissions, similar to the proposed project. Improvements in long-term water quality would be realized since treatment
control measures would be constructed.
While this alternative is considered feasible under CEQA, and would modernize and expand the
shopping center into a contemporary facility, it would not meet the basic project objectives to the same extent as the proposed project. Alternative 2 is therefore not recommended for approval on
this site.
4.3 Alternative 3 – Reduced Project: Re-Tenant Main Mall Plus Out-Buildings
Under Alternative 3, instead of fully reconstructing and substantially renovating the former
Robinsons-May department store and adjacent retail shops, the spaces would undergo tenant
improvements and be re-tenanted and the three new out-buildings would be constructed. Based
on this description, this alternative would result in 225,631 sf of the main mall being re-occupied
(after internal tenant improvements are implemented) and 26,300 sf of new commercial space being constructed where the three out-buildings are proposed. Therefore, the net increase would
be 26,300 sf under Alternative 3 (in contrast to the 35,417 sf under the proposed project) and the
expanded shopping center would encompass 1,177,392 sf GLA (or 9,117 sf less than the
proposed project) under this alternative. The Westfield Carlsbad SP would still be implemented
under this alternative. The development standards, design criteria and guidelines and implementation procedures contained in the SP would be adopted. Similar to the proposed project,
future SDPs would have to comply with the provisions and procedures in the SP.
4.3.1 Findings in Support of Fact
Under Alternative 3, potentially significant impacts to cultural resources, geologic hazards,
hydrology and water quality, and paleontological resources would be the similar to but slightly
less than anticipated with the proposed project. However, the impacts would be mitigated
through the same measures recommended for the proposed project. The additional traffic
associated with new construction would not result in significant direct impacts but would contribute to indirect cumulative impacts to three roadway segments in the City of Oceanside in
the future. Similar to the proposed project, less than significant impacts would occur for air
quality, aesthetics, energy, land use and planning, noise, and utilities/service systems for this
alternative. Alternative 3 would meet most of the basic project objectives identified in Section
3.0 of the EIR, but not to the same extent as the proposed project. Specifically, this alternative would modernize and expand the shopping center into a contemporary facility. New standards
for landscaping, parking, uses, signage and building design would be implemented under the SP.
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 53 January 2013
Pedestrian-friendly gateways between the outer edges of the center and the mall would be
implemented along with the out-buildings. Less construction and commercial jobs, shopping
opportunities and sales tax base would be generated by Alternative 3 since 9,117 less sf of
commercial space would be constructed on site. With the out-buildings and other SDP improvements in place an improved street presence would be realized, including an enhanced
streetscape for El Camino Real, a visual “gateway” into the City. Sustainability measures would
be integrated into the project under Alternative 3, but not necessarily to levels anticipated under
the proposed project. Similar improvements in long-term water quality would be realized under
the proposed project and Alternative 3, since treatment control measures would be constructed.
While this alternative is considered feasible under CEQA, and would modernize and expand the
shopping center into a contemporary facility, it would not meet the basic project objectives to the
same extent as the proposed project. Alternative 3 is therefore not recommended for approval on
this site.
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 54 January 2013
5.0 ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE
While the No Project Alternative is considered the environmentally superior alternative, as it
reduces or avoids most of the environmental effects identified for the proposed project, the State CEQA Guidelines, Section15126.6(e)(2) requires that another alternative be identified as the
Environmentally Superior Alternative among the other alternatives. Alternative 2 – Reduced
Project: Main Mall Renovations Only (No Out-Buildings) has been identified as an additional
Environmentally Superior Alternative.
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 55 January 2013
6.0 CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE FINAL EIR
Pursuant to Article 7 of the State CEQA Guidelines, these Findings have been prepared for the
consideration and approval of the Final EIR and the analysis contained herein. The Final EIR was completed in accordance with CEQA; and the decision-making body, the City Council for
the City, has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final EIR prior to action.
It is recommended that the proposed project, along with the above detailed mitigation measures
to reduce identified significant environmental effect to below a level of significance, be adopted.
No unmitigated significant impacts associated with the proposed project would occur; therefore, no Statement of Overriding Considerations is required.
Exhibit “A”
June 5, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad
Candidate CEQA Findings 56 January 2013
7.0 STATEMENT OF LOCATION OF RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
California Public Resources Code Section 21081.6(a)(2) requires that the CEQA lead agency, in
this case the City, specify the location and custodian of the documents and other material that constitute the record of proceedings upon which its decision is based. It is the purpose of this
statement to satisfy this requirement.
Documents and other material that constitutes the record of proceedings for CEQA
documentation for the Westfield Carlsbad project are on file at the following location:
City of Carlsbad
Planning Division
1635 Faraday Avenue
Carlsbad, California 92008-7314
Because this project was subject to a hearing of the City Council, the following are also locations
for retention and custodianship of documents and other material that constitutes the record of
proceedings.
City of Carlsbad
City Clerk
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive
Carlsbad, California 92008
OR City of Carlsbad – Dove Library
1775 Dove Lane
Carlsbad, California 92011
Exhibit “B” June 6, 2013
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
FOR
WESTFIELD CARLSBAD SPECIFIC PLAN/SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN PROJECT
EIR 09-02/SP 09-01/SDP 09-04 State Clearinghouse No. 2010011004
Prepared for:
City of Carlsbad
Planning Division
1635 Faraday Avenue
Carlsbad, California 92008
December 2012
Exhibit “B” June 6, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 1 December 2012
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
WESTFIELD CARLSBAD SPECIFIC PLAN / SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN PROJECT
Mitigation measures have been identified in the Environmental Impact Report for the Westfield
Carlsbad Project (project) to reduce or eliminate potential environmental impacts. The City of
Carlsbad (City) is required to implement all adopted mitigation measures. In order to ensure
compliance, the following mitigation monitoring and reporting program has been formulated. This
program consists of a checklist followed by a detailed description of the mitigation measures.
