HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992-04-21; City Council; 11655; Rancho Santa Fe Road Environmental Impact Report EIR 91-01- 1 .:
i.5 u 2 .rl a, a5a c a, *rl .rl c 111 cl .rJ, d p o
0 bo
2 g '2
2 iV z c) 5 rn c'1 -3
*rl h *JJ a, 4 .rl 3 I a0 dd
o\ ow
CJ 0 : i s Ga, bno e d *rl a, -4 u JJ h'rl rb wau TI a (A ucd M a
:gF
u rn boa -rl $ .5 2 Ea c) :33 4 ;a
a, a' $
a c a
E E e a2 2
u m
h-
a.4 c\1
0 c)\
wa aha)* 'a, c a,
4 Q\ G.4 w a u rb ' mu O u G a
u 0 4 u 2
5u h rn c E
-4 a, -4 o
El 0 u G 001 c)
muon
4-l aa -m a, El c
uoo
a,.rlo 111 ?-T-,
uCau
oa u &I a, *rl
@vu sa, bo hUC w .rl c) *rl
ul-ln rb rb.4 34 Burnt&
a35 a, El
E6 $5
"lhI
I\ *cn
acn
@Jd I\ ern
z
I- 0
i z 3 0 0
0
a
Q Y 1. CI~~F*CARLSBAD - AGENQ&ILL
DEPT. I
CITY A
CITY M
AB # /( dss TITLE:
MTG. 4/21/92 RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT - EIR 91-1 DEPT. PLN
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Planning Commission and staff are recommending that the City Council direct the (
Attorney to prepare documents CERTIFYING EIR 91 -1 based on the findings and subject to
conditions contained therein including a statement of overriding considerations.
ITEM EXPLANATION
EIR 91-1 analyzes the realignment and construction of Rancho Santa Fe Road to six lane pr
arterial standards from La Costa Avenue north to the existing Melrose Avenue as describec
the City of Carlsbad Rancho Santa Fe Road Adoption Report - alignment C-1 "Can
Alignment" and the mass grading of land on both sides of the roadway in preparation
future development on a total of 448 acres within a 768 acre site.
In 1987 as a response to a petition from residents in La Costa, the City commissioned a sf
of studies and appointed a citizens committee to study a realignment of Rancho Sant:
Road. The result of that effort was a City Council preferred alignment designated as
canyon alignment". The project reviewed by the EIR includes the canyon alignmen
previously approved by the Council.
The Draft EIR was prepared as required by CEQA and the City's environmental proced
ordinance Title 19. A draft was circulated for public review and comments were received f
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Sewice (U.S.F.W.S.), California Department of Fish and G
(C.D.F.G.), City of San Marcos, Fieldstone Company and M.A.G. Properties.
Responses to those comments were prepared by the EIR consultants, CottodBeland
A.D.Hinshaw, and incorporated into the document thereby creating the Final EIR.
Discussed in the Final EIR are:
EARTH RESOURCES AIR QUALITY
WATER RESOURCES NOISE
LIGHT AND GLARE
LAND USE TRAFFIC CIRCULATION
PUBLIC SERVICES UTILITIES
LANDFORM ALTERATION
CULTURAL HISTORIC RESOURCES
Also discussed are six alternatives to the proposed project. They are:
0 REALIGN RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD AND DEFER THE MASS GRADING
REALIGN RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD WITH MASS GRADING OF DEVELOP1
LAND CONSISTENT WITH THE EXISTING GENERAL PLAN LAND
DESIGNATIONS.
GRADING.
*
ROAD WIDENING IN THE EXISTING ALIGNMENT AND DEFER R
0 m
PAGE 2 OF AGENDA BILL NO. /! dsx 1
ROAD WIDENING IN THE EXISTING ALIGNMENT AND MASS GRADING.
ROAD WIDENING IN THE EXISTING ALIGNMENT WITH MASS GRADING
DEVELOPABLE LAND CONSISTENT WITH THE EXISTING GENERAL PLAN NO PROJECT.
As discussed in the attached Planning Commission staff report there are several consideratic
that make these alternatives infeasible.
Several impacts were determined to be insignificant and others to be significant but mitigal
The most notable mitigated impact within this section is to the Diegan Coastal Sage SCI
habitat for the California Gnatcatcher.
A Mitigation Plan as recommended by the consultant who prepared the biological portior
the EIR and which satisfies the requirements of the California Environmental Quality
(CEQA) has been developed which will reduce the identified impacts to the Gnatcatcher t
level of less than significant. The plan includes on-site and off-site mitigation as well as mol
contributions for further studies. Although the specific details of the mitigation plan are !
being worked on, the plan includes a significant increase in open space on-site (loo+ acI
over what the city's present General Plan and Open Space map identifies, acquisition of a la
parcel in the San Dieguito River Valley for offsite mitigation and funding to complete
citywide Habitat Management Plan. The Council will be updated at the public hearing on
EIR on the status of the Mitigation Plan.
Relative to the impacts to the California Gnatcatcher, an addendum has been attached to
EIR (refer to Exhibit B) with full disclosure of the process which lead to the determination t
the Mitigation Plan will mitigate impacts to the Gnatcatcher to a level of less than signific:
A significant unmitigated impact has been identified on AIR QUALITY. For this reaso
statement of overriding considerations is required and has been included in Plann
Commission Resolution # 3371. In addition, should the proposed Mitigation Plan regard
Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub habitat and the California gnatcatcher not be fully implemeni
the same statement of Overriding considerations would apply to the impacts of the projec
biological resources.
In summary, the Final EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA and the Cj
Environmental Procedures Ordinance (Title 19). One significant unmitigated impact has b
identified on AIR QUALITY which requires a statement of overriding considerations an
second significant unmitigated impact to BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES should the propc
mitigation plan not be fully implemented.
The Planning Commission unanimously (7-0) supported the proposed mitigation plan
impacts to Biological Resources and has recommended that the City Council certlfy EIR S
which includes a statement of overriding considerations.
e 1) 1
PAGE 3 OF AGENDA BILL NO. //6kf
FISCAL, IMPACT
Certification of the Final EIR has no direct fiscal impact on the city. Fiscal impacts associa
with the Rancho Santa Fe Road construction project including the cost of the environmer
mitigation plan, will be addressed when the assessment district for the road is considered
the City Council.
EXHIBITS
1.
2.
3. Exhibit B - Addendum
4.
5.
Planning Commission Resolution No. 3371
Exhibit A - EIR 91-1 (previously distributed)
Exhibit C - Errata Sheet
Exhibit D - Planning Commission Staff Report dated, March 18, 1992
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
e
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3371
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION OF AN
REALIGN AND CONSTRUCT RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD TO SIX LANE
PRIME ARTERIAL, STANDARDS FROM LA COSTA AVENUE NORTH TO
THE EXISTING MELROSE AVENUE AS DESCRIBED IN THE CITY OF
0
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, EIR 91-1, FOR A PROJECT TO
CARLSBAD RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD ROUTE ADOPTION REPORT -
ALIGNMENT C-1 "CANYON ALIGNMENT" AND THE MASS GRADING OF
LAND ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ROADWAY IN PREPARATION FOR
FUTURE DEVELOPMENT ON A TOTAL OF 448 ACRES WITHIN A 76E
ACRE SITE.
CASE NAME: RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD REALIGNMENT AND MASS
GRADING
CASE NO.: EIR 91-1
WHEREAS, a verified application for certain property to wit:
SEE ATTACHED Exhibit 'Y.
has been filed with the City of Carlsbad and referred to the Planning Commissi(
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request as provided by '
of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 4th day of March, 1992
the 18th day of March, 1992, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed b!
consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testim
arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission consid
factors relating to the project and;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Coh
follows:
A)
PC RES0 NO. 3371 -1-
That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
I
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
0 0
B) That the Environmental Impact Report EIR 91-1 will be amended to incluc
comments and documents of those testifying at the public hearing and resp
thereto hereby found to be in good faith and reason by incorporating a copy
minutes of said public hearings into the report.
That the Environmental Impact Report EIR 91-1 as so amended and evaluatec
attached errata sheets dated March 18.1992 are recommended for acceptanc
certification as the final Environmental Impact Report and that the
Environmental Impact Report as recommended is adequate and provides reasc
information on the project and all reasonable and feasible alternatives th
including no project.
That among the alternatives evaluated, it is recommended that the project
incorporates mitigation measures as discussed below, be approve
implementation.
C)
D)
Findings:
1. That the following findings are made relative to the conclusions of the
Environmental Impact Report (FF.IR) for the proposed Rancho Santa Fe
realignment and mass grading (SCH #90010850) based on the FEIR
including the cornments and respollses to the draft EIR, and all document,
public testimony and illustrations included in the public record.
That the future administrative actions associated with the proposed project i
the approval of a Grading Permit and a Hillside Development Permit (HDI
That the FEIR will be used by the City as a "Project EIR" in dg imp;
the proposed mass grading and mad realignment.
That the FEIR will also serve as a "Program EIR" by addressing impacts
initial project and the subsequent General Plan Amendment and La Costa I
Plan Amendment.
That additional environmental review will be required for follow-on proje
That these future projects are antiapated to include a General Plan her
to the Land Use Element, a La Costa Master Plan Amendment and one o
tract maps.
That the proposed project involves the realignment and construction of E
Santa Fe Road within a mass graded 448 acre area of southeastern Carlsba
project proposes the relocation of existing Rancho Santa Fe Road easterly
"Canyon Alignment", replacing the bridge over San Marcos Creek and q
of the road into a six lane prime arterial between La Costa Avenue and 1
Drive as ded for in the circulation F.lement of the Carlsbad General Pla
mass grading of property adjoining the road is to provide for future develo
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
PC RES0 NO. 3371 -2-
I.
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
l3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
8. That the formation of a 2,210 acre Rancho Santa Fe Road Assessment Dis
also included in the project.
That financing of the roadway improvements will be provided by generating
within the Assessment District.
That the Planning Commission hds and determines that the Environmental1
Report EIR 91-1 has been completed in conformance with the Cal
Environmental Quality Act, the state guidelines implementing said Act, a
prodons of Title 19 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code and that the P1
Commission has reviewed, considered and evaluated the information conta
the report.
That the FEIR for the Rancho Santa Fe Road Realignment and Mass 2
project concluded that the project would not have significant adverse imp
the following areas (numbers refer to the page(s) of the FER where the i
discussed):
9.
10.
11.
0 Hospitals
As'
woulz adversely impacted by this project.
0 Natural Resources
in the EIR (pgs. 5.9-9, 10) the current availability of hospital s
As noted in the Initial Study (Appendix A of the FIR), no natural resources are 1
in the project area.
a Risk of Upset
As noted in the Initial Study (Appendix A of the FIR), no hazardous mat&
would be, present on the project site.
a Population
The project would not increase the residential density of the project area as shc
the General Plan Land Use Map. However, the ultimate development of the are:
increase t-g population levels.
0 Housing
The project would not create a demand for additional housing.
a Enernv
NO substantial energy wge will ocm as a result of the project.
PC RES0 NO. 3371 -3-
If
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
I.9
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
1, Human Health
No hazardous conditions would exist at, or near, the project site.
8 Recreation
No adverse effect on recreational facilities would occur because the city's Local Far
Management Program coordinates the development of recreational facilities
residential development.
7. Law Enforcement
Provisions of the Public Facilities Element of the General Plan ensure that adequal
enforcement would be available prior to buildout of the project area.
ri Libraries
The Local Fa&ties Management Plan contains performance standards that e
libmy space would be available consistent with development activities.
12. That the following findings are made pursuant to Section 21081 of the Cali
Public Resources Code and Section 15091 of Title 14 of the California Cc
Regulations.
A. Public Resources Code Section 21081 (a)
The decisioders, having reviewed and considered the information contained i
Final EIR for the proposed Rancho Santa Fe Road Realignment and Mass Grading PI
and having reviewed and considered the information in the public record, finc
changes have been incorporated into the project which mitigate or avoid or substar
lessen the significant environmental impacts thereof, except for as idenfied in the EIlLspeCifically:
EARTH RESOURCES (EIR pgs. 5.1-1 through 10)
ImDact: Implementation of the project will require the mass grading of approxin
448 acres of mostly undeveloped land extending north/south along Rancho San
Road. The terrain is rolling, with occasional steep slopes and canyons. Drak
conveyed by tributaries to San Marcos Creek in the northwest podon of the site
Enchitas Creek in the southern extent of the site.
Grading for the project will occur over a smaller area than grading neede
development to the full extent of the RL, RLM, C, and 0 land use designations (
existing General Plan, thus lessening the impacts to Earth Resources. The grading o
adjacent to the roadway is necessary to ensure an increase in the value of the adjc
land, in order to permit the financing of the road.
PC RES0 NO. 3371 -4-
I.
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
l2
13
14
15
I'
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 *
Findinns: Mitigation measures are included on pgs. 5.1-9 and 10 of the EIR and P
become conditions of project approval. These measures were prepared by the const
Geologic Engineer and address blasting and filling operation, seismic hazards, erc
control measures and landslide remediation. Requirements of the Uniform Building ( the Citfs Hillside Development Ordinance and Grading Ordinance would be includ
the project review and approval of the grading plans, the grading permit and subsec development approval.
Mitigation Measure #4 (pg. 5.1-9) has been modified to state that the applicant
adhere to the grading restrictions set forth in the La Costa Master Plan 01
amendments thereto. No grading shall occur between October 1 and April 15, e when special measures can be taken to control siltation. This shall be met t
satisfaction of the City Engineer.
The mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a level less than significant.
AIR QUAUTY (EIR PgS. 5.2-1 through 10)
Impact: The ultimate development of the project would generate 12,753 lbs/d,
emissions. Widening of the roadway would provide for a more efficient circulation SJ
and less congestion, which would result in a reduction of 6,507 lbs/day of vehi
emissions from the "no project" emissions levels.
Findinns: A variety of mitigation measures are recommended in the EIR to min
short-term air quality impacts. Measures involving bikeways, trails and transit fac
are also recommended to reduce the reliance on automobiles. However, implement
of the proposed project would cause significant, and unmitigated long-term impacts
quality within the San Diego Air Basin. Short-term impacts are not significant locall;
are cumulatively significant because the area is located within a non-attainment b
The impact to Air Quality is significant and unmitigated.
WATER RESOURCES (EIR pgs. 5.3-1 through 7)
Impact: The project site is located in the watersheds of the San Marcos Creek
Enchitas Creek. Surface runoff from the project site ultimately enters either San M
Creek or Enchitas Creek which meet at the Batiquitos Lagoon in the City of Carlsba
fore entering the Pacific Ocean. Erosion and sedimentation impacts during the si
and construction period would be short-term, after storm events only, and wou
potentially significant. Diversion of drainage flows could occur during grading oper
temporarily and artificially increasing flows in adjacent tributaries or waters
Grading of the project's 448 acres will cause fewer significant impacts due to floodin;
drainage than grading 550 acres to the full extent of the RL, FUMY Cy and 0 lanc
designations of the existing General Plan due to the smaller area.
Findinns: Implementation of the measures contained in the geotechnical evaluatioi
City's Grading, Clearing and Grubbing Policy, Grading Ordinance and Landscape M(
PC RES0 NO. 3371 -5-
I.
2
3
4
!5
6
7
8
9
10
11
I.z
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
e e
would minimize erosion and provide for a comprehensive maintenance progra
would be maintained and no additional runoff into the reservoir would result fro
approved grading plans. Conditions of approval would include the preparatior hydrology study for San Marcos Creek and the recommendations of the consulting '
engineer. The south-central trending drainage channel would be maintained in a n
vegetated condition as a "best management practice" consistent with RWQCB
Number 90-42.
The mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a level less than significant.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Impact: Grading of the project will result in a disturbance of existing vegetation
owing to the realignment of the road and the mass grading. The amount of dist
area within the project site would change from approximately 88.4 acres to 369.5
This will result in both direct and indirect impacts to plants and animals. S
sensitive habitats, including Diegan coastal sage scrub, cottonwood-willow riparia
oak riparian, would be impacted by the project. Up to 14 pairs of the 22 pz
California Gnatcatchers on the project site may be adversely impacted or lost. In
impacts would mainly result from habitat fragmentation and a residual amoi
downstream siltation.
Findings: Onsite mitigation would include the dedication of an area of Diegan c
sage scrub of a size, configuration and topography large enough to support a mir
size of 8 pairs of California Gnatcatchers in perpetuity. Specific criteria to be cons
in the selection of the area to be dedicated are listed on page 5.4-18 of the EIR.
The mitigation of biological impacts as set forth in the EIR is adequate and complie
the criteria, to provide:
erosion control and drainage facilities. The Stanley Mahr reservoir spillway ca
1. Onsite mitigation
2. Offsite mitigation
3. Contribution to funding for planning local, sub-regional and re;
conservation plans, and funding a directed life history study fc
California Gnatcatcher.
Mitigation which meets the criteria and is in accord with the mitigation measu
forth in the EIR will not appreciably reduce the likelihood of the survival and re(
of the Gnatcatcher and other Species of Concern in the wild. Based on the best av:
information, the project, and a Mitigation Plan minimizes to the maximum I practicable, the impacts on Scrub Habitat and the Species of Concern. The projec
also contribute to the approximately 3,800 residential units and 60 acres of corn
development which are necessary to provide the approximately $60,000,000 whic
be necessary to finance the roadway infrastructure improvements in this area.
'.*
PC RES0 NO. 3371 -6-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
lo
11
12
13
I.4
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
e 0
Other mitigation measures include modifying the proposed project grading to prc
100% of the "dense" area of San Diego goldenstars and a minimum of 75 percent
"sparse" area of San Diego goldenstars, and applying for and obtaining, if requi
Clean Water Act, Section 404 permit and a Section 1600-1603 agreement.
In addition to the Mitigation Plan discussed above, the City has entered in1
Memoranda of Agreements (MOA'S) with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FW!
State Department of Fish and Game (DFG) for the development of a multi-species
wide Habitat Management Program ("HMP"), and, as part of that program, fc
development of a Habitat Conservation Plan ("HCP") for the conservation of
Habitat and Species of Concern.
The MOAS contemplate that the species covered will be addressed as if they were
as "endangered" under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the California Endar Species Act (CESA), and that appropriate mitigation will be provided.
As part of the early phases of the HMP, it is contemplated that the Rancho Santa Fc
project would be addressed as an "interim project" and considered for approval 1
City, DFG and FWS under the HCP. It should be noted that more than one HCP F
prepared at various phases of the HMP. The work program and time-line for the adc
of the project HCP are included in Appendix I of the EIR.
It is also anticipated that the HCP to be developed under the work program will re!
the requisite federal permit to ensure continuation of the project when and if the cc
species become formally listed under the ESA and CESA, and when the State of Cali
and the United States Government then acquire formal jurisdiction.
The mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a level of insignificance. If any
or government agency finds the impact to Biological Resources to be unmitigated,
the mitigation plan is not approved by the City Council and then fully implemented
we find the statement of Overriding Considerations supports approval of the projc
NOISE (EIR pgs. 5.5-1 through 7)
ImDact: Implementation of the proposed project would result in widening c
roadway, and realignment of the roadway to a location approximately one-quartel
east of the La Costa Vale subdivision. Traffic-generated noise levels along the real
Rancho Santa Fe Road will be substantial at completion of the project and at buil
of the City. Other noise sources associated with the project include short-term
generated by construction operations such as blasting and crushing of resistant
hauling of material off-site to the Arroyo La Costa subdivision, and constn
equipment noise.
Findings: The City would implement policies and action programs of the General Noise Element and Administrative Policy Number 17 which apply to construction (
proposed project. Other measures include placing stockpiling and staging areas
from occupied dwellings and creating the greatest distance possible between noise sc
PC RES0 NO. 3371 -7-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
lo
I1
12
13
14
15
l6
17
18
19
2o
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
and receptors during construction and complying with state standards for noise er
and control.
Realignment of the road to the east will substantially decrease the impact of noise
existing residences. The impact of this major improvement project on the existir
dences is a significant concern and was contrary to the alternatives which 1 alignment in its present location. Mitigation of noise impacts to future residences
achieved through adherence to Administrative Policy #17.
The mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a level less than significant.
LIGHT AND GLARE (EIR pgs. 5.6-1,2)
Increases in light and glare would impact the existing residential land uses to thc
and west of the proposed roadway alignment and future development on both s
the roadway. Urbanization of the natural surface cover increases light emissic
reflectance.
Findings: Mitigation measures include the use of roadway landscaping to limit he:
intrusion into residential areas, directing street lighting to limit excess ligl
consideration of the use of low pressure sodium street lights.
The mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a level less than significant.
LAND USE (EIR pgs. 5.7-1 through 13)
As a program EIR, the document has analyzed the realignment of RSF and the adj
mass grading as the project and has also analyzed some aspects of potential
projects, i.e. subsequent tract maps, site development plans, etc. A clear distinctio,
be made while reviewing the LAND USE section of the EIR between the impact!
project grading and the impacts from subsequent development.
ImDact: Subsequent development of the project will result in conwrsion of 448 at
vacant and undeveloped lands to a prime arterial surrounded by residentk
commercial land uses, interspersed with large areas of open space. Subs
development of the project is inconsistent with the General Plan Land Use map i
Costa Master Plan. General Plan and La Costa Master Plan Amendments are neec
implementation of the project to be consistent with the long-range land use planr
the area. The FEIR states that grading on M.A.G. properties will eliminate Open
designated in the General Plan on the Comprehensive Open Space Network Mar
proposed project grading will neither remove nor preclude the conceptual open
areas of the Comprehensive Open Space Network Map and is therefore not incon!
with the General Plan: General Plan and La Costa Master Plan Amendments are D
prior to implementation of the subsequent development of the M.A.G. properties
consistent with the long-range land use planning of the area.
...
PC RES0 NO. 3371 -8-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
lo
11
12
13
14
15
l6
I'
18
19
2o
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
Findings: Prior to development, mitigation measures to be completed include confo
to land uses and respective acreages on the General Plan Land Use map and dwelh
allocations in the Local Facilities Management Plan or proposing amendments
General Plan, La Costa Master Plan, and Local Facilities Management Plan. Propose
uses shall be consistent with the Land Use Element guidelines. The applicant sha
propose an amendment of the City's Comprehensive Open Space Network Map con with the Open Space and Conservation Element of the General Plan.
The mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a level less than significant.
TRAFHC/CIRCULATION (EIR pgs. 5.8-1 through 16)
Impact: The impact of the project on the circulation system was considered for 195
year after project completion, and 2010, the year when the County road sys
projected to be completed. For 1995, all road segments and intersections of E
Santa Fe Road would operate with a Level of Service (LOS) of A or B with threl
in each direction. For 2010, all segments and intersections of Rancho Santa Fc
would operate under acceptable conditions (LOS of C or D).
Under existing conditions (the "no project" alternative) all of Rancho Santa Fe Ro
Questhaven Road would operate with an LOS of F in the year 2010, an unaccc
condition. Eventual development in the area would increase traffic volumes
roadway causing adverse impacts.
Findings: Mitigation measures contained in the EIR would require the City to cc
intersection and road segment geometrics as proposed for 1995 without the
connection and to retain right-of-way that will be sufficient for creation
intersection of Rancho Santa Fe Road and the future Melrose Drive south. The (
Carlsbad and San Marcos would create a mechanism to determine the configur:
this intersection. An interim signal would be constructed at the intersection of
Santa Fe Road and Questhaven Road and a fully signalized intersection w(
constructed at Rancho Santa Fe Road and Cadencia Street.
The mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a level less than significant.
PUBLIC SERvlcEs (EIR pgs. 5.9-1 through 10)
Fire Protection
ImDact: Demand for fire protection services to the project area will be incre
ultimate development of the area.
Findings: Ultimate development plans would be conditioned to require the COM
of a permanent fire station No. 6 along the alignment of Rancho Santa Fe Roac
The mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a level less than significant.
PC RES0 NO. 3371 -9-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
l2
l3
14
15
* 16
17
18
19
2o
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
Schools
ImDact: Ultimate development of the project would generate 1,203 elementary stu
386 junior high students and 799 high school students.
Findings: Prior to the approval of a final map for any project within the San R
Unified School District an agreement shall be entered into providing for the deed
an acceptable school site and guaranteeing the financing and construction of a
unless modified or waived by the District.
The mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a level less than significant.
Water
ImDact: Water demand at ultimate development of the project site would be 5:
gallons-per-day. However, this is approximately 30 percent lower than water d
under buildout conditions according to the land uses of the existing General Plar
Findings: Water demand would be assessed during the development review pro(
the Vallecitos Water District and Olivenhain Municipal Water District to ensure th
11 will remain in conformance with adopted performance standards. Water
devices and reclamation, where feasible, would be required.
The mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a level less than significant.
sewer
Impact: Sewage generation at buildout of the project area would be 496,000 gallo
day.
Findings: New development within the project area would be required to corn
City's performance standards for sewer service.
The mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a level less than significant.
Solid Waste
Impact: Solid waste generation at buildout of the project area would be 7.3 tons-€
Findings: The siting and expansion of landfills in the area are currently being 1
by a variety of agencies to ensure that adequate landfill capacity will be availabl region.
The mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a level less than significant.
...
PC RES0 NO. 3371 -10-
I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
I.2
13
14
15
X
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
e 0
Natural Gas and Electricity
Impact: Electricity and natural gas demand at buildout of the project area would 1
megawatt hours and 210,000 cubic- feet per day.
Findings: The applicant would provide adequate infrastructure and, whenever pos
incorporate energy saving devices within the project development.
The mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a level less than significant.
LANDFORM ALTERATION/VISUAL QUAUTY (EIR pgs. 5.11-1 through 7)
Impact: Implementation of the project will result in the extensive modification of el
topography. The proposed project will alter the existing landscape with grading ai
creation of cut and fill slopes. In order to provide adequate surface area fc
construction of the proposed roadways, large volumes of earth will be displace reorganized into broad, flat surfaces. Other areas will be graded for future uses incl
residential, commercial and office.
The proposed landform alteration will result in 3,844,000 cubic yards (cu.yds.) of c1
4,197,000 cu. yds. of fill. This equates to a grading ratio of approximately 8,357 c
per acre (quantity for Rancho Santa Fe Road as a circulation element roadway g~
excluded). The area to be mass graded may remain undeveloped for several yean
development plans for the property are being prepared, reviewed and approved.
The Final EIR states that as proposed the grading plans conflict with sections of tl
of Carlsbad Open Space and Conservation Element. Since the date of completion
DEIR, the General Plan has been updated with a revised Open Space and Conser
Element. The updated General Plan Element has revised language pertaining to the
policies and actions but retains the intent of the previous element. Mitigation to
of insignificance of the described inconsistencies will be achieved through adherenc
the Hillside Development Ordinance and Grading Ordinance. Adherence WitE
ordinances will mitigate the impact to a level less than significant.
The FEIR also indicated that the proposed grading is inconsistent with the City's
Highways Element. Mitigation of the inconsistency to a level of insignificance
achieved through landscaping and adherence to the Scenic Corridor Study adopt
1, 1988.
The grading that will occur as a result of the project will have significant imF
surrounding landform and visual quality, however, the currently adopted Gener
allows the realignment of Rancho Santa Fe Road and similar development of the
site. Also, the City of Carlsbad Local Facilities Management Plan (Zone 11)
Rancho Santa Fe Road as having a future alignment which is consistent w
alignment proposed by the project. The project is consistent with the alignment a1
by the City Council in 1987.