Key objectives of the project are to:
• Develop a Specific Plan that guides the modernization and revitalization of Westfield
Carlsbad into a contemporary, vibrant, dynamic, convenient, and competitive shopping
center that attracts visitors from the surrounding community and the larger market area.
• Codify development standards to address landscaping, parking, uses, signage, and maintain
building design criteria to ensure future redevelopment in the Specific Plan area is compatible
with the proposed Westfield Carlsbad Specific Plan and in conformance with the Carlsbad
General Plan and its associated policies and goals.
• Develop updated, expanded, flexible, and enhanced retail, dining, commercial, and
entertainment spaces in a cohesive and economically feasible manner to enable tenants to be
competitive in a changing marketplace.
• Establish Westfield Carlsbad as a prominent regional retail center that is attractive to a wide
variety of high-quality retailers and provides a wide range of shopping and dining choices to
the surrounding community and on a regional scale.
• Establish Westfield Carlsbad as a safe location for visitors through enhanced lighting and
security standards that optimize public safety.
• Incorporate attractive outdoor gathering places into Westfield Carlsbad and create a
pedestrian-friendly site through creation of enhanced pedestrian connections between on-site
uses.
• Enhance employment opportunities in the City through the creation of construction- and
commercial-related jobs that are fully integrated into the community.
Exhibit “B” June 6, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 2 December 2012
• Create improved street presence for Westfield Carlsbad along El Camino Real that provides
visual identity, a visual gateway into the northern portion of the City, and pedestrian
gateways from the public sidewalks into the shopping center.
• Expand and enhance the utilization and safety of pedestrian linkages to and from Westfield
Carlsbad and the surrounding community through improved streetscape, lighting, and
security standards.
• Revitalize the property in a sustainable manner through re-use of existing buildings and
infrastructure where feasible and implementation of various environmentally sensitive
project design features.
• Improve the water quality in and downstream of the Specific Plan area through low impact
development design features, such as vegetated strips (bioswales) and pervious pavement.
• Fuel economic growth in the City and strengthen the City’s tax base through sales and
property taxes.
A mitigation checklist has been prepared for the project. Table 1 summarizes the mitigation
measures for the project. Information contained within the checklist clearly identifies the mitigation
measure, delineates the monitoring schedule, and defines the conditions required to verify
compliance. Following is an explanation of the seven columns that constitute the checklist.
Column 1 Mitigation Measure: An inventory of each mitigation measure is provided with a
brief description.
Column 2 Type: Each mitigation measure is classified as Project Design Mitigation (PD),
Project Construction Mitigation (PC), Ongoing Mitigation (OM), or Long-Term
Mitigation (LT) in order to identify at what stage in the project development process
the mitigation measure can be implemented based upon the following definitions:
– PD - Project Design Mitigation - mitigation that has been incorporated into the
project at the design phase of project development (e.g., traffic control plan,
landscape plan);
– PC - Project Construction Mitigation - mitigation that is to be initiated at the
project site prior to and/or during construction to avoid construction related
impacts (e.g., dust or noise control measures);
Exhibit “B” June 6, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 3 December 2012
– OM - Ongoing Mitigation - mitigation associated with the project over a period of time (e.g.,
success of revegetation);
– LT - Long-Term Mitigation - mitigation that requires monitoring over a greater period of time
(e.g., revegetation monitoring program).
Column 3 Monitor: Identifies the City division or other public agency that is responsible for
determining compliance with the mitigation measure and for informing the Planning
Division about compliance.
Column 4 Schedule: The monitoring schedule depends upon the progression of the overall
project. Therefore, specific dates are not used within the “Schedule” column.
Instead, scheduling describes a logical succession of events (e.g., prior to
construction, annual) and if necessary, delineates a follow-up program.
Column 5 Compliance Action: The monitor can easily determine a mitigation measure’s
completion by referring to “Compliance Action.” Upon satisfaction of the
requirement listed in this column, the mitigation measure is considered complete.
Column 6 Verification of Compliance: The monitor verifies completion of the particular
mitigation measure by initialing and dating in this column. Where the “Schedule”
column indicates annual or other ongoing mitigation measures, verification of
compliance may not occur until completion of the project. Provision of all required
signatures within the Verification of Compliance column signifies conclusion of the
monitoring program.
Column 7 Remarks: The status of ongoing and cumulative mitigation measures is to be
documented during each visit. The space provided for remarks is obviously too small
for inclusion of the remarks. It is intended that this space be used to indicate whether
there are specific comments pertaining to the status of the mitigation measure. If
there are additional comments they are to be attached to the checklist. Progress
reports are required for revegetation programs. Information provided within progress
reports will be helpful in the development of future mitigation programs.
This program is to be adopted by the lead and responsible agencies upon formulation of findings in
order to comply with the requirements set forth by Assembly Bill 3180 (Public Resources Code
Section 21081.6).
Exhibit “B” June 6, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 4 December 2012
TABLE 1
MITIGATION MEASURES FOR WESTFIELD CARLSBAD PROJECT
Mitigation Measure Type Monitor Schedule Compliance Action
Verification
of
Compliance Remarks
Initial Date
Cultural Resources
C-1 For the current SDP proposal and
any future SDPs involving grading, archaeological and Native American
monitor(s) shall be on site during initial ground disturbance and
grading operations in the event that unknown archaeological resources
are encountered during construction.
PC Carlsbad
Planning Division and
Construction Management
Division
Prior to and
during construction
Prior to issuance of the grading permit,
the developer and contractor shall both provide a statement agreeing to comply
in full with Mitigation Measure C-1 during grading and construction. Evidence of a
contract with a qualified archaeologist and Native American monitor shall be
provided to the Planning Division prior to issuance of the grading permit. The
contract shall include on-site monitoring at all times during initial ground
disturbance and grading operations in the event that unknown archaeological
resources are encountered during construction.
C-2 If archaeological resources are
discovered during project construction, all work in the area of
the find shall cease, and a qualified archaeologist shall be retained by
the City to investigate the find, and to make recommendations on its
disposition. The archaeologist shall consult with a representative from
the Pala Band of Mission Indians regarding the significance of the
discovery. The City shall donate the resource to the appropriate
interested party and/or museum for recordation and/or curation.
PC Carlsbad
Planning Division and
Construction Management
Division
During
excavation and grading activities
Prior to issuance of the grading permit,
the developer and contractor shall both provide a statement agreeing to comply
in full with Mitigation Measure C-2 through C-4 during grading and
construction. If archaeological resources are discovered during project
construction, all work in the area of the find shall cease, and a qualified
archaeologist shall be retained by the City to investigate the find, and to make
recommendations on its disposition.
Exhibit “B” June 6, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 5 December 2012
TABLE 1
MITIGATION MEASURES FOR WESTFIELD CARLSBAD PROJECT
Mitigation Measure Type Monitor Schedule Compliance Action
Verification
of
Compliance Remarks
Initial Date
Cultural Resources (cont.)
C-3 If human remains are discovered
during project construction, all work shall cease and the San Diego
County Coroner’s Office shall be contacted pursuant to procedures
set forth in Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code.
The City shall follow the recommendations of the San Diego
County Coroner’s Office and document the subsequent
management of the remains in the project file.
PC Carlsbad
Construction Management
Division
During
excavation and grading activities
If human remains are discovered during
project construction, all work shall cease and the San Diego County Coroner’s
Office shall be contacted.
C-4 If human remains are discovered
and the San Diego County Coroner determines the remains to be Native
American, the Native American Heritage Commission shall be
contacted and shall identify the “most likely descendant.” Their
treatment shall comply with procedures consistent with Public
Resources Code Section 5097.98 et al.
PC Carlsbad
Construction Management
Division
During
excavation and grading activities
If human remains are discovered and the
San Diego County Coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the
Native American Heritage Commission shall be contacted.
Exhibit “B” June 6, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 6 December 2012
TABLE 1 (CONT.)
MITIGATION MEASURES FOR WESTFIELD CARLSBAD PROJECT
Mitigation Measure Type Monitor Schedule Compliance Action
Verification
of
Compliance Remarks
Initial Date
Geology and Soils
GS-1 Prior to issuance of a project
grading permit, a detailed geotechnical investigation report
shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval.
This investigation shall address all geotechnical concerns identified in
the Geotechnical Reconnaissance Report prepared for the proposed
project by GEOCON (2010), as well as other applicable issues, and shall
conform to all pertinent requirements of the City’s Technical
Guidelines for Geotechnical Reports. Specifically, the detailed
project geotechnical investigation shall review and update
recommendations in the Geotechnical Reconnaissance
Report for issues including seismically-induced ground shaking
and liquefaction/dynamic settlement, as well as compressible/expansive
soils, shallow groundwater drainage, oversize materials, and
foundation/footing/pavement/retaining wall design.
PD and
PC
Carlsbad
Land Development
Engineering Division
Prior to issuance
of a grading permit
A final geotechnical report that
addresses site-specific geotechnical considerations shall be prepared and
submitted to the City Engineer for approval. The final report shall address
engineering measures for project-specific site conditions to minimize seismically-
induced ground shaking and liquefaction/dynamic settlement, as well
as soil erosion, compressible/ expansive soils, shallow groundwater drainage,
oversize materials and foundation/footing/pavement/retaining
wall design. This investigation would be conducted pursuant to all applicable
regulatory requirements of the City of Carlsbad and related standards such as
the IBC and CBC. Project construction and maintenance shall comply with the
recommendations of the final report as approved by the City Engineer.
Exhibit “B” June 6, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 7 December 2012
TABLE 1 (CONT.)
MITIGATION MEASURES FOR WESTFIELD CARLSBAD PROJECT
Mitigation Measure Type Monitor Schedule Compliance Action
Verification
of
Compliance Remarks
Initial Date
Geology and Soils (cont.)
Project design, construction and
maintenance shall implement and comply with all
recommendations/requirements identified in the approved detailed
geotechnical investigation report, as well as any other applicable
requirements identified by the City Engineer.
Exhibit “B” June 6, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 8 December 2012
TABLE 1 (CONT.)
MITIGATION MEASURES FOR WESTFIELD CARLSBAD PROJECT
Mitigation Measure Type Monitor Schedule Compliance Action
Verification
of
Compliance Remarks
Initial Date
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Haz-1 Contract specifications shall require
that any building materials found to contain asbestos containing-
materials (ACMs) or lead-based paint (LBP) shall be handled using
proper Health and Safety precautions and the materials shall
be properly disposed as hazardous waste according to federal, state
and local regulations. ACMs shall be removed by a licensed asbestos
abatement contactor. A certified asbestos consultant shall conduct
abatement planning, monitoring (as needed), oversight, and reporting to
ensure its proper removal and disposal.
PC Carlsbad
Building Division
During construction Building plans/contract specifications
shall require the use of proper Health and Safety precautions if any building
materials are found to contain ACMs or LBP. A licensed asbestos abatement
contractor and certified asbestos consultant shall be retained if such
materials are found during construction or demolition.
Exhibit “B” June 6, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 9 December 2012
TABLE 1 (CONT.)
MITIGATION MEASURES FOR WESTFIELD CARLSBAD PROJECT
Mitigation Measure Type Monitor Schedule Compliance Action
Verification
of
Compliance Remarks
Initial Date
Hydrology and Water Quality
WQ-1 Prior to issuance of a project
grading permit, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval.
The project SWPPP shall include adequate best management
practices (BMPs), to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, to demonstrate
conformance with the NPDES Construction General Permit (Order
No. 2009-0009-DWQ) and related City requirements for the issues of
erosion/sedimentation, construction-related hazardous materials, and
demolition-related debris generation. While final BMPs would
be determined as part of the noted SWPPP process based on site-
specific parameters, they would likely include standard measures
from the NPDES Permit text and City Storm Water Standards, as
outlined below.