PC RES0 NO. 3371 -11-
x
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
I,2
e 13
14
15
16
17
18
l9
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
* 0
Impacts to landform alteration and visual quality associated with the project will b
than the impacts of landform alterations resulting from grading to the full extent ( RL, RLM, C and 0 land use designations according to the adopted General Plan.
proposed project will serve to provide for reduced landform alteration and imp
visual quality at the conclusion of development.
Findinns: The 8,357 cu.yds./acre is within the potentially acceptable range as dt
in the City's Hillside Development Ordinance (0-7,999 cu.yds./acre is accept
Requirements of the City's Grading Ordinance and Hillside Development Ordinanc
be implemented through the grading plan review process. As discussed in LAND I
General Plan and La Costa Master Plan amendment is needed prior to implementaf
construction of the project beyond grading.
The mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a level less than significant.
CULTuRAL/HI!XORIC RESOURCES (EIR PgS. 5.12-1 through 4)
Impacts: Six of the seven sites located in the project area would be impacted by g
activities and could destroy potentially significant prehistoric resources. The full
of subsurface material of the sites is not fully known at this time and further 1
should be completed prior to site alteration.
Findinns: Subsurface testing of five sites would be required as a condition of
approval. If significant resources are located, a research design and data recovei
would be implemented. The provisions of the Historic Preservation Ordinance w(
followed in completing the mitigation program.
The mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a level less than significant.
CUMULATIVE IMPACI'S (EIR pgs. 7-1 through 12)
Impact: The ultimate development of the proposed project, in conjunction with 5
projects in a 30 square-mile area surrounding the project site would result
construction of approximately 10,600 dwelling units and 9 million square-feet (
residential floor space. These projects would add approximately 26,000 people
area (based on 2.47 persons per dwelling unit). At buildout, air quality impacts
be significant and unmitigated. Region-wide implementation of alternative m
transportation will serve to reduce impacts.
The ultimate residential development of the area to be mass graded would contn
the significant cumulative air quality impacts. The increased emissions resulting €
number of daily trips generated by the project would constitute an impedimen
region's ability to attain the national ambient air quality standards. The San Dj
Basin is a non-attainment area for ozone and particulates, and therefore, any inc
these air pollutants is a cumulative significant air quality impact.
-.-
PC RESO NO. 3371 -12-
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
lo
11
l2
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
* e
Finding: The ultimate development of the project area would contribute to unmiti
significant cumulative air quality impacts.
Impact: The realignment of Rancho Santa Fe Road and the mass grading would
in the direct loss of 216.9 acres of Diegan costal sage scrub habitat and the potentiz
of up to 14 pairs of California Gnatcatchers. Indirect impacts would result
fragmentation of the habitat.
Finding: Impacts to Diegan costal sage scrub habitat and the California gnatcatchf
be mitigated to a level of less than significant with the implementation of the mitii
program described in the biological discussion above.
GROWTH INDUCING IMPAflS (EIR pg. 7-12)
Impact: The incremental difference in growth of the project site under the pro
project is small when compared to buildout of the site according to the General Plan
LFMP for zone 11 & 12 of the City anticipate the development of this area.
Finding: City ordinances will ensure that adequate public infrastructure is availa
service this and adjoining properties as they develop. The project will not
significant growth inducing impacts.
B. Public Resource Code Section 21081 (b)
The decisionmakers, having each reviewed and considered the information contai
the Final EIR for the proposed Rancho Santa Fe Road Realignment and Mass G
project and associated discretionary actions, and having reviewed and consider
information contained in the public record, find that there are no changes or altei
to the project that would substantially lessen the significant environmental impacts
project that are the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and
be adopted by such other agency.
C. Public Resources Code Section 21081 k)
As discussed above, the EIR concludes that development of the project as proposed
result in significant, unmitigated cumulative air quality impacts. However, pursi
Public Resources Code Section 21081 (c), the decisionmakers, find that the fol
independent economic, social and other considerations make infeasible each
alternative identified in the EIR. The decisionmakers further find that each indep
consideration, standing alone, would be sufficient to make infeasible the
alternatives identified in the EIR.
1. Consideration of the six project alternatives must recognize the fea
of attaining the proposed project's basic objectives. The six altermath
Realign Rancho Santa Fe Road and defer mass grading; a.
PC RES0 NO. 3371 -13-
I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
I'
17
18
19
2o
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
e 0
b. Realign Rancho Santa Fe Road with mass grading of developable
consistent with the General Plan;
Road widening in the existing alignment and defer proposed mass gr;
Road widening in the existing alignment with mass grading of develc
land consistent With the General Plan;
Road widening in the existing alignment and mass grading for pro
development; and
c.
d.
e.
f. No project.
The improvement of Rancho Santa Fe Road to the standards of a prime arterial roi
as a major component of the region's circulation system require a significant exper
of economic resources. The project alternatives (#1 and #3) which defer mass g
present untenable economic impacts because the lack of a realistic and feasible fi
mechanism would preclude the City of Carlsbad from constructing the road. Altel:
funding mechanisms have been reviewed by the City and have all been rejected
various constraints which limit their effectiveness.
ALTERNATIVE #1: REALIGN RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD AND DEFER PROF
MASS GRADING
Short term benefits from this alternative, as compared to the proposed project,
include less impact to biological resources, air quality, erosion, sedimentation, c
and historical resources and the possible opportunity to create a development p
the adjacent property which could result in a more sensitive design. Howev
long-term impacts from this alternative would be the same as the proposed projc
would result in further delay in constructing the improved roadway due to the r
ensure a feasible and viable development of the adjacent property. Therefoi
alternative is not preferred over the proposed project even if it is environrr
preferred.
ALTERNATIVE #2: REALIGN RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD WITH MASS GRAD1
DEVELOPABLE LAND CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL, PLAN
This alternative would cause similar or possible greater impacts to certain resourc
would the proposed project. Specifically, impacts to earth resources, water res
air quality and biological resources would be greater than the proposed project
the grading of a larger area which would include all land currently designated
RLM, C, and 0 consistent with the existing General Plan. In addition, this altc
would lead to greater impacts from noise, light and glare to the adjacent develop(
The grading of the project, to the extent of including all land designated RL, I
and 0 consistent with the existing General Plan, would result in the loss of 1C
of open space when compared to the proposed project. The advantage tl
PC RES0 NO. 3371 -14-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
l3
14
15
16
17
18
19
2o
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
alternative has when compared to the proposed project is that its development a
consistent with the existing General Plan and would therefore not require a Genera
Amendment. However, the comparison in the EER of the proposed project's impai
the General Plan and the recognition that the General Plan would be amended
more detailed development proposals are submitted for the adjoining property, mal
"advantage" meaningless.
ALTERNATIVE #3: ROAD WIDENING IN THE EXISTING ALIGNMENT AND I:
PROPOSED MASS GRADING
This alternative is the most environmentally superior by providing short term adva
due to a reduction in the impacts to biological resources and landform alte
however, the long-term impacts would be the same as the proposed project. TI
projected that this alternative would provide a savings of construction costs and
impacts to erosion and sedimentation. However, the reduced flexibility by desigri
road within the confines of the existing alignment may increase costs associate
engineering. This increase in cost may offset the construction cost saving:
alternative, by comparison to the project, as identified in the City's consideration
road alignment in 1987, would result in increased noise impacts to the adjacent e
residences. Furthermore, this alternative would delay the construction of the roi
to the need to ensure adequate developable land to provide funding for the road
alternative is not feasible due to this lack of a funding mechanism.
ALTERNATIVE #4: ROAD WIDENING IN THE EXISTING ALIGNMENT WITH
GRADING OF DEVELOPABLE LAND CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLM
This alternative would result in similar impacts to the previous alternative, howe7
impacts associated with grading to the full extent of the RL, RLM, C, and 0 1;
designations and the subsequent development of those General Plan areas waul(
in greater impacts than the proposed project. The long-term impacts of this altf
are greater than the proposed project in many of the areas, including earth res
water resources, biological resources, light and glare, utilities and la
alteratiodvisual quality due to the larger area to be graded. This alternati
results in the loss of 102 acres of open space when compared to the proposed
ALTERNATIVE #5: ROAD WIDENING IN THE EXISTING ALIGNMENT WITF
GRADING FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
This alternative would result in fewer short term impacts to biological resow
to roadway construction, however, the long-term impacts of the mass grading u
the same. As discussed above, the noise impacts from this alternative wc
significant and the alignment would not be consistent with the action taken by
in 1987. The impacts from the adjoining mass grading are comparable to the p
project and the additional noise impacts on the existing residences do not jus
alternative.
...
PC RES0 NO. 3371 -15-
I1
I.
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
0 0
ALTERNATIVE #6: NO PROJECT
This alternative would leave Rancho Santa Fe Road in its current condition.
alternative would eliminate many of the environmental impacts associated wit
proposed project, including the impacts associated with biological resources,
resources, water resources, light and glare, and the destruction of cultural/hist
resources. The impacts to the existing residences due to noise would increase ovei
due to the increases in the amount of traffic on the existing road. Furthermori
existing roadway would not be able to adequately handle projected traffic volumc
could present a health and safety risk and could cause increased long-term air q
impacts because traffic could not flow efficiently on the existing two-lane road.
on these reasons, this alternative is not preferable to the proposed project.
2. Social considerations that make infeasible the construction of Alterr
#3, #4 and #5 involve public health, safety and welfare issues that
result from their adoption. These three alternatives involve wit
Rancho Santa Fe Road in its existing alignment. The precise e:
alignment does not provide sufficient flexibility to meet engineering
criteria for future intersecting roads, including the intersections of R
Santa Fe Road with La Costa Avenue and Melrose Street.
The "No Project" alternative (#6) is an untenable alternative bec;
would not provide any improvements to the existing road. Incr
traffic volumes on the road and the issues associated with safety of th
and long-term air quality impacts requires the City to facilitate a 1
which would result in the construction of the improved road witf
next three to five years.
The City of Carlsbad has adopted requirements for the provision of 1(
moderate income housing units in all new development projects.
requirements are needed to meet the City's obligation to provide h
for low and moderate income families. The mass graded area inch
the proposed project would ultimately be developed predominant
new housing units, including low and moderate income units. Alter
that would unduly delay the construction of low and moderate
housing units would hinder the City's ability to provide this type of h
Furthermore, alternatives that would delay the construction of ad(
housing and office and commercial development would also de
creation of additional employment opportunities in the City of C:
Such delays would have an adverse impacts on the economic welfar
City and its citizens.
Other considerations that make infeasible Alternatives #2 and #4
the reduction in the amount of open space that would result fro
adoption. Both alternatives could result in the loss of 102 acres
space. This could result because the existing General Plan provides
3.
PC RES0 NO. 3371 -16-
,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
l9
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
development of 102 acres that would be left in open space by the pro;
project and the subsequent General Plan Amendment.
The City Council has carefully and deliberately considered the opt
alignment for Rancho Santa Fe Road. The City first considere
realignment of the road in 1987 and appointed a Citizen's Commit
review the available options for the road alignment. After very c
consideration of all the options and the issues involved with each o
the Committee recommended that an alternative alignment be implemi
Their recommended alignment is essentially the same alignment i
proposed project.
The City and property owners in Zone 11 have conducted detailed plz
studies of the alignment and have concluded that the alignment shc
the proposed project is the optimum alignment from a constr
perspective. Furthermore? these studies have reduced the mass gradin
to the minimum that will financially support the construction of the
To now reject the proposed project and select an alternative would r
the City to commence again the planning process.
The improvement of Rancho Santa Fe Road to the standards of a
arterial requires a significant expenditure of economic resources.
project alternatives (#1 and #3) which defer mass grading witha
advantage of agreement for future development present untenable ecc
impacts. The lack of that realistic and feasible funding mechanism preclude the City of Carlsbad from constructing the road. Altei
funding mechanisms have been reviewed by the City and have a1
rejected due to various constraints which limit their effectiveness.
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS:
Section 15093 of the CEOA Guidelines
The decision makers, having reviewed and considered the information contained
Final EIR, and having reviewed and considered the public record, find that the fol
factors support approval of the project despite any significant impacts identified
Final EIR and, therefore? make the following statement of Overriding Considerat
The City of Carlsbad finds that the mitigation measures discussed in the CEQA fi
when implemented? avoid or substantially lessen most of the significant effects idc
in the EIR. Nonetheless? certain significant effects of the project on AIR QUALI'
unavoidable even after incorporation of all feasible mitigation measures. With re
these significant impacts, the City has balanced the benefits of the project agaj
unavoidable environmental risks in approving the project. In this regard, the Ci
that all feasible mitigation measures identified in the CEQA findings, have been i
be implemented with the project, and any significant remaining effects are accepta
to the following specific economic, social and other considerations.
PC RES0 NO. 3371 -17-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
I1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 e
a. The City finds that Rancho Santa Fe Road must be improved in ord
protect the public health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Carlsbac
the other users of this major regional facility. Reconstruction
realignment of the roadway segment will improve its efficiency thc
reducing potential future traffic hazards which could otherwise increa
the number of trips on the road increases due to the population grow
the region.
Construction of this prime arterial road and associated infrastructure
cost approximately sixty million dollars ($60,000,000) which the
cannot afford. The City has investigated various methods for fundin
construction of this major regional facility, including the use of funds
the state and various County organizations. The City has determine(
a public assessment district is the most fiscally sound and the mech
which will provide the necessary funds within the shortest amount of
The use of a public assessment district requires the City to assess prc
which is, and will be, benefitted by the construction of the road.
creation of the assessment district requires the identification of undevc
real property in order to ensure an adequate increase in the assessed
of the property in order to support the funding for the road. The prc
available for assessment, and thus funding the construction of the r(
the real property through which the road currently traverses.
The proposed project will provide the necessary improvements to R
Santa Fe Road and will provide the land development necessary to si
the assessment for the road.
The grading for the road and the development of the adjoining mass 2
property will have less environmental impact than comparable develo
pursuant to the existing City General Plan Land Use Element. F
development of the adjoining mass graded property (i.e., subdivisior
and building permits) will require additional environmental review
specifics of the design, location and infrastructure are identified
phasing of the various stages of subsequent development will all1
further refinement of the environmental, social and economic issues
the City must consider. This FEIR, as a program EIR for the subs
projects, identifies the issues which must be addressed prior to the ax
of other development entitlements for the property.
Construction of the road is part of the Carlsbad General Plan, tht
Facilities Management Plan (Zone 11) and the La Costa Maste:
Construction of the road is an integral component of these documei
as such is necessary for the orderly development of the City.
The proposed grading and ultimate development of the graded area i
result in more residential units in the area but will redistribute thc
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
PC RES0 NO. 3371 -18-
/I
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
0 e
manner which will result in less environmental impacts than the grad
the developable area allowed by the existing General Plan.
The ultimate development of additional office and commercial space that contemplated by the existing General Plan, will provide social, CI
and economic benefits to the residents of the City by providing ad&
jobs and services in a location closer to their home. Furthermorc
project will provide significant revenues to the City by way of sales t:
property tax which will provide for City services.
Upon completion of a subsequent General Plan amendment, it is antic
that the project will provide 102 acres of additional General Plar
space.
Construction of the project may also include the construction of a recl
water system which would assist the City and the water agencies
area to more efficiently use their limited water resources and ens1
adequate water supply for the area's residents.
The realignment of the road will lessen the existing and the future
impacts on existing residents.
The ultimate development of the property adjacent to the road will F
for the housing needs of the City.
The proposed project, unlike the alternatives which consider improvj
road in its present location, provides the most flexibility to
engineering design issues for future intersecting roads, includi intersection of La Costa Avenue and Melrose Street.
Rancho Santa Fe Road is designated as a "regionally significant arte
the 1990 Renional TransDortation Plan prepared by the San
Association of Governments (SANDAG). This system is part of thr
and highway network which provides for accessibility between comm
within the region. The circulation analysis for the City's Local F;
Management Plan for Zone 11 is based on the projected levels of r(
traffic as well as locally generated traffic.
The traffic analysis completed for the Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR COI
that the roadway would operate at unacceptable levels of service (
with the existing 2-lane road in 1995 (pg. 5.8-6). Consequently, t
improvement of the roadway is required to ensure that adequate 1t
service are maintained.
The Carlsbad Citywide Facilities and Immovements Plan was adoptec
City to, "assure the elimination of the shortages of public facilities id(
by the City Council to be detrimental to the public health, saft
h.
i.
j.
k.
1.
m.
n.
PC RES0 NO. 3371 -19-
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
e e
welfare of the citizens of Carlsbad." (Citywide Facilities and Improve1
Plan, 9/16/86, pg. 2). With regard to circulation the plan provides
No road segment or intersection in the zone nor any road
segment or intersection out of the zone which is impacted
by development in the zone shall be projected to exceed a
service level C during off-peak hours, nor service level D
the traffic generated by the local facility management zone
will use the road segment or intersection. (pg. 40).
during peak hours. Impacted means where 20% or more of
The Local Facilities Management Plan-Zone 11 (LFMP) dated 1/
identifies a need to construct Rancho Santa Fe Road to Prime A
standards by 1995. The LFMP also requires that a comprehensive fin:
plan guaranteeing construction of Rancho Santa Fe Road to Prime A
Standards be approved prior to the recordation of the first final map 7
Zone 11 (LFMP, pg. 19).
The location, grading and ultimate construction of Rancho Santa FE
has been studied by the City of Carlsbad for a number of year
addition, the property owners have also considered the same issues
planning for the development of their property. The decision regardi
location of the roadway considered the potential impacts to e:
residences in the area and the need to minimize the amount of g
associated with the development to the surrounding vacant land.
development of the surrounding land must be considered a likely re
construction of the roadway due to the cost associated with this
public improvement. The proposed project balances these many iss
recognizing the appropriateness of relocating the road and amendi
General Plan.
roadway will ensure an increase in the value of the real property whi
permit the funding of this expensive public improvement and associa
frastructure of $60,000,000.
adjoining property makes the proposed project the only feasible alter
The construction of Rancho Santa Fe Road to prime arterial standar
reduce future air pollution emissions by 6,507 lbs/day. This reductic
result from a more efficient circulation system and less roadway cong
This reduction will reduce cumulatively significant air quality impac
regional basis. No further reduction in emissions are possible as a re
the road widening project.
0.
Furthermore, the grading of the land adjacent
I The need to increase the value
p.
Conditions:
1. Refer to attached Exhibit A (Mitigation Measures) for all conditions, mit
measures, and monitoring programs applicable to the Rancho Santa Ft
realignment and mass grading.
PC RES0 NO. 3371 -20-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
2. No grading, grubbing or scraping shall be done until any land requh
mitigation by the mitigation plan for biological resources is secured 1
satisfaction of the City Attorney and Planning Director.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Pk
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 18th day of March, 19
the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Erwin, Commissioners: Schlehuber, Schramm, H
Savary, Noble & Hall.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
‘zrl,2-,.,
TOM ERWIN, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
. MICHAEL J. HOTZMIL%R
PLANNING DIRECTOR
PC RES0 NO. 3371 -21-
.x \ *.f I /( 'C 0 0
e' -c I
ORDER NO. 986023-1
EXHIBIT " y "
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN IS SITUATED IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNI COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
PARCEL A:
LOT 5 AND THE WEST HALF OF LOT 6 AND LOT 8 OF RANCHO LAS ENCINITF
IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNI
ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 848, FILED IN THE: OFFICE OF THE COUP
RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, JUNE 27, 1898.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION LYING WITHIN CARLSBAD TRACT 1
75-9(B) UNIT NO. 2, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIE(
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF YO. 9959, FILED IN
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, DECEMBER 31, 1
AND THAT PORTION LYING SOUTHERLY AND SOUTHWESTERLY OF THE SOUTHE
BOUNDARY THEREOF.
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION LYING WITHIN PARCEL MAP
13524, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE - CALIFORNIA, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN Dl
COUNTY, OCTOBER 25, 1984 AS FILE NO. 84-40329:) OF OFFICIAL RECO€
AND THAT PORTION THEREOF LYING SOUTHERLY OF THE SOUTHERLY BOUNt
THEREOF.
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION LYING NORTHWESTERLY OF
FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LINE:
BEGINNING AT THE MOST EASTERLY TERMINUS OF THE CENTERLINE OF LA C
AVENUE AS SHOWN ON HEREINBEFORE MENTIONED PARCEL MAP NO. 13; TH
NORTH 55°00'00" EAST 200.89 FEET TO THE BEGINIJING OF A 1000.00
RADIUS CURVE NORTHWESTERLY: THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURV
THE NORTHERLY LINE OF HEREINBEFORE MENTIONED LOT 5 OF RANCHO
ENCINITAS.
AFFECTS PARCEL NOS. 223-060-15, 223-060-49 AND 264-220-47.
I
PARCEL B:
THE WEST HALF OF SECTION 32 AND A PORTION OF SECTION 31, ALL BE11 TOWNSHIP 12 SOUTH, RANGE 3 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MER11
ACCORDING TO OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF, ALL BEING IN THE CIT'
CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF SAID SECTION 31 1
NORTHWESTERLY OF THE SOUTHEASTERLY BOUNDARY OF CARLSBAD TRACT
PAGE 22
r \'IC n,( 0 0
,+- I I 4 1
ORDER NO. 986023-1
72-20 (LA COSTA VALE) UNIT NO. 3, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY (
SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 7951 FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORVER OF SAN DIEGO COUNT JUNE 3, 1974.
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION LYING NORTHEASTERLY OF T
-
FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LINE:
BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID WEST ONE HALF OF SA
SECTION 32; THENCE SOUTH 89°5314211 EAST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SA WEST ONE HALF, 2689.53 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; THEN
SOUTH OO"36'38" WEST ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID WEST ONE HAL
3120.35 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHWESTERLY EIGHT OF WAY LINE O€
200.00 FOOT SAN DIEGO GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY EASEMENT IN BOOK 52( PAGE 399 OF THE OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID SAN DIEGO COUNTY AND BE1
THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING: THENCE LEAVING SAID EAST LINE AND ALC
SAID EASEMENT LINE, NORTH 64°1312311 WEST, 2226.43 FEET; THENCE SO1
72°0810011 WEST, 65.20 FEET TO A POINT ON A LINE, SAID LINE BE:
45.00 FEET SOUTHWESTERLY, MEASURED AT RIGHT ANn3LES AND PARALLEL W:
SAID SOUTHWESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 200.00 FOOT SAN DIEGO GAS i
ELECTRIC COMPANY EASEMENT: THENCE NORTH 64'13'23" WEST ALONG Si
PARALLEL LINE, 1583.36 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHEASTERLY BOUND(
NORTH 64"13'23" WEST TO THE INTERSECTION WITH THE NORTHERLY LINE
LINE OF SAID MAP NO. 7950; THENCE CONTINUING ALaONG SAID PARALLEL L
-_ SAID SECTION 31, SAID INTERSECTION BEING THE POINT OF TERMINUS.
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION LYING SOUTHWESTERLY OF '
FOLLOWING LINE:
BEGINNING AT THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF SAID CARLSBAD TRACT
72-20 AS SHOWN ON MAP NO. 7950, SAID CORNER BEING A POINT ON THE
OF A NON-TANGENT 1230.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY
RADIAL TO SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 51°5410811 WEST; THENCE CONTINU
ALONG THE SOUTHEASTERLY BOUNDARY LINE OF CARLSBAD TRACT NO. 72- THE FOLLOWING COURSES:
NORTHERLY ALONG THE ARC OF' SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE
14"34'46" A DISTANCE OF 312.99 FEET, NORTH 38'50103" EAST, 31.80 E
TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 1480.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONC
SOUTHEASTERLY: THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUC
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 7°19t5711 A DISTANCE OF 189.40 FEET; THENCE NC
466101001t EAST, 1057.78 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THE
LEAVING SAID SOUTHEASTERLY BOUNDARY LINE SOUTH 43"50'00" El
1685.42 FEET: THENCE SOUTH 53°3913211 EAST, 42.00 FEET TO A POIN'I
THE ARC OF A- NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY A RADIAL 1
TO SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 53'3913211 EAST: THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY AI
SAID CURVE TO THE INTERSECTION WITH THE SCUTHERLY LINE OF :
SECTION 31, SAID INTERSECTION BEING THE POINT OF TERMINUS.
-
PAGE 23
.I \\'kif, c 0 0-
'2.8 I " 1
ORDER NO. 986023-1
ALSO EXCEPTING THE INTEREST CONVEYED TO THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO B DEED RECORDED FEBRUARY 16, 1967 AS FILE N3. 21426 OF OFFICIA
RECORDS, LYING WITHIN THOSE PORTIONS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
-
PARCEL 66398-A:
THAT PORTION OF SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 12 SOUTH, RANGE 3 WEST, Sf BERNmDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, LYING WITHIN A STRIP OF LAND 60 FEE WIDE, 30 FEET ON EACH SIDE OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED CENTER LINE:
COMMENCING AT THE POINT OF INTERSECTION OF THE CENTER LINE OF ROI SURVEY NO. 454, A PLAT OF WHICH IS ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF TI COUNTY ENGINEER, WITH THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER BEI' DISTANT ALONG SAID NORTH LINE 721.98 FEET FRO14 THE NORTHEAST CORN
OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER, SAID POINT BEING ENGINEER'S STATION 1
PLUS 74.85, POINT ON A 1000 FOOT RADIUS CURVE:, I CONCAVE EASTERLY SAID CENTER LINE: THENCE ALONG SAID CENTER LINE AS FOLLOWS:
SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID 1000 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, 36.54 FEET AND TANGE
TO SAID CURVE SOUTH 7'22' EAST, 12.41 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT BEGINNING AND THE BEGINNING OF A 1200 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, THE CENT OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 82'38' WEST FROM SAID POINT; THENCE LEAVING SA CENTER LINE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE
71"50', A DISTANCE OF 1504.47 FEET TO ENGINEER'S STATION 210 PI
87.12 POINT OF TERMINATION ON THE CENTER LINE CF SAID ROAD SURVEY b
454.
PARCEL 66398-B:
THAT PORTION OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER LYING SOUTHERLY OF PAR( 66398-A HEREINABOVE DESCRIBED, AND NORTHERLY OF SAID ROAD SURVEY 1
454.
AFFECTS PARCEL NOS. 223-050-63 AND 223-050-64; 223-071-05 i
223-071-07.
PARCEL C:
THAT PORTION OF THE WEST HALF OF SECTION 32; AND THE NORTH HALF
SECTION 31; AND THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER
SECTION 30, ALL BEING IN TOWNSHIP 12 SOUTH, RANGE 3 WEST; TOGET
WI?H THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 36,
TOWNSHIP 12 SOUTH, RANGE 4 WEST, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE
CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF DESCRIBED FOLLOWS :
BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID WEST HALF: THENCE SC
89'53'42'' EAST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID WEST HALF, 2689.53 I
TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; THENCE SOUTH 00'3613811 WEST AI THE EAST LINE OF SAID WEST HALF, 3120.35 FEET TO A POINT ON
PAGE 24
, 4"kH 0 e
4 If '+- -< t
ORDER NO. 986023-1
SOUTHWESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF A 200.00 FOOT SAN DIEGO GAS Ab
ELECTRIC EASEMENT, RECORDED APRIL 19, 1954 IN 800K 5208, PAGE 399 t OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID SAN DIEGO COUNTY: THENCE LEAVING SAID EA:
LINE AND ALONG SAID EASEMENT LINE, NORTH 64'13'23'' WEST, 2226.4
FEET: THENCE SOUTH 72"081001' WEST, 65.20 FEET TO A POINT ON A LINl
SAID LINE BEING 45.00 FEET SOUTHWESTERLY MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES AI
PARALLEL WITH SAID SOUTHWESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF A 200.00 FOc
SAN DIEGO GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY EASEMENT; THENCE NORTH 64'13'2
WEST ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE, 1583.36 FEET TO A POINT ON T'
SOUTHEASTERLY BOUNDARY LINE OF LA COSTA VALE UNIT NO. 3, IN THE CI
OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING
MAP THEREOF NO. 7950, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER
SAN DIEGO COUNTY, JUNE 3, 1974; THENCE NORTH 31"00100" EAST ALC
SAID BOUNDARY LINE, 45.19 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID I"
NO. 7950: THENCE NORTH 64"13'2311 WEST ALONG THE NORTHEASTEF
BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID MAP NO. 7950, A DISTANCE OF 1326.91 FEE
THENCE SOUTH 43"30'00" WEST 477.59 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A NC
TANGENT 1720.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY, A RAD1
LINE TO SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 43°3010011 WEST: THENCE NORTHWESTET
ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 02°50'00'1 A DISTANCE
85.06 FEET: THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE NORTH 43"40' WEST 445
FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 455.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCi
SOUTHERLY: THENCE NORTHWESTERLY, WESTERLY AND SOUTHWESTERLY AU
SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 96"50'00" A DISTANCE OF 768
- FEET: THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE SOUTH 39"3111001t WEST 153.51 F1
SOUTHEASTERLY: THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 08"59'38" A DISTANCE OF 122.44 FEET TO A POINT
THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF CARLSBAD TRACT NO. 72-20, UNIT NO. 2,
THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORN
ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 7779, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COU
RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, OCTOBER 26, 1973: THENCE LEAVING S
MAP NO. 7950 AND ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID MAP NO. 7779, NON-TANG
TO SAID CURVE NORTH 71'OO10O1~ WEST 269.16 FEET: THENCE NC
44'00'0011 WEST 965.00 FEET: THENCE NORTH 71"13123'1 WEST 276.62 FE
THENCE SOUTH 77"46*509' WEST 290.25 FEET: THENCE NORTH 59"50'00" k
121.23 FEET: THENCE SOUTH 83°4010011 WEST 114.59 FEET: THENCE SC
14"40'00" WEST 230.00 FEET: THENCE SOUTH 28"201301g WEST 436.00 FT
THENCE SOUTH 18*27'30'! EAST 218.11 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 25"03'28" 1
165.00 FEET: THENCE NORTH 64°56132t1 WEST 300.00 FEET: THENCE S(
00"24'131' WEST 110.03 FEET TO THE INTERSECTION WITH THE SOUTHWEST1
LINE OF THAT CERTAIN ioo.oo FOOT EASEMENT fro SAN DIEGO GAS
ELECTRIC COMPANY, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF
bIEG0 COUNTY, APRIL 19, 1954 IN BOOK 5208, PAGE 403 OF OFF11
RECORDS: THENCE LEAVING SAID BOUNDARY OF SAID MAP NO. 7779 AND A
THE SOUTHWESTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID EASEMENT NORTH 64 " 56' 32" WEST
THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF CARLSBAD TRACT NO. 75-4 (LA Cc
ESTATES NORTH), IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, S
OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 8302, FILED IN THE OF
OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, MAY 5, 1976; TH
-
TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 780.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONC,
-
PAGE 25
.I \\It& IC * e.
9 y..
% 1
ORDER NO. 986023-
LEAVING SAID EASEMENT ALONG THE EASTERLY BOUNDARY THEREOF NOR
25"0312811 EAST 100.00 FEET: THENCE NORTH 03°021101t WEST 495.00 FEE
THENCE NORTH 20'2511011 EAST 280.00 FEET: THENCE NORTH O5"3O10O1* WE
130.00 FEET: THENCE NORTH 36'5511011 EAST 345.00 FEET: THENCE NOR
52°15'0011 EAST 160.00 FEET TO A POINT IN THE I3OUNDARY OF PARCEL Y
NO. 10179, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE
CALIFORNIA, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIE
COUNTY, JUNE 27, 1980 AS FILE NO. 80-204502 OF .OFFICIAL RECORI
THENCE LEAVING SAID BOUNDARY OF MAP NO. 8302 AND ALONG THE SOUTHEE
BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEL MAP NO. 10179, SOUTH 26"58'00" EAST 346
FEET: THENCE NORTH 89"43'111* EAST 880.46 FEET: THENCE SOUTH 42"13':
EAST 281.25 FEET: THENCE SOUTH 49"46'54" EAS'T 170.00 FEET: THE1
SOUTH 42"4213011 EAST 530.00 FEET: THENCE NORTH 66"24'35" EAST 174
FEET: THENCE NORTH 89"58'20t1 EAST 145.00 FEET: THENCE NORTH 34"29'
EAST 309.50 FEET: THENCE SOUTH 74"0012111 EAST 145.50 FEET; THE1
NORTH 41°27t0011 EAST 113.50 FEET: THENCE SOUTH 85"4414011 EAST 271
FEET: THENCE NORTH 31°57t1511 EAST 330.00 FEET: THENCE NORTH 47"25'
EAST 129.10 FEET TO THE INTERSECTION WITH THE NORTHERLY LINE OF S
SECTION 31: THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY BOUNDARY THEREOF NO
89"43'111' EAST 2607.74 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF SECTION 25 TOWNSHIP 12 SOUTH, RANG
WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF LY
SOUTHEASTERLY OF THE SOUTHEASTERLY BOUNDARY OF SAID MAP NO. 8302.
EXCEPT THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF SAID LAND DESCRIBED AS
ALL THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP
SOUTH, RANGE 3 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE COL
OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO OFFICIAL E
THEREOF, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER
SECTION 32; THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARcl
SOUTH 0°36t3111 WEST, 950.65 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 31°281501t WEST, 341
FEET: THENCE SOUTH 58°42'4911 WEST, 456.37 FEET; THENCE N(
NORTH 0°36'311f EAST, 77.00 FEET: THENCE NORTH 89°23'2918 WEST, 35(
FEET: THENCE SOUTH 0°3613111 WEST, 265.00 FEET: THENCE SOUTH 46'28
SOUTH 67°1012611 EAST, 76.69 FEET: THENCE SOUTH 89'23'29" EAST, 11(
FEET: THENCE NORTH 78"04'47" EAST, 92.20 FEET TO A LINE WHICH BI
SOUTH 0°36'3111 WEST FROM THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE A
SAID LINE, NORTH O"36'31" EAST, 263.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINl
BEGINNING.
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF SAID LAND DESCRIBEI:
76"1212711 WEST 230.37 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; TH]
EAST, 68.28 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 55O28'26" EAST 34.95 FEET; THI
FOLLOWS :
A
PAGE 26
e 0
I IC , \ '1 f i<
k' 1 I.- .
ORDER NO. 986023-
FEE TITLE TO THAT CERTAIN PARCEL OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED IN T'
NORTHERLY HALF OF SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 12 SOUTH, RANGE 3 WEST, S
BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF S
DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF, MO
-
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 32 ; THENCE ALC
THE NORTH LINE THEREOF SOUTH 89°53'4211 EAST 496.36 FEET: THEN
LEAVING SAID NORTH LINE SOUTH O"06'18" WEST, 210.00 FEET TO THE TF
POINT OF BEGINNING: THENCE SOUTH 89'53'42'' EAST, 237.57 FEET TO 'I
BEGINNING OF A 47-0 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHERLY: THEb
EASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE
36"03'42", A DISTANCE OF 295.82 FEET: THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CUI SOUTH 53"50'001' EAST, 386.84 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 35"24'00" WEST, 30
FEET: THENCE SOUTH 63"42'00'1 EAST, 424.18 FEET; THENCE SO1
76°4010011 EAST, 288.30 FEET: THENCE SOUTH OOoOO~OO1l WEST, 81.00 FE THENCE SOUTH 72"49f00'1 WEST, 288.60 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89"32'
WEST, 628.00 FEET: THENCE SOUTH 87"0810011 WEST,, 618.80 FEET: THE
NORTH 47"36'OOt1 WEST, 187.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 2"5610011 EAST, 166
FEET: THENCE NORTH 20°0513011 EAST, 530.37 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT
BEGINNING.
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF SAID LAND DESCRIBED
FOLLOWS :
A PARCEL OF LAND BEING A PORTION OF SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 12 SOU
RANGE 3 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIJIAN, IN THE CITY
CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED
FOLLOWS :
COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF PARCEL 3 OF PARCEL MAP
10179 ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DI
COUNTY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION
AS SHOWN ON SAID PARCEL MAP: THENCE SOUTH 89c4311111 WEST ALONG
SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 3, A DISTANCE OF 48.19 FEET TO A P(
ON THE SOUTHEASTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF ROAD SURVEY NO. 454,
FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ENGINEER OF !3AID SAN DIEGO COUI
THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTHERLY LINE AND ALONG SAID'RIGHT OF WAY I
SOUTH 31O32'16'' WEST .247.14 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINN:
THENCE LEAVING SAID RIGHT OF WAY LINE NORTH 89°43'11" EAST, 14!
FEFT TO A POINT ON THE NORTHWESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF PROP(
RANCHO SANTA FE DRIVE: THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHWESTERLY RIGHT OF
LINE SOUTH 12O22'42'' WEST, 22.51 FEET TO THE J3EGINNING OF A TAN(
1137 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY; THENCE SOUTHWEST1
ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 7'17'2;
DISTANCE OF 144.68 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID NORTHWESTERLY RIGHY
WAY LINE NORTH 69°00'00'' WEST, 172.47 FEET TO A POINT ON i
SOUTHWESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE: THENCE NORTH 31°3211611 EAST, 11
FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
PAGE 27
\\!t N o e-
% I IC I .x C'
I
_. ORDER NO. 986023-
AFFECTS PARCEL NOS. 223-071-09, 223-050-43, 223-050-49, 223-050-5
223-050-52, 223-050-53, 223-050-54, 223-.050-59, 223-050-6
223-010-31.
PARCEL D:
THE WEST HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP SOUTH, RANGE 3 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, IN THE CITY
CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING
OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF.
AFFECTS PARCEL NOS. 223-011-02, 223-011-03, 223-032-01 I
223-032-02.
PARCEL DD:
PARCELS 3 AND 4 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 10179, IN THE CITY OF CARLSB1
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF '
COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, JUNE 17, 1980 AS FILE I
80-204502 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.
TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION DELINEATED AND DESIGNATED "NOT A PART"
SAID PARCEL MAP.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION LYING WITH1 N CARLSBAD TRACT
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 10243, FILED IN '
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, OCTOBER 20, 198
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THOSE PORTIONS LYING WITHIN CARLSBAD TR
NO. 79-25(B) PHASE VI, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 10820, FILED IN
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, JANUARY 13, 19
AND CARLSBAD TRACT NO. 84-23, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF
DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 11241, FI
IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, MAY
1985.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION LYING WITHIN RECORD OF SURVEY
9182, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE
CALIFORNIA, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DI
COUNTY, OCTOBER 28, 1982 AS FILE NO. 82-332144 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF SAIC PARCEL MAP NO. 10
LYING NORTHEASTERLY OF THE CENTERLINE OF THAT CERTAIN RIGHT OF WAY
DESCRIBED IN DEED TO THE COUNTY, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COU
RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, APRIL 7, 1966 AS FILE NO. 58549
OFFICIAL RECORDS.
- 79-25(B) UNIT NO. 1, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIE1
-
PAGE 28
" t I( , ~ 0 0
b. 1 -< 1
ORDER NO. 986023.
AFFECTS PARCEL NOS. 223-010-12, 223-010-18, 223-010-19, 223-010-:
223-010-28, 223-010-29, 223-010-32, 223-*010-33, 223-010-:
223-010-35, 223-010-37; 223-011-04, 223-*011-05, 223-011-(
22 3 -02 1-08, 223-021-09, 223-021-10 , 223-021-11, 223-021-
223-021-15 AND 223-021-16; 222-150-13 AND 222-470-23.
--
,.
c
PAGE 29
0 0
c n P n 0 0 as
- - - 0 0 0 0
sag, d i."
4 -
E-l g93
2: s
'0 gd
pz
H m 2 TJz
z 0 53
t xz 2 =\
H c s=
X 0 w - 0
c-
8 E$i g 3 8 8
gzg g E c
$29 s" 5" s" s" s"
g jg
6 ce 0 a a c B c B
B B 8 8
0 P 5 s g 0
c_ i 2 0 c 0
-
.-
b I a "a - X X X X t2 $' ;i
c isx
- 68=
6 d s 'C &ti 3s 3Q3h 2% ZoGgx -52 2 u mm-ag 1 gu E
CO~S~ "Q5 gar*- 5%mt *"I34 i:pg'.
2qoq 5=4% z35.e ',%i[l$ *- e&?: $3 :as
a mccBg I:=$. szsp E a5j.f~ E. t~~~.j~ 3's
g =o?.c& ap3 s:oa aocz .zap$ 5-f-a~ ;aV, 5s os-4 g.aa =
=go al 2 48 5-3 is.-,= bOsf'a #Zs%d, bj -3 $31 rlf8q
p1,l p. 1: =%*it a $fj 2 $* PZ fn ~~ppg~ 03 jggg7Ps ;;$E& 5
pp=B x-s.Oa.pp-3 2 0 3- zss.;z aaz .- a d
58s 9zSz c=ES 3ma=<$gu ='osm -5~*-~xg.g~,,u~ 3 -f6; q&
#= a5-g n9 n ipm z?=.g sf,
$3, g*
n EHgri fBq ss
F 11 LE
I 874
25883- Em :a*
I
3 gm*gg SqfHB c Jg ZU- 85'gda $#rnSSf
fqzQ gap= = m&i BtE f $I$, 38 g$zzgp,
2,mP En=
6 i d - u
4 ZQ
O3
&fi3 0 a-w 'ig 853 o-~~~~%%a~~ -- "'.jj %='- ' j9~~~p~~~~= +v!'f anEoiia
ma 8 3; e; sa
9
E;
,cQ lz9 $8 a- so ;;
$$ I": -cy
ii e
fg!
I,i
[I:
11 g
i Q
ssz
as
.- e
c 0 E, 0
0 - g{ si
a!
<I
2-
.. Q c
P n
6
3s
*p P Id
0 0
8 n n e a 592 a 8n
Q 0 0 0
_? 1 ir Zpj,
La 5s
: 5- 32
sg 2
g 38
g -3
m fa
2 xz 5 e.
0 - -
12
B 8q 8 a 8 4 cc2 5
5 G E t c s" 5": = ""x9 5 c $25 5" d 8 BB 8 8
6 .E d
CI E E c_
c
D
0 5 r b \ E
1 jg
X X x
!
I$ 8.6: dl= x
"B -
SE! aq5Si.jp -a,., 23 q 5 sa:gg3g rsq$J sa gg ill
Ba
p!,c,g, a8 = am3 ED pa €84 g iqasj .- - is -., s-.z&lgr g ir.g""~ '3s ssis %~.25~~~-S 8 q1-2; f 2 ,a 3q
I
51 pa 28 Q:;:=z .- arii xHa
Jq-3' $38 =-3, rod ssp gsi iq PPJ
e p z=
c gsx
E=- z z s a ,i ax $ E,- 5 53 f x 25 :z 2s fa
8j au- .K 8a
E,gt g;;
g eosi
"-:qf 8- io
'0 =g;;i:".1 ;ii '53 r 8a cam 05 zu .,ai; gEs : lg..p+, "3 ScfcS8 - 0.0 a55 a35 *
2 eii ~l~~~~j~ a,S rn23 a/paz .4~2~=SS ?X
Ea 33s . gas CSf8o8ZB 332 6
oi s r; cd cd
-3 ZCS"
2% g=
a 8.5 5
SIEf
0 0-w
ae ii% 3: $ti
3
F; =g C
0 '8 0- EO Dc 38
3s
e 0
1"" -w
1%
I?
I;
l\
1:
Ea! g5
-A
d-
c 0 E, 0 - fl 0
U
9 B t
el a
a?
i .E ; !l
-
0 0
n 6 n c
0 a 8. 3-8 =9 1 p. qg m 0 m 0 +zg"
'1 xs -
5 ri 3 - - 23 C
C $5 2 b2 g 88 Pa
n=
C'
g8a p a Q 83
c, E ai$ f C
CC2
55 Cd
d a
0 rn
3 B 6 6 z sa E 2s a c gl23 H 5" z h E %I
B 6 6 B 65"
4 1:
ti! $ ii X x
!I T! '- f% f &Ex ij
X co 96
x &I-
p" 6 -
.= =n a;€ c 235 6a 9 62 3 p 3 .egg : 9
~233 i)..nx~~ a 8 gp 33 a= on 3 .s $83 23 =a 3 a ~SS s== * f z ig: rszy 1 * -3: 08 9 33% a s=:# O=rq 2x3 '-33 3: bbC .E s 2zE %ga:. 93.5 %sf .E& j p= ma
83; g a2.g 3 q .zJ o"ga s po" $9 sg? s $33 E,
3 g gT$;f c-g.gp .ys.gs ri-a*gSa c= 0 3 -8 $tap
% 31 -8% .~!J~%E=S -SO 00-0 cg* 5:
f .gr,g psqph_i j')' %s kg ,03g 2
gggs .p510b a%. s A3g i&Ig Egg s !z;i[ gp 85.4 IJt ...q t.;q zgq @a :
z$:j e.-4 -gpg AE# 8."$W 112 _gg -33
EE Eb E
5 8:q g:,sn<pra ZStji 2 ?$$= pa^
I
c
'J sa28 1 -=zgb=, agp3 "i" 43: *- .z n
$zsz.E 23E5Zbfio a<z- efis* .e 0 c $! 5 fc c i qj;,
$.gSIma
-2 2,3'3."
='E 'ot
E g sjs 8g z ad t
4
6 za c
a q
gg
0- 50 Sr dd 1" -0
e' 0 lg.
1"'
p f4
11 I! i
96 1
a.
.- .- C 0 k 0 0 -
5
< * B P a
3s
.s ; %z f
a e
I F: = ap 0 0 538
2g$* pa 0 0
, -% 1 i1
5u.
3 zz
c =\ =z
O >"A 3. - - tg
$ 3;
c pz
- QQ
h r=
0
C' Pa
$e&sa 2885 E'=c SE 5s
qaq 2s %t 25
3 12 3 ;i
s 3 c&g g8g 4 5i 55
d d a a so so d
0 1 3 8; g8 c
X X
B ill - c isx p% 5 'E Hs
g
SF
a 2. e U
Ea n 0 as ag B iQ 3
2 'B 8 =:E,, OP
b €4 3 3 eb o
HE s 5 ocg 5s .o 3nz ea
3%' u P assit mo 3, s!=,i '38 a J lg
ssi 'p 0
58 0c ii' a s r yj2.g Ba g? "as ~ - zuc s p" E f qc. f c dl 5 5 .o 3: Fg a5 33 a EE pap gg t 08
52 3 s3.g 3: p" 13 255 t .as?; f aI 't 0%
*3j = ?;s :z €2E g:
5 '1 c 9 9s <3 -"$ z5
!jig oa ; j 153a i* : of'
3 - :sa= =? 4 ${; aE + 9 48 i ? ?#sa 5% g ::p = ,t 93 w p g,gl 83 g me PP 58 :$ dl
s .9 g
-5 f; *s
'3 5.Q
.I-* E 0 .?!
0 0 i 0
3
0 4 000
81
&
-3 ac=
4cot epgj
T
A ??I ff 1 2fp q c
xu
5
3
C =: ;$ 0- EC Px $2
$; I?
rf
8":
c- P
96
0
- C 0 g 0
0 - fi
11 ii e
i; Pi
2 P 3
n
si ti;
-3
g,".pw S'E = 2gj
5
mI am 34
.I .- Q4aJ 333; t seam >.g .P 1 0 133: a3oo3 "oF',IL&,f c m iiE .e.:.,% g"%z Po 6 '5,'s X25 02 .)-. e- .*C'
3 s,ca,~.~rltgg~~6~r.~ag 2 3.g 3-3 3 9 82 f 3m852 G-
a =a
P - 853 a'~E8H~~=sPl.~~~~~.~~ at- =
23 "2 E! ',a 6z =SI 28 52
a
0
0.
e
n 0 (I n eSp (I n
0
0 0 m 0 OO'
8 1. 3 qo ss I
23 S
g gi
55 K 2
385 5" s" s" P ff QHE I
B hg
d
: Be c s-
- BI
2 x: 3 e.
0 ;d
99
E?
BSZ Q 2 2i a 2 cc-
si s5
00 00
9 !i? s t
CI 0
P > a E
.-
cc s
s .- C g 0
a b
c c f I, : d b 3 b $8 88 -
e',.,p 3 Pp:if sp-8 8qj sat ggP %,aE 83"" sasJ p;j so .a --a5 !$c,oo
I
ipl ifqf -- =.gst :fea pa!gji ew% Jj8 = mg =<<a occc
X X X X g' 33
c $6
E
X X $1 z &Ex ii '
ai=
Do Ba 38 & z 3i t='8H zfi @ baa= %go 3,s z8g:E zms
P=$%J gP'zr: pU so PP, E:$ rzss s~g lt sasi dlql Eo? a= %zgg sp,o &gg
0s PQZ 3s fa5b "js5I SCS
q g - 8ac- EZdj q'1 5PS "1.214 31zp 28 1 gtdft fe 2 35% mt* ?s:n3 -2 beas ls2g gztlj ZSS jag.$ =sea+, "3 16.$3 ti gzsf
s3Q -3 SB q.s pgg al ,qg3
s: C -*E - 3 s?
-
'0 acac $S ax %a-8 ,cos 0
40 i o.Et :.s c @C
s 98
aso &-=E5 ao8g 'pPloi 32 aCQm
53 4 13 .aga:
(I- kagg'
cd r; cd 6g
f Zf$,3
E =s Ez%H$ dgaa <d.c5a1 is3 ern e288
i ui
0 e
.E gj
5 r;;5%381 2'859 sa^
3% s= a$%" jq.
ma as 23 535 ZL si
i
7
$ =g
n
so Br d8
!g
ff
0- sl' -ci
6 9 fi
I?
$ 1;
11
pl
s6q 8'
01
i- C 0 5 0
0 -
ss t
<
.- '0 0 2 a c
T9
E
.E i gd
0 e
0 a e "8 a aaaa .s 0 r-B
mmmm 0 < ! 'L,. 4 jq I., g .= 0
--.. ..
$ 3.2 : >"A e zz
- 0, - z?g E
2 2 2,: %;E4
$3
5 fa
C
8 5'2 o 8.3 2 %St23 8
=tz 8 g .E
s 8s
c 86
3.55
0 C 0 C .- C C c s ZE
is
d dddd
.- 000- ,s 0 ,E D .E 0 .5 0 c .c 2 .E s .s g .E SEO Bt 23 i?s t?! EC
05 35 3s a5 35
tl! $'vz X
"
d .E 0
.E ag
E B I ;;; 3'5 2.5 3.5 2'5 EO b
%B -*
1
e0
X xxx X X I
Csii ;: c.b
%% s 'E Ha c .5 -- SF
>; -6 cu 00
? 5EB m3=t 03 gz :$ cmo - O c 098 '5 H ,P + 9 vi-r% .Sois .!i&J ctC f'?
,e e : g'g, s*- g % = - u $st.?!.$ g%au , a. gSJ 8 gBgrs &k.p .
z 8 agz 'f 3 i; zoa*a _x.sga sgjaa
81 Xc5q E53 PqXH &E- g a jZ.8 :g = a St?j=s o8 '.If% ~2 %X DDX$ 33 *g gg 3=z=m .g>s& u8f=o.g gz ,Os: q 1; =a 3 O 2- 58 3tRaf aa'LOz qE1 gssrs,
a o e.= : sg3? 2 ; 4
c U
zf gzf t a s -85; :.="zag -,ggas am 51
4 g 338 4 gs .sam.-, "%$ g -.-.--a
c
'5 a 0% 2s ZS~S! $ala b~~~z as 5 e C- ZgESa 058% u.ts8'
- "Osg s gp8g -= G f 5g5t5
s%sx .-.0.~Sf5=m~rtr,~',~~fnP.- m-3, a = 23 % pnf;q,,3 ,,z
&$Z b 23 s; s 3jg8f: I$$ $$.E i g; ; 3: ga 6 i
,Z;$ mgmm ma5zCe 11 l$!l Q 01 j% 1 jg 3 5E-O i5Lasfi E82'sh
c- cjejiui .- ci m *s 4 n -
a=;'f.-. Z'S%$ p- ~~~-.~~s~mf~*~l~~ "z-g"f.&gcs 5m==;33q a'i -';i'Tmag~c ~i.p~*,po
00-w 05-c-a-
Q 3'5
0 -3 -
5 mzaz au2asgB -nnm g 3~3 s3 mDcy ,.E 8aza 3 1.5 68 s'=or a h a bo a.rf 6
-n 2: .u - 3a g.4
i&2 i
8
E 5
n d a-
zr czz
5:
"E P
ca .-
\el
ii
It'
-e
._ C 0 .-
is:
6
.. e EB
k 0 - 0 If $
4 i
I!
4
; z
a
a]
.E 1;
2 8-
0 0
e an n n n n n "8 0 80
pgc m
: <. zz z $i
5g 2
2 xz 2 ;E> s >"a
l$t 0 0 0 0 0 a 0'0 :S.o "oE
- @ -
C'
P p2
gig 9 4% 9 4 48 % 55 Ge
=e 8 E 85 3 3w
%B E! - 8 Sb 5% z *EEx Ba ' B
3 Bp
X X X X X c 5s
st
r - a 2 - -I. @
-,gsts 1 a 4s sq gzEGo 2: 5. d
\ 5.2Ggaa:; -=a ~"5 283 5% .E SzgJI f= Zf€O - 3-z~ * a gc.5=o- -.cSO srE ?E' '8 3% o,asp C
a CE .-S=ca =x - $93 t 9Dggs2gql '.sJ, Q-c "8 gs a;* fps
823 Zl.3 p s=3 -Sa *Egg gs:z c-seL 0;gamsa~p B a= PO,S, ~3 3 dgz .,rag' 13 &%ZfLE &I. a p'.f e:! 3: $8 g:$
:py%4615 c3zf ;.a. 33 + 3S-a
534 pfj s=!$ B
2a 2 4*n;$f$ :o sg. g o 3298
25
isp.al% i:g%aB 2-3 9-5 * =a -5.8 3x3 :I Srg E
3 3i-I- *=a €
cs €4
-I i doE'fiJ' IzgE f? 03; a- pi :$ $ji 332,s +--
Sb 1 'SdB3.- p+
EE ZaSESsb 832 8S.e Cnl $90 30
i ui w G 6 6
ag qI. -2 558 ==g3 2=0= &g .) -- 8qU 3sCm 9FZ3
je -8.s $8
gsE)=
6 an a€
3
: -f
2;
;<
TE,
0. c 9.