PD and
PC
Carlsbad
Land Development
Engineering Division
Prior to and
during construction
Prior to issuance of a grading permit,
the developer shall prepare and submit for review and approval of the Carlsbad
City Engineer, a SWPPP to control pollutants in compliance with the City’s
Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP), General
Construction Storm Water Permit, and the General Municipal Storm Water
Permit. The developer shall be responsible for monitoring and
maintaining all project BMP erosion control measures on a weekly basis.
Exhibit “B” June 6, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 10 December 2012
TABLE 1 (CONT.)
MITIGATION MEASURES FOR WESTFIELD CARLSBAD PROJECT
Mitigation Measure Type Monitor Schedule Compliance Action
Verification
of
Compliance Remarks
Initial Date
Hydrology and Water Quality (cont.)
Erosion/Sedimentation
• Use phased grading schedules to limit the area subject to erosion at
any given time.
• Prepare and implement a
Construction Site Monitoring Program (CSMP) to ensure
appropriate monitoring, testing, BMP effectiveness, and
conformance with applicable discharge requirements.
• Prepare and implement a Rain
Event Action Plan (REAP), if applicable (i.e., depending on
risk level), to ensure that active construction areas/activities
have adequate erosion and sediment controls in place within
48 hours of the onset of any likely precipitation event (i.e., 50
percent or greater probability of producing precipitation, per
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
projections).
• Properly manage storm water
and non-storm water flows to minimize runoff.
Exhibit “B” June 6, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 11 December 2012
TABLE 1 (CONT.)
MITIGATION MEASURES FOR WESTFIELD CARLSBAD PROJECT
Mitigation Measure Type Monitor Schedule Compliance Action
Verification
of
Compliance Remarks
Initial Date
Hydrology and Water Quality (cont.)
• Use erosion control/stabilizing
measures such as geotextiles, mulching, mats, plastic sheets/tarps, fiber rolls, soil binders, compost blankets, soil
roughening, or temporary hydroseeding (or other
plantings) in appropriate areas (e.g., graded areas).
Use appropriate sediment controls
to protect the construction site perimeter and prevent off-site
sediment transport, potentially including measures such as temporary inlet filters, silt fences, fiber rolls, silt dikes, biofilter bags,
gravel bags, compost socks/berms, temporary sediment basins, check
dams, street sweeping/vacuuming, active treatment systems (ATS),
energy dissipators, stabilized construction access points/sediment
stockpiles, and properly fitted covers for sediment transport vehicles.
Exhibit “B” June 6, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 12 December 2012
TABLE 1 (CONT.)
MITIGATION MEASURES FOR WESTFIELD CARLSBAD PROJECT
Mitigation Measure Type Monitor Schedule Compliance Action
Verification
of
Compliance Remarks
Initial Date
Hydrology and Water Quality (cont.)
• Store BMP materials on-site to
provide “standby” capacity adequate for the complete protection of exposed areas and to prevent off-site sediment
transport.
• Provide full erosion control for disturbed areas not actively
worked for seven (7) or more consecutive calendar days
during the rainy season (October 1 to April 30), or 14 or
more consecutive calendar days during the non-rainy season.
• Provide appropriate training for
personnel responsible for BMP installation and maintenance.
• Use solid waste management efforts such as street sweeping,
and proper containment and disposal of construction debris.
• Comply with local dust control
requirements.
• Install permanent landscaping, with emphasis on native and/or
drought-tolerant varieties, as soon as feasible during or after
construction.
Exhibit “B” June 6, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 13 December 2012
TABLE 1 (CONT.)
MITIGATION MEASURES FOR WESTFIELD CARLSBAD PROJECT
Mitigation Measure Type Monitor Schedule Compliance Action
Verification
of
Compliance Remarks
Initial Date
Hydrology and Water Quality (cont.)
• Implement appropriate
monitoring and maintenance efforts (e.g., prior to, during and after storm events) to ensure proper BMP function and
efficiency.
• Implement sampling/analysis, monitoring/reporting and post-
construction management programs per NPDES and/or
City requirements.
• Restrict paving operations during wet weather and use
sediment control devices downstream of paving activities.
• Implement additional BMPs as necessary to ensure adequate
erosion and sediment control. Construction-related Hazardous
Materials
• Minimize the amount of hazardous materials on-site,
and restrict storage/use locations to areas at least 50
feet from storm drains and surface waters.
Exhibit “B” June 6, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 14 December 2012
TABLE 1 (CONT.)
MITIGATION MEASURES FOR WESTFIELD CARLSBAD PROJECT
Mitigation Measure Type Monitor Schedule Compliance Action
Verification
of
Compliance Remarks
Initial Date
Hydrology and Water Quality (cont.)
• Use raised (e.g., on pallets),
covered, and/or enclosed storage facilities for all hazardous materials, and maintain accurate and up-to-date written inventories
and labels.
• Use berms, ditches, and/or impervious liners (or other
applicable methods) in material storage and vehicle/equipment
maintenance and fueling areas to provide a containment
volume of 1.5 times the volume of stored/used materials and
prevent discharge in the event of a spill.
• Place warning signs in areas of
hazardous material use or storage and near storm drains
(or other appropriate locations) to avoid inadvertent disposal.
• Properly maintain all construction equipment and
vehicles.
Exhibit “B” June 6, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 15 December 2012
TABLE 1 (CONT.)
MITIGATION MEASURES FOR WESTFIELD CARLSBAD PROJECT
Mitigation Measure Type Monitor Schedule Compliance Action
Verification
of
Compliance Remarks
Initial Date
Hydrology and Water Quality (cont.)