2'
-
1% c
ii
p
E
11
1;
c' P
9s
a
ii c ii 0 - B
r: i$ f;
4 ;
1 a
a]
.Q g;
2 -i_ .,
,, '....c.*
i
q/ e
B II
.
e 0
e. 8. m a (I a 0 ssg
ig
p!$. 2s a a rnrn( m
133n
- ; =\ 33 .-
.c - ag E .-
2 c sb @S E s jg
Pa
eHgj 5 C C
E L - 3, O' ?i a z
n O .= m
- .-
3
1% -
fi
p 0
fg
i
Jj
t&
C
c 2 ss 4 .-
5=2 082% 8 % .E a
0 0 0 C .- C .- C
C .-
C C C c [:
X p
11
g PO C .- c .- 3
C
&%?E h 2 i? z 2 BB E 6 Eb is a 8 EE GB
EPI
.. 0 C 0 l,jS 5 X
0 -
"x x X X X dG
.$ G
E cwa51 32 3 3 2 :: pa d B 2s ~35ae as pgj5J qa,o c c ang" 'D z ,e E 2 0 2 is 2.p ~a u-o~aq.~~ =as'- -aaQ
a z c a*-- sz;=.- E -- xga 6.5 E =A q $3 sgj SdszE a8~mJ~.~ t 8f :sf e9s g
a 9 f 33* =.= gf 9i33Ea <X 2:Sg38239a g a= SSJam c €sac 3.S au '=* 85 8,0 s55rs0'35i ~=;G:E.~S,S?~
- e
0
5 5 w* ."31 ggsm usa.5
8 0- co .-
s, .I 5 5 Q ._ =5 g.pm'D3 o~aca~co=
384 9 .rE 5.2 Z~~~E~SWE bU*,e nZEh.SQ .Q=+~~s3; ~3~tsZ~5st 513 iig '$5
4, - .-
.. f 5 .e3 as .- q 35 =o- 8 g %?g SE6E 3 s 3 8 09acya s.pe a gz
!I €81 "Osa 'X= UaQ EaP olE-g=anc 2 g $4 gihj8 4; == 3 s f g=.t 5aE € g
n m worn .- sl --nI Coc'.2€ - 2 48s == ij; =,a 5; s3rp,a.3 . &a Sg S~ZZ - a3 3 : i;.s.g;a l3.g 3-9 -E f f t? f g'-arr.s. g$a 8 arj.E_oB: PE r%
acs 2z €3 sq,rys#p sa %Sp8q8s3E.5s Q o n - 0 t2hWHZ -0- 3&: d~gt nab sh - aafta5~~~.~Hg?PIac?pa~~
3: n.3 28 $-T &s.a4 e4 34 :g"q
xs
3 32, 233 Baat-a 2~432 88 3
44 ci i F 4
a 88 s b .E $ =;3 3 g B oZ 5.0- 13 0 0 0 - gss
-3 gy CU'S zp; 09 ~S~~;~a~mn 3a3s"f cho = g 0 P.ZW 83 ,p L
3 gugp~~gu't
:: E 3
s ai7j* a0.c o~c~S
rS *_a 3* mSP3 rQ?8~3h=.~~c,aS~Sltaaku.
8
3 34 E9 03 30
10
L
h
---/
I "B ti!
ti g f
0 0
z 5sa a 8. a a a
m
4 n (0
\ B t,
j.'gm
f $E -. c =.
0 ad a P - B E
3 3 =2
c al I! g e>
c 53
E - - s
n I! c
ti
B B 5" $ b ft
3 la - ..
Ef
'-
0 s"f a jntt;l a$ -05 u a==,: ='= - = dP g# zq 0.cq Q 1; 3c~tgcaoro sgzg.gggoa .q $3 sgsg n;pjE
a 3gdjs:z:af oe gkP*g$ 5385,g ~2:- psz ~sg~g~
f &=uu-G ma?= 0 - 6Cc€g9fk0 83 32s ==-# 5 0 mi?
.? .n 7evQ453g ca8=Qgm s.q"sg 85 me E ep8H:ez $ &lg~*pS~ 53Ea 5E *Q gobs ssps a.s-?fx
O -s=* *msmE= 0055 3 5 pigz $ gp: g; 5 #-.rpaBsSS SEjcs~a si-= 35p4
... 11 f w ss fa ;i pgp* = g-+ >sa# c 833s cp tS ojg35d
9-sa Pe.$gi
tf43 3-gs isis*q z=:tg -s I 'fy'fal - 09- ,$ f,lg% BSJZEC ;!& i 39 oazq. ii B&$ rsssPf=z3 tss3 mu#
z E53 (rs !$I ~ "pi CbE :I&% uaEf - G?g" p1,.
0
f2
c' 088 a 4 a 2 0 5'2
1 sea g E E ESS c 282 2
c v) Ea
0 E .- P E
5"
m
c t 98 0 B 0 \
a
z 0
c 8' zz 0 5 X
0
0 -
X X !!;;x
ce t 0 :.s ca s c3
QEh"fEOga, slgcos ,=as --. -2-5
<
-0s i P .- 2 -
e5 - ci ci - - E - -
.R 0 ,f 2.q 5 2
- 'Pabla Ii Q ip 1 q [! =.E$= aXU*gp 9903 &-Zs=
osar~Z ss gad0 oa
c 0 2z
I8 c6
3 ft ?g 3a Ec 38
11
-..
b
I, 88
B
tt! fr
0 0
r7z SSd 0 8. 0 0 a
8:i Q jfy n m m
; sl = c c\
0 # E, 3 0. :; c z. 4( 2 32
(f G\
'0 $3
5 -
1'; f: -6
-( j' 2
ai g 503 B
p QP
ccz e
v1 sa Bas 8 28 2 P
2.8 g 5
r [l
%g l
0
96 E 0 0
d 88 8
B c
E E c Q
z 0
0
- C P) 5 X
0
pix X X - fl
0 ne$ $
0-55 I23 a3p% i zag%[ 3-9 S$j 3gJs q -5- =OS.& 31' .:P= 6 Sa osw E,.?. 1 .gpg; p 9 zzc#
3 gzsa jE$s 35 08 :%OSP g82t4 8 E =-.SZ~ ,325.E 325 65 ;2a zaa
3 qqi $8, =${Z 1 53rg3 3.q
do-of ;tS 5 q ;$ 2s. 3== f= 31 L. ea$ .E* 'CC 50" hi g = q1 ;;I gr
f .gpe. 1"' i prsc- qooa 19 ms sg4gE 030.- Ea? %sa 2 Bg g3d p.3. d "8 53' wag g Pt as q! Ee Eks ai35 iP 6
.s 288 'ti' 8 ,rig 'a 3.Si had22
32 E= BjgJPp.g,=i
5 !&s k
-
SF - 0 E fa .g-=* IC -.E
2 5 =.as "Ci!
s 5s 5- PE 0033
0 -9
03 058s 3s 3 s 3 E = c sa 3" pfizg - .= P, S2.E' a= 303
n= <
6 : t
e Q
a .-
!ji
EQ:
0 0 0 i ui - ci
-3 r'E_*s- a=? 39 .c 5 14 5 2 %S-S s"? ace za:j aQTq3 Zs
2 in"'? ul doti
?L 8aof a4g8
I
a, =3
34 Tip 06 sa am 3-0s g !I GO8 291
12
e "8 a a 6 6
2 +3 m
"'Ed c
f c 3z 53
0 0 m
e- 8s
i- Pf
O s,"$ 1. - -
2 xz g =.
4g - t
g 2:
$3 C'
32 9 =rig ZSs 9
2; C 6
Q a
50 a-
& 0s gea I1
rei
c' 0 -
P
i "B
B
ti! 11
'. -
6 e
c "86 QQ m m $:2 8:: 0 $4 4 ad 4 4
2 5s =3
c =,Q Q qj : >"a
23
s 16 ; sf
6 gd
=cz 0 0 0
6
"I 0 - 50
'Po 00 b 01 I!33 -cy I1
L dd d P, d a # $
It!
f3
323 'o"#
p &
c' %9 2 4 0 Ck2
5 s5
90,
Bss g
>= 6 dZ
- aa
CP, sa cg ern izs cs tc zc
2- 2-
16 2 Sf $f hs
dz3a as a5 si!! 815"
:zz a 5s Ss "E XE
an
> '1=
X ._ - C 0 5 X
0 - $+ r:; SF X n X X Efj n is! g;
$1 1 %! x
fi: g.g
0
H.aE >=02 g 3 ga 1 ys=z ; q 5 4" aP 25s rq 5 gPs !!$ mq f 2.9 3, qs& .I 3.t 87 tm +!I g gi a psi <g g 8 zrz
j:d ."d= [j I%
EpH 3 "ZJ& -'E 44, n,-gfP, 's ra gp+ f4:ws;s d.5 &! 4 iag,r I EBB
s:: a - .s sp ;
!
z?3g pgg 0s 91. 284,sg
a 2 a "'By d :$ pj i f = 0 da& :{ ea
'L
J
3 % 3.q &z; 51 d6 s9 Po 54 -O t8ss -53 Q-' m '5
0. -5 '=t
*E 38
34 de5 c c -
03 0 ti!,, ag?" '9 I912 e,o$$i 5 il33n&?$$$
jr4.3
a.5 3 ~GS 8cir P
3
4.4
0 0
-d
3 .= E €
z< 22
zj
01 E( .-
E3 01 16; -e
lf
Egi e2
F U'
31
I! .E s
._ c 0 .-
9s 1
.. - c a 5 0 - 5 ii 1
9fal
._ x
t
U '0
n 6
3;
P ii
15
..A
i
\ "B
I
tk! HI
0 0
598 = Ho a 0 81
c zg z2 5 sfj
ig Eo;
n ;g
c aH gl! i 223 h" 5%
g *i ffi
W s=B
S"P 0' 2 Bzm m
6
B - a zi Q- -
Pa c 1%
Q D z p& 0
2 1666
65 x p
lami
gn i
i';l ;z 2
P2 a&
c' 5 ggj EU g 4 8 a 0
2 E c 62 e +s c
'8:; o @? b h
c gs g
,*a an c B 8
X
,d
3 p
S'Si3 0 = 56 5s
X 322
- 5 QP- rii -3 7: 5s; 0.c 3 3 mw :ij: s$r PYP49 gig8 zh% 3s n*-g5= i; 0 :2co a.s<
f A*
$ i:sd&p .Epf ci-
o a~'::~~~ m5~5= 48 3593 3 g,a,,=J s8eq ss,p 6 fE9'5@ z;3fji E'dF Ti4 =+Hp at 9s: .-ss; 2 sg 3q$$ t3iJm5
;!& i;.;.= a- Fgsg sa,at,tEt= IPUZZ .r>aj ;$gg
- C
X = -t
-
m c 0 m 8.5:: s
9s: 549 3zg
9
n qiE.p 'au' sna msa
SmZi
U L n $3 4a 6?
ii E aQ
&~:'3 gg*5z afjzcg X,Ffa Eo8a
5 -8
c e4 6 8" 2
2m 6-z
Y.Ci q
- a 0 -2 35- S
; I.9 bE 9 qa.a *a
qf ms$Hp,;
rs qtg& $3 a?Bs 8 83
a :3 ad sa 231 392
76
LOCATION MAP
City of Clr~
I
EIR 914 RANCHO SANTA FE RD ALIGNMENT & MASS GRADING
J
0 E.&ITS "B" and "C"
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Pa
ADDENDUM ..........................................
ERRATA ............................................ x
1.0 INTRODUCTION ..................................... 1
2.0 EXECUTIVESUMMARY ............................... 2
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ............................... 3
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ........................... 4 .
5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS ................... 5 .
5.1 Earth ......................................... 5.1- 5.2 Air Quality ..................................... 5.2. 5.3 Water Resources ................................ 5.3-
5.4 Biological Resources .............................. 5.4- 5.5 Noise ......................................... 5.5- 5.6 Light and Glare ................................. 5.6-
5.7 LandUse ...................................... 5.7- 5.8 Traffic/Circulation ............................... 5.8- 5.9 Public Services .................................. 5.9- 5.10 Utilities ...................................... 5.10- 5.11 Landform Alteration/Visual Quality .................. 5.11- 5.12 Cultural/Historic Resources ....................... 5.12-
6.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT ............ 6-
Realign Rancho Santa Fe Road and Defer Proposed
Mass Grading .................................... 6-1
Realign Rancho Santa Fe Road With Mass Grading
of Developable Land Consistent with the
General Plan .................................... 6-'
Road Widening in the Existing Alignment and
Defer Proposed Mass Grading ...................... 6-1:
Road Widening in the Existing Alignment With Mass Grading of Developable Land Consistent with
the General Plan ................................ 6-1:
6.1
6.2
6.3
6.4
e 0
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(continued)
Section Pa€!
6.5 Road Widening in the Existing Alignment With Mass Grading for Proposed Development ................... 6-2
6.6 The No Project Alternative ......................... 6-2,
6.7 Summary ...................................... 6-2
7.0 OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES ........................ 7-
7.1 Cumulative Impacts ............................... 7-
7.3 Impact Areas Considered But Not Found to be .......... 7-1
7.2 Growth-Inducing Impacts ........................... 7-1
7.4 Short and Long Term Environmental Changes ........... 7-1 7.5 Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes ........... 7-1.
REFERENCES AND PERSONS RESPONSIBLE FOR PREPARATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL
Potentially Significant
8.0
IMPACT REPORT .................................... 8-
9.0 RESPONSES TO COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT EIR .......... 9-
10.0 APPENDICES
Appendix A:
Appendix B: Mitigation Monitoring Checklist
Appendix C:
Appendix D:
Appendix E: Appendix F: Appendix G:
Appendix H:
Appendix I:
Notice of Preparation, Initial Study and
Responses to NOP
Supplemental Soil and Geologic Investigation by
Geocon Incorporated Hydrology/Water Quality Report by Dudek &
Associates
Biological Assessment by Michael Brandman Associates
Traffic Study by Wes Pringle and Associates
Archaeological and Historical Survey by Roth and
Associates
Cultural Resource Survey of the La Costa Town Center,
City of Carlsbad, California, by Recon
Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub Habitat Conservation Plan
(HCP) Work Program
0 0
Addendum
em
0 0
ADDENDUM
A final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the Rancho Santa Fe Road Realignment and Mass Grading project was completed in January of 1992. An addendum has been prepared to clarify mitigation of biological resource impacts contained in the FEIR. Mitigation identified in the Final EIR is required to reduce significant environmental impacts to the Diegan coastal sage scrub habita
and the California gnatcatcher caused by the project. The Mitigation Plan described in this addendum evolved from efforts to prepare a Habitat
Conservation Plan (HCP) as part of a City-wide Habitat Management Plan
(HMP). This addendum explains the process which led to development of the
Mitigation Plan in its present form and includes an explanation of that plan.
Purpose and Scope
This addendum to the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Rancho Sant Fe Road Realignment and Mass Grading (SCH # 90010850) is prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines
15164. According to the CEQA Guidelines, the purpose of an addendum to an EIR is to comply with CEQA in situations in which the EIR requires "minor
technical changes or additions that do not raise new important new issues about the project's significant effects on the environment, and where no factors are
present that would require the preparation of either a subsequent or
supplemental EIR (CEQA section 15164[a]. CEQA also states that "An
addendum need not be circulated for public review, but can be included in or
attached to the Final EIR" (CEQA section 15164[b], and that 'The decision-
making body shall consider the addendum with the Final EIR prior to making a
decision on the project" (CEQA section 15 1641~1.
An addendum to the Final EIR for this project is appropriate because a preliminary Mitigation Plan has been prepared that identified on-site and off-site mitigation areas and funding of gnatcatcher studies that would implement the mitigation criteria listed in the Final EIR. The development of the Mitigation Plan requires modification to the section describing mitigation of impacts to biological resources in the Final EIR.
At the time of the printing of the Final EIR, the City and the project applicant were seeking to develop a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) in conjunction with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) pursuant to a Memorandum of
Agreement (MOA). The California Department of Fish & Game (DFG) is also
involved in the effort to develop the HCP as a result of a separate MOA. The HCP would be a pre-listing agreement since the California Gnatcatcher has not been listed as an endangered or threatened species. Because the California
Gnatcatcher is not presently listed as an endangered species under the Federal
Endangered Species Act, an HCP is not required under Federal Law.
vii
e a
The Final EIR anticipated that the implementation of the HCP would mitigate
or reduce impacts to Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat and the California
Gnatcatcher to a level of less than significant. Development of the HCP has not
proceeded at the pace anticipated by the City. The project proponent has therefore proceeded with the development of a Mitigation Plan which satisfies
the mitigation requirements set forth in the final EIR and which can be implemented within the foreseeable future.
The addendum is included to fully explain the sequence of events leading to the
current Mitigation Plan and the effects this has on the text of the EIR.
The Mitigation Plan
Development of the Mitigation Plan
Development of the Mitigation Plan has been ongoing since the identification of impacts to biological resources during preparation of the Draft EIR. In the Biological Resources section of the Final EIR, under LEVEL OF
SIGNIFICANCE, there is description of the appointment of a Habitat
Conservation Plan Facilitation Team (see page 5.4-17 of the Final EIR and page xiv of the Errata). The Final EIR also includes a work program and time schedule for completing a preliminary Habitat Conservation Plan (see Appendix I).
The Facilitation Team has been meeting weekly since January 7, 1992 to identifj
and review candidate preservation actions that could be taken to minimize and
mitigate impacts to the Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat and the California
gnatcatcher. This identification and review process has taken longer than originally anticipated. The Facilitation Team is continuing to meet in an effort to develop a range of preservation actions that will be sufficient to meet the standards for a Habitat Conservation Plan.
The meetings are expected to require several more weeks to finally determine if a range of actions can be developed that will allow the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service to approve a pre-listing Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP). An HCP is
likely to incorporate the measures included in the Mitigation Plan described in
this addendum.
In lieu of an HCP, the project proponents have designed a Mitigation Plan whic
can be used to implement the mitigation requirements contained in the Final EIR. An HCP is an additional plan that may require mitigation measures different from those identified in the Mitigation Plan. While the Mitigation Pla recommended in this EIR reduces impacts to Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat,
and the California gnatcatcher to a level of less than significant to meet the
requirements of CEQA, an HCP will meet the provisions of the Federal
Endangered Species Act (ESA) if the California gnatcatcher is subsequently
listed.
... vlll
0 0
An Environmental Assessment (EA) or an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will be required under the provisions of the National Environmental Polic Act (NEPA) if an HCP is ultimately prepared, and additional environmental
review will be necessary under the provisions of CEQA. A joint IS/EA or EIR/EIS can be prepared and adopted to satisfy the provisions of both CEQA and NEPA.
Description of the Mitigation Plan
The EIR for the Rancho Santa Fe Road and Private Grading Project identifies
direct impacts to Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat totalling 217 acres, as well a
the direct loss of 14 pairs of California gnatcatchers. Additional indirect impaci
would also result from habitat fragmentation by the project. The mitigation required for impacts to the coastal sage scrub and California gnatcatcher are as follows:
"If the proposed project is chosen, mitigation and/or compensation could be accomplished by a combination of onsite open space conservation preserves and offsite preserves which would conserve at a minimum the existing population levels of 22 pairs of California gnatcatchers and replace the approximately 217 acres of Diegan Coastai Sage Scrub gnatcatcher habitat being directly impacted.
Because a specific mitigation plan has not been worked out at the time c preparation of this draft document, listed below are a set of criteria whic. the mitigation program shall have to conform to prior to approval of the project. If a combination of onsite and offsite gnatcatcher preservation areas are chosen, each preserve area shall be able to survive in perpetuit!
on its own and the combined preserves shall meet the minimum requirement of preservation of 22 pairs of California gnatcatchers (at lest 8 pairs remaining onsite and 14 pairs offsite) and preserve a minimum of
217 acres of additional gnatcatcher habitat. It is recommended that a
specific mitigation program be finalized prior to approval of the project,
and made available for public review, if possible."
Specific mitigation provisions presently contained in the Final EIR are describec on pages 5.4-17 through 5.4-22. The following Mitigation Plan consisting of two
principal components and two additional alternatives is proposed to meet these
mitigation criteria, and replaces the specific provisions presently contained in thc
Final EIR. The first two are being proposed by The Fieldstone Company to
preserve 15 to 16 gnatcatcher pairs, while the last two options can be combined
to mitigate for the remaining 6 to 7 pair.
1. On-site preservation (8-9 pair). The project as proposed would retain
habitat currently occupied by eight pair of California gnatcatchers in
permanent open space. Additionally, areas of currently unoccupied
habitat will be retained in permanent open space. Approximately 240
ix
e 0
acres of Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat will be retained in open space
on-site.
If further redesign of the project for preservation of a movement corridor results in an increase in the number of pairs retained on-site, these pairs would be counted towards the total number of pairs preserved on-site, thus reducing the number of pairs needed for off-site preservation. For example, a preliminary assessment of potential redesign options indicates
that one additional pair could be retained in open space by the
incorporation of a movement corridor.
Off-site preservation (9 pair). The 388-acre Konyn parcel and the 80-acre
Alyea site are being proposed as off-site mitigation for a portion of the direct impacts to the California gnatcatcher. The Konyn site supports 255
acres of sage scrub, approximately 104 acres which are considered good quality breeding habitat, and the remaining 151 acres of sage scrub is considered good quality foraging and dispersal habitat. A total of 7 pair of gnatcatchers currently use the site. An additional 47 acres of disturbed
grassland occurs on the property that could be restored to sage scrub
vegetation. The Alyea site supports 80 acres of sage scrub and at lest two
pair of gnatcatchers. Both properties adjoin each other.
To mitigate the remaining 4 to 5 pair, some combination of the remaining two components will be implemented. The final options chosen will be based on that combination of measures that maximizes the biological
value of the total mitigation package while retaining the economic viabilit!
of the project.
Off-site revegetation (4 pair). The 47 acres of disturbed grassland on the
Konyn site is a result of previous agricultural activities on the site.
Portions of this area have scattered remnants of sage scrub vegetation.
This fact, and its location immediately adjacent to existing high quality
sage scrub vegetation on gentle slopes with well drained soils that have
not been disturbed below the A horizon of the soils, makes it an ideal
candidate for sage scrub restoration. If this area is restored, it would
provide a wide band of sage scrub adjacent to a narrow band of currently
unoccupied habitat. Based on the location of the revegetation area adjacent to good quality breeding and dispersal habitat, it is assumed that up to an additional four pair of gnatcatchers could occupy site upon completion of the restoration plan.
In addition to the Konyn property, other revegetation opportunities may be available in the San Pasqual Valley on public lands currently in a
disturbed condition. The Fieldstone Company is pursuing the option of
revegetating portions of these areas as part of the mitigation program.
2.
3.
X
a 0
4. Other off-site acquisition or project redesign (1 pair). Based on the three components outlined above, one additional gnatcatcher pair will be
needed to mitigate this project. These will be provided by one of two
ways. The first option is through additional acquisition of off-site open
space, either within the vicinity of the Konyn property, or within the City
of Carlsbad. The second option would be to redesign the project to preserve an additional pair on-site,
In summary, the first two components of the mitigation program will result in the protection of 17 to 18 of the pair through on-site and off-site preservation. The
remaining mitigation requirements for 4 to 5 pair will be mitigated through some
combination of measures 3 and 4.
xi
8
c3 3
R# $9 $$
P s
E
nZ 8s cq zg
m
0
=z
zu oQ)% ugi s 0
8% "&
u3pp: 3 mGS2 8 \o v)w @
0,s 5 v)m
IZ 5 .3
ooz cL= %I) (0
32
52
a
a0 LIY *E
000 f galf f 0
Y m
a b .?
025 zgpp: 22 c3z
fm
N N m II br-44
ui Y
Y .e 0
% -: c
L gc
2 a .s LI 4
cr) .I?. -v s 8
9 Y 2 .z" q
e, 9
?
E, % E .z a- g Y c v)
b3 m 23 Q)& -g .z 0 aw 2.2 b Yf Y m&-8g v) a 0
g O2 Q) 0 8-i Y
% 8 3 g*: p m *zs
Q) x:ae, 0 82 c.8
pp:o 3, 7 a ?E v) 4
8 i ri vi+ L(
v) - 8 Q)
m 3 8
.I 0
v) E *-
Yam
c 0
.I Y
9
.- .- .* pp:
0
Y Q) .-
Y
cobl
3 -
I) A
0 e
Errati
e!
e e
ERRATA
Prepared on April 1, 1992
Page 2-2
The first paragraph should be modified as follows:
"Based on these data and conclusions in this EIR, the City finds that the project w
result in significant impacts to air quality d 4 which cannot be fully mitigate
& Implementation of tf
mitigation measures outlined in this document can reduce all other impacts to le:
than significant levels. . . ). The remainder of the paragraph is unchanged.
Page 2-4
The heading, "11. Significant Environmental Impacts That Can Be Avoided Or Mitigate Section 151269~) of the State CEQA Guidelines" should be placed above the Biologic: Resources entry in Table 2-1. The entry in the Residual Impact column for "Biological Resources" should be deleted.
Page 2-8
The last line of the Potential Environmental Impact column for "Land Use" should b
revised as follows:
"..reduced in area by development and degraded in quality by grading."
The last 5 lines of the Mitigation Measures column for "Land Use" should be revised a follows:
"Space Map 3 consisten
with the Open Space and Conservation Element, or revise gmdmg developmen
plans to preserve open space on the City Map.
..
Page 2-9
The 4th line of Potential Environmental Impact column for "Landform Alteration/Visual Quality" should be revised as follows:
"of 3;6;37 8.357 cubic yards per acre; the"
... xlll
0 a
Paye 3-4-12
The 4th line of the last paragraph should be revised as follows:
"approximately 88.4 acres to 3449 345.2 acres, and increase of 290 percent. Of the
Pave 5.4-13
The "Disturbed" and "TOTAL (ACRES)" entries should be changed as shown on th
attached page 5.4-13.
Pave 5-4.17
The first two paragraphs on the page should be revised as follows:
.. The impacts of the proposed project on biological resources - : arc significant but mitigable. Impacts to the Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat and thc
California gnatcatcher can be mitigated to a less than significant level through thc
implementation of 2 the mitigatioi measures listed below. In addition to the mitigation measures a A Habita Conservation Plan Facilitation Team has been appointed to prepare an HCI consistent with the Memorandums of Agreement entered into by the U.S. Fish d Wildlife Service, Calfironia Department of Fish & Game, the City of Carlsbad anc
the Fieldstone Companies. The work program and time schedule for completing
preliminary Habitat conservation Plan is included in Appendix I to this EIR.
If the H€P-k mitigation measures are not implemented, the impacts to the Diega
coastal sage scrub habitat and the California gnatcatcher would not be mitigated tl a less than significant level. Consequently the project would result in significant an! unmitigated impacts and a Statement of Overriding Considerations would b
required if the project, or any of the alternatives, is approved.
Page 5.7-6
The Gross Acres column under the General Plan Amendment (GPA) section of the tablt
should be changed as shown on the attached page 5.7-6.
Pape 5.7-8
The last sentence of the first paragraph should be deleted as an incorrect statement.
XiV
.e Q
Page 5.7-12
The 4th line of the first paragraph to be revised as follows:
"..occur only with adjustment of the pdkg development plans to preserve the ope space on.."
The 1st line of the second paragraph to be revised as follows:
"..aforementioned Table 540, implementation.."
Pape 5.7-13
The 6th line of the second paragraph should be revised as follows:
"..developer(s) shall revise gmdmg develotlment plans to preserve open space.."
Page 5.11-5
Page 5.11-5 in the Final EIR should be replaced with the attached pg. 5.11-5. Table 5.24 on this page in the Final EIR contains typographical errors.
The "Road" and "Fieldstone" acreages should be changed as shown on the attached page
The 3rd line of the second paragraph should be revised as follows:
5.11-5.
"..fill. This equates to a grading ratio of approximately 7;676 8.357 C.Y. per acre.."
Pape 5.11-6 1st Paragraph
The City's Open Space and Conservation Element was amended following the preparation of the Draft EIR. Consequently the three quoted items do not reflect the current element.
PaPe 6-2 (Table 6-11
The "Earth Resources" acreages should be changed as shown on the attached page 6-2.