• Properly contain and dispose of
wastes and/or slurry from sources including concrete, finishing compounds, dry wall, and paint, by using methods
such as providing properly designed and contained
washout areas, avoiding overuse, and protecting storm
drain inlets.
• Use appropriate measure to control non-storm water wastes,
such as containment and treatment.
• Provide training for applicable
employees in the proper use, handling, and disposal of
hazardous materials, as well as appropriate action to take in the
event of a spill.
• Store absorbent and clean-up
materials in readily accessible locations.
• Properly locate, maintain, and
contain wastewater facilities.
• Regularly (at least weekly) monitor and maintain hazardous
material use/storage facilities and operations to ensure proper
working order.
Exhibit “B” June 6, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 16 December 2012
TABLE 1 (CONT.)
MITIGATION MEASURES FOR WESTFIELD CARLSBAD PROJECT
Mitigation Measure Type Monitor Schedule Compliance Action
Verification
of
Compliance Remarks
Initial Date
Hydrology and Water Quality (cont.)
• Restrict construction debris
storage areas to appropriate locations at least 50 feet from storm drain inlets and water courses.
• Use appropriate storage
facilities for construction debris, including adequately sized
watertight dumpsters, covers to preclude rain from contacting
waste materials, impervious liners, and surface containment
features such as berms, dikes, or ditches to prevent run-on and
runoff.
• Employ a licensed waste disposal operator to regularly (at
least once a week) remove and dispose of construction debris at
an authorized off-site location.
Demolition-related Debris Generation
• Recycle appropriate (i.e., non-hazardous) construction debris for on- or off-site use whenever
feasible.
Exhibit “B” June 6, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 17 December 2012
TABLE 1 (CONT.)
MITIGATION MEASURES FOR WESTFIELD CARLSBAD PROJECT
Mitigation Measure Type Monitor Schedule Compliance Action
Verification
of
Compliance Remarks
Initial Date
Hydrology and Water Quality (cont.)
• Restrict construction debris
storage areas to appropriate locations at least 50 feet from storm drain inlets.
• Use appropriate storage facilities for applicable construction debris,
including adequately sized watertight dumpsters, covers to
preclude rain from contacting waste materials, impervious
liners and surface containment features such as berms, dikes, or
ditches to prevent run-on, runoff and infiltration.
• Employ a licensed waste
disposal operator to regularly remove and dispose of
construction debris in an authorized off-site location.
• Implement appropriate controls for concrete sawing or grinding
activities, such as slurry and debris containment.
• Use dust-control measures such
as watering to reduce particulate generation for
pertinent locations/activities (e.g., concrete removal).
Exhibit “B” June 6, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 18 December 2012
TABLE 1 (CONT.)
MITIGATION MEASURES FOR WESTFIELD CARLSBAD PROJECT
Mitigation Measure Type Monitor Schedule Compliance Action
Verification
of
Compliance Remarks
Initial Date
Hydrology and Water Quality (cont.)
• Use appropriate erosion and
sediment control measures downstream of all demolition activities.
• Conform to applicable requirements related to the
removal, handling, transport, and disposal of hazardous
materials generated during demolition, including efforts
such as implementing appropriate sampling and
monitoring procedures; proper containment of contaminated
materials during construction; providing protective gear for
workers handling hazardous materials; ensuring acceptable
exposure levels; and ensuring safe and appropriate handling,
transport, and disposal of hazardous materials generated
during project construction.
Exhibit “B” June 6, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 19 December 2012
TABLE 1 (CONT.)
MITIGATION MEASURES FOR WESTFIELD CARLSBAD PROJECT
Mitigation Measure Type Monitor Schedule Compliance Action
Verification
of
Compliance Remarks
Initial Date
Hydrology and Water Quality (cont.)
WQ-2 The extraction and disposal of
groundwater associated with project construction activities shall conform
to all applicable requirements of the NPDES Groundwater Permit
(R9-2008-0002). While final BMPs would be determined as part of the
NPDES Permit process based on site-specific parameters, they would
likely include standard measures from the NPDES Permit text, with
typical requirements outlined below.
• Use erosion/sedimentation
controls similar to those described above in Mitigation Measure WQ-1.
• Test extracted groundwater for appropriate contaminants prior
to discharge.
• Treat extracted groundwater prior to discharge, if required, to
provide conformance with applicable discharge criteria
(e.g., through methods such as filtration, aeration, adsorption,
disinfection, and/or conveyance to a municipal wastewater
treatment plant).
PD and
PC
Carlsbad
Land Development
Engineering Division
Prior to and
During Construction
Prior to issuance of permits or
approvals for any public or private right-of-way improvements or site
development plans, the developer shall prepare and submit for review and
approval of the Carlsbad City Engineer, improvement plans that demonstrate
that the project is designed so that the extraction and disposal of groundwater
associated with project construction activities shall conform to all applicable
requirements of the NPDES Groundwater Permit (R9-2008-0002).
Exhibit “B” June 6, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 20 December 2012
TABLE 1 (CONT.)
MITIGATION MEASURES FOR WESTFIELD CARLSBAD PROJECT
Mitigation Measure Type Monitor Schedule Compliance Action
Verification
of
Compliance Remarks
Initial Date
Hydrology and Water Quality (cont.)
WQ-3 Long-term project operation and
maintenance shall conform to all applicable requirements of the
NPDES Municipal Permit (Order No. R9-2007-0001) and related City
standards, including the Grading Ordinance (Carlsbad Code of
Ordinances, Title 15, Chapter 15.16); the Storm Water
Management and Discharge Control Ordinance (Carlsbad Code or
Ordinances, Title 15, Chapter 15.12); Engineering Standards
Volume 4, Storm Water Standards Manual; and Engineering Standards
Volume 1, General Design Standards. The project Storm
Water Management Plan (SWMP) has identified a number of LID site
design, source control, priority project, and treatment control BMPs
to provide conformance to the noted requirements.
These measures and associated
maintenance efforts are summarized below and shall be
implemented to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
PD and
LT
Carlsbad
Land Development
Engineering Division
Prior to issuance
of any construction
permits; Throughout
project operation and maintenance
activities.
Prior to issuance of permits or
approvals for any public or private right-of-way improvements or site
development plans, the developer shall prepare and submit for review and
approval of the Carlsbad City Engineer, improvement plans that demonstrate
that long-term project operation and maintenance shall conform to all
applicable requirements of the NPDES Municipal Permit (Order No. R9-2007-
0001) and related City standards, including the Grading Ordinance
(Carlsbad Code of Ordinances, Title 15, Chapter 15.16); the Storm Water
Management and Discharge Control Ordinance (Carlsbad Code or
Ordinances, Title 15, Chapter 15.12); Engineering Standards Volume 4,
Storm Water Standards Manual; and Engineering Standards Volume 1,
General Design Standards.
Exhibit “B” June 6, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 21 December 2012
TABLE 1 (CONT.)
MITIGATION MEASURES FOR WESTFIELD CARLSBAD PROJECT
Mitigation Measure Type Monitor Schedule Compliance Action
Verification
of
Compliance Remarks
Initial Date
Hydrology and Water Quality (cont.)
LID Site Design BMPs – LID site design
BMPs are intended to control post-development runoff, erosion
potential, and contaminant generation by mimicking the natural
hydrologic regime to the maximum extent practicable (MEP), and
capturing, filtering, storing, evaporating, detaining, and/or
infiltrating runoff close to its source. Specific LID site design BMPs
identified in the project SWMP include the following:
• Limit the extent of impervious surfaces to the MEP by maximizing building density with
a multi-story design (per City build height limitations),
designing buildings and circulation facilities to minimize
roof and pavement areas, and maintaining associated access
roads and parking lots at the minimum allowable width of 24
feet.
LID site design, source control, priority
project, and treatment control BMPs shall meet or exceed the effectiveness
of those evaluated in the project SWMP to the satisfaction of the
Carlsbad City Engineer. The City Land Development Engineering Division
shall confirm in writing the mitigation to be implemented. Building plans shall
list measures to be implemented as directed by City staff.
Exhibit “B” June 6, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 22 December 2012
TABLE 1 (CONT.)
MITIGATION MEASURES FOR WESTFIELD CARLSBAD PROJECT
Mitigation Measure Type Monitor Schedule Compliance Action
Verification
of
Compliance Remarks
Initial Date
Hydrology and Water Quality (cont.)
• Preserve existing vegetation
wherever feasible; maximize the use of native and/or drought-tolerant landscaping; use pervious surfaces (turf, gravel or
pervious pavement) wherever feasible; and direct site drainage
from parking areas and rooftops into pervious areas, (e.g., vegetated swales and pervious pavement) to the MEP.
• Drain impervious areas (parking
lots and rooftops) to engineered treatment control BMPs or
Integrated Management Practices (IMPs).
The described LID site design BMPs
would help reduce long-term contaminant generation by retaining
pervious areas and limiting increases in site runoff
rates/amounts, increasing filtering and infiltration potential, and
minimizing chemical applications (i.e., pesticides, herbicides, and
fertilizers).
Exhibit “B” June 6, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 23 December 2012
TABLE 1 (CONT.)
MITIGATION MEASURES FOR WESTFIELD CARLSBAD PROJECT
Mitigation Measure Type Monitor Schedule Compliance Action
Verification
of
Compliance Remarks
Initial Date
Hydrology and Water Quality (cont.)
Source Control BMPs - Source control BMPs are intended to avoid or minimize the introduction of contaminants into storm drains and natural drainages by reducing on-site contaminant generation and off-site contaminant transport to the MEP. Specific source control BMPs identified in the project SWMP include the following:
• Design trash storage area to include impervious (concrete) bases, slopes to prevent run-on/runoff to/from adjacent areas; walls and gates to prevent trash dispersal; and covers and attached receptacle lids to minimize direct precipitation contact.
Exhibit “B” June 6, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 24 December 2012
TABLE 1 (CONT.)
MITIGATION MEASURES FOR WESTFIELD CARLSBAD PROJECT
Mitigation Measure Type Monitor Schedule Compliance Action
Verification
of
Compliance Remarks
Initial Date
Hydrology and Water Quality (cont.)
• Install “no dumping” stencils,
tiles, and/or signs (per current City guidelines) at all proposed on-site storm drain inlets and catch basins to discourage illicit
contaminant discharge.
• Provide storm water pollution
educational materials to site owners, lessees and operators.
The described source control BMPs
would help improve long-term water quality within and downstream of the
site by avoiding or minimizing runoff, contaminant generation, and
exposure of potential contaminants to storm flows at the source.
Priority Project BMPs - Priority
project BMPs are intended to provide additional or enhanced
control for facilities or uses that encompass specific targeted
contaminants, and/or that exhibit increased potential for contaminant
discharge. Specific priority project BMPs identified in the project
SWMP include the following:
Exhibit “B” June 6, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 25 December 2012
TABLE 1 (CONT.)
MITIGATION MEASURES FOR WESTFIELD CARLSBAD PROJECT
Mitigation Measure Type Monitor Schedule Compliance Action
Verification
of
Compliance Remarks
Initial Date
Hydrology and Water Quality (cont.)
• Although two of the three would
not be covered, proposed loading docks shall be sloped away from the driveways, with trench drains located at the
backs of the loading areas. Trench drain filter inserts shall
be installed to provide treatment prior to discharge to the storm
drain.
• Equipment wash areas at restaurants (or other applicable
sites) shall be indoors to prevent direct precipitation contact, and
linked to the sanitary sewer system to preclude discharge
into the storm drain system. Condensate drain lines shall
discharge to landscaped areas if the flow is small enough that
runoff will not occur.