The reference to gnatcatchers across the line under Biological Resources should be changed to:
"Significant but mitigated to a less than significant level with the implementation of a Mitigation Plan"
xv
0 *
Pace 6-4 (Table 6-11
The "Landform Alteration" acreages should be changed as shown on the attached page 6-4
Pape 6-5 (Table 6-22
The "Area" acreages should be changed as shown on the attached page 6-5.
Page 6-9
The first line of the last paragraph should be changed as follows:
"Potential erosion and sedimentation from leaving a graded 398 485 acre area.."
Pape 7-9
The last two sentences of the last paragraph should be changed as follows:
"Implementation of 1 Mitigation Plan wil rr&ga+e reduce impacts in the City to levels of less than significant. Cumulativc impacts will remain significant. w .. . . ..
Page 7-11
The second and third lines of the last paragraph should be changed as follows:
impact areas of water resources, biolom, noise, light and glare, ..." 11 .. 8, will be mitigable to levels of less than significant. Tht
Pape 7-15
Biological Resources under the heading of SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE
ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES should be stricken.
In addition, the last paragraph should be changed as follows:
'The impacts associated with these this impact area b discussed in detail in Sectior 5.2 .ftfta-5;4 of this EIR. 4
Pape 7-15
The last line on this page should be changed as follows:
"significant 1 for the project site."
xvi
e 0
Page 9-1
The page numbering of Section 9.0 of the EIR, Responses to Comments on the Draft E11
is incorrect. Section 9.0 presently consists of pages 9-4 through 9.75. Pages 9-2 throul
9-16 have been removed and Pages 9-17 through 9-90 should be numbered 9-2 through 9-7
respectively,
Page 9-66
The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service have reviewed the responses to their comments submitte
on September 23, 1991. The Service has requested clarification of certain responses. Tk
following additional information is provided as requested by the U.S. Fish & Wildlii Service.
ResDonse 5L (Dace 5-68): The mass grading is proposed to be accomplished in advanc
of the actual development of the graded area for the following reasons.
a. The grading plan provides for a balanced grading of the mass grading are
which will necessitate moving volumes of earth across the existing ant
proposed alignments of Rancho Santa Fe Road. The grading phasing p1a1
provides for moving this earth with a minimum of disruption to the traffic 01
either the existing or proposed alignments. If the mass grading were deferrec
until after the construction of Rancho Santa Fe Road, a major disruption o
traffic would result.
As noted in paragraph 3 on pg. 3-1 of the Final EIR, the grading is requirec to ensure development within the Assessment District prior to roadwa!
financing. The road construction project requires that the Assessment District be able to sell bonds to finance the construction of the road. Bond underwriters must ensure the development potential of the property included
in the Assessment District. Furthermore, traditional bank financing i:
unavailable to construct a regional public facility when the security for thai
facility is unentitled land. The only binding mechanism available to ensure
the development potential of the property is the issuance of a grading permit
and actual grading of the area.
The need to construct the realigned Rancho Santa Fe Road in the near-term is a result of the Local Facilities Management Plan requirements and the previous approval of development projects in the area. The construction
activities will require staging and stockpiling areas within the mass grading
area. Thus, portions of the mass grading area will have to be graded to
accommodate the staging area for equipment and stockpiling of material. Further, roadbed material must be generated for the construction activity.
Preliminary investigations indicates that suitable materials are located in the areas shown on Fig. 5-11 (pg. 5.5-5) of the EIR. These areas will be disturbed as a result of the need to generate roadbed materials.
b.
c.
xvii
0 0
The construction period for the road will extend over a two to three year time period.
Resuonses 5R/5U ( Papes 9-70/9-73): The mass grading operation will result
manufactured slopes that would be subject to erosion and significant levels of downstrea siltation absent any erosion control. The Final EIR and responses note that a variety l mitigation measures will be implemented to reduce the level of erosion and siltation to less than significant level. This does not mean that erosion and siltation aft
implementation of the mitigation measures will be totally eliminated, but that the r&du levels of erosion and siltation will not be significant.
Response 5s (Page 9-72): Erosion control devices such as catchment basins are planne to be placed within the footprint of the mass grading area. Preliminary grading plans ar erosion control plans area being reviewed by the City Engineering Department and ai
subject to further refinement to insure their compliance with City ordinances. No erosio
or siltation impacts beyond those identified in the EIR are anticipated.
Response 5BB (Page 9-76): Horned lizards and orange throated whiptails were nc observed during the three surveys of the project site. As noted in the response, the tw
species may possibly occupy the site, but simply were not observable during the man surveys conducted on the property. If the species are present, the construction of the roac and mass grading could result in an adverse impact and contribute to cumulative impact on a regional basis. The development of the Habitat Conservation Plan for the Californi
Gnatcatcher would provide a reasonable level of mitigation for the species.
Response 5CC (Pace 9-79: Text Addition)
The following text should be added to the Revised Grading Plan, Figure 9-3, "GradinP Plar
prepared on April 23. 1992".
Response 5DD/5EE (Pages 9-77/9-78): The ultimate development of the mass grade(
area could result in indirect impacts to the Diegan Coastal Sage habitat and Californii Gnatcatcher that cannot be assessed at the Program EIR level of analysis. Potentia.
impacts related to human occupation of the area may result in indirect impacts. Examples of such indirect impacts include occupants of the area entering the native vegetation are2 for recreational hiking activities, pesticide and erosion runoff, residential noises, light anc
glare and household pets entering the native vegetation area. Fragmentation of the habitai
would result from the mass grading and construction of Rancho Santa Fe Road, anc
ultimately La Costa Avenue and Melrose Avenue.
The effect of these indirect impacts could result in impacts to California Gnatcatchers beyond the 14 pair identified being impacted in the Final EIR. During subsequent
environmental review these impacts can be more precisely identified and appropriate mitigation measures recommended.
xviii
0 0
See Section 9.0 TABLE 5-9
Response 5W & 5X PLANT COMMUNITIES
BEFORE AND AFER PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION
Southern Mixed Chaparral
Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub
Annual Grassland
Valley Needle Grassland
Cottonwood Willow Riparian
Xix
e a
Area (ac)
Road 6S
Mass Fieldst one 31 1 MAG. 72
TOTAL, 448
Cut in cubic yards (cy) Fill in cubic yar
899,000 996 ,ON
2,24 1,000 2,404,00( 704,000 797,00(
3,844,000 4,197,00(
v E e
2.2. - g hi$&E n 3
c. -- -
cw 5 0 m cn-uPuF 5 E 8gqsOs a Q
CEC&?fE$ - - c.ol - 85 ~~p?~?!~ 2 2 Em 2 - 2
z" gsggggg z" z" $.E z"
mm
z g
im Q, 2 W j
e% 68
v) e ;,OLE ;$ %
E--= .--uqTJ ~~SOSE s 0,2
*-J= z;E4czc> 0 a- zcDamww
cu a
iijg 2 .-E 0
E::M. w gf5,x3sg
TI il Id
2e
LL O::):i 7 .- v) f a"%(. v
&A gg 3.5 Q w.gwz
Pa EBb z 6.G -CD==U
A
3
?2 ..% -
qi! 8 g P gqan 00 83&3@!
3 B
Ma S"&d
W e- E - 2. m .- - i gg ZZEE iz$g a
i
E v) w.c E
-
* w5; -- 2 py.-er 33 - --EE'IW 25
fa 85 Ea 85
&E g,Ea5: mr mz GE i7jsg=(rJ G€ GE
* 0 w%z
a5 85 35 8E S.S$Z ,E g,E3=5
i7jE iijSgg& i7j€ GE
- 2 fn
.- c 5% 2 cw c- a5 & 3=Se G Emgd $2 52 - gguag &:g 3 'E z" GE=== iiiE 3.p
cw cw
c.ca c.ca E$ i+j E=.- fiZ# 5
c.
a '5s no n 5gG.g~ - *-Erne -c cw cw cw cn
Em E=.- 5 ~m sm c .- c.e c.9 a.= 0.z
- kj g:52 -m$* 3 n -
c 2 m- sg
0- -* 2 ze; 33 Ea EB "k9-Z-S or 33 8E b%,re 0 i+j gs sta fE-a.Zjj El8 Em =.g &E I QZ c .- c .P c.9 m.= 0' ZE Gsgz& iijE i7jE
v) - .t 01 E z x26 a c
3 g ,m bVJ=
g 8gnzz G fcQco - =@.ea-€ C.P -'E
cg5-5 2 Ew E= 3% s.$ mg.= 01 L 0)c 01 z" iii~E%=g i7jE 3.e
u)
0 -it? c. L
c) 3 ZZ ~QS a 3 -. 25 523 2 5
!Em bB E,E.-802 8~C-00 sa 8z E" 85
m: c .- &-Z%I(rJ- c 0- v) -=.e m.= mc c.F
n
c w = g.s= cw =w
GE SZ8mQOS ZE SE
W
3 e m e
v) 0 ,: B z d bZ $ 'El 3 m
-. +s .zs E r" ma" 29
1
2 p
ea I- sg cnz II" i5 2
I
E 2 ~: k 53
- .- zv
E 'P s 3 an
go 05
$0 n Po .- c L - or
0 'B e
c .- 3 F - 2 - e P z" L z" a
s - .9g n - a, ss .E sp E a' 85E.P E ';./{a E"-- 3."0,bI Bagbg zE3g g g udg ,B Ernoam Ern;; 3 c.Pu,z, c.P-e2 8 2
.- ,o e 2: - a si? .-
E U.gEEhE e cip;-xa -'4- cicu g .a 3.egctJ';JQ ZBgbg s=3g g 2
253 Qd iSjEcr,>v) gp?g 5 a
-- 0 c - zz
==Eo2 cosvl .c e - 3." 0cctJ m Pu
c m3- 3- 2 .z E%
0cu s 3 -
m 5 *= 0 '5
3s C 1m s~~SSE a z$ n -5
&Q&s .gzzgs .gz .gJ au g 1 8
fc .- P Sm
atqtt &gJ"gpa E.P%* :5 a
gi .QPp me 85 @$ t."U .- m mm
@ga udgYj $g;s pg3 3 z" 04 :g
$3 gr if$L
1 344
v i
W? 322; no z
j gqm Et3 85 iSj & 8 'E.m.E L 09 9
@ 0 'C !g
3 35u 2 2 .E$ QU -c cjgl L = Ego:a =.--e a Eg za
sagq ;;mego" s:>'$ Ls % QL a- 1g)q;a c
;Em '~.p8+j~ mu,.^" $2 80 .p=y-= mz g.mg = Q) 5.j
ms gz b? 5 gB
8.F 08
3 .Eu 22% 2% $2 5
cop ga 2.2 5 :g Fz 55 ,o % .g zg< 2-08
0 .- c L
uc 30
f L= -mw-arn cco-0
0 a'D t= 50 .- 0- .-
c C
0
I=
d 5q
50
nu uz
$0 an 8% .- 3 ii; - as e= E a :E ?+j ;v)wa z 2
,--as! c,-Uo -?- .- azp sicu E;;; vag% $ & ;Em 3 ;; m.- .z ca.0 v) 'E g2 3 de5 c m.= mg 2 .o ZEoo iSjE-Gjo 3 E P "8 9 - mer =
a g.5 z 59.p .0 0 $ 'c f?L a,cu "f a
gzgg m.E ms $m r
7 0
0 - C L^.O 0 evl am EW n .= IA
>,.c z
zg%z3 GEZU rno ac 5
Q.E m e ."E - a $8 v
g=CU E 0
mfgs"& cnEWS.$ iSjEQ5U a=
f B
e%
e= - - m
no \ >z 8 I... 1528 1 .E
* 0
AND THESROPOSED PROJE&
TABLE 6-2 APPROXIMATE GRADING UANTITIES FOR EA H ALTERNATIVE
For Roadway and Mass
Road Widening in the
Msting Alignment and later for 448 I
Realign RSF Road With
Road Widening in the
XXiV
0 0
&@
STAFF REPORT
DATE: MARCH 18, 1992 0
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBTEcrT: EIR 91-1 - RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD REALIGNMENT AND MASS GRADING - Request for the certification of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to
realign and construct Rancho Santa Fe Road to six lane prlme arterial
standards from La Costa Avenue north to the existing Melrose Avenue as
described in the City of Carlsbad Rancho Santa Fe Road Route Adoption
Report - alignment C-1 "Canyon alignment" and the mass grading of land on
both sides of the roadway in preparation for future development on a total
of 448 acres within a 768 acre site.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission ADOPT Resolution No. 3371 recommending
CERTIFICATION of EIR 91-1 based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained
therein including a statement of overriding considerations.
11. PROJF,CX DESCRIPTION
The primary objective of the project is the relocation of Rancho Santa Fe Road to the east
of its present alignment and its reconstruction to prime arterial standards, 6 lanes within
a 126 foot right-of-way, from La Costa Avenue to the existing Melrose Avenue. Funding
for the road will be accomplished through the formation of a 2,210 acre assessment
district. It will be the future development within the assessment district boundaries that
will ultimately be the source of funds for the road. Therefore, the secondary objective of
the project is to perform mass grading which will accommodate future development.
Within the 768 acre project site, 65 acres will be graded for the construction of the road
and 383 acres will be graded in anticipation of development. The project's total graded
area is 448 acres.
111. BACKGROUND
Rancho Santa Fe Road was originally constructed by the County of San Diego along an
eastern alignment similar to the existing bypass alignment (Fig. 1). In 1972 what is now
@
AP 0 EIR 91-1 - RANCHO S LA L E ROAD REALIGNMENT AND MASS L-ADING
MARCH 18, 1992 PAGE 2
the La Costa portion of the city was annexed to Carlsbad. The road was designated in the
City's General Plan as a Major Arterial. When the La Costa Vale subdivision was
constructed, the road was moved to the west and constructed as a two lane road along the
existing alignment to serve the new development. In 1984, Rancho Santa Fe Road was
upgraded in the General Plan Circulation Element to a Prime Arterial due to new traffic
projections which showed a need for more capacity. As the only north-south road east of
El Camino Real and west of 1-15, SANDAG designated the road as "Regionally Significant".
In 1986 the City of Carlsbad adopted the Growth Management Plan which mandates
acceptable levels of service for roads and other public facilities. The Plan requires funding
for Rancho Santa Fe Road (RSF) and other specified facilities to be borne by new
development to maintain the adopted performance standards. No construction beyond
grading can occur Within LFMP Zones 11, 12, and a portion of 6 until RSF is financed.
That same year residents of the La Costa Vale subdivision petitioned the City to move
Rancho Santa Fe Road back to the original alignment. The petition was based on safety
issues and the future noise impacts to their homes from RSF as a 6 lane road.
As a response to the petition the City commissioned a series of three traf'fic studies and
appointed a citizens committee to study alternative alignments. The "canyon alignment",
which is part of the proposed project, was the preferred alignment by the City Council in
1987.
Iv. ANALYSIS
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACI' REPORT
Backmound
The project analyzed in the Environmental Impact Report is the realignment and
construction of Rancho Santa Fe Road as a prime arterial and 383 acres of grading in
anticipation of future development. In addition, as a program EIR, the document has
analyzed potential impacts which could result from a subsequent General Plan and La Costa
Master Plan amendment as well as the future development of those land use designations.
Per the City of Carlsbad Title 19, the action the Planning Commission will be taking at this
time will be on a recommendation to the City Council of certification of the Final
Environmental Impact Report (FEIR). Certification signifies that the FEIR has been
completed pursuant to the provisions of California law, and that the Planning Commission
and City Council will review its contents prior to consideration of the project.
Further development of the site (i.e. Tract Maps, Site Development Plans, etc.) will require
additional environmental and discretionary review by the Planning Commission.
EIR 91-1 - RANCHO S AI@- E ROAD REALIGNMENT AND MAS 9 u-ADING
MARCH 18,1992
PAGE 3
The Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Title 19 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. It serves
as the compliance document by the City of Carlsbad in determining whether to issue one
or more Hillside Development Permits (HDP) for the project. As an administrative action
the City Engineer would subsequently issue a grading permit to carry out the project under
the HDP.
An Environmental Impact Assessment was completed and City Staff determined the need
for the preparation of an EER. The following areas had the potential of being adversely
impacted by the implementation of the road project: Earth Resources; Air Quality; Water
Resources; Noise; Light and Glare; Land Use; Traffic/Circulation; Public Services; Utilities;
Landform AlteratiorUVisual Quality; and Cdtural/Historic Resources. The analysis of the
impacts to these areas as a result of the project were compiled in the form of a Draft EIR.
The Draft EIR was released for public review and comments were received from the United
States Fish and Wildlife Service, California Department of Fish and Game, The Fieldstone
Company, MAG Properties, and the City of San Marcos. The comments were reviewed and
responses prepared and included into the text of the Draft EIR thereby creating the Final
EIR (FEER). The FEIR was then made available for public review prior to the public
hearings.
ALTERNATIVES
CEQA requires the discussion and analysis of a range of reasonable alternatives to the
project, or to the location of the project, which could feasibly attain the basic objectives
of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives. The Planning
Commission will make a recommendation to the City Council for action on the FEIR which
will include the recommendation to go forward with the project as proposed or one of the
six alternatives discussed in the FEIR. The feasibility of each alternative will be based on
findings pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081 (c). (A discussion of these
findings appears on page 19 of this report.)
The six alternatives are:
1. Realism Rancho Santa Fe Road and defer mass madinq
This alternative is identical to the project which is recommended for approval, however it would only involve realignment of Rancho Santa Fe
Road and defer the adjoining mass grading to a later date.
Realism Rancho Santa Fe Road with mass wading of developable land
consistent with the General Plan
This alternative would also realign Rancho Santa Fe Road to the location
shown on the plan recommended for approval, however, the adjoining mass
2.
EIR 91-1 - RANCHO S A@ ..E ROAD REALIGNMENT AND MAS !R .ADING
MARCH 18,1992
PAGE 4
grading would be expanded by approximately 102 acres to include all land
Plan Land Use Element.
Road wideninn in the existinn aliment and defer moposed mass mading
Under this alternative Rancho Santa Fe Road would be left approximately in
the existing alignment (abutting the La Costa Vale subdivision and widened
in conformance with City Standards to a six lane arterial from its present 2
lane configuration) and the adjoining mass grading which would remain
within the limits defined by the project would be deferred to a later date.
Road widening in the existing aliment with mass mading of developable
land consistent with the General Plan
Under this alternative Rancho Santa Fe Road would be widened in
conformance with City Standards to a 6 lane prime arterial in the
approximate existing alignment. The adjoining mass grading would be
expanded by approximately 102 acres to include all land designated as RL,
RLM, C, and 0 in accordance with the existing General Plan Land Use
Element.
Road widening in the existinn aliment and mass nradinn for DroDosed
develoDment
Under this alternative Rancho Santa Fe Road would be widened in
conformance with City Standards approximately in the existing alignment,
and the adjoining mass grading would remain within the limits defined by
the project which is recommended for approval.
designated as RL, RLM, C, and 0 in accordance with the existing General
3.
4.
5.
6. No project.
This alternative would leave Rancho Santa Fe Road in its current condition
and no grading of adjacent lands would occur.
Alternatives ImDact ComDarison
ALTERNATIVE #1: REALIGN RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD AND DEFER PROPOSED MASS
GRADING
Short term benefits from this alternative, as compared to the proposed project, would
include less impact to biological resources, air quality, erosion, sedimentation, cultural and
historical resources and the possible opportunity to create a development plan for the
adjacent property which could result in a more sensitive design. However, the long-term
d 0 EIR 91-1 - RANCHO SAN L*E ROAD REALIGNMENT AND MASS GimING MARCH 18,1992
PAGE 5
impacts from this alternative would be the same as the proposed project and would result
in further delay in constructing the improved roadway due to the need to ensure a feasible
and viable development of the adjacent property. Therefore, this alternative is not
preferred over the proposed project even if it is environmentally preferred.
ALTERNATIVE #2: REALIGN RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD AND MASS GRADE
DEVELOPABLE LAND CONSISTENT WITH THE EXISTING GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATIONS
This alternative would cause similar or possible greater impacts to certain resources than
would the proposed project. Specifically, impacts to earth resources, water resources, air
quality and biological resources would be greater than the proposed project due to the
grading of a larger area which would include all land currently designated as RL, RLM, C,
and 0 consistent with the existing General Plan. In addition, this alternative would lead
to greater impacts from noise, light and glare to the adjacent developed land. The grading
of the project, to the extent of including all land designated RL, RLM, C, and 0 consistent
with the existing General Plan, would result in the loss of 102 acres of open space when
compared to the proposed project. advantage that this alternative has when
compared to the proposed project is that its development area is consistent with the
existing General Plan and would therefore not require a General Plan Amendment.
However, the comparison in the EIR of the proposed project's impacts on the General Plan
and the recognition that the General Plan would be amended when more detailed
development proposals are submitted for the adjoining property, make this "advantage"
meaningless.
ALTERNATIVE #3: ROAD WIDENING IN THE EXISTING ALIGNMENT AND DEFER
PROPOSED MASS GRADING
This alternative is the most environmentally superior by providing short term advantages
due to a reduction in the impacts to biological resources and landform alteration, however,
the long-term impacts would be the same as the proposed project. The EIR projected that
this alternative would provide a savings of construction costs and fewer impacts to erosion
and sedimentation. However, the reduced flexibility by designing the road within the
confines of the existing alignment may increase costs associated with engineering. This
increase in cost may offset the construction cost savings. This alternative, by comparison
to the project, as identified in the City's consideration of the road alignment in 1987,
would result in increased noise impacts to the adjacent existing residences. Furthermore,
this alternative would delay the construction of the road due to the need to ensure
adequate developable land to provide funding for the road. This alternative is not feasible
due to this lack of a funding mechanism.
The
EIR 91-1 - RANCHO S AI'@ A J?, ROAD REALIGNMENT AND MAS @ .&ING
MARCH 18,1992
PAGE 6
ALTERNATIVE #4: ROAD WIDENING IN THE EXISTING ALIGNMENT WITH MASS
GRADING OF DEVELOPABLE LAND CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN
This alternative would result in similar impacts to the previous alternative, however, the
impacts associated with grading to the full extent of the RL, RLM, C and 0 land use
designations and the subsequent development of these General Plan areas would result in
greater impacts than the proposed project. The long-term impacts of this alternative are
greater than the proposed project in many of the areas, including earth resources, water
resources, biological resources, light and glare, utilities and landform alteration/visual
quality due to the larger area to be graded. This alternative also results in the loss of 102
acres of open space when compared to the proposed project.
ALTERNATIVE #5: ROAD WIDENING IN THE EXISTING ALIGNMENT WITH MASS
GRADING FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
This alternative would result in fewer short term impacts to biological resources due to
roadway construction, however, the long-term impacts of the mass grading would be the
same. As discussed above, the noise impacts from this alternative would be significant and
the alignment would not be consistent with the action taken by the City in 1987. The
impacts from the adjoining mass grading are comparable to the proposed project and the
additional noise impacts on the existing residences do not justify this alternative.
ALTERNATIVE #6: NO PROJECT
This alternative would leave Rancho Santa Fe Road in its current condition. This
alternative would eliminate many of the environmental impacts associated with the
proposed project, including the impacts associated with biological resources, earth
resources, water resources, light and glare, and the destruction of cultural/historical
resources. The impacts to the existing residences due to noise would increase over time
due to the increases in the amount of traffic on the existing road. Furthermore, the
existing roadway would not be able to adequately handle projected traffic volumes and
could present a health and safety risk and could cause increased long-term air quality impacts because traffic could not flow efficiently on the existing 2-lane road. Based on
these reasons, this alternative is not preferable to the proposed project.
Alternatives Discussion
Social considerations that make infeasible the construction of Alternatives #3, #4 and #5
involve public health, safety and welfare issues that would result from their adoption.
These three alternatives involve widening Rancho Santa Fe Road in its existing alignment.
The precise existing alignment does not provide sufficient flexibility to meet engineering
design criteria for future intersecting roads, including the intersections of Rancho Santa Fe
Road with La Costa Avenue and Melrose Street.
EIR 91-1 - RANCHO S a. E ROAD REALIGNMENT AND MAS d LADING MARCH 18,1992
PAGE 7
The "No Project" alternative (#6) is an unacceptable alternative because it would not
provide any improvements to the existing road. Increasing traffic volumes on the road and
the issues associated with safety of the road and long-term air quality impacts requires the
City to facilitate a process which would result in the construction of the improved road
within the next three to five years.
The City of Carlsbad has adopted requirements for the provision of low and moderate
income housing units in all new development projects. These requirements are needed to
meet the City's obligation to provide housing for low and moderate income families, The
mass graded area included in the proposed project would ultimately be predominantly
developed with new housing units, including low and moderate income units. Alternatives
that would unduly delay the construction of low and moderate income housing units would
hinder the City's ability to provide this type of housing.
Furthermore, alternatives that would delay the construction of additional housing and
office and commercial development would also delay the creation of additional employment
opportunities in the City of Carlsbad. Such delays would have an adverse impact on the
economic welfare of the City and its citizens.
Other considerations that make infeasible Alternatives #2 and #4 include the reduction in
the amount of open space that would result from their adoption. Both alternatives could
result in the loss of 102 acres of open space. This could result because the existing General
Plan provides for the development of 102 acres that would be left in open space by the
proposed project and the subsequent General Plan amendment.
The City Council has carefully and deliberately considered the optimum alignment for
Rancho Santa Fe Road. The City first considered the realignment of the road in 1987 and
appointed a Citizen's Committee to review the available options for the road alignment.
After very carefbl consideration of all the options and the issues involved with each option,
the Committee recommended that an alternative alignment be implemented. Their
recommended alignment is essentially the same alignment as the proposed project.
The City and property owners in Zone 11 have conducted detailed planning studies of the
alignment and have concluded that the alignment shown in the proposed project is the
optimum alignment from a construction perspective. Mass grading has been reduced to a
minimum area that will financially support the construction of the road. Selection of an
alternative would require further detailed study by the City.
The improvement of Rancho Santa Fe Road to the standards of a prime arterial requires
a significant expenditure of economic resources. The project alternatives (#1 and #3)
which defer mass grading without the advantage of agreement for future development
present untenable economic impacts. The lack of that realistic and feasible funding
mechanism would preclude the City of Carlsbad from constructing the road. Alternative
EIR 91-1 - RANCHO S Ad!. E ROAD REALIGNMENT AND MAS e ,,&ING
MARCH 18, 1992
PAGE 8
funding mechanisms have been reviewed by the City and have all been rejected due to
various constraints which limit their effectiveness.
Project alternatives must also consider the need for the future construction of La Costa
Avenue and Mehose Avenue Within the project area. Both of these are Circulation Element roads and are included in the Local Facilities Management Plan.
Regardless of the alignment selected for Rancho Santa Fe Road, La Costa Avenue and
Melrose Avenue will have to be constructed to complete the City's circulation network, as
well as the regional network. Both roadways pass through sensitive biological areas (inen
Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub habitat) and would result in impacts to these resources.
Because of the infeasibility of the alternatives staff requests that the Planning Commission
recommend that the project which incoprates mitigation measures be approved for
implementation.
A history of the planning process that led to the selection of the proposed project is
attached as Attachment A.
INSIGNIFICANT IMPACTS
The final EIR for the Rancho Santa Fe Road Realignment and Mass Grading project
concluded that the project would not have significant adverse impacts in the following
areas (numbers refer to the page(s) of the EIR where the issue is discussed):
0 HosDitals
As discussed in the EIR (pgs. 5.9-9, 10) the current availability of hospital services
would not be adversely impacted by this project.
e Natural Resources
As noted in the Initial Study (Appendix A of the EIR), no natural resources are
present in the project area.
Risk of Upset
As noted in the Initial Study (Appendix A of the EIR), no hazardous materials are,
or would be, present on the project site.
EIR 91-1 - RANCHO S AI@- L ROAD REALIGNMENT AND MAS 51, u-A~ING MARCH 18,1992
PAGE 9
0 Powlation
The project would not increase the residential density of the project area as shown
on the General Plan Land Use Map. However, the ultimate development of the area
would increase existing population levels.
0 Housing
The project would not create a demand for additional housing.
0 =
No substantial energy usage will occur as a result of the project.
0 Human Health
No hazardous conditions would exist at, or near, the project site.
0 Recreation
No adverse effect on recreational facilities would occur because the City's Local
Facilities Management Program coordinates the development of recreational facilities
with residential development.
0 Law Enforcement
Provisions of the Public Facilities Element of the General Plan ensure that adequate
law enforcement would be available prior to buildout of the project area.
Libraries
The Local Facilities Management Plan contains performance standards that ensure
library space would be available consistent with development activities.
SIGNIFICANT BUT MITIGABLE IMPACTS
EARTH RFSOURCES (EIR pg~. 5.1-1 through 10)
ImDact: Implementation of the project will require the mass grading of approximately 448
acres of mostly undeveloped land extending noWsouth along Rancho Santa Fe Road. The
terrain is rolling, with occasional steep slopes and canyons. Drainage is conveyed by
tributaries to San Marcos Creek in the northwest portion of the site, and Enchitas Creek
in the southern extent of the site.
EIR 91-1 - RANCHO S AN@. d ROAD REALIGNMENT AND MAS @ u,,IDING
MARCH 18,1992
PAGE 10
Grading for the project will occur over a smaller area than grading needed for development
to the full extent of the RL, RLM, C, and 0 land use designations of the existing General
Plan, thus lessening the impacts to Earth Resources. The grading of land adjacent to the
roadway is necessary to ensure an increase in the value of the adjoining land, in order to
permit the financing of the road.
Findhns: Mitigation measures are included on pgs. 5.1-9 and 10 of the EIR and would
become conditions of project approval. These measures were prepared by the consulting
Geologic Engineer and address blasting and filling operation, seismic hazards, erosion
control measures and landslide remediation. Requirements of the Uniform Building Code,
the City's Hillside Development Ordinance and Grading Ordinance would be included in the
project review and approval of the grading plans, the grading permit and subsequent
development approval.
Mitigation Measure #4 (pg. 5.1-9) has been modified to state that the applicant shall
adhere to the grading restrictions set forth in the La Costa Master Plan or any amendments
thereto. No grading shall occur between October 1 and April 15, except when special
measures can be taken to control siltation. This shall be met to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer.
The mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a level less than significant.
WATER RESOURCES (EIR pgs. 5.3-1 though 7)
Impact: The project site is located in the watersheds of the San Marcos Creek and
Enchitas Creek. Surface runoff from the project site ultimately enters either San Marcos
Creek or Enchitas Creek which meet at the Batiquitos Lagoon in the City of Carlsbad be-
fore entering the Pacific Ocean. Erosion and sedimentation impacts during the grading and
construction period would be short-term, after storm events only, and would be potentially
significant. Diversion of drainage flows could occur during grading operation temporarily
and artificially increasing flows in adjacent tributaries or watersheds. Grading of the
projects 448 acres will cause fewer significant impacts due to flooding and drainage than
grading 550 acres to the full extent of the RL, RLM, Cy and 0 land use designations of the
existing General Plan.
Findings: Implementation of the measures contained in the geotechnical evaluation, the
City's Grading, Clearing and Grubbing Policy, Grading Ordinance and Landscape Manual
would minimize erosion and provide for a comprehensive maintenance program for erosion
control and drainage facilities. The Stanley Mahr reservoir spillway capacity would be
maintained and no additional runoff into the reservoir would result from the approved
grading plans. Conditions of approval would include the preparation of a hydrology study
for San Marcos Creek and the recommendations of the consulting bridge engineer. The
south-central trending drainage channel would be maintained in a natural vegetated
condition as a "best management practice" consistent with RWQCB Order Number 90-42.
EIR 91-1 - RANCHO SaL d ROAD REALIGNMENT AND MAS&DING
MARCH 18,1992
PAGE 11
The mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a level less than significant.
BIOLOGICAL RES0LJRCF.S
Impact: Grading of the project will result in a disturbance of existing vegetation cover
owing to the realignment of the road and the mass grading. The amount of disturbed area
within the project site would change from approximately 88.4 acres to 369.5 acres. This
will result in both direct and indirect impacts to plants and animals. Several sensitive
habitats, including Diegan coastal sage scrub, cottonwood-willow riparian and oak riparian,
would be impacted by the project. Up to 14 pairs of the 22 pairs of California
Gnatcatchers on the project site may be adversely impacted or lost. Indirect impacts would
mainly result from habitat fragmentation and a residual amount of downstream siltation.
Findings: Onsite mitigation would include the dedication of an area of Diegan coastal sage
scrub of a size, configuration and topography large enough to support a minimum size of
8 pairs of California Gnatcatchers in perpetuity. Specific criteria to be considered in the
selection of the area to be dedicated are listed on page 5.4-18 of the EER.
The mitigation of biological impacts as set forth in the EIR is adequate and complies with
the criteria, to provide:
1. Onsite mitigation
2. Offsite mitigation
3. Contribution to funding for planning local, sub-regional and regional
conservation plans, and funding a directed life history study for the
California Gnatcatcher.
Mitigation which meets the criteria and is in accord with mitigation measures set forth in
the EIR will not appreciably reduce the likelihood of the survival and recovery of the
Gnatcatcher and other Species of Concern in the wild. Based on the best available
information, the project, and a Mitigation Plan minimizes to the maximum extent
practicable, the impacts on Scrub Habitat and the Species of Concern. The project will also
contribute to the approximately 3,800 residential units and 60 acres of commercial
development which are necessary to provide the approximately $60,000,000 which will be
necessary to finance the roadway infrastructure improvements in this area.
Other mitigation measures include modifving the proposed project grading to preserve
100% of the "dense" area of San Diego goldenstars and a minimum of 75 percent of the
"sparse't area of San Diego goldenstars, and applying for and obtaining, if required, a Clean
Water Act, Section 404 permit and a Section 1600-1603 agreement.
The mitigation measures listed in the EIR, if approved by the City Council and then
implemented, would reduce impacts to a level of insignificance. The mitigation plan will
add considerable cost to the Rancho Santa Fe Road project and assessment district. If it
EIR 91-1 - RANCHO S AN(). d ROAD REALIGNMENT AND MAS @ *&ING
MARCH 18,1992
PAGE 12
is determined that these costs are prohibitive and the mitigation plan is not approved and
implemented, impacts to biological resources would not be mitigated to a level of
insignificance.
The City has entered into the Memoranda of Agreements (MOA'S) with the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (F'WS) and State Department of Fish and Game (DFG) for the development
of a multi-species, Citywide Habitat Management Program (''HMP''), and, as part of that
program, for the development of a Habitat Conservation Plan ("HCP") for the conservation
of Scrub Habitat and Species of Concern.
The MOAS contemplate that the species covered will be addressed as if they were listed as
"endangered" under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the California Endangered
Species Act (CESA), and that appropriate mitigation will be provided.
As part of the early phases of the HMP, it is contemplated that the Rancho Santa Fe Road
project would be addressed as an "interim project'' and considered for approval by the City,
DFG and FWS under the HCP. It should be noted that more than one HCP may be
prepared at various phases of the HMP. The work program and time-line for the adoption
of the project HCP are included in Appendix J of the EIR.
NOISE (EIR pgs. 5.5-1 through 7)
Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would result in widening of the roadway,
and realignment of the roadway to a location approximately one-quarter mile east of the
La Costa Vale subdivision. Traffic-generated noise levels along the realigned Rancho Santa
Fe Road will be substantial at completion of the project and at build-out of the City. Other
noise sources associated with the project include short-term noise generated by
construction operations such as blasting and crushing of resistant rock, hauling of material
off-site to the Arroyo La Costa subdivision, and construction equipment noise.
Findings: The City would implement policies and action programs of the General Plan
Noise Element and Administrative Policy Number 17 which apply to construction of the
proposed project. Other measures include placing stockpiling and staging areas away from
occupied dwellings and creating the greatest distance possible between noise sources and
receptors during construction and Complying with state standards for noise emission and
control.
Realignment of the road to the east will substantially decrease the impact of noise on the
existing residences. The impact of this major improvement project on the existing resi-
dences is a significant concern and was contrary to the alternatives which left the
alignment in its present location. Mitigation of noise impacts to future residences will be
achieved through adherence to Administrative Policy #17 i.e. site and sound attenuation
barriers.
EIR 91-1 - RANCHO S a dfA r'E ROAD REALIGNMENT AND MA&IDING MARCH 18,1992
PAGE 13
The mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a level less than signrficmt.
LIGHT AND GLARE (EIR pgs. 5.6-1,2)
Increases in light and glare would impact the existing residential land uses to the south and
west of the proposed roadway alignment and future development on both sides of the
roadway. Urbanization of the natural surface cover increases light emission and
reflectance.
Findings: Mitigation measures include the use of roadway landscaping to limit headlight
intrusion into residential areas, directing street lighting to limit excess light and
consideration of the use of low pressure sodium street lights.
The mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a level less than sigruficant.
LAND USE (EIR pgs. 5.7-1 through 13)
As a program EIR, the document has analyzed the realignment of RSF and the adjoining
mass grading as the project and has also analyzed some aspects of potential future projects,
i.e. subsequent tract maps, site development plans, etc. A clear distinction must be made
while reviewing the LAND USE section of the EIR between the impacts from project
grading and the impacts from subsequent development.
Impact: Subsequent development of the project will result in conversion of 448 acres of
vacant and undeveloped lands to a prime arterial surrounded by residential and commercial
land uses, interspersed with large areas of open space. Subsequent development of the
project is inconsistent with the General Plan Land Use map and La Costa Master Plan.
General Plan and La Costa Master Plan Amendments are needed for implementation of the
project to be consistent with the long-range land use planning of the area. The FEIR states
that grading on M.A.G. properties will eliminate Open Space designated in the General Plan
on the Comprehensive Open Space Network Map. The proposed project grading will
neither remove nor preclude the conceptual open space areas of the Comprehensive Open
Space Network Map and is therefore not inconsistent with the General Plan. A General
Plan and La Costa Master Plan Amendment are needed prior to implementation of the
subsequent development of the M.A.G. properties to be consistent with the long-range land
use planning of the area.
Findings: Prior to development, mitigation measures to be completed include conforming
to land uses and respective acreages on the General Plan Land Use map and dwelling unit
allocations in the Local Facilities Management Plan or proposing amendments to the
General Plan, La Costa Master Plan, and Local Facilities Management Plan. Proposed land uses shall be consistent with the Land Use Element guidelines. The applicant shall also
propose an amendment of the City's Comprehensive Open Space Network Map consistent
with the Open Space and Conservation Element of the General Plan.
EIR 91-1 - RANCHO SAN'L~ * **E ROAD REALIGNMENT AND MAS !@ IADING MARCH 18, 1992
PAGE 14
The mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a level less than significant.
TRAFFI~CIRCULATION (EIR pg~. 5.8-1 though 16)
Impact: The impact of the project on the circulation system was considered for 1995, one year after project completion, and 2010, the year when the County road system is projected
to be completed. For 1995, all road segments and intersections of Rancho Santa Fe Road
would operate with a Level of Service (LOS) of A or B with three lanes in each direction,
For 2010, all segments and intersections of Rancho Santa Fe Road would operate under
acceptable conditions (LOS of C or D).
Under existing conditions (the "no project" alternative) all of Rancho Santa Fe Road and
Questhaven Road would operate with an LOS of,F in the year 2010, an unacceptable
condition. Eventual development in the area would increase traffic volumes on the roadway
causing adverse impacts.
Findings: Mitigation measures contained in the EIR would require the City to construct
intersection and road segment geometrics as proposed for 1995 without the SA-680
connection and to retain right-of-way that will be sufficient for creation of the intersection
of Rancho Santa Fe Road and the future Melrose Drive south. The Cities of Carlsbad and
San Marcos would create a mechanism to determine the configuration of this intersection.
An interim signal would be constructed at the intersection of Rancho Santa Fe Road and
Questhaven Road and a full signalized intersection would be constructed at Rancho Santa
Fe Road and Cadencia Street.
The mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a level less than significant.
PUBLIC SERVICES (EIR pgs. 5.9-1 through 10)
Fke Protection
Impact: Demand for fire protection services to the project area will be increased by
ultimate development of the area.
Findings: Ultimate development plans would be conditioned to require the construction
of a permanent fire station No. 6 along the alignment of Rancho Santa Fe Road.
The mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a level less than significant.
schools
Impact: Ultimate development of the project would generate 1,203 elementary students,
386 junior high students and 799 high school students.
EIR 91-1 - RANCHO S AI#!! r'E ROAD REALIGNMENT AND MAS R, &ING
MARCH 18,1992
PAGE 15
Findings: Prior to the approval of a final map for any project within the San Marcos
Unified School District an agreement shall be entered into providing for the deeding of an
acceptable school site, guaranteeing the financing and construction of a school unless
modified or waived by the District.
The mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a level less than significant.
Water
Impact: Water demand at ultimate development of the project site would be 590,600
gallons-per-day. However, this is approximately 30 percent lower than water demand
under buildout conditions according to the existing General Plan.
Findings: Water demand would be assessed during the development review process by the
Vallecitos Water District and Olivenhah Municipal Water District to ensure that Zone 11
will remain in conformance with adopted performance standards. Water saving devices and
reclamation, where feasible, would be required.
The mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a level less than significant.
sewer
ImDact: Sewage generation at buildout of the project area would be 496,000 gallons-per-
day.
Findings: New development within the project area would be required to comply the City's
performance standards for sewer service.
The mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a level less than significant.
Solid Waste
Impact: Solid waste generation at buildout of the project area would be 7.3 tons-per-day.
Findings: The siting and expansion of landfills in the area are currently being pursued by
a variety of agencies to ensure that adequate landfill capacity will be available to the
region.
The mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a level less than significant.
Natural Gas and Electricity
Impact: Electricity and natural gas demand at buildout of the project area would be 52
megawatt hours and 210,000 cubic- feet per day.
EIR 91-1 - RANCHO S AN@. d ROAD REALIGNMENT AND MAS @ .dDING
MARCH 18, 1992
PAGE 16
Findings: The applicant would provide adequate infrastructure and, whenever possible,
incorporate energy saving devices within the project development.
The mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a level less than significant.
LANDFORM ALTFRATION/VISUAL QUALITY (EIR pgs. 5.11-1 through 7)
Impact: Implementation of the project will result in the extensive modification of existing
topography. The proposed project will alter the existing landscape with grading and the
creation of cut and fill slopes. In order to provide adequate surface area for the
construction of the proposed roadways, large volumes of earth will be displaced and
reorganized into broad, flat surfaces. Other areas will be graded for future uses including
residential, commercial and office.
The proposed landform alteration will result in 3,844,000 cubic yards (cu.yds.) of cut and
4,197,000 cu. yds. of fill. This equates to a grading ratio of approximately 8,357 cu.yds.
per acre (quantity for Rancho Santa Fe Road as a circulation element roadway grading
excluded). The area to be mass graded may remain undeveloped for several years while
development plans for the property are being prepared, reviewed and approved.
The Final EIR states that as proposed the grading plans conflict with sections of the City
of Carlsbad Open Space and Conservation Element. Since the date of completion of the
DER, the General Plan has been updated with a revised Open Space and Conservation
Element. The updated General Plan element has revised language pertaining to the goals,
policies and actions but retains the intent of the previous element. Mitigation of the
described inconsistencies to a level of insignificance will be achieved through adherence
with the Hillside Development Ordinance and Grading Ordinance. Adherence with these
ordinances will mitigate the impact to a level less than significant.
The FEIR also indicated that the proposed grading is inconsistent with the City's Scenic
Highways Element. Mitigation of the inconsistency to a level of insignificance will be
achieved through landscaping and adherence to the Scenic Corridor Study adopted July 1,
1988.
The grading that will occur as a result of the project will have significant impacts ta
surrounding landform and visual quality, however, the currently adopted General Plan
allows the realignment of Rancho Santa Fe Road and similar development of the project
site. Also, the City of Carlsbad Local Facilities Management Plan (Zone 11) shows Ranchc
Santa Fe Road as having a future alignment which is consistent with the alignmen1
proposed by the project. The project is consistent with the alignment approved by the Ciq
Council in 1987.
Impacts to landform alteration and visual quality associated with the project will be les:
than the impacts of landform alteration resulting Erom grading to the full extent of the RL
EIR 91-1 - RANCHO sa r~ ROAD REALIGNMENT AND &,mING
MARCH 18,1992
PAGE 17
RLM, C and 0 land designations according to the adopted General Plan. The proposed
project will serve to provide for reduced landform alteration and improved visual quality
at the conclusion of development.
Findings; The 8,357 cu.yds,/acre is within the potentially acceptable range as defined in
the City's Hillside Development Ordinance (0-7,999 cu.yds./acre is acceptable).
Requirements of the City's Grading Ordinance and Hillside Development Ordinance will be
implemented through the grading plan review process. As discussed in LAND USE, a
General Plan and La Costa Master Plan amendment is needed prior to implementation of
the project development.
The mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a level less than significant.
CULTURALJHISTORIC RESOURCES (EIR pgs. 5.12-1 through 4)
ImDacts: Six of the seven sites located in the project area would be impacted by grading
activities and could destroy potentially significant prehistoric resources. The full extent of
subsurface material of the sites is not fully known at this time and further testing should
be completed prior to site alteration.
Findings: Subsurface testing of five sites would be required as a condition of project
approval. If significant resources are located, a research design and data recovery plan
would be implemented. The provisions of the Historic Preservation Ordinance would be
followed in completing the mitigation program.
The mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a level less than significant.
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS (EIR pgs. 7-1 through 12)
Impact: The ultimate development of the proposed project, in conjunction with 51 other
projects in a 30 square-mile area surrounding the project site would result in the
construction of approximately 10,600 dwelling units and 9 million square-feet of non.
residential floor space. These projects would add approximately 26,000 people to the arei
(based on 2.47 persons per dwelling unit). At buildout, air quality impacts would be
significant and unmitigated. Region-wide implementation of alternative modes ol
transportation will serve to reduce impacts.
The ultimate residential development of the area to be mass graded would contribute tc
the significant cumulative air quality impacts. The increased emissions resulting from thc
number of daily trips generated by the project would constitute an impediment to tht
region's ability to attain the national ambient air quality standards. The San Diego AG
Basin is a non-attainment area for ozone and particulates, and therefore, any increase iI
these air pollutants is a cumulative significant air quality impact.
EIR 91-1 - RANCHO S A. E ROAD REALIGNMENT AND M Aa. ADING
MARCH 18,1992
PAGE 18
Findinns: The ultimate development of the project area would contribute to unmitigated
significant cumulative air quality impacts.
ImDact: The realignment of Rancho Santa Fe Road and the mass grading would result in
the direct loss of 216.9 acres of Diegan costal sage scrub habitat and the potential loss of
up to 14 pairs of California Gnatcatchers. Indirect impacts would result from
fragmentation of the habitat.
Findings: Impacts to Diegan costal sage scrub habitat and the California gnatcatcher can
be mitigated to a level of less than significant with the implementation of the mitigation
program described in the biological discussion above. However, if the mitigation plan is
not approved by the City Council and implemented, impacts to biological resources would
be significant and unmitigated.
GROWTH INDUCING IMPACTS (EIR pg. 7-12)
Impact: The incremental difference in growth of the project site under the proposed
project is small when compared to buildout of the site according to the General Plan. The
LFMP for zone 11 & 12 of the City anticipate the development of this area.
Findings: City ordinances will ensure that adequate public infrastructure is available to
service this and adjoining properties as they develop. The project will not cause significant
growth inducing impacts.
SIGNIFICANT AND UNMITIGATED IMPACTS
AIR QUALITY (EIR pgs. 5.2-1 though 10)
Impact: The ultimate development of the project would generate 12,753 lbs/day of
emissions. Widening of the roadway would provide for a more efficient circulation system
and less congestion, which would result in a reduction of 6,507 lbs/day of vehicular
emissions from the "no project" emissions levels.
Findinns: A variety of mitigation measures are recommended in the EIR to minimize short-
term air quality impacts. Measures involving bikeways, trails and transit facilities are also
recommended to reduce the reliance on automobiles. However, implementation of the
proposed project would cause significant, and unmitigated long-term impacts to air quality
within the San Diego Air Basin. Short-term impacts are not significant locally, but are
cumulatively significant because the area is located within a non-attainment basin.
Impacts to air quality are therefore significant and unmitigated.
EIR 91-1 - RANCHO S AI&, E ROAD REALIGNMENT AND MAS @ *mING
MARCH 18,1992
PAGE 19
BIOLOGY
As previously explained, a mitigation plan has been proposed which will reduce impacts
to coastal sage scrub habitat to a level of insignificance. However, if this mitigation plan
is not ultimately approved by the City Council and then fully implemented, impacts to
coastal sage scrub and the California Gnatcatcher would be significant and unmitigated.
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
Section 21081 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that no public
agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an environmental impact report has
been completed which identifies one, or more, significant effects thereof unless such public
agency makes one of the following findings:
1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, such
project which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental effects thereof
as identified in the completed environmental impact report. Those changes
or alterations are discussed in the preceding significant but mitigable impacts
section.
Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of
another public agency and such changes have been adopted by such other
agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. There were no
changes or alterations to the project that are the responsibility of another
agency.
Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the
mitigation measures of project alternatives identified in the environmental
impact report.
2.
3.
The City of Carlsbad has original jurisdiction over the project and is required, under the
provisions of CEQA, to ensure either mitigation of impacts to a level of less than significant
or a finding and statement of overriding consideration as to any impact which remains
significant and incapable of mitigation.
CEQA further requires that, where the decision of the public agency allows the occurrence
of significant effects which are identified in the Final EIR, but are not at least substantially
mitigated, the agency shall state in writing the specific reasons to support its action based
on the Final EIR and/or other information in the record (Section 15093 of the CEQA
Guidelines).
The FER concludes that ultimate development of the project would result in significant,
unmitigated cumulative air quality impacts and significant impacts to biological resources
if the mitigation plan for impacts to coastal sage scrub habitat is not implemented.
EIR 91-1 - RANCHO S Ad! A E ROAD REALIGNMENT AND d.mING MARCH 18,1992
PAGE 20
The following factors support approval of the project despite any significant impacts
identified in the FEIR
Rancho Santa Fe Road must be improved in order to protect the public health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Carlsbad and the other users of this major regional facility.
Reconstruction and realignment of the roadway segment will improve its efficiency thereby
reducing potential future traffic hazards which could otherwise increase as the number of
trips on the road increases due to the population growth of the region.
Construction of this prime arterial road and associated infrastructure will cost
approximately sixty million dollars ($60,000,000) which the City cannot afford. The City
has investigated various methods for funding the construction of this major regional
facility, including the use of funds from the state and various County organizations. The
City has determined that a public assessment district is the most fiscally sound and the
mechanism which will provide the necessary funds within the shortest amount of time.
The use of a public assessment district requires the City to assess property which is, and
will be, benefitted by the construction of the road. The creation of the assessment district
requires the identification of undeveloped real property in order to ensure an adequate
increase in the assessed value of the property in order to support the funding for the road.
The property available for assessment, and thus funding the construction of the road, is the
real property through which the road currently traverses.
The proposed project will provide the necessary improvements to Rancho Santa Fe Road
and will provide the land development necessary to support the assessment for the road.
The grading for the road and the development of the adjoining mass graded property will
have less environmental impact than comparable development pursuant to the existing City
General Plan Land Use Element. Further development of the adjoining mass graded
property (i.e., subdivision maps and building permits) will require additional environmental
review as the specifics of design, location and infrastructure are identified. The phasing
of the various stages of subsequent development will allow for further refinement of the
environmental, social and economic issues which the City must consider. This FEIR, as a
program EIR for the subsequent projects, identifies the issues which must be addressed
prior to the approval of other development entitlements for the property.
Construction of the road is part of the Carlsbad General Plan, the Local Facilities
Management Plan (Zone 11) and the La Costa Master Plan. Construction of the road is an
integral component of these documents and as such is necessary for the orderly
development of the City.
The proposed grading and ultimate development of the graded area will not result in more
residential units in the area but will redistribute them in a manner which will result in less
EIR 91-1 - RANCHO S AI@I-E ROAD REALIGNMENT AND MAS st Id4DING
MARCH 18,1992
PAGE 21
environmental impacts than the grading of the developable area allowed by the existing
General Plan.
The ultimate development of additional office and commercial space, from that
contemplated by the existing General Plan, will provide social, cultural and economic
benefits to the residents of the City by providing additional jobs and services in a location
closer to their home. Furthermore, this project will provide significant revenues to the City
by way of sales tax and property tax which will provide for City services.
Upon completion of a subsequent General Plan amendment, it is anticipated that the
project will provide 102 acres of additional General Plan open space.
Construction of the project may also include the construction of a reclaimed water system
which would assist the City and the water agencies in the area to more efficiently use their
limited water resources and ensure an adequate water supply for the area's residents.
The realignment of the road will lessen the existing and the future noise impacts on
existing residents.
The ultimate development of the property adjacent to the road will provide for the housing
needs of the City.
The proposed project, unlike the alternatives which consider improving the road in its
present location, provides the most flexibility to meet engineering design issues for future
intersecting roads, including the intersection of La Costa Avenue and Melrose Street.
Rancho Santa Fe Road is designated as a "regionally significant arterial" in the 1990
Regional TransDortation Plan prepared by the San Diego Association of Governments
(SANDAG). This system is part of the street and highway network which provides for
accessibility between communities within the region. The circulation analysis for the City's
Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 11 is based on the projected levels of regional
traffic as well as locally generated traffic.
The traffic analysis completed for the Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR concludes that the
roadway would operate at unacceptable levels of service (LOS F) with the existing
&lane road in 1995 (pg. 5.8-6). Consequently, the improvement of the roadway
is required to ensure that adequate levels of service are maintained.
The Carlsbad Citywide Facilities and Imm-ovements Plan was adopted by the City
to, "assure the elimination of the shortages of public facilities identified by the City
Council to be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare of the citizens of
Carlsbad." (Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan, 9/16/86, pg. 2). With
regard to circulation the plan provides that:
EIR 91-1 - RANCHO S At@! &.E ROAD REALIGNMENT AND A-mING
* MARCH 18,1992
PAGE 22
No road segment or intersection in the zone nor any road
segment or intersection out of the zone which is impacted by
development in the zone shall be projected to exceed a service
level C during off-peak hours, nor service level D during peak
hours. Impacted means where 20% or more of the traffic
generated by the local facility management zone will use the
road segment or intersection. (pg. 40).
The Local Facilities Manazement Plan-Zone 11 (LFMP) dated 1/20/88 identifies a
need to construct Rancho Santa Fe Road to Prime Arterial standards by 1995. The
LFMP also requires that a comprehensive financing plan guaranteeing construction
of Rancho Santa Fe Road to Prime Arterial Standards be approved prior to the
recordation of the first final map within Zone 11 (LFMP, pg. 19).
The location, grading and ultimate construction of Rancho Santa Fe Road has been studied
by the City of Carlsbad for a number of years. In addition, the property owners have also
considered the same issues when planning for the development of their property. The
decision regarding the location of the roadway considered the potential impacts to existing
residences in the area and the need to minimize the amount of grading associated with the
development to the surrounding vacant land. The development of the surrounding land
must be considered a likely result of construction of the roadway due to the cost associated
with this major public improvement. The proposed project balances these many issues by
recognizing the appropriateness of relocating the road and amending the General Plan.
Furthermore, the grading of the land adjacent to the roadway will ensure an increase in
the value of the real property which will permit the funding of this expensive public
improvement and associated infrastructure of $60,000,000. The need to increase the value
of the adjoining property makes the proposed project the only feasible alternative.
The construction of Rancho Santa Fe Road to prime arterials standards will reduce future
air pollution emissions by 6,507 lbs/day. This reduction will result from a more efficieni
circulation system and less roadway congestion. This reduction will reduce cumulativelj
significant air quality impacts on a regional basis. No further reduction in emissions an
possible as a result of the road widening project.
HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE (HDO)
Hillside Development Permits will be required to be issued as an administrative action bj
the Planning Director prior to the issuance of grading permits. Staff has conducted a~
analysis of the project as described in the FEIR and with the conditions, modifications, an(
exclusions allowed per the HDO has found the project to be in conformance with tht
development standards of the HDO.
EIR 91-1 - RANCHO S A#!. E ROAD REALIGNMENT AND MASJt --DING MARCH 18, 1992
PAGE 23
GRADING ORDINANCE
Prior to issuance of a grading permit, plans must be submitted to the City Engineer for
review and approval in accordance with the Excavation and Grading Ordinance; Chapter
11.06 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. Grading proposed must also conform to plans and
conditions approved under a Hillside Development Permit.
V. SUMMARY
Realignment and construction of Rancho Santa Fe Road at prime arterial standards and the
adjoining mass grading is in conformance with the General Plan and applicable Zoning
Ordinances. The Environmental Impact Report has been prepared in compliance with the
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the analysis of the
environmental impacts to the project area is complete and adequate. The FEIR has
identified one area which will be significantly impacted and cannot be mitigated. The FEIR
has also identified one area, biological resources, for which a mitigation plan is possible
to reduce impacts to an insignificant level but which may be found to be cost-prohibitive.
This area, therefore, may also be significantly impacted and not adequately mitigated. Staff
requests that the Planning Commission recommend certification of EIR 91-1 through
adoption of Resolution No. 3371 which includes a statement of overriding considerations.
ATTACHMENTS
1.
2. Location Map
3.
4. Attachment "A", Historical Summary of Alternatives for Minimization and
5. EIR 91-1 (previously distributed).
Planning Commission Resolution No. 3371
Figure 1 - Road Alignments
Reconfiguration of Rancho Santa Fe Road/Mass Grading Project
CW:km:vd
January 24, 1992
e 0 LOCATION MAP
-
city of carlsbad
EIR 91-1 RANCHO SANTA FE RD ALIGNMENT & MASS GRADING
4
FIGURE 1 .e e
9
1
4 --.-.---.--. ORIGNAL AUGNMENT - EXISTING AUGNMENT (WITH BYPASS)
.........I FUTURE A-
bty of Carlsbad
EIR 91-1 RANCHO SANTA FE RD ALIGNMENT & MASS GRADING
0 0
AlTACHMENT A
HISTORICAL SUMMARY
OF
ALTERNATIVES FOR MINIMIZATION AND RECONFIGURATION
OF
RANCHO SANTA FE ROADlMASS GRADING PROJECT
-0 0
HISTORICAL SUMMARY
Of
ALTERNATIVES for MINIMIZATION AND RECONFIGURATION
RANCHO SANTA FE ROADIMASS GRADING PROJECT
Jnrrodiicrion
The Fieldstone Company owns approximately 2,300 acres within the Southeastern portion (
Carlsbad. Of this acreage, approximately 678 acres are bifurcated by Rancho Santa Fe Roac
a north-south link in the City's General Plan Circulation Element. The City's General Plan ar
Growth Management Ordinance require that financing for realignment and improvement of th
road be guaranteed prior to recordation of a final map, issuance of grading or building permit
whichever occur first for further development within southeast carlsbad (Zones 11 and 12). I
addition, the road has been identified as "regionally significant" in the SANDAG report entitle
Regional Transportation Plan and Congestion Management Plan.
Tlie design and construction of Rancho Santa Fe Road is inextricably linked to the developmei
of adjacent land in three ways. First, the specific design and alignment of the road affects tt.
physical pianning for the surrounding property. Second, and most importantly, improvemen
to Rancho Santa Fe Road are necessary to alleviate an existing health and safety hazard and t
provide adequate capacity for anticipated local and regional traffic increases. Third, th
financing and construction of the road is dependent upon a proposed assessment district that wi
assess tlie future development on those adjacent properties. This development is necessary t
provide a minimum basis to support the assessment district. Although future development i
Carisbad will equate to only 34%' of the total projected traffic on this road segment, per th
requirements of tlie Carlsbad Growth Management Program, the road improvements must b
tinaiiciaily guaranteed prior to future development. The Fieldstone Company's participation i
the assessment district is approximately 60% of the total assessment.
During the design process, the City of Carlsbad and the Fieldstone Company perceived that th
proposed Rancho Santa Fe RoadIPrivate grading project would result in impacts to Diega
coastal sage scrub. They have entered into an agreement with the U.S. Fish and Wildlit
Service and the California Department of Fish and Game for mitigation of impacts to Diega
coastal sage scrub resulting from the proposed project. For tlie purposes of this process, thi
paper will describe the evolution of the project configuration, alternatives which werc
considered, and efforts to minimize impacts to biological resources. In addition, it will describc
how these efforts have been affected by both the Rancho Santa Fe design and fundin;
considerations.
I This percentage is based on SANDAG post 2010 model analysis with connection o
Melrose Avenue Soiith.
0 e
I. RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD ALICMIENT SET (1972-1987)
The following is a description of the events which led to the realignment of Rancho Santa 1
Road by the City of Carlsbad in 1987.
1972 - Rancho Santa Fe Road Annexation/Change of Classification
The City of Carlsbad annexed Rancho Santa Fe Road from the County of San Diego, changii
the County’s prime arterial (six-lane) designation to major arterial (four-lane) on the Carlsb;
General Plan Circulation Element.
1972 - 1984 - Adiacent Deveioument Occurs
Several residential subdivision were approved and constructed immediately adjacent to the we.
side of Rancho Santa Fe Road, north of La Costa Avenue. Final occupancy permits were issue
over a period of seven years with the last occupancy permits being issued during 1979.
1981 - General Plan Circulation Element Studied
The City of Carisbad undertook a citizeiis review of the General Plan including the Circulatio
Element. The Citv’s consultant prepared a study of the Circulation EIement and a coinmitte
was appointed to rkview the study. The committee agreed with the consultants conclusions t
maintain the current road alignment, however, the committee disagreed on the classification an
recommended upgrading Rancho Santa Fe Road from major arterial (four-lane) to prime arteri:
(six-lane). Staff supported the recommendation since the traffic projections indicated that th
road would need to carry 50,000 ADT at build out and a four-lane arterial is designed to caT
40,000 ADT.
Furthermore, staff coilsidered it a possibility that Melrose Avenue (a north-south coiinectoI
south of Rancho Santa Fe Road might never be constructed, further contributing to traffic or
Rancho Santa Fe Road. (The status of this roadway has remained tentative due to uncertainti
of connection through adjacent jurisdictions).
A General Plan Amendment to the Circulation Element map was prepared by staff incorporatin!
the committee’s findings and taken fonvard for review by the Planning Commission and Cit}
Council.
Awiist 21, 1984 - Council Amroves Upgrading from Maior to Prime Arterial
After hearing the report arid recommendations from the Circulation Committee, the City Council
approved upgrading of Rancho Santa Fe Road from major arterial to prime arterial designation.
Council directed staff to undertake a review of all General Plan Elements for consistency witl-
*. . 2
e a
the amendment to the Circulation Element. At about the same time, SANDAG designated f
road as "regionally significant." (It is the only north-south roadway east of El Camino Real)
March 21, 1987 - Adiacent Residents become Concerned Over Noise and Safetv
Over the years, as development of surrounding areas occurred and traffic became heavier
Rancho Santa Fe Road the City became aware of problems on Rancho Santa Fe Road regardit
speeding, non-fatal and fatai accidents, and noise genemfed by the traff\c \nvc\ing \he 102
An increasingly active citizen group began soliciting the City to address these concerns. Ma
of the most vocal citizens were residents of a subdivision approved and constructed during tl
period in which Rancho Santa Fe Road was designated a major (four-lane), rather than prin
(six-lane), arterial.
Staff began studying ways to mitigate the citizen concerns. On March 21, 1987, the City 1
Carlsbad held a meeting to solicit public input regardiiig the Rancho Santa Fe Road corrido
Five potential solutions were presented by staff at this meeting, ranging from slight realignme
of the road with noise attenuation measures to significant realignment. These studies followc
two conceptual corridor alignments. Mitigated Alternative #I (see attached) proposed to p~
the road away from existing homes approximately 30 to 50 feet while generally maintaining tt
existing alignment and incorporating noise mitigation. Alternative #2 (see attached) as propose
relocated the road southeasterly into a canyon in the vicinity of the current truck bypa!
alignment.
Representatives of the MAG properties and La Costa Ranch Company (predecessors to Th
Fieidstone Company), major developersl land owners affected by the alignment of the road, wer
present at the meeting. Both expressed concerns regarding the need for an equitable solutio
to the problem and a willingness to cooperate and expedite the solution.
Citizen input was focused in two areas: 1) inany owners felt that a six-lane ,merial adjacent 1
their homes was unacceptable and the circulation plan should be scrutinized to determine if th
status of Rancho Santa Fe Road should be changed from six lanes to four or less: and 2) th
existing alignment (Alternative #I) would not be acceptable, regardless of the number of lanes
and therefore the residents desired to see it realigned "as far away from La Costa as possible.
As a result of this input. the City Council appointed a Circulation Committee to review th
Rancho Santa Fe Road corridor. This coininittee was composed of Planning Commissioners
City Staff, development representatives and citizens. The first meeting of this committee wa
convened on April 30, 1987.
Ami1 30, 1987 - June 25. 1987 - Circulation Committee Works with Citizens on Alternativl
Solutions
The Circulation Coninlittee held a series of public meetings to review the alignment an(
mitigation proposals. Through its deliberation, the Committee explored many alternatives bu
.* 3
0 0
constrained by slopes and would have required significant grading. The canyon alignm
recoinmended by the circulation coinmittee met all City design standards, however, crea
significant grading and could not easily be phased. The Committee's report stated the
environmental consultant reviewed the alignment and deemed that there were no archeologic
biological or paleontological restrictions. The estimated cost for constmchon Of Allernat Alignment #z was S14,434,000. The Committee deemed that grading cost and construct
scheduling would appear to be the primary negative aspects of the canyon alignment.
Conc 1 usion s
To fully compare costs of the two alternatives was not possible without complete land plans
the time. Preliminary cost estimates included in the committee's final report were qualified
"ignoring any land deveiopinent economics,'' (Rancho Santa Fe Road Alioninent Stu
Cornmi ttee Report, September, 1987, p.3) The committee concluded that although the cum
alignment with noise mitigation (Alternative #I) [nay be the optiinum economical design, t
majority of the Committee felt that this alignment would riot adequately mitigate noise and 0th
environmental impacts. Therefore, the committee recommended that Council adopt t
realignment of Rancho Santa Fe Road southeasterly into the canyon area.
October 20. 1987 - Council AdoDts Alternative i\li9ntnent #2
After reviewing the findings of the Circulation Committee and hearing public testimony, Ci
Council approved the Alternative #2 canyon alignment for Rancho Santa Fe Road. The Counc
directed staff to expedite the required financing and planning effons to insure the earlie.
possible cotistructioii of the roadway. Staff was also directed to amend the City's Circulatio
Plan and prepare the necessary environiiierital documents.
11. City Adopts Growth kIalino,emeiit Pt'ogixiii Requiriiig Rancho Saiitn Fe Roa
Impt'ovenieiits (1986- 1988)
In July of 1986, the City adopted a Growth Management Program to implement the General Plal
and Zoning Ordinance by ensuring that public facilities are provided commensurate witi
development. The tint phase included approval of the Citywide Facilities and Improvement Plai
(CFIP) which was adopted in September of 1986. The CFIP was prepared by the City an(
provided the for the following: I) identification of existing development and projected ultiinatt
buildout. 2) division of the City into 15 Local Facilities Management Zones for subsequen
analysis, 3) identitication of eleven public facilities to be analyzed for each zone, and 4
specification of perforniance standards for each of the eleven facilities.
The second phase of the Growth Management Prognm involves the preparation and approval
of the individual Local Facilities Management Plans (LFMP) for each of the 25 zones identifiec
in the CFIP. Per the Growth Management Prograin. LFMPs were prepared and approved fa
5
e 0
Zones 11 and 12 within the southeast quadrant of tlie City. The traffic analysis prepared fc
these plans projected that Rancho Santa Fe Road would require upgrading by the year 1989.
The Growth Management Prograin also requires that improvements identified as necessary i
the LFMPs be financially guaranteed prior to filial map, issuance of a grading or buildin
permit, whichever occurs tirst for further development in the zone. The Zone 11 and 12 LFMF
require financing of four major roadway projects totalling an estimated S60,000,000. Th
current estimate for the Rancho Santa Fe Road project is $38,000,0002.
The Fieldstone Company's participation in funding these improvements will has been estimate
at 60%. The remaining 40% will be funded by MAG properties, a commercial developrner
company, and other owners representing smaller residential and commercial holdings withi
Zone 11. The MAG parcel is part of tlie proposed private grading plan identified in the EIR
This owner will eveiitualIy participate in the proposed mitigation plan for the project.
111. Development Initial Road and Development Area Design/Feasibiiity Aiialysis (1988)
In response to the financing and timing requirements imposed by the Growth Managemen'
Program, once the alignment and ciassification were set, the property owner began preparinz
preliminary engineering studies on the Rancho Saiita Fe Road design. Concurrently, tht
property owner began conceptual planning studies for land. In addition. the property owner:
within Zones 11 and 12 began development of a finance plan.
Of the properties in Zones 11 and 12, The Fieldstone Company's 678 acre property known z
Southeast I1 is most impacted physically by the aligniiieiit and design of Rancho Saiita Fe Road.
The current General Plan designates the Fieldstone property for Low (0- I dwelling unitlacre)
and Low-medium (0-4 dwelling unitdacre) density residential uses. The General Plan texi
describes these uses as typically single-family detached residential products.
Under Growth Management program. areas which are considered constrained for density
calculation purposes include: major powerline easements; circulation element roads; raiiroad
beds or right-of-ways; slopes greater than 40% ; significant riparian or woodland habitats:
significant wetlands; tloodways: water bodies: other significant features; and half credit for
slopes of 2540% steepness. After consideration of these constraints, approximately 5 17 of the
original 678 acres were considered developable or "net" acreage. Coastal sage scrub was not
specified as a constraint. Per the Growth Management Program, a mid-point density is
associated with the General Plan residential categories. These are 1.0 and 3.2 dwelling Linitshet
' Uiiintlated construction cost estimate. Does not include issuance costs connected with
the assessment district.
6
e 0
acre for Low and Low-Medium, respectively. Application of the Growth Management Contrc
Point densities would allow approximately 1,WP’ dwelling units on the TFC property.
Once the density was established, the physical design constraints were overlayea to betermin
opportunities and constraints. A primary factor in this analysis is the City’s HiIlsid
Development Ordinance which includes provisions prohibiting disturbance of slopes greater tha
40% steepness, llmitation of manufactured slope heights to a 30 foot maximum, an1
requirements for unduiation of manufactured slopes. North-south trending bands of 40% anl
greater slope occur in the eastern portion of the Fieldstone property. Largely because of thes
slopes, the constraints analysis showed access to be restricted to portions of the eastern projec
site which were otherwise developable.
The Fieldstone Company’s target market was determined to be single family detached products
Preliminary design studies showed that the developable area would likely accoinmodatl
approximately 900 to 1,000 single family detached homes on lots ranging from 5,000 square fee
to 7,000+ square feet in site. This would have been siiililar to the recently approved Arroyc
La Costa project (Zone 12) in which the decision iiiakers had discouraged lots of 4,000 squarc
feet and less.
A preliminary financial feasibility analysis showed that Rancho Santa Fe Road and other. smallei
road facility assessinents propossd for a srrictly detached home project were inanageable, giver
an assumed larger ultimate value on larger homes which would tit the assessment burden intc
a total tax (including real property taxes) of a riiaxiinuiii of 3% of home value.
Coastal Sage Scrub Perceived as mi Issue (1989)
In 1989, during preparation for submittal of the proposed projects, preliminary biologica
reconnaissance was prepared by the property owner. This investigation idelitifred the presence
of 458 acres of Diegan coastal sage scrub on the Fieldstone property the inajority of which iL
located in otherwise det#eIopable property. This tegetation type was identified as being a State
species of special concern. The Fieldstone Coinpuny recognized this to be an issue.
The original market feasibility analysis (conceptual) estimated that assuming an average 7,000
square foot lot, Growth Management densities could be achieved. A decision was inade to
proceed with a design which would depend on using more attached product than originally
considered to reduce the footprint of development, where possible. Had the property owner not
opted to utilize attached product. the potential yield analysis assuming single family dwellings
would have dropped to approximately 750 homes. This resulted in a total of 241 acres of sage
scrub presenvd. The design would now provide a mix of single-faillily detached and attached
product in the approximate ratio of 65 % to 35 ’%.
11’.
3 Does not include the transfer of I89 Dus froill Zone 12 and 206 Dus from Zone 10 as
approved in the Zone 11 and Zone 12 LFhZPs.
7
0 0
Since a majority of the developable property possessed coastal sage scrub, altemath
configurations for the development footprint do not appreciably alter primary impacts to coast
sage scrub. However. it was felt that configuration could appreciably affect indirect impacts t
the habitat from fragmentation and road noise impacts. In addition, conflicting objectives existe
of creating either (1) a large, contiguous and viable habitat area, or (2) fulfilling th~ absolur
requirement for sufficient dwelling units of a value to support an Assessment District t
construct Rancho Santa Fe Road.
Upon consideration of these factors, a decision was made to aggregate development in on
bubble conforming primarily to the alignment of RSF. This was thought to reduce habita
fragmentation which might occur with development of several "fingers" of development. 11
addition the desigri allowed for preservation of large blocks of habitat thereby reducing the "edgr
effect" from adjacent uses. All of these design changes were accomplished internally at Th
Fieldstone Company prior to suggesting and discussing the project description for the EIR wit1
the City.
V. Preliminary Plans for Rancho Sarita Fe Ro;ld/l\lass Grading are completed and foimall!
submitted to Cit!iEnvironmeiit~l Review Initiated (January 1990)
Once the above design issues were addressed to the extent possible, the project was submitted
for Preliminary Environmental Revieiv. For purposes of the environmental document, the
project description identified 448 acres of grading including Rancho Santa Fe Road and the
associated adjacent private project grading for the Fieldstone Company and MAG properties.
The total project area included approximately 760 total acres of which Fieldstone and MAG
properties own 678 and 82 acres respectively. This description allowed for anaIysis of
cumulative project impacts.
For purposes of creating a c!early understandable public document, the City and Fieldstone
Conipany resolved to propose project grading boundaries in the EIR which would reduce impacts
to a level of insignificance prior to public review of the EIR document. This resulted in a
dociirnent which iiiore clearly explained the iiiipacts which would not be mitigated as a part of
the tinal project design. The grading project was at this tiwe redesigned to avoid significant
impacts to oak woodland habitat and goldenstar.
However, impacts to the California gnatcatcher were deemed significant and unmitigated.
Further reduction of impacts to coastai sage scrub and the California gnatcatcher were evaluated
in the following manner:
A majority of the developable land within the project description owned by Fieldstone possessed
coastal sage scrub. The value per developable acre in SE I1 is approximately $176,000. To
preserve, for exampie, sufficient habitat for 20% of the impacted bird pairs, or three pairs at
20 acres per pair. would result in a cost of approximately $10,560,000. However, the resulting
mitigation area would not be significantly less impacted by fragmentation and noise impacts from
8 8
0 0
the roadway despite requiring commitment of significant funds. Moreover, reducing tk
number of dwelling units would prevent a successful assessment district for the road as require
by the City.
A consensus was reached that pursuit of wholly onsite mitigation would not achieve the City
objective for construction of the road and formation of a financing district. It was determine
that a process was needed to be developed with the goal of achieving mitigation criter
acceptable to the City, resource agencies, and the private developer.
.* 9
e 0
.
' ,l
-. (D'
RANCH
-.a. .- . . ..
e a
..
.-_ ---- ___ .:
LA COST
ALIGNMENT STUDY I COMPA"
RANCHO SANTA FE &E'- RANCH
.. rn F,v =--E m m- -IF=--
..
4 Q)'
RANCH
e-.mmmmc 3 __ - ----n-a~ e
.. --- ---- -___..:
LA COSTA
RANCH
ALIGNMENT STUDY 1 COMPANY
4 0
FIELDSTOXE *LA COSTA F-; FOR THE iN!W?MATiON ---AT- Of
WE CIN COUNC
April 21, 1992 - CIM MANA.
.I DATE -.--. -- I
Mr. Michael Holzmiller Planning Director City of Carlabad . 2875 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, California 92009
bear Michael:
The purpose of this letter is to inform you and the Carlsbad City Council that we agree to and support the proposed 30 day continuance Of the public hearing for the Rancho Santa Fe Road Environmental Impact Report and the Hillside Deve~opment Permit fox
the same projrct.
while agreeing to this continuanca, we feel it is important tc atate mat we Will not rruppart any additional continuanco of the public hearing- As you are aware, we have workad on this prejrct for over two years and we feel the document is ready for Citi Council consideration, as does tho Planning Commission by theiz unanimous, reconmending vote.
~lso, as you are aware, tha purpose of the proposed extension is tc allow an appropriata time frame to complete dircussions with thc
U.S. Fish t Wildlife Service. I cannot think of a set oj circumstances within which we will not have complQt8d OUI discusaions in this time frame. We may or may not come tc agreeaent in 30 days, but we will have completed those discussions
Thank you ZOr your consideration and cooperation on this matter.
Sincaraly,
-
0
P UG AVXS
DA: jb
r
PO. BOX 9WO-X6+C~isbad.C.4 92018 * 619-931-8?47 + FAXS19-931-1946
-7-f /- a %-&
FAX TRA NSMIT T A 11
NUMBER OF PAGES BEING TRANSMITTED:
(INCLUDING FAX TRANSMrTl'AL]
2
*- J DATE:
FROM: MICHAEL HOLZM
PLANNING DEPN DEPT:
TIME SENT! 2; $9
c
Citv Clerk I s DfflcF!
3 TO:
COMPANY: - -
PHONE W: (619, 4.38-1161 E - PHONE #:
7 (619 430-0094 FAX #! I FAX 1st:
EWE INWcTtONS:
THIS IS A REVISED COPY,
-n75 ' !ran Q-'** TT Whm Cnrlabad C.m'?+vnia 92009-4859 I fBl9'1 4338-1 1
c 0 (Ir
REVISE1 MAY 18, 1992
TQ f CITY COWCTL
VIA: City Mannger
FROM f Planning Director
RAMCRO SMTA B1 MAD EIRIAGENDA ITEM NO. 10 - CITY COWCIL mEPXN 0% MY 191 2992
As the City Council is aware, the City, the wildlffa agencies, th
F ddstone Company and the einvirenmental camunity have reache agreement on an acceptable Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) fo impacts to biological raseurces &a a result of the Rancho Santa F Road project and aS8ociated private grading. Thr HCP praceas wai identified in the EfR but tha geographical scape of the Plan is nQi larger than anticipated when the EIR wa5 pr8pared. As a result the WCP will require additional tima ta fomaliee sand tu completr supplemental enviranmental review. It ie necessary ea go forwarc and cerrtify the present EIR at this time se that the formation o tho Assessment Dirrtrict to finance the construction of Rancho Santi Fe Road can begin. The Assessment District is a lengthy proces: that cannot cammence until the EIR is ctmtiffod. The scape of thr Assessment District is adequately addressed in the EIR. Thua, certification of the EIR will permit the City to proceed with thr Assessment District formation while the HCP is completsd.
However, in order to adequately recagnizc that progrem has beel mad+ on the HCP and that ft would be the preferred mitigation foi the project, staff is recommending that two additional conditions be addrd by the City Council to the reeolution certifying the EIR. Thess would be in addition to th8 onas already rscamonded by thr Planning Cammission contained in Planning Commission Resolution No.
3371. The additional conditions are aa follows:
1, "If an HCP is completed, including envh-onmental review under the provision8 #f the California Environmrntal Quality Act and the Nati0ha.l EnVirarmental PmteEthn
A&, and approved by thm-City, FW6 and PFG pXbr ka the hplemontation of the Mitigation Plan presently containrd in the EIR, the HCP may be implemented as an alternative Mitigation Plan, Such an alternative plan would also have tha affect of reducing biological impacts tb a level
of insignif icancr. 8t
2. "All interseted parthg are UesirGus of completing and imghmrnting thr KCP altarnative. Thmrrforr, grading permits shall not be issued for tha project for CI period of at lrast 60 days from Council crrtfficatian of the EIR. An extension to this time period may be authorfeed
by the Planning Director and City Engineera" .A4 MICHAEL J. HOLZM LER
Planning Director arb
49c
1 0 -G2/
Shoreline Study Center
1
May 19, 1992
Carlsbad City Council Members
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Honorable Members:
We have supported the US Fish and Wildlife through negotiations on the mitigation plan (see attached) on Rancho Sante Fe Road and
Mass Grading. Since F&WS is a Federal Agency, it is not respon-
sible for the CEQA process. We feel obligated, therefore, to
point out that Section 15096 Sub section G2 and 15126 Sub section
C of CEQA Guidlines strongly intimates that the mitigation plan be presented in the Final EIR before certification. 46 President Inez Y d ,
199 !Ir,& EL Camino Real Suite 411 Encinitas, CA 920.24
% .
.. . ............... e . .’
,_._______ .-_..._ .._. .....-.-.--
C 0 N S U LTANTS
C 0 LLABO RAT IVE
----.------ ._._._
-_ __ __-
( To : HCP Facilitation Team From: Rick Alexander
Re :
Date: May 6, 1992
I have prepared a draft final listing of those project design,
habitat conservation, and mitigation actions which will be part of a final agreement on the Carlsbad HCP. Following review by
the participating parties, a joint proposal will be finalized
which incorporates these points of agreement for public environmental review.
1.
Draft Final Preservation/Mitigation Criteria for HCP Agreement
All three Fieldstone project areas are included in the agreement:
- Southeast I1 (RSF Road) - Rancheros - Northwest
2. Southeast I1 Agreement Details
A. Cross-Project Corridor:
- Preserve and revegetate a wildlife habitat corridor across the project linking the Rancheros
parcel with open land in natural vegetation to the
southeast.
In discussion of this point, both a ‘Inorthernii and llsouthern” corridor were considered. Fieldstone has chosen to preserve the ilnorthernii corridor
which will:
+ Have a minimum width of 1,000 feet.
- support two nesting pairs of California gnatcatchers with 75% of each pair’s
territory located in the corridor. sites for these two pairs must also be in the corridor boundaries. Alternatively, the Fish
and Wildlife Service may choose other
criteria proposed by Fieldstone to demonstrate the biological integrity of the “northern corridor. It
The corridor must encompass the northwestern population of Muilla clevelandii.
Nesting
-
..... ___ ___. ...... .- - .._-....._-.-. .._
570 Rancheros Drive, Suite 201
San Marcos, CA 92069
...... -.- ....... .. ._.__.-_---. ------.
.. - ___-.--..-. -.-- ........ ..........
6191471-2365 FAX 6191 471-2383
0 0
- In any event, the #'southern corridor1' area may not be disturbed until the Fish and
Wildlife Service has agreed that the proceeding criteria are met.
B. Water District Land i
- Attempt to reach an agreement with the Vallecitos
Water District on future use and/or reveqetation
of District lands surrounding the reclaimed water
reservoir which are adjacent to the corridor. In
any event, quality of natural habitat on District land can be no worse than at the time of this
Agreement.
C. Parcel East of Rancho Santa Fe Road
- Fieldstone and the City will resolve the future use of the approximately 17 acres south of the new location of Questhaven Road: including as an option preservation of this area as part of the
corridor.
D. San Marcos Creek Wildlife/Habitat Corridor:
- To be designed cooperatively with the City of San
Marcos and University Commons development.
Takes advantage of RSF Road bridge height to provide wildlife access underneath.
-
- Average width 2,400 feet.
- Explore potential revegetation of private park along creek corridor in San Marcos.
E. Melrose Avenue:
- Redesign Melrose alignment to retain California gnatcatcher "use areas 5 and 21."
- Downgrade Melrose from prime arterial to major
- Agreement on taking of habitat associated with
arterial in order to reduce right-of-way width.
Melrose applies only to that portion of the road alignment contained within the boundaries of the
SE I1 project area.
I * 0
F. Summary of Impact and Mitigation for Southeast I1
Parcel
750 approximate total acres
457 ac. of Coastal Sage Scrub
218 ac. of CSS impactdd
22 pairs California gnatcatchers
16 pairs CGC impacted
8 pairs CGC retained, including 2 pairs
reestablished in the cross-project corridor
3. Rancheros Agreement Detail
A. Design project to preserve most Coastal Sage Scrub on-
site and 2/3 of the California gnatcatcher pairs.
B. Agree to a generalized site plan and on-site
minimization which reflects this Dreservation.
Fish & Wildlife will conduct a verification survey for gnatcatchers for the purpose of improved information. Fieldstone will be consulted on survey design, criteria, and conduct.
c.
D. Supmary of Impact and Mitigation for Rancheros Parcel
750 approximate total acres
240 ac. of Coastal Sage Scrub
100 ac. CSS impact
13 pairs California gnatcatchers currently
1/3 of CGC pairs impacted
2/3 of CGC pairs retained
identified
4. Northwest Agreement Detail
A. Agree to a generalized site plan and on-site
B. Fieldstone to provide off-site mitigation for
minimization of take.
gnatcatcher pairs at a ratio of 1:l for the allowed take at an anticipated cost of $5,000,000.
- Off-site mitigation would be in a corridor study
area generally linking Carlsbad and the SE I1
project site to the San Dieguito JPA boundary.
site mitigation in the study area, subject to final approval of the Service and the California
Department of Fish and Game.
- Parties would jointly develop criteria for off-
e 0 *r t
c. Summary of Impact and Mitigation for Northwest Parcel
350 approximate total acres
119 acres of Coastal Sage Scrub
69 ac. of CSS impacted
13 pairs CalifornJa gnktcatchers
5. Areas of Agreement Which Apply to All Three Parcels
A. Phase Grading:
- Fieldstone and the City will develop a plan for phasing of grading in all three project areas, although grading associated with Rancho Santa Fe Road will proceed.
B. Revegetation Plan
- Fieldstone will develop a revegetation/maintenance
plan for all appropriate areas once final
agreement is reached on areas developed and preserved. An institutional management structure
will also be established.
C. Fund CarISbad HMP
- Fieldstone will provide funding for the HMP not to
exceed $150,000.
- Fieldstone will provide $50,000 in additional funding for independent scientific research on the
California gnatcatcher.
0 0
I
Miowiiric. htiid! (:t-ritc.r
Hay 10, i992
Carrie Phillips
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Dear Carrie:
You may need this information if you don’t already have it. I’ve tried to reach you by phone a few times. I can imagine you are swamped up with what must have been set aside for negotiations.
In case you are not familiar with the Open Space Element of Carlsbad’s General Plan, here are some details pertinent to lands
Locar St
with tying up details on the mitigation and catching
.’ set aside for mitigation:
Many descriptions are placed under the one unbrella
called Open Space -- ball fields, school yards, lawns
of City-owned property, lagoons, recreational areas
such as tennis courts or other play areas which are
lighted.
Open Space designation allows an equipment storage
shed or a clubhouse to be built, concrete walkways, or trails and picnic areas -- amenities which might
serve the citizens or tourists.
There is no distinction made between people-serving
and wildlife-serving Open Space except as demanded by Resource Agencies or the Coastal Commission.
You may be familiar already with Carlsbad’s General Plan but, for
preservation into the future, Open Space designated land is not
protected land.
Sincerely,
Inez Yoder,
President
IT, ,l ,,, , r,,,, , I r,, I> r, I I (9 I
r, 0 . -7;v-
2076 Sheridan Road Leucadia, CA 92024
May 19, 1992
Mayor Buddy Lewis
City Councilpersons
City of Carlsbad 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
RE: Rancho Santa Fe EIR t
Dear Mayor Lewis:
Thank you for this opportunity to comment. And thank you to all
those people who worked so diligently and cooperatively to come
up with the proposal in front of you tonight.
This is a precedent-setting process. Once again a Carlsbad
project is of national importance, attracting national attention. I am delighted as a member of the environmental community to have
this opportunity to comment.
We strongly support the environmental gains made during this
process.
To quote Mike Holzmiller: the city has "been well educated by
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to set environment as the first consideration."
I will be delighted to watch the city accept and utilize this
statement as policy in future development proposals.
We fully support and commend the HCP participants and our
environmental representatives for the following:
1. The HCP committee agreement to maintain gnatcatcher habitat
within the city limits of Carlsbad, rather than relegating
Carlsbad gnatcatcher habitat and Carlsbad open space to the Wild
Animal Park.
2. That this agreement lays out the intention and policy of
the city to connect the remnants of coastal sage within Carlsbad
with each other and with other areas of coastal sage east of
Carlsbad through the use of wildlife corridors, a giant step
forward in habitat preservation. 3. The emphasis, for the first time, on multi-species protec-
tion by focusing on habitat rather than on single species preser- vation. While the pending listing of the gnatcatcher as an
-
lJ&h$ Q I
, 0 0
endangered species was the driving force for the HCP, everyone recognized that at least 62 species are dependent upon Coastal
Sage Scrub habitat, and the focus was on habitat preservation. 4. Representatives of the environmental community were invited
to the closed table of negotiations. No minutes were kept so it
is difficult to know if their input was seriously considered, but
they were invited to the table.
Nevertheless, we have concerns with the process for many reasons:
elitism, speed, complexity, status of the HCP agreement, coordi-
nation with other city documents, lack of coordination with
national environmental organizations, emphasis of habitat conser-
vation plans on habitat already on the brink of extinction and
cost.
PROCESS: EL: ,ITISM 1. First, not all environmental groups have been included in
this process. Local environmental groups and chapters of national organizations were asked to get together and choose two
persons to represent them on this committee. That isn't
the way organizations work, and you received letters to that effect. I attach one for the record (see Attachment "A"). It
isn't possible for the League of Women Voters, for example, to
give over the authority of their group to any one person, and
even local organizations rarely find that their by-laws allow
them to be ruled by the decision of a single representative.
SPEED AND COMPLEXITY
2. So we all tried to keep up-to-date, keep informed, and keep
our members and boards informed, but when the final compromise
was made, we were asked to support it without anything in writing
and without proper time to carry it back to the organization even
to explain it, much less discuss and critique it.
The first written agreement from the HCP is a 4-page outline
summary of the HCP agreement, dated May 6. When was this handed
out? Did the city realistically expect that this document could
be circulated among the environmental community to be discussed,
explained, and accepted or rejected by the time of the May 14
press conference?
Now it is Tuesday, May 19, and already the Rancho Santa fe road
EIR is before the Carlsbad City Council for approval.
What's the rush? This EIR has been on the table since 1987.
Suddenly it has to be passed in less than a week with a press
conference held even before the City Council holds a public hearing. Even before the City Council adopts the agreement. The
only evidence available for the rush is the refusal by Fieldstone
in their letter attached to AB 11,655 to continue negotiations
beyond May 21, $?!!!i-L*
e 0
STATUS OF THE HCP AGREEMENT
In fact, the 4-page outline summary of the HCP agreement is not
even included in the Agenda bill before us tonight. Instead,
this Agenda Bill presents the city with the old, unchanged EIR as
if HCP committee negotiations had never taken place. This makes
me very nervous. I herewish request that the 4-page outline
record along with my own remarks (See Attachment "B").
COORDINATION WITH OTHER CITY DOCUMENTS
Furthermore, this EIR is Item 10 on the agenda, and Item 11 is
the financing plan for Rancho Santa Fe Road. In other words,
this hearing is just a formality and the Rancho Santa Fe Road EIK
might as well have been put on the consent calendar. In the rush
to get the financing under way so that grading can occur before
the gnatcatcher is declared an endangered specie, certification
is a done deal, and the democratic process is pure red tape.
When the process shifts into warp speed as soon as there is a
written decision and before the environmental community can
react, there is a feeling we have been used to put a good face on
things, to allay public unease, and discourage opposition, but
that when the bell goes off environmentalists are left in the
paddock while staff slaps the ready-made documents in front of
the council as fast as they can be signed.
Tomorrow night, the Planning Commission holds a hearing on the
new Carlsbad General Plan Open Space Element. Here is another
weighty document to read in a very short period of time which
also applies to the viability of gnatcatcher habitat. In the
past, open space in Carlsbad can be used for public buildings,
tennis courts, parking lots and swimmimg pools. An open space
designation in Carlsbad does not protect endangered species habi-
tat. What designation is being proposed in any document for
protected gnatcatcher habitat that will guarantee gnatcatcher
preservation?
Is Coastal Sage Scrub classified as constrained in the Carlsbad
General Plan? What effect does/would this classification have
upon the KCP agreement so far?
What about the Carlsbad requirement for 15% of open space? How
do the Fieldstone properties and the HCP agreements fold into
Carlsbad's requirement of a percent of open space? What effect
will the HCP agreements have on open space in future proposed
developments?
COORDINATION WITH NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS
3. The fate of an endangered specie and an adjustment in the
way endangered species are dealt with is not a local
environmental issue. It is a national issue, and national
environmental groups must be invited to the table if a true
consensus is desired. The City of Carlsbad may believe that the
existence of the gnatcatcher is at most a state and local issue,
but it isn't. Rational environnental groups are very interested
summary of the HCP agreement be made an official part of the
Lf!L--& Pq3
e 0
in this process and the product that results. They will have
input. What attempt has the City of Carlsbad made to include
national environmental groups in their HCP or IiMP planning?
Which groups were contacted?
EMPHASIS OF HABITAT CONSERVATION PLANS ON HABITAT ALREADY ON THE BRINK OF EXTINCTION
4. The fatal flaw in this process and in the NCCP is that
they deal only with coastal sage scrub, a habitat on the verge of
extinction. Since we already have laws protecting endangered
species and providing for their recovery, new processes should
deal with habitats that are not yet threatened or be used in
conjunction with existing law on habitats that support endangered
species.
5. Cost is a process flaw. Neither Fish and Wildlife nor Fish
and Game have the resources to spend on another HCP. Accommoda-
ting the construction of one city road and its financing plan has
been extremely expensive for the the Resource Agencies. If this
process is to be used a second time, the Resource Agencies will
have to be given a budget increase.
PRODUCT
Even more important than the HCP process is the environmental
product, and here we have definite concern.
LOSS OF MORE THAN 50% OF BIRDS ON SITE
1. The original EIR proposes dedication of Coastal Sage Scrub
large enough to support 8 pair of gnatcatchers on site in perpe-
tuity. The HCP negotiations do not increase the number of gnat-
catchers to be preserved on site even though the allowed number
of residential units has been decreased by nearly 1000.
APPROVAL OF THIS AGENDA BILL AND THIS EIR WITHOUT A FINISHED HCP
2. We would like to be able to add our endorsement of the
final project, but we can't. The final project isn't in writing
and even if it were, we have not been allowed the time to
circulate it winin the environmental community orto the public at
large so that questions can be answered and agreement can be
reached.
The truth is that until the final agreement is in writing and
sufficient time has been allowed for comment, it is impossible to
agree to support it in entirety. One environmental
representative on the committee asked for a written copy of the
agreement to take to his organization. None existed. He refused
to ask the organization he represented to endorse a verbal and
perhaps still significantly fluid agreement.
vJ$ r7yq
0 0
IS AB# 11,655 THE FINAL AGREEMENT?
negotiated agreement.
Specifically, in this Agenda Bill:
1) No habitat or open space maps are included that specify
even roughly the areas to be preserved nor the location of the
wildlife corridor agreed upon in the HCP.
2) The unconnected 'Northwest (?I' fieldstone parcel is not
included in these pages either by map or reference.
3) The Agenda Bill includes without change the original EIR
designation of off-site mitigation on the 388 Konyn parcel and
the 80-acre Alyea site (Addendum, page x). These specific par-
cels have been discarded as mitigation sites during the HCP
discussions and the Agenda Bill should so state.
4) The present EIR requires a Habitat Conservation Plan as
mitigation, but the Errata sheets in AB# 11,655 change the
language of the EIR so that "an approved Habitat Conservation
Plan (HCP)" now reads, "the mitigation measures listed below," without inclusion in the Agenda Bill of those measures or any
change to those mitigation measures. What is the effect of this
language change upon the project and upon the HCP agreements
reached but not yet written and not included in this Agenda Bill?
5) Another language change listed in the Errata is to
substitute "development" plans for "grading" plans when speaking
of adjustments to preserve open space. Since our understanding
is that mass grading will precede development plans, we disagree
with this change of language and ask for written explanation of
impacts to Coastal Sage Scrup and Open Space because ofthis
change. What impact does this change of language have on the HCP
agreement? 6) The revised grading ratio (page xv, ERRATA) from 7676 CY
per acre to 8357 CY per acre means that this project will exceed
the city's allowed 0-7999CY per acre in the City's Hillside
Development Ordinance. 7) This statement, (page 2, AB 11,655) makes us very nervous, "A significant unmitigated impact has been identified on AIR QUALITY. For this reason a statement of overriding
considerations is required and has been included in Planning Commission Resolution #3371. In addition, should the proposed
Mitigation Plan regarding Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub habitat and
the California gnatcatcher not be fully implemented, the same
statement of overriding considerations would apply to the impacts
of the project to biological resources,"
Page 7, lines 16 through 18 of Planning Resolution Eo. 3371
repeat this statement as legal language.
What impacts do these statements have on the proposed, but as
yet unwritten or adopted, HCP and/or mitigation plan?
How do or do not these statements allow the city a legal loop- hole?
What scenario is foreseen that causes the city staff to feel
the need for these statements?
If so, it contradicts the understanding we have of the HCP
- d4 FS-
0 0
8) (Mass grading, page 4 PC Reso No. 3371) It was our under-
standing that grading would be phased, that 2 gnatcatchers would
have to be nesting in the revegetated corridor before Coastal
Sage Scrub on Rancheros could be touched. Obviously lines 21,
22, and 23 negate that understanding. Was it a true impression
that the Rancheros property would be un-graded until two gnatcat-
cher pairs nested in the revegetated corridor and utilized that
corridor for 75% of their territory? If not, please explain.
9) Page 3, (PC Reso No. 3371) Natural Resources should be
amended to reflect current biology.
10) On page 5, a comparison of impacts to water resources
should be made by comparing existing conditions (natural
conditions) to the proposed project, not by comparing the
proposed project to a hypothetical project.
11) The impact of light and glare on preservation of the
gnatcatcher has not been dealt with.
12) The project will reduce the visual quality of the area.
I have other concerns, but time constrains ne from presenting any
but those I consider to be most important.
In summary, What are we to think? Surely the city understands
the message they are sending to the public by presenting Agenda
Bill 11,655 for approval one week after reaching a conceptual
agreement among the participating members of the E-ICP -- without
written reference to that HCP surnr?.ary agreement, and without
including the 4-page sumnary agreement in the approval package.
Planning Commission Resolutions are legal documents. Is not
Agenda Bill 11655 legally binding? Will the City suddenly
discover that they are legally unable to implenent the EZCP after
having approved tonight's agenda bill?
khat provision in Agenda E.ill 11655 guarantees the existing HCP
agreements and provides for inplenenting those agreenients?
Concerning the HCP agreements, people ask, Isn't this a better
deal than we had at the start?"
The answer is, "Yes, the ZCP agreement is a better deal than we
had at the start. But it is not as good a deal as we should have
at the finish." 024
Dolores Welty
-_ - .
-
I\ /J /e 0 t ---j- '1 /f71 /r:L;F
:* J / p-, t<-
(u"ir 1
Slioreliiie Studd (:enter
April 16, 1991
Don Rideout Planning Department
2075 Las Palmas Dr
Carlsbad, CA 92009-4859
Re: Habitat Advisory Group
Dear Mr. Rideout:
We note in your invitation and in your meeting of March 21, 1991
that the City has decided to limit: represenration of the envi-
ronmental community EO two committee memDers. We regard this as
inadequate representation, likely LO be outvotec! by non-environ- mental interests.
In accordance with its charter, Shoreline Study Center wishes to
retain the right of independenc research, publication, and other
actions in the public interest. We request that the name of
Shoreline Study Center not be used in any list or representation as participating, subscribing or endorsing the composition or
actions of the Habitat Advisory Group/Commitree.
.I City of Carlsbad
Sincerely,
Inez Yoder, President
cc: Arboretum Foundation
199 !Vorth F,'/ (itmillo Reo1 Suite 41 I 9 Encutitas. (',4 92024
fi77iulLfld '1 B 'f
' /~t%L:*NTs 'L-
COLLABORATIVE
To: HCP Facilitation Team
From: Rick Alexander Re: Draft Final Presewation/Mitigation Criteria
Date : May 6, 1992
I have prepared a draft final listing of those project design, habitat conservation, and mitigation actions which will be part of a final agreement on the Carlsbad HCP. Following review by the participating parties, a joint proposal will be finalized
which incorporates these points of agreement for public environmental review.
1. All three Fieldstone project areas are included in the
for HCP Agreement
agreement:
- Southeast I1 (RSF Road) - Rancheros - Northwest
2. Southeast I1 Agreement Details
A. Cross-Project Corridor:
- Preserve and revegetate a wildlife habitat
parcel with open land in natural vegetation to the
southeast.
In discussion of this point, both a 11northern11 and "southern" corridor were considered. Fieldstone
has chosen to preserve the llnorthernll corridor which will:
- Have a minimum width of 1,000 feet.
-
* corridor across the project linking the Rancheros
Support two nesting pairs of California gnatcatchers with 75% of each pair's
territory located in the corridor. Nesting sites for these two pairs must also be in the corridor boundaries. Alternatively, the Fish and Wildlife Service may choose other criteria proposed by Fieldstone to demonstrate the biological integrity of the
"northern corridor. 1'
The corridor must encompass the northwestern
population of Muilla clevelandii.
-
570 Rancheros Drive, Suite 201
San Marcos, CA 92069
- --
- -. . _. . - - - ._ _. -
619 1471-2365 FAX 619 1471-2383 - - -_ ---_ - - -_
0 0
- In any event, the tlsouthern corridortt area
may not be disturbed until the Fish and Wildlife Service has agreed that the proceeding criteria are met.
B. Water District Land
- Attempt to reach an agreement with the Vallecitos Water District on future use and/or revegetation of District lands surrounding the reclaimed water
reservoir which are adjacent to the corridor. In
any event, quality of natural habitat on District
land can be no worse than at the time of this
r~d :'P
XI\/ ) -)
)I)\ Agreement. p C. Parcel East of Rancho Santa Fe Road
- Fieldstone and the City will resolve the future use of the approximately 17 acres south of the new
location of Questhaven Road; including as an option preservation of this area as part of the
corridor.
qwJ
D. San Marcos Creek Wildlife/Habitat Corridor:
- To be designed cooperatively with the City of San
Marcos and University Commons development.
- Takes advantage of RSF Road bridge height to provide wildlife access underneath.
- Average width 2,400 feet.
- Explore potential revegetation of private park along creek corridor in San Marcos.
E. Melrose Avenue:
- Redesign Melrose alignment to retain California
gnatcatcher "use areas 5 and 21."
- Downgrade Melrose from prime arterial to major
- Agreement on taking of habitat associated with
arterial in order to reduce right-of-way width.
Melrose applies only to that portion of the road
alignment contained within the boundaries of the SE I1 project area.
a e
F. Summary of Impact and Mitigation for Southeast I1
Parcel
7 'I
750 approximate total acres
457 ac. of Coastal Sage Scrub
218 ac. of CSS impacted
22 pairs California gnatcatchers
16 pairs CGC impacted
8 pairs CGC retained, including 2 pairs
reestablished in the cross-project corridor
3. Rancheros Agreement Detail
Design project to preserve most Coastal Sage Scrub on-
site and 2/3 of the California gnatcatcher pairs.
Agree to a generalized site plan and on-site
minimization which reflects this preservation.
A.
.B.
C. Fish b Wildlife will conduct a verification survey for
gnatcatchers for the purpose of improved information.
Fieldstone will be consulted on survey design, criteria, and conduct.
Summary of Impact and Mitigation for Rancheros Parcel D.
750 approximate total acres
240 ac. of Coastal Sage Scrub
100 ac. CSS impact
13 pairs California gnatcatchers currently . identified
1/3 of CGC pairs impacted - & W p - W) 2/3 of CGC pairs retained
4. Northwest Agreement Detail
A. Agree to a generalized site plan and on-site minimization of take.
B. Fieldstone to provide off-site mitigation for gnatcatcher pairs at a ratio of 1:l for the allowed take at an anticipated cost of $5,000,000.
- Off-site mitigation would be in a corridor study area generally linking Carlsbad and the SE I1
project site to the San Dieguito JPA boundary.
site mitigation in the study area, subject to
final approval of the Service and the California Department of Fish and Game.
- Parties would jointly develop criteria for off-
- e 0 " /
f
C. Summary of Impact and Mitigation for Northwest Parcel
350 approximate total acres
119 acres of Coastal Sage Scrub
69 ac. of CSS impacted
13 pairs California gnatcatchers
5, Areas of Agreement Which Apply to All Three Parcels
A. Phase Grading:
- Fieldstone and the City will develop a plan for phasing of grading in all three project areas, although grading associated with Rancho Santa Fe
Road will proceed.
.B. Revegetation Plan
- Fieldstone will develop a revegetation/maintenance plan for all appropriate areas once final agreement is reached on areas developed and
preserved. An institutional management structure will also be established.
C. Fund Carlsbad HMP
- Fieldstone will provide funding for the HMP not tc
- Fieldstone will provide $50,000 in additional
exceed $150,000.
funding for independent scientific research on the California gnatcatcher.
APPLICANT: City of Carl sbad PUBLISH: April 10, 1992
CITY OF CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL
6iii-qpJ
b
I
4 o*ouLKIp.Brr -------- - -*u..cKTlyITw~l
m.DB0Da.H RN*Lc.LLIIT
Cq d LdJM
I EIR 91-1 RANCHO SANTA FE RD ALIGNMENT & MASS GRADING
APPLICANT: City of Carl sbad PUBLISH: April 9, 1992
CITY OF CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL
9-j
4 -------- -- - uIsn*3*u1*B(T(wm~)
mm-mnm ~l~ul~*uo~cn
City (I cusw
I EIR 91-1 RANCHO SANTA FE RD ALIGNMENT & MASS GRADING
* NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING e
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad will hold
a public hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad,
California, at 6:OO p.m. on Wednesday, March 4, 1992, to consider a request for the
certification of an Environmental Impact Report to realign and construct Rancho Santa Fe
Road to prime arterial standards from La Costa Avenue north to the existing Melrose
Avenue. The project is located in Local Facilities Management Zone 11.
Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public
hearing. Copies of the staff report will be available on and after February 26,1992. If you
have any questions, please call Christer Westman in the Planning Department at 438-1161,
ext. 4448.
If you challenge the Environmental Impact Report in court, you may be limited to raising
only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice
or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad at or prior to the public
hearing.
CASE FILE: EIR 91-1
CASE NAME: RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD REALIGNMENT AND MASS GRADING
PUBLISH: FEBRUARY 20, 1992
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PLANNING COMMISSION
CW:km
@
4 ------__ OROIUL- - EusTlGwo1Bn~mBIRsI)
888888.88. W Urwsn
city d c
I EIR 9' RANCHO SANTA FE RD ALIGNMENT & MASS GRADING
6 6
(Form A)
i
TO: CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
RE: PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST
Attached are the materials necessary for you to notice
EIR 91-1 - Rancho Santa Fe Road Enviornmental Impact Report
for a public hearing before the City Council.
#
Please notice the item for the council meeting of 4/21/92
Thank you.
4/3/92
Assist- ity Managa Date *
1) + Carlsbad Journal
Decreed A Legal Newspaper by the Superior Court of San Diego County
Mail all correspondence regarding public notice advertising to
W.C.C.N. Inc. P.O. Box 230878, Encinifas, CA 92023-0878 (61 9) 753-6543
Proof of Publication
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ss.
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO,
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the county aforesaid;
I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the above entitled
I am principal clerk of the printer of the Carlsbad Journal, a newspaper of general circ
published weekly in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, and which ne1
is published for the dissemination of locaI news and intelligence of a genera1 character, an1
newspaper at all times herein mentioned had and still has a bona fide subscription list of
subscribers, and whichnewspaper has been established, printed and published at regular intervz
said City of Oceanside, County of San Diego, State of California, for a period exceeding one YE
Ll preceding the date of publicatioI
I notice hereinafter referred to; and
& notice of which the annexed is a 1
copy, has been published in each
in any supplement thereof on the
t and entire issue of said newspaper -.?e:
'i 1
1) ing dates, to-wit:
April 09
I certify under penalty of perjury
foregoing is true and correct. Exec
Carlsbad, County of San Diego, :
Californiaon the 9th
day of Aori 1 1992
Clerk of the
4Wl Ir/irOh2.*e
I ’ NOTICEOF PUBLIC HEARING RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD REALIGNMENT AND MASS GRADING EIR 91-1
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Carls- bad will hold a public hearing at the City Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, . California, at 6:OO p.m., on Tuesday, April 21,1992, to consider a request for certification of an Environmen- tal Impact Report to realign and construct Rancho Santa Fe Road to prime arterial standards from La Costa Avenue north to the existing Melrose Avenue. The project is 10- cated in Local Facilities Manage- ment Zone 11.
If you have any questions regard- ing this matter, please call Christer Westman in the Planning Depart- ment at 438-1161, extension 4448.
If you challenge the Environmen- tal Impact Report in-court, you may be limited to raising only those issues raised by you or someone else at ublic hearing de- scribed i notice or in written correspondence delivered to the
at or prior to the public hearing.
Applicant: City of Carlsbad
CITY OF CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL
,
City of Carlsbad, City Clerk’s Office,
CJ 6775: April 9.19DZ
,
4 ---- ---- QlDuL- - uOR(0~mmnyr)
mm- (VIU-
I Civ II W
1 EIR 91-1
--_ __~-- - -._I
RANCHO SANTA FE RD ALIGNMENT 6 MASS GRADING