• The described priority project BMPs would help improve long-
term water quality within and downstream of the SP area by
avoiding or minimizing the introduction of related
contaminants into the project storm drain system.
Exhibit “B” June 6, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 26 December 2012
TABLE 1 (CONT.)
MITIGATION MEASURES FOR WESTFIELD CARLSBAD PROJECT
Mitigation Measure Type Monitor Schedule Compliance Action
Verification
of
Compliance Remarks
Initial Date
Hydrology and Water Quality (cont.)
Treatment Control BMPs - Treatment
control (or structural) BMPs are designed to remove pollutants from
runoff to the MEP through means such as filtering, treatment, or
infiltration. The described use of LID site design, source control, and
priority project BMPs is intended to reduce treatment requirements by
preserving existing hydrologic conditions and preventing pollutants
from entering storm water runoff to the MEP. Treatment control BMPs
would be required for the project, however, with specific proposed
measures in the project SWMP including the installation of
approximately 0.44 acre of vegetated swales, and 0.69 acre of pervious
pavement, and the use of FloGard® LoPro trench drain filter inserts (or
other equivalent units approved by the City Engineer) at loading docks.
Summary descriptions of the proposed treatment BMPs are
provided below, with additional information included in the project
SWMP.
Exhibit “B” June 6, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 27 December 2012
TABLE 1 (CONT.)
MITIGATION MEASURES FOR WESTFIELD CARLSBAD PROJECT
Mitigation Measure Type Monitor Schedule Compliance Action
Verification
of
Compliance Remarks
Initial Date
Hydrology and Water Quality (cont.)
Vegetated swales typically function
by slowing runoff velocities and allowing sediment and other
pollutants to settle, and also provide some infiltration capacity. Targeted
pollutants include sediment, metals, and hydrocarbons (high removal
efficiency); trash and organic materials (medium removal
efficiency); and nutrients and pathogens (low removal efficiency).
Ten-foot wide vegetated swales would be installed along the southern
(Marron Road) and eastern (El Camino Real) SDP perimeters.
Smaller areas of five-foot wide vegetated swales would be installed
in the parking lot north of the expanded portion of the mall building.
Exhibit “B” June 6, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 28 December 2012
TABLE 1 (CONT.)
MITIGATION MEASURES FOR WESTFIELD CARLSBAD PROJECT
Mitigation Measure Type Monitor Schedule Compliance Action
Verification
of
Compliance Remarks
Initial Date
Hydrology and Water Quality (cont.)
Pervious pavement typically includes
a high-permeability concrete layer underlain with materials such as
crushed rock, sand, gravel, filter fabric, and appropriately permeable
soil. Pervious pavement typically exhibits moderate to high removal
efficiencies for pollutants including nutrients and heavy metals, and also
provides some capacity for infiltration and runoff control. Pervious
pavement would be installed along the southern and eastern perimeter of
the parking areas, generally alongside the vegetated swales and
in the reconfigured parking lot. The identified FloGard® LoPro trench
drain filter inserts consist of multi-modal facilities designed to collect
silt, trash and debris, and petroleum hydrocarbons (oil and grease) from
surface water runoff. They typically include a polypropylene filter element
and a Fossil Rock™ filter medium for hydrocarbon retention. Such media
filtration systems generally exhibit high removal efficiencies for
sediment, trash and debris, metals and hydrocarbons, and a medium
removal efficiency for bacteria.
Exhibit “B” June 6, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 29 December 2012
TABLE 1 (CONT.)
MITIGATION MEASURES FOR WESTFIELD CARLSBAD PROJECT
Mitigation Measure Type Monitor Schedule Compliance Action
Verification
of
Compliance Remarks
Initial Date
Hydrology and Water Quality (cont.)
Trench drain filter inserts would be
installed at the loading docks since these areas would not be covered,
and would treat runoff from the loading areas before it is released
into the storm drain system.
Based on the described treatment BMPs identified in the project SWMP,
the following measures are applicable to the proposed project:
Approximately 0.44 acre of vegetated
swales shall be incorporated into the SP area drainage system as shown
on the Drainage Management Areas figure of the project SWMP, with
runoff from surface parking areas and rooftops to be directed into the on-site
vegetated swales to the MEP.
Approximately 0.69 acre of pervious pavement shall be incorporated into
the SP area drainage system as shown on the Drainage Management
Areas figure of the project SWMP, with runoff from surface parking areas
and rooftops to be directed into the on-site pervious pavement to the
MEP.
Exhibit “B” June 6, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 30 December 2012
TABLE 1 (CONT.)
MITIGATION MEASURES FOR WESTFIELD CARLSBAD PROJECT
Mitigation Measure Type Monitor Schedule Compliance Action
Verification
of
Compliance Remarks
Initial Date
Hydrology and Water Quality (cont.)
• FloGard® LoPro trench drain filter inserts (or other equivalent units approved by the City Engineer) shall be installed in the trench drains at the back of the loading dock areas, as described in the project SWMP and shown on the associated Drainage Management Areas figure.
• BMP Maintenance - All project related BMPs shall be maintained in perpetuity by the project owner/applicant (and/or property tenants as applicable). Specific requirements shall be identified in the final SWMP and in a maintenance agreement to be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of any construction permits. Typical maintenance requirements for the types of BMPs identified for the proposed project include regular inspection, cleaning, and as-needed repair of applicable facilities (including pervious pavement and trench drain filter inserts); mowing, trimming, and replacement of vegetation in landscaping and vegetated swales; and removal of standing water.
Exhibit “B” June 6, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 31 December 2012
TABLE 1 (CONT.)
MITIGATION MEASURES FOR WESTFIELD CARLSBAD PROJECT
Mitigation Measure Type Monitor Schedule Compliance Action
Verification
of
Compliance Remarks
Initial Date
Paleontological Resources (cont.)
P-1 A Paleontological Mitigation Plan (PMP)
shall be prepared prior to the start of construction of the current SDP
proposal and any future SDPs that involve excavation into previously
undisturbed areas of the Santiago Formation, as there is potential to
encounter highly sensitive paleontological resources within the
limits of the SP area. The following elements shall be included in the PMP:
• As a condition of the grading
permit, the developer shall comply with the following measures:
− Prior to initiation of
construction activities, the project developer shall
retain a qualified paleontologist to carry out
the mitigation program outlined here. A qualified
paleontologist is defined as an individual with a M.S. or
Ph.D. in paleontology or geology who is familiar with
paleontological procedures and techniques.
PD and
PC
Carlsbad
Planning Division,
Construction Management
Division, and Land
Development Engineering
Division
Prior to and
during construction
Prior to issuance of the grading permit, the developer and contractor shall both provide a statement agreeing to comply in full with Mitigation Measure P-1 during grading and construction. Evidence of a contract with a qualified paleontologist to carry out the mitigation program shall be provided to the Planning Division prior to issuance of the grading permit. The contract shall include on-site monitoring at all times during the original cutting of previously undisturbed deposits of high sensitivity formations (Santiago Formation) to inspect exposures for contained fossils. The contract shall also include recovery, cleaning, repairing, sorting, cataloging, and donation of recovered fossils, and preparation of a final summary report.
Exhibit “B” June 6, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 32 December 2012
TABLE 1 (CONT.)
MITIGATION MEASURES FOR WESTFIELD CARLSBAD PROJECT
Mitigation Measure Type Monitor Schedule Compliance Action
Verification
of
Compliance Remarks
Initial Date
Paleontological Resources (cont.)
− A qualified paleontologist
shall be at the preconstruction meeting to discuss grading plans and consult with the grading and
excavation contractors regarding the potential
location and nature of paleontological resources
and associated monitoring/recovery
operations.
Exhibit “B” June 6, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 33 December 2012
TABLE 1 (CONT.)
MITIGATION MEASURES FOR WESTFIELD CARLSBAD PROJECT
Mitigation Measure Type Monitor Schedule Compliance Action
Verification
of
Compliance Remarks
Initial Date
Paleontological Resources (cont.)
A paleontological monitor
shall be on site at all times during grading/excavation
activities involving previously undisturbed
deposits of high sensitivity formations (Santiago
Formation) to inspect for well-preserved fossils. The
paleontological monitor need not be on site during
the original cutting of previously undisturbed
deposits of zero sensitivity formations (alluvium and
compacted fill). A paleontological monitor is
defined as an individual who has experience in the
collection and salvage of fossil materials. The
paleontological monitor shall work under the direction of a
qualified paleontologist.
Exhibit “B” June 6, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 34 December 2012
TABLE 1 (CONT.)
MITIGATION MEASURES FOR WESTFIELD CARLSBAD PROJECT
Mitigation Measure Type Monitor Schedule Compliance Action
Verification
of
Compliance Remarks
Initial Date
Paleontological Resources (cont.)
− In the event that well-
preserved fossils or other unearthed paleontological resources are discovered, the paleontologist (or
paleontological monitor) shall recover them. In most
cases this fossil salvage can be completed in a short period of time. However, some fossil specimens
(such as a complete large mammal skeleton) may
require an extended salvage period. In these
instances the paleontologist (or paleontological monitor)
shall be allowed to temporarily direct, divert, or
halt grading to allow recovery of fossil remains in
a timely manner. Because of the potential for the
recovering of small fossil remains, such as isolated
mammal teeth, it may be necessary to set up a
screen-washing operation on the site.
Exhibit “B” June 6, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 35 December 2012
TABLE 1 (CONT.)
MITIGATION MEASURES FOR WESTFIELD CARLSBAD PROJECT
Mitigation Measure Type Monitor Schedule Compliance Action
Verification
of
Compliance Remarks
Initial Date
Paleontological Resources (cont.)
− Fossil remains collected
during the monitoring and salvage portion of the mitigation program shall be cleaned, repaired, sorted,
and cataloged.
− Prepared fossils, along with
copies of all pertinent field notes, photos, and maps
shall be deposited (as a donation) in a scientific
institution with permanent paleontological collections
such as the San Diego Natural History Museum.
Donation of the fossils shall be accompanied by financial
support for initial specimen storage.
Exhibit “B” June 6, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 36 December 2012
TABLE 1 (CONT.)
MITIGATION MEASURES FOR WESTFIELD CARLSBAD PROJECT
Mitigation Measure Type Monitor Schedule Compliance Action
Verification
of
Compliance Remarks
Initial Date
Paleontological Resources (cont.)
− A final summary report shall
be completed and submitted to the Planning Division that outlines the results of the mitigation program. This
report shall include discussions of the methods
used, stratigraphic sections exposed, fossils collected,
and significance of recovered fossils.
Compliance with this mitigation measure shall be
verified by the City of Carlsbad’s Land
Development Engineering Division.
Exhibit “B” June 6, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 37 December 2012
TABLE 1 (CONT.)
MITIGATION MEASURES FOR WESTFIELD CARLSBAD PROJECT
Mitigation Measure Type Monitor Schedule Compliance Action
Verification of
Compliance Remarks
Initial Date
Transportation-Traffic
T-1 Prior to issuance of building or grading permit (whichever comes
first) for the current SDP proposal, the project applicant shall provide
written proof from the City of Oceanside that they have paid their
fair-share contribution toward adaptive-responsive signals along the
segments of Vista Way (west of El Camino Real), Jefferson Street
(south of Vista Way) and El Camino Real (south of Vista Way) to the
satisfaction of the Carlsbad City Engineer.
PD Carlsbad Land
Development Engineering
Division
Prior to issuance of building or
grading permit
Provide written proof from City of Oceanside that fair share
contribution has been paid by the project applicant.
Exhibit “B” June 6, 2013
Westfield Carlsbad (SCH No. 2010011004) City of Carlsbad Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 38 December 2012
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK