Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-12-04; City Council; 19240; Ponto Beachfront Village Vision PlanCITY OF CARLSBAD - AGENDA BILL 19,240AB# MTG. "12/04/07 DEPT. Housing & Red. PONTO BEACHFRONT VILLAGE VISION PLAN EIR 05-05/GPA 05-04/LCPA 05-01/DI O5-01 DEPT. HEAD CITY ATTY. CITY MGR.I ___ RECOMMENDED ACTION: That the City Council ADOPT City Council Resolution No. 2007-303 CERTIFYING EIR 05-05 and APPROVING the Candidate Findings of Fact, Statement of Overriding Considerations, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, GPA 05-04, LCPA 05-01 and Dl 05-01. ITEM EXPLANATION: On November 13, 2007, the City Council held a public hearing to consider a General Plan Amendment, Local Coastal Program Amendment, Discussion Item and Environmental Impact Report for the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan. The Council received public testimony and considered the recommendation of the Planning Commission to approve the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan and related actions with amendments. At the November 13th hearing, the Council took action to approve the subject Vision Plan as recommended by the Planning Commission with modified amendments and additional and/or revised language for the Plan and EIR mitigation measure for future La Costa Avenue Improvements. The approving documents have been revised according to the City Council direction and are returned at this time for final approval and adoption. FISCAL IMPACT Adoption of the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan will not directly incur any costs to be borne by the City or private property owners since the Plan does not include action on any specific development proposal. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW A Program Environmental Impact Report was completed for this project. The EIR indicates that the project will result in unavoidable significant impacts to cumulative Air Quality and from Short-Term Construction Noise impacts. A comprehensive description of the environmental impacts, the CEQA Findings of Fact, and Statement of Overriding Considerations were set forth within the Planning Commission Staff Report, Resolution for the Program EIR and the Planning Commission minutes for this project. DEPARTMENT CONTACT: Debbie Fountain 760-434-2815 dfoun@ci.carlsbad.ca.us FOR CITY CLERKS USE ONLY. COUNCIL ACTION: APPROVED DENIED CONTINUED WITHDRAWN AMENDED ^D D D D CONTINUED TO DATE SPECIFIC CONTINUED TO DATE UNKNOWN RETURNED TO STAFF OTHER -SEE MINUTES D D nn Page 2 of AB Approval of City Council Resolution No. 2007-303will certify the subject EIR and approve the Candidate Findings of Fact, Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. EXHIBITS: 1 City Council Resolution No. 2007-303. 2 Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 6338, 6339, 6340, and 6341 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2007-303 2 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING PROGRAM 3 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, EIR 05-05, 4 APPROVING THE CANDIDATE FINDINGS OF FACT, A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND 5 A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM AND APPROVING GENERAL PLAN 6 AMENDMENT GPA 05-04, LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT LCPA 05-01, AND DISCUSSION ITEM Dl 7 05-01 FOR THE PONTO BEACHFRONT VILLAGE VISION PLAN FOR THE AREA GENERALLY LOCATED BETWEEN 8 CARLSBAD BOULEVARD AND SAN DIEGO NORTHERN RAILROAD, NORTH OF BATIQUITOS LAGOON AND SOUTH OF PONTO ROAD. 10 CASE NAME: PONTO BEACHFRONT VILLAGE VISION PLAN 11 CASE NO.: EIR 05-05/GPA 05-04/LCPA 05-01/DI 05-01 12 WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal Code, the 13 Planning Commission did, on September 5th and 19th, 2007, hold a duly noticed public 14 hearing as prescribed by law to consider certification of Environmental Impact Report (EIR 05-05), General Plan Amendment (GPA 05-04), Local Coastal Program 16 Amendment (LCPA 05-01) and Discussion Item (Dl 05-01); and 17 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, on the 13th day of 18 November, 2007, held a duly noticed public hearing to consider said Environmental 2Q Impact Report, General Plan Amendment, Local Coastal Program Amendment, and 21 Discussion Item and at that time received recommendations, objections, protests, 22 comments of all persons interested in or opposed to EIR 05-05, GPA 05-04, LCPA 05- 23 01, and Dl 05-01. 24 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of 25 the City of Carlsbad as follows: 26 1. That the above recitations are true and correct. 27 2. That the recommendation of the Planning Commission for the 28 CERTIFICATION of EIR 05-05 and ADOPTION of the Candidate Findings of Fact, a 1 Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and APPROVAL of GPA 05-04 is hereby accepted, approved in concept and shall 2 be included in the third General Plan Amendment of 2007, and LCPA 05-01 and Dl 05-01 is APPROVED by the City Council and that the findings and conditions of the Planning Commission as set forth in Planning Commission Resolution No. 6338, 6339, 6340, and 4 6341 on file with the City Clerk and made a part hereof by reference are the findings and conditions of the City Council with the following amendments and/or additions to 5 said conditions: 6 a. Mitigation Measure T-1 of the Final Environmental Impact Report for said project shall be revised to read as follows: 7 "T-1: Impacts to the affected intersection shall be mitigated by 8 implementation of the following improvements: 9 La Costa Avenue / Vulcan Avenue: Install traffic signal with La Costa widening to facilitate intersection improvements. 10 Prior to the issuance of a building permit, developers within the Ponto Area shall pay a pro-rata fair share contribution to the La Costa Avenue/Vulcan 11 Avenue improvement. The pro-rata fair share contribution shall be paid to 12 the City of Carlsbad City Engineer prior to the issuance of building permits. The pro-rata fair share contribution may be adjusted by the City of Carlsbad 13 to reflect any changes in estimated construction and land costs (as described in Appendix G-2). The City of Carlsbad will retain the Ponto 14 developers' allocated pro-rata fair share contribution until the City of Encinitas is required to collect said contributions. Developers with existing 15 ADT credits within their Ponto property will be given offsets against their projected ADT's. This intersection is located within the jurisdiction of the City of Encinitas and 17 the improvements to this intersection are already required mitigation as part of the City of Encinitas adopted North 101 Corridor Specific Plan and have 18 been included in the City of Encinitas Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Future developers within the Ponto Beachfront Village shall be required to 19 make a proportionate fair share contribution towards the improvements listed in Mitigation Measure T-1. 20 Based on cost estimates from the City of Carlsbad, the proposed road 21 improvements associated with improving La Costa Avenue from Highway 101 through Vulcan Avenue, including the La Costa Avenue/Highway 101 22 and La Costa AvenueA/ulcan Avenue intersections, would cost approximately $7,352,505. This dollar amount is an estimate based on 23 current information. Annual adjustments shall be made as described in Appendix G-2. Calculations for the cost estimate are provided in Appendix 24 G-2. As shown in Figures 5.6-8 and 5.6-9 the project would contribute 5,003 ADT to this intersection. The future development within the Vision Plan area 25 shall contribute 27 percent (5,003 ADT/18,300 ADT = 27%) of the total cost, 26 or $1,985,176 ($7,352,505 x 0.27 = $1,985,176). This amount would be divided up among the future developments within the Ponto Beachfront 27 28 -2- 1 Village Vision Plan area based on the traffic they contribute to the intersection." 2 b. The following development guidelines as recommended by the Planning 3 Commission in Planning Commission Resolution No. 6338 are not 4 approved by the City Council and shall not be added to the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan: 5 "2b. Parking Garages shall be underground unless proven to be 6 technically or financially infeasible." "2g. Any hotel on the southernmost Resort Hotel Character Area parcel 7 shall incorporate an ocean view restaurant." 8 c. The following development guideline as recommended by the Planning 9 Commission in Planning Commission Resolution No.6341, Condition 2h shall be amended to read as follows: 10 "The Character Areas within the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan 11 shall be revised to reflect the enhanced structural setback of generally 75 feet from the southerly bluff edge as referred to in the "Increased 12 Recreational Amenities/Green Space Alternative (Figure 6.6)" of the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan Final Environmental Impact Report with 13 the inclusion of a 10 to 12 foot public trail, and with approval of the precise structural setback to be determined with approval of future development permits." d The following amendment is approved to the permitted accessory uses 16 language for the Beachfront Resort within the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan to read as follows: 17 "Accessory uses developed as an integral part of the hotel to serve hotel 18 guests, but accessible to the public, and generally small in scale (ie., less than 2500 to 3000 square feet per accessory use), such as apparel and accessories, beauty and barber shops, dry cleaning, laundry pickup 20 service only, florist, novelty and/or souvenir store, travel agency." 21 e. The Introduction Section (Chapter 1) of the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan shall be amended to read as follows: 22 "CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 23 SECTION 1.1: INTENT & BACKGROUND 24 The Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan is intended to provide 2$ guidance for development of the Ponto area, as directed by the 26 City of Carlsbad's General Plan and the South Carlsbad Coastal Redevelopment Area Project Redevelopment Plan. The Plan sets 27 forth a Vision of what Ponto could be; presents goals and objectives that support the Vision; and provides an implementation 28 -3- 1 strategy and design guidelines for the projects that will implement the Vision. 2 The Vision Plan is intended for use by prospective developers and 3 their consultants, City of Carlsbad staff, and those performing design review on individual projects. The conceptual site plan contains a level of detail necessary to visually depict the desired 5 land uses, circulation, and major design components; however, it is recognized that actual development site plans will change, which is 6 acceptable if the goals and objectives of the Vision Plan are still achieved. 7 PROJECT GOALS & OBJECTIVES 8 The City recognizes the importance of the Ponto area relative to 9 the City of Carlsbad. Its prime coastal location at the City's south edge, across from a State Park beach campground and near new 10 single-family neighborhoods, offers the opportunity for the Ponto 11 area to become an integral and vibrant part of Carlsbad, providing amenities for both tourists and City residents. 12 The City's Goals and Objectives for the Ponto Beachfront Village 13 Vision Plan are: 14 o Establish the Southern Coastal Gateway to the City. 15 o Accommodate a balanced and cohesive mix of local and tourist serving commercial, medium- and high-density residential, 16 mixed use, live/work, and open space land use opportunities that are economically viable and support the implementation of 17 these goals. ^ o Provide site design guidelines that require street scenes and 19 site plans to respect pedestrian scale and express a cohesive and high-quality architectural theme. 20 o Establish a pattern of pedestrian and bicycle accessibility that 2i links the planning areas internally as well as with adjacent existing and planned pedestrian and bicycle facilities. 22 o Provide expanded beach access. 23 o Establish a mixed use district that encourages local and tourist- 24 oriented retail, commercial, recreational and residential uses. 25 o Require landscape architecture that celebrates the historic past and horticultural heritage of the City. o Assure that public facilities and services meet the requirements of the Growth Management Plan. 28 -4- 1 o Conform with the General Plan, Amended Zone 9 and 22 Local Facilities Management Plans (LFMP), applicable City ordinances, 2 regulations and policies 3 STUDY AREA 4 The Ponto study area is an approximately 130-acre relatively narrow strip of land, approximately 1/8 mile wide and 1-1/2 miles long, located between Carlsbad Boulevard and tracks for the San Diego Northern g Railroad. Portions of the Plan area extend north to Poinsettia Lane and south to La Costa Avenue. For purposes of this Ponto Beachfront Village 7 Vision Plan, however, the area considered viable for future development is much smaller. It consists of approximately 50 acres, with its northern 8 limit at Ponto Drive and its southern limit at the Batiquitos Lagoon (Figure 1.1). GENERAL PLAN10 The City of Carlsbad General Plan identifies Ponto as an area with special considerations and directs its development to be consistent with the goals, , ~ objectives and guidelines set forth within the Ponto Vision and Land Use Strategy Plan (the Plan). Submittal of a Site Development Plan and other 13 applicable discretionary permit applications are required, which will include review for consistency with the intent of this Ponto Beachfront 14 Village Vision Plan and its Design Guidelines. The Plan's Design Guidelines supplement and are subject to existing regulatory controls, 15 including the zoning standards adopted by the City of Carlsbad. The site plans are all illustrative and set forth guidelines and a vision. If the actual 16 site plan for a specific development achieves the goals, objectives, . 7 guidelines and intent of the Vision Plan, it shall be consistent with this ' Plan. 18 REDEVELOPMENT AREA PLAN 19 As seen in Figure 1.2, a portion of the Ponto study area is within the 20 South Carlsbad Coastal Redevelopment Area (SCCRA), which was established in July 2000. The SCCRA Redevelopment Plan gives the 21 Carlsbad Housing and Redevelopment Commission the legal authority to use various powers to achieve the Redevelopment Plan's goals and 22 objectives. 23 A complete list of the original twelve goals for the Redevelopment Plan is found in Appendix 1-A of this document; however, the overall intent can be summarized as follows: 25 o Strengthen and stimulate the economic base of\ o Enhance commercial and recreation functions 27 o Increase amenities to benefit the public 28 -5- 1 o Increase and improve the affordable housing supply 2 o Assure quality design in the area's development 3 Development of the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan is the first step toward achieving the Redevelopment Area's overall intent.4 PLAN ORGANIZATION This Ponto Beachfront Vision Plan is organized into the following chapters: 7 Chapter 1: Introduction Q This Chapter provides an overview of the Plan, including intent and 9 purpose, Plan goals and objectives, background information on study area conditions, the planning process and public outreach 10 activities, and how this Plan fits within the City of Carlsbad's regulatory environment. 11 Chapter 2: Ponto Vision 12 This Chapter defines the Vision for the Ponto area and presents 13 the subarea land use themes, circulation patterns for vehicles, pedestrians, and bicycles, parking, streetscape and gateways, and desired Plan amenities. The site plans, including the specific land 15 uses and development design, set forth within the Plan are illustrative and are provided as an example as to how the Vision for 16 the area may be achieved. Alternate site plans may be consistent with the Plan if the goals and objectives and general intent of the 17 Vision for the area are achieved. 18 Chapter3: Design Guidelines 19 Design guidelines are provided for the subarea types: resort/hotel; mixed use/commercial; townhouse neighborhood and live/work 20 areas. The guidelines address site planning factors, parking and 21 circulation, architecture, landscaping, signage and public spaces/amenities. 22 Chapter 4: Implementation Program 23 This Chapter details the permit and entitlement process to develop 24 individual properties within the Plan area and describes the general process phasing to implement various components of the Plan." 25 26 3 The Housing and Redevelopment Director and/or Planning Director are hereby directed to make the amendments to the appropriate 27 documents as set forth above. 28 -6- 1 The Planning Director is directed to file the Notice of Determination for2 said project, without undue delay. 3 This action shall not become final until the Local Coastal Program 4 Amendment (LCPA 05-01) is approved by the California Coastal Commission and the California Coastal Commission's approval 5 becomes effective. The Provisions of Chapter 1.16 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, "Time Limits for Judicial Review" shall apply: 6 "NOTICE TO APPLICANT" 8 The time within which judicial review of this decision must be sought is governed by Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1094.6, 9 which has been made applicable in the City of Carlsbad by Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 1.16. Any petition or other paper 10 seeking review must be filed in the appropriate court not later than the nineteenth day following the date on which this decision 11 becomes final; however, if within ten days after the decision becomes final a request for the record of the deposit in an amount sufficient to cover the estimated cost or preparation of such record, the time within which such petition may be filed in court is extended to not later than the thirtieth day following the date on which the 14 record is either personally delivered or mailed to the party, or his attorney of record, if he has one. A written request for the 15 preparation of the record of the proceedings shall be filed with the City Clerk, City of Carlsbad, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, 16 CA. 92008." 17 //// 18 //// 19 20 21 22 23 24 //// 25 //// 26 //// 27 //// 28 -7- 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 PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Carlsbad on the 4tb day of December , 2007, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Council Members Lewis, Kulcbin, Hall, Packard and Nygaard. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. Mayor ATTEST: L$RRAIN£ V- WOOD/CJ/ u O =o SEAL) -8- 1 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 6338 2 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE 3 CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION OF A PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL 4 IMPACT REPORT, EIR 05-05, FOR THE PONTO . BEACHFRONT VILLAGE VISION PLAN, AND RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF THE CANDIDATE 6 FINDINGS OF FACT, A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND A MITIGATION MONITORING 7 AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE AREA GENERALLY LOCATED BETWEEN CARLSBAD BOULEVARD AND SAN 8 DIEGO NORTHERN RAILROAD, NORTH OF BATIQUITOS 9 LAGOON AND SOUTH OF PONTO ROAD. CASE NAME: PONTO BEACHFRONT VILLAGE VISION 10 PLAN CASE NO.: EIR 05-05 11 WHEREAS, the City of Carlsbad, "Applicant," has filed a verified application 13 with the City of Carlsbad regarding property described as 14 the areas known as the Ponto Beachfront Village Area generally located between Carlsbad Boulevard and the San 15 Diego Northern Railroad, north of Batiquitos Lagoon and , £ south of Ponto Roadlo 17 ("the Property"); and 18 WHEREAS, a Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR 05-05) was 2Q prepared in conjunction with the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan; and 21 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did again on the 5th and 19th days of 22 September, 2007, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said 23 request after preparation of an EIR for the project; and 24 WHEREAS, after hearing the staff presentation for the Ponto Beachfront Village 25 Vision Plan and public testimony on the project, the Planning Commission did hold a duly26 ~7 noticed public hearing on the project; and 28 WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, examining the Program EIR, Candidate Findings of Fact, Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, analyzing 2 the information submitted by staff, and considering any written comments received, the Planning 3 Commission considered all factors relating to the Program EIR. 4 5 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning 6 Commission as follows: 7 A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. o B) That the Final Program Environmental Impact Report consists of the Final Program Environmental Impact Report, EIR 05-05, dated August 2007, appendices, written comments and responses to comments, as amended to 10 include the comments and documents of those testifying at the public hearing and responses thereto hereby found to be in good faith and reason by incorporating a copy of the minutes of said public hearing into the report, all on file in the Planning Department incorporated by this reference, and collectively referred to as the "Report." 13 C) That the Program Environmental Impact Report, EIR 05-05, as so amended and 14 evaluated is recommended for acceptance and certification as the final Program Environmental Impact Report and that the final Program Environmental Impact Report as recommended is adequate and provides reasonable information on the ,,- project and all reasonable and feasible alternatives thereto, including no project. 17 D) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning Commission hereby RECOMMENDS CERTIFICATION of the Program 18 Environmental Impact Report, EIR 05-05; RECOMMENDS ADOPTION of the Candidate Findings of Fact ("CEQA Findings"), and the Statement of Overriding Considerations ("Statement"), attached hereto marked as Exhibit 2Q "EIR-A" and incorporated by this reference; and of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ("Program"), attached hereto marked 21 as Exhibit "EIR-B" and incorporated by this reference; based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions. 22 Findings; 24 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad does hereby find that the Final Program EIR 05-05, the Candidate Findings of Fact, the Mitigation Monitoring and 25 Reporting Program, and the Statement of Overriding Considerations have been prepared in accordance with requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, the State EIR Guidelines, and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Carlsbad. 27 2. The Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad has reviewed, analyzed, and 28 considered Final Program EIR 05-05, the environmental impacts therein identified for this project; the Candidate Findings of Fact ("Findings" or "CEQA Findings") and the Statement of Overriding Considerations attached hereto as Exhibit "EIR-A," and the PC RESO NO. 6338 -2- Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ("Program") attached hereto as Exhibit 2 "EIR-B," prior to RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of this project. 3 3. The Planning Commission finds that Final Program EIR 05-05 reflects the independent judgment of the City of Carlsbad Planning Commission. 4 4. The Planning Commission does accept as its own, incorporate as if set forth in full herein, and make each and every one of the findings contained in the CEQA Findings 6 (Exhibit "EIR-A"), including feasibility of mitigation measures pursuant to Public Resources Code 21081 and CEQA Guidelines 15091, and infeasibility of project 7 alternatives. 8 5. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the Program (Exhibit "EIR-B") is designed to ensure that during project implementation, the Developer and any other responsible parties implement the project components and comply with the feasible 10 mitigation measures identified in the CEQA Findings and the Program. 6. Although certain significant or potentially significant environmental effects caused by the .„ project will remain, even after the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures and any feasible alternatives, there are specific economic, social and other considerations that 13 render the unavoidable significant adverse environmental effects acceptable, as set forth in the Statement. 14 7. The Record of Proceedings for this project consists of The Report, CEQA Findings, 15 Statement and Program; all reports, applications, memoranda, maps, letters and other planning documents prepared by the planning consultant, the environmental consultant, and the City of Carlsbad that are before the decision makers as 17 determined by the City Clerk; all documents submitted by members of the public and public agencies in connection with the Program EIR; minutes of all public meetings and public hearings; and matters of common knowledge to the City of Carlsbad which they may consider, including but not limited to, the Carlsbad General Plan, Carlsbad Zoning Ordinance, South Carlsbad Coastal Redevelopment 20 Plan, Poinsettia Shores Master Plan, Poinsettia Properties Specific Plan, and Local Facilities Management Plan which may be found at 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive in 21 the custody of the City Clerk, and 1635 Faraday Avenue in the custody of the Director of Planning. 22 _„ Conditions: 24 1. All future developers shall implement the mitigation measures described in Exhibit "EIR-B," the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, for the mitigation 25 measures and monitoring programs applicable to development of the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan.26 27 2. Exhibit "A" shall be amended to include the following under the heading of (2) Biological Resources Direct Impacts and Exhibit "B" shall be amended to include 28 - Mitigation Measure B-7a: Jurisdictional Areas PC RESO NO. 6338 -3- Impact B-7: With implementation of the project, Impact B-7 would result in significant 2 secondary impacts to the native plant and animal communities of the north shore of the Batiquitos Lagoon adjacent to the project site including light overspill and predatory bird 3 perching. Mitigation Measure B-7a: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed <- upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring that a minimum seventy-five (75) foot structural setback shall be provided from the top of the southerly bluff edge and the 6 setback shall be restricted to passive public park uses only. 7 3. Mitigation Measure N3-b under the heading of (5) Noise Onsite Vehicular Noise in Exhibit "A"; and Mitigation Measure N3-b in Exhibit "B" shall be amended to read as follows: 9 Through site plan review and to the satisfaction of the final decision makers, the location of 10 driveways, service areas and building entrances associated with hotel uses in the Tourist Commercial zone, to the greatest extent feasible, shall be located and physically buffered with a combination of setbacks, landscaping, berms, and or walls to minimize mobile and stationary noise impacts on residential uses. 13 4. Exhibit "A" shall be amended to include the following under the heading of (2) Biological Resources Direct Impacts and Exhibit "B" shall be amended to include 14 Mitigation Measure Bl-b: Mitigation Measure Bl-h: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been ,, imposed upon the project as a condition of approval requiring that, to the greatest extent feasible, all offsite mitigation shall be located adjacent to the Batiquitos Lagoon as a 17 primary effort and within the City limits of Carlsbad as a secondary effort. 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PC RESO NO. 6338 -4- H 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1 *">12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 19th day of the following vote, to wit: AYES: Chairperson Baker, Commissioners Boddy, Douglas, Montgomery, and Whitton NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ^>4<M \JL JULIE BAKEh, Chairperson CARLSBAOjlANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: vy&A / km DON NEU Planning Director PCRESONO. 6338 -5- September, 2007, by Cardosa, Dominguez, EXHIBIT "EIR-A" PONTO BEACHFRONT VILLAGE VISION PLAN EIR 05-05/GPA 05-04/LCPA 05-01/DI05-01 SCH No. 2007031141 CEQA FINDINGS REGARDING SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS August 2007 Pursuant to Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City of Carlsbad finds that, for each of the significant effects identified in the FEIR, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen ("mitigate") each of the significant environmental effects as identified in the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR), The Impacts and Mitigation Measures are stated fully in the FEIR. The following are brief explanations of the rationale for this finding for each impact: m Air Quality Impact AQ-2: With implementation of the project, Impact AQ-2 may result in significant impacts on air quality from the generation of fugitive dust as a result of trucks hauling material on- and offsite. Mitigation Measure AQ-2: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for significant impacts to air quality associated with fugitive dust resulting from trucks hauling material on- and offsite. To reduce potential impacts from project- generated fugitive dust, as a result of trucks hauling material on- and offsite, all trucks hauling excavated or graded material shall comply with State Vehicle Code Section 23114, with special attention to Sections 23114(b)(F), (e)(2) and (e)(4), as amended, regarding the prevention of such material spilling onto public streets. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-2 would reduce potential significant impacts on air quality from the generation of fugitive dust as a result of trucks hauling material on- and offsite because prevention methods would reduce the amount of fugitive dust emissions generated. Implementation of fugitive dust control techniques included in Mitigation Measure AQ-2 will reduce Impact AQ- 2 to less than significant. Asbestos Impact AQ-4: With implementation of the project, Impact AQ-4 may result in significant impacts on air quality from the potential exposure of asbestos to sensitive receptors during demolition activities. Mitigation Measure AQ-4: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring the project proponent to mitigate for potential air quality impacts associated with the potential exposure of asbestos to sensitive receptors during demolition activities. To reduce potential impacts resulting from the exposure of asbestos during demolition activities the construction contractor shall adhere to SDAPCD District Ponto Beach Village Vision Plan CEQA 15091 Findings August 2007 Page 2 Rule 361.150 (Standards for Waste Disposal for Manufacturing, Fabricating, Demolition, Renovation, and Spraying Operations) to regulate asbestos emissions as a result of demolition activities. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-4 would reduce potential significant impacts on air quality associated with the potential exposure of asbestos to sensitive receptors because the regulation has been a proven method to reduce the potential for the exposure of asbestos. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-4 will reduce Impact AQ-4 to less than significant. Reactive Organic Gas and Volatile Organic Compound Emissions Impact AQ-5: With implementation of the project, Impact AQ-5 may significantly impact sensitive receptors from the potential exposure of pollutant concentrations of reactive organic gas and volatile organic compound emissions as a result of future improvement activities. Mitigation Measure AQ-5: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for the potential exposure of sensitive receptors to pollutant concentrations of reactive organic gas and volatile organic compound emissions, resulting from future improvement activities. To reduce potential impacts resulting from the exposure of sensitive receptors to pollutant concentrations, the construction contractor shall adhere to SDAPCD District Rule 67.0 (Architectural Coatings) to limit volatile organic compounds from architectural coatings. This rule specifies storage, clean up, and labeling requirements for architectural coatings. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-5 would reduce significant impacts associated with the potential exposure of sensitive receptors to pollutant concentrations of reactive organic gas and volatile organic compound emissions because the regulation has been a proven method to reduce the potential for the exposure of pollutant concentrations. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ- 5 will reduce Impact AQ-5 to less than significant. FINDING: Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(l), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. Potential impacts on air quality will be reduced to less than significant as a result of implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ-2, AQ-4 and AQ-5. (2) Biological Resources Direct Impacts Sensitive Vegetation Communities Impact B-l: With implementation of the project, Impact B-l would result in significant impacts to 47.6 acres of sensitive vegetation communities including: 0.04 acre of southern willow scrub, 0.1 acre of disturbed southern coastal bluff scrub, 1.2 acres of Diegan coastal sage scrub (including disturbed), 0.3 acre of eucalyptus woodland, and 21.1 acres of disturbed habitat. Ponto Beach Village Vision Plan CEQA 15091 Findings August 2007 Page] Mitigation Measure B-la: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for significant impacts to southern willow scrub. To reduce potential impacts to southern willow scrub, impacts to 0.04 acre of southern willow scrub shall be mitigated at a 3:1 ratio either through offsite creation at a 1:1 ratio and enhancement at a 2:1 ratio, or offsite acquisition at a 3:1 ratio of 0.12 acre of southern willow scrub credit at a wetland mitigation bank. If credits are not purchased, a Restoration Plan for habitat creation and enhancement shall be submitted to the USFWS, CDFG, and City for approval prior to issuance of any grading or construction permits, and prior to approval of a final map. Mitigation Measure B-lb: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for significant impacts to southern coastal bluff. To reduce potential impacts to southern coastal bluff, impacts to 0.1 acre of southern coastal bluff scrub (including disturbed) shall be mitigated at a 3:1 ratio either through offsite creation at a 1:1 ratio and enhancement at a 2:1 ratio, or offsite acquisition at a 3:1 ratio of 0.12 acre of southern coastal bluff scrub at an approved mitigation bank. If credits are not purchased, a Restoration Plan for habitat creation and enhancement shall be submitted to the USFWS, CDFG, and City for approval prior to issuance of any grading or construction permits, and prior to approval of a final map. Mitigation Measure B-lc: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for significant impacts to Diegan coastal sage scrub. To reduce potential impacts to Diegan coastal sage scrub, impacts to 1.2 acres of unoccupied Diegan coastal sage scrub (including disturbed) shall be mitigated at a 2:1 ratio through creation at a minimum 1:1 ratio (to meet the no net loss policy of Diegan coastal sage scrub within the coastal zone), and either creation or offsite acquisition at a 1:1 ratio. If credits are not purchased, a Restoration Plan for habitat creation and enhancement shall be submitted to the USFWS, CDFG, and City for approval prior to issuance of any grading or construction permits and prior to approval of a final map. Mitigation Measure B-ld: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for significant impacts eucalyptus woodland. To reduce impacts, impacts to 0.3 acre of eucalyptus woodland shall be mitigated with payment of a fee into the City's Habitat In Lieu Mitigation Fee fund, consistent with the City's fee schedule at the time of permit issuance. The City has adopted an In Lieu Mitigation Fee, consistent with Section E.6 of the Habitat Management Plan and City Council Resolution No. 2000-223 to fund mitigation for impacts to certain categories of vegetation and animal species. All development projects within the Ponto Area shall be required to pay the fee in order to be found consistent with the Habitat Management Plan and the Open Space and Conservation Element of the General Plan. The fee shall be paid prior to recordation of a final map or issuance of a grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs first. Ponto Beach Village Vision Plan CEQA 15091 Findings August 2007 Page 4 Mitigation Measure B-le: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for significant impacts to disturbed habitat. To reduce impacts, impacts to 21.1 acres of disturbed habitat shall be mitigated with payment into the City's Habitat In Lieu Mitigation Fee fund, consistent with the City's fee schedule at the time of permit issuance. The City has adopted an In Lieu Mitigation Fee, consistent with Section E.6 of the Habitat Management Plan and City Council Resolution No. 2000-223 to fund mitigation for impacts to certain categories of vegetation and animal species. All development projects within the Ponto Area shall be required to pay the fee in order to be found consistent with the Habitat Management Plan and the Open Space and Conservation Element of the General Plan. The fee shall be paid prior to recordation of a final map or issuance of a grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs first. Mitigation Measure B-lf: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for significant impacts to impacts to southern willow scrub, southern coastal bluff scrub, and/or Diegan coastal sage scrub. Jf restoration for impacts to southern willow scrub, southern coastal bluff scrub, and/or Diegan coastal sage scrub occurs, the project applicant shall execute and record a biological conservation easement over habitat to be preserved in perpetuity for project-related mitigation. The easement shall be in favor of an agent approved by the USFWS and CDFG. Either the USFWS or CDFG shall be named as third party beneficiary. Further, the project applicant shall prepare and implement a perpetual management, maintenance, and monitoring plan for all biological conservation easements. The project applicant shall also provide a non-wasting endowment for an amount approved by the USFWS and CDFG (based on a cost estimation method) to secure the ongoing funding for the perpetual management, maintenance, and monitoring of biological conservation easement areas. Mitigation Measure B-lg: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for significant impacts to impacts to southern willow scrub, southern coastal bluff scrub, and/or Diegan coastal sage scrub. Project-specific development shall be required to comply with the provisions of Section 7-11 (Buffers and Fuel Management) and Section 7-12 (Grading and Landscaping Requirements) of the City's HMP. Implementation of Mitigation Measures B-la through B-lg would reduce impacts associated with significant impacts to sensitive vegetation communities, specifically southern willow scrub, southern coastal bluff scrub (including disturbed), Diegan coastal sage scrub (including disturbed), eucalyptus woodland, and disturbed habitat, because these requirements would ensure that a greater value of habitat will be preserved than that which is impacted. Through the purchase of credits in an approved mitigation bank or through preparation of a Restoration Plan, implementation of these measures would assist in the creation of large blocks of habitat that will enhance the long-term viability of the vegetation Ponto Beach Village Vision Plan CEQA 15091 Findings August 2007 PageS communities impacted by the project. Furthermore, implementation of Mitigation Measures B-la through B-lg would reduce potential impacts to sensitive vegetation communities by requiring compensatory mitigation to be established, before the impacts would take place. Implementation of Mitigation Measures B- la through B-lg will reduce Impact B-l to less than significant. Jurisdlctional Areas Impact B-2: With implementation of the project, Impact B-2 would result in significant impacts to 0.15 acre of Corps jurisdictional areas, including 0.04 acre of southern willow scrub and 0.11 acre of non-wetland Waters of the U.S; and 0.21 acre of CDFG jurisdictional areas, including 0.04 acre of southern willow scrub and 0.17 acre of streambed. Mitigation Measure B-2a: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for significant impacts to Corps jurisdictional areas and non-wetland Waters of the U.S. Impacts to 0.04 acre of Corps jurisdictional wetlands and 0.11 acre of non- wetland Waters of the U.S. shall be mitigated by the creation and/or enhancement of 0.23 acre of jurisdictional areas offsite at 3:1 and 1:1 ratio, respectively, as determined by the resource agencies. Mitigation Measure B-2b: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring the project proponent to mitigate for significant impacts to CDFG jurisdictional areas. Impacts to 0.04 acre of CDFG jurisdictional wetlands and 0.17 acre of CDFG jurisdictional streambed shall be mitigated by the creation and/or enhancement of 0.29 acre of jurisdictional areas offsite at 3:1 and 1:1 ratio, respectively, as determined by the resource agencies. Implementation of Mitigation Measures B-2a and B-2b would reduce potential significant impacts to jurisdictional areas, specifically, Corps jurisdictional areas, non-wetland Waters of the U.S, and CDFG jurisdictional areas because these requirements would ensure that an equal or greater value of jurisdictional areas will be preserved than that impacted by the project. Implementation of Mitigation Measures B-2a and B-2b will reduce Impact B-2 to less than significant. Construction Noise Impact B-3: With implementation of the project, Impact B-3 would result in significant impacts on local wildlife from noise associated with development of the Ponto Area from such sources as grubbing, grading, and vehicular traffic. Construction-related noise impacts would be considered significant if sensitive species (such as coastal California gnatcatcher, least tern, or raptors) were displaced from their nests and failed to breed. Birds nesting within any area impacted by noise exceeding 60 dB Leq may be significantly impacted. Any construction activity within 500 feet of an active coastal California gnatcatcher, California least tern, or raptor nest would be considered significant. Ponto Beach Village Vision Plan CEQA 15091 Findings August 2007 Page 6 Mitigation Measure B-3a: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for significant impacts to coastal California gnatcatchers from construction noise associated with development of the Ponto Area. To reduce impacts from construction noise, no grubbing, grading, or clearing within 500 feet of occupied Diegan coastal sage scrub during the coastal California gnatcatcher breeding season (March 1 through August 15) shall occur. As such, all grading permits, improvement plans, and the final map shall state the same. If grubbing, grading, or clearing is proposed during the coastal California gnatcatcher breeding season, a pre-construction survey shall be conducted to determine if this species occurs within the areas impacted by noise (either within 500 feet or where noise is greater than 60 dB Leq or the ambient noise level). If there are no coastal California gnatcatchers nesting (includes nest building or other breeding/nesting behavior) within this impact area, development shall be allowed to proceed. However, if coastal California gnatcatchers are observed nesting or displaying breeding/nesting behavior within the area, construction shall (1) be postponed until all nesting (or breeding/nesting behavior) has ceased or until after August 15; or (2) a temporary noise barrier or berm shall be constructed at the edge of the development footprint to ensure that noise levels are reduced to below 60 dB Leq. Alternatively, the use of construction equipment could be scheduled to keep noise levels below 60 dB Leq, or the ambient noise level, in lieu of or in concert with a wall or other noise barrier. Mitigation Measure B-3b: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for significant impacts to the California least tern from construction noise associated with development of the Ponto Area. To reduce impacts from construction noise, no grubbing, grading, or clearing within 500 feet of the Least Tern Preserve during the least tern breeding season (April through September) shall occur. As such, all grading permits, improvement plans, and the final map shall state the same. If grubbing, grading, or clearing is proposed during the Least Tern breeding season, a noise study shall be conducted to determine if construction noise would be greater than 60 dB Leq or the ambient noise level within the Least Tern Preserve. If the noise level within this impact area exceeds 60 dB Leq or the ambient noise level within the Least Tern Preserve, construction shall (1) be postponed until all nesting (or breeding/nesting behavior) has ceased or until after September 30; or (2) a temporary noise barrier or berm shall be constructed at the edge of the development footprint to ensure that noise levels are reduced to below 60 dB Leq, or the ambient noise level. Alternatively, the use of construction equipment could be scheduled to keep noise levels below 60 dB Leq, or the ambient noise level, in concert with a wall or other noise barrier. Mitigation Measure B-3c: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for significant impacts to raptor nests from noise associated with development of the Ponto Area. To reduce impacts from construction noise, no grubbing, grading, or clearing within 500 feet of raptor nesting habitat (such as eucalyptus trees) during ...ll... Ponto Beach Village Vision Plan CEQA 15091 Findings August 2007 Page 7 the raptor breeding season (December through July) shall occur. As such, all grading permits, improvement plans, and the final map shall state the same. If grubbing, grading, or clearing is proposed during the raptor breeding season, a pre-construction survey shall be conducted to determine if raptors are nesting within the areas impacted by noise (either within 500 feet or where noise is greater than 60 dB Leq or the ambient noise level). If there are no raptors nesting (includes nest building or other breeding/nesting behavior) within this area, development shall be allowed to proceed. However, if raptors are observed nesting or displaying breeding/nesting behavior within the area, construction shall (1) be postponed until all nesting (or breeding/nesting behavior) has ceased or until after July 15; or (2) a temporary noise barrier or berm shall be constructed at the edge of the development footprint to ensure that noise levels are reduced to below 60 dB Leq or the ambient noise level. Alternatively, the use of construction equipment could be scheduled to keep noise levels below 60 dB Leq, or the ambient noise level, in lieu of or in concert with a wall or other noise barrier. Mitigation Measure B-3d: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for significant impacts to avian species from noise associated with development of the Ponto Area. To reduce impacts from construction noise, and in order to ensure compliance with the MBTA, clearing of all vegetation shall occur outside of the breeding season of most avian species (February 15 through September 15). Grubbing, grading, or clearing during the breeding season of MBTA-covered species may occur if it is determined via a pre-construction survey that no nesting birds (or birds displaying breeding or nesting behavior) are present immediately prior to grubbing, grading, or clearing activities, and would require approval of the City, USFWS, and CDFG that no breeding or nesting avian species are present in the vicinity of the grubbing, grading, or clearing activities. Implementation of Mitigation Measures B-3a through B-3d would reduce potentially significant impacts on local wildlife resulting from construction noise from grubbing, grading, and clearing activities, as well as from construction- related vehicle traffic, because prior to construction, a qualified biologist will ensure that construction activity will not disrupt local sensitive wildlife. Implementation of Mitigation Measures B-3a through B-3d will reduce Impact B- 3 to less than significant. Domesticated Pets Impact B-4: With implementation of the project, Impact B-4 may result in significant impacts to native wildlife from the increased presence of domesticated animals and nuisance species. Cats, especially, are known to hunt rodents and birds. In addition, commercial and residential uses may introduce Argentine ants (Linepithema humile) to local habitats, which could have significant consequences for native ant species and animals that feed on them. Mitigation Measure B-4: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for significant impacts to native wildlife from the increased presence of nuisance . II. Ponto Beach Village Vision Plan CEQA 15091 Findings August 2007 Page 8 species and domesticated animals. To reduce impacts on native wildlife, each Homeowner's Association (HOA; for residential projects), property owners (for all non-residential projects), and the City of Carlsbad (for public spaces), shall be responsible for taking steps to prevent problems from nuisance animals and pets by an integrated program of education; signage; litter and refuse collection; prohibition against feeding wildlife, pest-proof refuse containers; pest eradication (as necessary), and coordination with CDFG and other habitat managers as necessary. In addition, permanent fencing, approved by the USFWS and CDFG, shall be provided along the top of slope overlooking Batiquitos Lagoon to reduce intrusion into the lagoon by pets. Implementation of Mitigation Measure B-4 would reduce potentially significant impacts on native wildlife from the increased presence of nuisance species and domesticated animals because controls and restrictions will be placed on human activities that would contribute to potential impacts. Mitigation Measure B-4 designates that a specific entity will be responsible for each development area for controlling access of domestic pets to open space areas. Implementation of Mitigation Measure B-4 will reduce Impact B-4 to less than significant. Night Lighting Impact B-5: With implementation of the project, Impact B-5 may result in significant impacts on native habitats from night lighting that can provide nocturnal predators with an unnatural advantage over their prey. This could potentially result in an increase in the loss of native wildlife, especially sensitive species that may occur within the study area. Mitigation Measure B-5: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for significant impacts on native habitats from night lighting. To reduce impacts, outdoor lighting proposed with development of lands adjacent to preserved habitat (i.e. Resort Hotel) shall be of the lowest illumination allowed for human safety, and selectively placed, shielded, and directed away from preserved habitat. Outdoor lighting proposed with development plans for such lands shall be reviewed and approved by the City as part of the application review process to reduce potential impacts relative to light and glare. Implementation of Mitigation Measure B-5 would reduce impacts associated with significant impacts on native habitats from night lighting, because controls and restrictions will be placed to ensure that light spillover is minimized by shielding and pointing lighting away from adjacent preserved habitat. Implementation of Mitigation Measure B-5 will reduce Impact B-5 to less than significant. Errant Construction Impacts Impact B-6: With implementation of the project, Impact B-6 may result in significant impacts from construction activities associated with development of the Ponto Area, and with offsite improvements that have the potential to result in errant impacts outside of the intended construction limits. Any grubbing, clearing, grading, or other impacts that inadvertently occur outside of the limits of Ponto Beach Village Vision Plan CEQA 15091 Findings August 2007 Page 9 construction in areas where sensitive habitat occurs would be considered significant. Mitigation Measure B-6: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for significant impacts from errant construction activities. To reduce impacts from errant construction activities during the construction period, limits of grading and clearing shall be clearly delineated with temporary fencing such as orange construction and silt fencing to ensure that construction activity remains within the defined limits of disturbance, according to the grading plan. All temporary fencing shall be placed on the impact side of the interface. A qualified biologist shall inspect the fencing and shall monitor construction activities occurring adjacent to the construction limits to avoid unauthorized impacts. Unauthorized impacts shall be reported to the USFWS, CDFG, and City within 24 hours of occurrence and shall be mitigated at a 5:1 ratio. Temporary fencing shall be removed only after the conclusion of all grading, clearing, and construction. Implementation of Mitigation Measure B-6 would reduce significant impacts associated with significant impacts from'errant construction activities because controls and restrictions will be implemented to ensure that fencing is installed prior to grading activities to delineate the limits of construction. In addition, a monitor will be required to inspect all such fences to ensure they are in place and visible. Implementation of Mitigation Measure B-6 will reduce Impact B-6 to less than significant. FINDING: Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(l), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. Potential impacts to biological resources are less than significant as a result of implementation of Mitigation Measures B-l through B-6. (3) Cultural Impact CR-1: With implementation of the project, Impact CR-1 may result in significant impacts to archaeological resources or human remains resulting from grading or construction activities. Mitigation Measure CR-1: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for significant impacts to archaeological resources or human remains. To reduce impacts to archaeological resources or human remains, prior to issuance of any grading permits or approval of improvement plans, the applicant shall implement a Data Recovery Program, in compliance with the City of Carlsbad's Cultural Resource Guidelines Criteria and Methodology, to mitigate potential impacts to undiscovered buried archaeological or paleontological resources on properties located within the Ponto Area to the satisfaction of the Planning Director, This Program shall include, but shall not be limited to, the following actions; Provide evidence to the Planning Department that a qualified archaeologist and/or archaeological monitor has been contracted to implement a grading, trenching, 2-M Ponto Beach Village Vision Plan CEQA 15091 Findings August 2007 Page 10 brushing monitoring and data recovery program to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. A copy of the contract as well as a letter from the applicant and the archaeologist and/or archaeological monitor shall be submitted to the Planning Director. The contract shall include the following guidelines: a) The consulting archaeologist shall contract with a Native American monitor to be involved with the grading monitoring program; b) the consulting archaeologist/historian and Native American monitor shall attend the pre-grading meeting with the contractors to explain and coordinate the requirements of the monitoring program; c) the consulting archaeologist shall monitor all areas identified for development; d) an adequate number of monitors (archaeological/historical/paleontological/ Native American) shall be present to ensure that all earth-moving activities are observed and shall be onsite during all grading activities; e) during the original cutting of previously undisturbed deposits, the archaeological monitor(s) and Native American monitor shall be onsite full-time to perform full-time monitoring as determined by the Principal Investigator of the excavations. The frequency of inspections will depend on the rate of excavation, the materials excavated, and the presence and abundance of artifacts and features; f) isolates and clearly non- significant deposits will be minimally documented in the field and the monitored grading can proceed; g) in the event that previously unidentified, potentially significant cultural resources are discovered, the archaeological monitors) shall have the authority to divert or temporarily halt ground disturbance operations in the area of discovery to allow evaluation of potentially significant cultural resources. The archaeologist shall contact the City at the time of discovery. The archaeologist, in consultation with the City, shall determine the significance of the discovered resources. The City must concur with the evaluation before construction activities will be allowed to resume in the affected area. For significant cultural resources, a Data Recovery Program to mitigate impacts shall be prepared by the consulting archaeologist and approved by the City, then carried out using professional archaeological methods. If any human bones are discovered, the Principal Investigator shall contact the City Coroner. In the event that the remains are determined to be of Native American origin, the Most Likely Descendant, as identified by the Native American Heritage Commission, shall be contacted in order -to determine proper treatment and disposition of the remains; i) before construction activities are allowed to resume -in the affected area, the artifacts shall be recovered and features recorded using professional archaeological methods. The archaeological monitor(s)/Principal Investigator shall determine the amount of material to be recovered for an adequate sample for analysis; j) in the event that previously unidentified cultural resources are discovered, all cultural material collected during the grading monitoring program and all previous archaeological studies shall be processed and curated according to current professional repository standards. The collections and associated records shall be transferred, including release of title, to be permanently curated at a qualified repository as defined by the "State of California Guidelines for the Curation of Archaeological Collections." The affected landowner shall agree to pay such fees as required for curation that are in effect for the selected repository at the time of curation. Evidence must be provided to the satisfaction of the Ponto Beach Village Vision Plan CEQA 15091 Findings August 2007 Page 11 ' Planning Director and that all fees have been r)aid. All curation activities shall be completed within six months of project completion; k) in the event that previously unidentified cultural resources are discovered, a report documenting the field and analysis results and interpreting the artifact and research data within the research context shall be completed and submitted to the satisfaction of the Planning Director prior to the issuance of any building permits; 1) in the event that no cultural resources are discovered, a brief letter to that effect shall be sent to the Planning Director by the consulting archaeologist that the grading monitoring activities have been completed. Implementation of Mitigation Measure CR-1 would reduce impacts associated with significant impacts on archeological resources or human remains resulting from grading and construction activities because, prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a Data Recovery Program for significant cultural resources would be implemented for potentially areas disturbed by site development activities. A qualified archaeological monitor would be required to be present onsite during grading activities. The monitor would be responsible for identifying, testing, and proper curation of sensitive cultural resources discovered during the site grading process. Implementation of Mitigation Measure CR-1 will reduce Impact CR-1 to less than significant. Paleontological Resources Impact CR-2: With implementation of the project, Impact CR-2 may result in significant impacts on paleontological resources uncovered onsite during project grading and disruption of soils. In addition, offsite activity resulting from project implementation would largely be limited to improvements required to improve Carlsbad Boulevard and for utility improvements. Potential project-related impacts to offsite paleontological resources are considered less than significant, particularly since no such resources have been identified to date in areas that would be affected by development of the project. As such, project-related disturbance to offsite areas from proposed improvements is not anticipated to result in significant impacts to paleontological resources. However, mitigation is proposed to prevent potential impacts to such resources, should they be uncovered during project development. Mitigation Measure CR-2: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for potentially significant impacts to paleontological resources. To reduce impacts on paleontological resources, prior to issuance of grading permits and approval of improvement plans pursuant to approval of any map, the applicant shall retain a qualified paleontologist to monitor the site during grading. The applicant shall provide evidence to the satisfaction of the Planning Director of contracting with a paleontologist through a letter prepared by the paleontologist that states he/she has been retained by the applicant. The paleontologist shall attend all pre-grading meetings to consult with grading contractors. A paleontological monitor shall be present onsite during all grading operations to evaluate the presence of fossils. The paleontologist shall have the authority to Ponto Beach Village Vision Plan CEQA 15091 Findings August 2007 Page 12 direct, divert, or halt any grading activity until such time that the sensitivity of the resource can be determined and the appropriate mitigation implemented. Prior to approval of the Final Map, the applicant shall furnish documentary evidence to the satisfaction of the Planning Director that prepared fossils, along with copies of field notes, photos, and maps, have been deposited in a scientific institution, such as the San Diego Natural History Museum. Implementation of Mitigation Measure CR-2 would reduce significant impacts on paleontological resources resulting from grading and construction activities because prior to the issuance of any grading permits, a data recovery program for cultural resources would be implemented for construction areas. A qualified paleontological monitor would be required to be present onsite during grading activities. The monitor would be responsible for identifying, testing and the proper curation of any sensitive paleontological resource discovered during the grading process. Implementation of Mitigation Measure CR-2 will reduce Impact CR-2 to less than significant. FINDING: Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(l), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. Potential impacts to cultural or paleontological resources will be less than significant as a result of implementation of Mitigation Measures CR-1 and CR-2. (4) Hazards and Hazardous Materials Existing Hazardous Materials Onsite Structures Impact HM-1: With implementation of the project, Impact HM-1 may result in significant impacts from the potential to release hazardous materials, from the demolition or renovation of existing structures, into the environment. Mitigation Measure HM-1: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for significant impacts resulting from the potential release of hazardous materials into the environment. To reduce impacts from the release of hazardous materials into the environment, prior to the commencement of demolition or renovation activities, the interior of individual onsite structures within the Ponto Area shall be visually inspected. Should hazardous materials be encountered with any onsite structure, the materials shall be tested and properly disposed of offsite in accordance with State and Federal regulatory requirements. Any stained soils or surfaces underneath the removed materials shall be sampled. Results of the sampling would indicate the appropriate level of remediation efforts that may be required. Implementation of Mitigation Measure HM-1 would reduce significant impacts from the potential release of hazardous materials from demolition or renovation of existing structures into the environment because, prior to the commencement of Ponto Beach Village Vision Plan CEQA 15091 Findings August 2007 Page 13 demolition or renovation activities, existing hazardous materials will be identified and proper remediation efforts will be implemented to ensure hazardous material are not released into the environment. Implementation of Mitigation Measure HM-1 will reduce Impact HM-1 to less than significant. Asbestos Containing Materials Impact HM-2: With implementation of the project, Impact HM-2 may result in significant impacts from the potential for the exposure of asbestos containing materials (ACMs) (within onsite structures built prior to 1978) into the environment. Mitigation Measure HM-2: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for significant impacts from the potential release of ACMs into the environment. To reduce impacts from the potential release of ACMs into the environment, prior to the commencement of any remedial or demolition work, building owners shall contract with a certified professional to conduct an asbestos survey, consistent with National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) standards to determine the presence of ACMs. Demolition of or within existing buildings on individual parcels onsite must comply with State law, which requires the presence of a certified contractor where there is asbestos-related work involving 100 square feet of more of ACMs, to ensure that required procedures regarding the removal of asbestos are followed. Implementation of Mitigation Measure HM-2 would reduce significant impacts from the potential release of ACMs into the environment because, prior to the commencement of demolition or renovation activities, existing ACMs will be identified and proper remediation efforts will be implemented to ensure that ACMs are not released into the environment. Implementation of Mitigation Measure HM-2 will reduce Impact HM-2 to less than significant. Lead Based Paints Impact HM-3: With implementation of the project, Impact HM-3 may result in significant impacts from the potential release of lead based paint (LBPs) (within onsite structures built prior to 1978) into the environment. Mitigation Measure HM-3: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for significant impacts from the potential release of LBPs into the environment. To reduce impacts from the potential release of LBP, if, during demolition of any onsite structures on individual parcels, paint is separated from the building material (e.g., chemically or physically), the paint waste shall be evaluated independently from the building material to determine its proper management. According to the Department of Substances Control, if paint is not removed from the building material during demolition (and is not chipping or peeling), the material could be disposed of as construction debris (a non-hazardous waste). It is recommended that the landfill operator be contacted in advance to determine specific requirements for the disposal of lead-based paint materials. Ponto Beach Village Vision Plan CEQA 15091 Findings August 2007 Page 14 Implementation of Mitigation Measure HM-3 would reduce significant impacts from the potential release of LBPs into the environment because, prior to the commencement of demolition or renovation activities, existing LBPs will be identified and proper remediation efforts will be implemented to ensure that LBPs are not released into the environment. Implementation of Mitigation Measure HM-3 will reduce Impact HM-3 to less than significant. Other Hazardous Materials Miscellaneous Debris Impact HM-4: With implementation of the project, Impact HM-4 may result in significant impacts from the potential for hazardous materials from miscellaneous debris piles to seep into the soil below and contaminate underlying groundwater, thereby releasing hazardous materials into the environment. In addition, other hazardous materials may pose a potential hazard to future occupants of the Ponto Area. The Phase I ESA identified other potentially hazardous materials or conditions such as stained soils, unidentified pipes, onsite storage units, ASTs and unidentified soil/gravel piles. These conditions may be potentially hazardous and may represent the potential for release of hazardous materials into the environment. Mitigation Measure HM-4: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for significant impacts from the seepage of hazardous materials from miscellaneous debris piles into the soil below and the subsequent contamination of underlying groundwater. To reduce potential impacts from such hazardous materials, prior to issuance of a grading permit, all miscellaneous debris (i.e., wood, concrete, 55- gallon drums, miscellaneous household debris, automobiles, scrap metal, construction equipment, paint cans, batteries, plastic and metal piping, etc.) shall be removed offsite and properly disposed of at an approved landfill facility. Once removed, a visual inspection of the area beneath the removed materials shall be performed. Any stained soils observed underneath the removed materials shall be sampled. Results of the sampling (if necessary) would indicate the level of remediation efforts that shall be required. All light industrial equipment associated with hazardous materials storage, mixing, and/or use (i.e., fume-hoods, vents, piping, etc.) shall be properly disposed of in accordance with State and Federal regulations at an approved offsite landfill facility. Septic Tanks Mitigation Measure HM-5: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for significant impacts from the potential release of hazardous materials from septic tanks into the environment. To reduce potential impacts, prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the specific location of onsite septic tanks shall be determined. Once located, septic tanks shall be removed and properly disposed of at an -(I... Ponto Beach Village Vision Plan CEQA 15091 Findings August 2007 Page 15 approved offsite landfill facility. Once the tanks are removed, a visual inspection of the area beneath and around the removed tanks shall be performed. Any stained soils observed underneath the septic tanks shall be sampled. Results of the sampling (if necessary) would indicate the level of remediation efforts that shall be required. Unidentified Pipes Mitigation Measure HM-6: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for significant impacts from the potential release of hazardous materials from unidentified pipes into the environment. To reduce potential impacts, prior to issuance of a grading permit, the terminus of all existing, unidentified metal pipes within an individual property shall be defined (as applicable). Should a UST be present in association with such pipes, the UST shall be removed and properly disposed of offsite at an approved landfill facility. Once the UST is removed, a visual inspection of the areas beneath and around the removed UST shall be performed. Any stained soils observed underneath the UST shall be sampled. As a result of sampling (if necessary), the identified level of remediation shall be required. Pole-mounted Transformers Mitigation Measure HM-7: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for significant impacts from the potential release of hazardous materials from pole- mounted transformers into the environment. To reduce potential impacts, transformers and/or hydraulic lifts to be relocated during site construction/demolition shall be conducted under the supervision of the local utility purveyor to identify property-handling procedures regarding potential PCBs. Stained Concrete/Asphalt Mitigation Measure HM-8: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for significant impacts from the potential release of hazardous materials from stained concrete/asphalt into the environment. To reduce potential impacts, prior to issuance of a grading permit, any stained concrete/asphalt shall be removed and disposed of offsite at an appropriate permitted facility. Once removed, exposed soils shall be visually observed to confirm the presence/absence of staining (an indication of contamination migration into the subsurface). If observed, stained soils shall be segregated and tested to identify appropriate remedial activities if necessary which shall then be implemented. Above Ground Storage Tanks Mitigation Measure HM-9: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for significant impacts from the potential release of hazardous materials from above Ponto Beach Village Vision Plan CEQA 15091 Findings August 2007 Page 16 ground storage tanks (ASTs) into the environment. To reduce potential impacts, prior to issuance of a grading permit, onsite ASTs shall be removed and properly disposed of offsite at an approved landfill facility. Once the ASTs are removed, a visual inspection of the areas beneath and around the removed ASTs shall be performed. Stained soils observed underneath the ASTs shall be sampled. Results of the sampling (if necessary) would indicate the level of remediation efforts that shall be required. Unidentified Soil/Gravel Piles Mitigation Measure HM-10: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for significant impacts from the potential release of hazardous materials from unidentified soil/gravel piles into the environment. To reduce potential impacts, prior to issuance of a grading permit, onsite soil/gravel piles shall be removed from each individual property and properly disposed of. Due to the unknown origin of the soil/gravel piles, the piles shall be sampled and tested for hazardous materials. Once removed, a visual inspection of the areas beneath the removed materials shall be performed. Any stained soils observed underneath the removed materials shall be sampled. Results of the sampling (if necessary) would indicate the level of remediation efforts that shall be required. High Pressure Gas Line Mitigation Measure HM-11: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for significant impacts from the potential release of hazardous materials from high-pressure gas lines into the environment. To reduce potential impacts, prior to any excavation within the Ponto Area, the exact location of the high-pressure gas line shall be defined prior to the commencement of construction. Any activities occurring within the gas line easement shall be conducted pursuant to applicable guidelines and regulations. Storage Units Mitigation Measure HM-12: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for significant impacts from the potential release of hazardous materials from storage units into the environment. To reduce potential impacts, prior to demolition, the interior of the onsite storage units shall be visually inspected prior to removal. The storage units shall be removed and properly disposed of offsite at an approved landfill facility. Once removed, a visual inspection of the areas beneath the removed materials shall be performed. Any stained soils observed underneath the removed materials shall be sampled. Results of the sampling (if necessary) would indicate the level of remediation efforts that shall be required. Concrete Foundation Mitigation Measure HM-13: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation Ponto Beach Village Vision Plan CEQA 15091 Findings August 2007 Page 17 for significant impacts from the potential release of hazardous materials from concrete foundations into the environment. To reduce potential impacts, prior to issuance of a grading permit, the affected owner shall remove the existing concrete foundation in the northern portion of the development area and properly dispose of it at an approved offsite landfill facility. Once removed, a visual inspection of the areas beneath the removed materials shall be performed. Any stained soils observed underneath the removed materials shall be sampled. Results of the sampling (if necessary) would indicate the level of remediation efforts that shall be required. Soil Sampling Mitigation Measure HM-14a: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for significant impacts from the potential release of hazardous materials from contaminated soils into the environment. To reduce potential impacts, prior to the issuance of a grading permit, where surficial staining associated with the automobile and storage areas is visible, soils shall be excavated to determine the exact vertical extent of the contamination (if any). If during soil removal, evidence of petroleum products appears to continue below the ground surface, sampling shall be performed to characterize the extent of contamination and identify appropriate remedial measures that shall be implemented. Mitigation Measure HM-14b: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for significant impacts from the potential release of hazardous materials from contaminated soils into the environment. To reduce potential impacts, if directed by the City, prior to issuance of a grading permit, individual landowners shall contract with a certified Phase II/III specialist to conduct soil sampling to identify any pesticide residues in the soil related to historic agricultural uses onsite. The sampling will determine if pesticide concentrations exceed established regulatory requirements and will identify proper handling procedures that shall be required. Mitigation Measure HM-14c: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for significant impacts from the potential for release of hazardous materials from contaminated soils into the environment. To reduce potential impacts, prior to issuance of a grading permit, construction in which the soil around the historic railway alignment shall be conducted under the purview of the local regulatory agency to identify presence of gasoline, diesel, and/or creosote within the soils and to identify proper handling procedures. A visual inspection of the areas beneath and around the removed area shall be performed. Any stained soils observed underneath the adjacent area shall be sampled. Results of the sampling (if necessary) would indicate the level of remediation efforts that shall be required. Ponto Beach Village Vision Plan CEQA 15091 Findings August 2007 Page 18 Construction Activities Mitigation Measure HM-15: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for significant impacts from the potential release of hazardous materials from construction activities into the environment. To reduce potential impacts, if unknown wastes or suspect materials are discovered during construction on individual properties believed to involve hazardous waste/materials, the contractor shall: immediately stop work in the vicinity of the suspected contaminant, removing workers and the public from the area; notify the Project Engineer of the implementing Agency; secure the areas as directed by the Project Engineer; and, notify the implementing Agency's Hazardous Waste/Materials Coordinator. Implementation of Mitigation Measures HM-4 through HM-15 would reduce impacts associated with the potential for the release of miscellaneous hazardous materials into the environment because, prior to the commencement of demolition or renovation activities, existing miscellaneous hazardous materials will be identified and proper remediation efforts' will be implemented to ensure that hazardous materials are not released into the environment. Implementation of Mitigation Measures HM-4 through HM-15 will reduce Impact HM-4 to less than significant. FINDING: Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(l), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. Potential impacts from hazardous materials will be less than significant as a result of implementation of Mitigation Measures HM-1 through HM-15. (5) Noise Long-Term (Mobile) Impacts Onsite Vehicular Noise Impact N-3: With implementation of the project, Impact N-3 may result in significant impacts onsite from vehicular noise from Carlsbad Boulevard due to noise levels ranging from 69.3 dBA CNEL to 68.9 dBA CNEL (Year 2030), and from Avenida Encinas due to noise levels ranging from 59.6 dBA CNEL to 63.2 dBA CNEL, thereby exceeding the exterior 60 dBA CNEL and interior 45 dBA CNEL noise levels, respectively, as indicated in the Noise Guidelines Manual. Impacts to existing adjacent sensitive land uses (residential) may also result from noise from vehicles traveling onsite along Ponto Road. Mitigation Measure N-3a: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for significant impacts from vehicular noise. To reduce potential impacts, prior to final discretionary development approval, property owners within the Ponto Area shall prepare a site-specific noise analysis to the satisfaction of the City Director of Planning, which demonstrates that mobile noise sources would not exceed Ponto Beach Village Vision Plan . CEQA15091 Findings August 2007 Page 19 maximum interior noise level criteria established for residential uses in the City General Plan, and that maximum exterior noise levels have been mitigated to the maximum extent feasible. The acoustical reports shall also be prepared pursuant to the City of Carlsbad Noise Guidelines Manual. The analysis shall verify that residences are adequately shielded and/or located at an adequate distance from mobile noise sources in order to comply with the City's noise standards. Individual developments shall, to the extent feasible, implement site-planning techniques such as: increasing the distance between the noise source and the receiver; using non-noise sensitive structures such as garages to shield noise- sensitive areas; orienting buildings to shield outdoor spaces from a noise source; orienting non-noise generating uses toward existing adjacent residential uses; routing commercial truck away from more noise-sensitive uses within the Ponto Area; individual developments shall incorporate architectural design strategies, which reduce the exposure of noise-sensitive spaces to stationary noise sources (i.e., placing bedrooms or balconies on the side of the house facing away from noise sources). These design strategies shall be implemented based on recommendations of acoustical analysis for individual developments as required by the City to comply with City noise standards; individual developments shall incorporate noise barriers, walls, or other sound attenuation techniques, based on recommendations of acoustical analysis for individual developments as required by the City to comply with City noise standards; and, elements of building construction (i.e., walls, roof, ceiling, windows, and other penetrations) shall be modified as necessary to provide sound attenuation. This may include sealing windows, installing thicker or double-glazed windows, locating doors on the opposite side of a building from the noise source, or installing solid-core doors equipped with appropriate acoustical gaskets. Mitigation Measure N-3b: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for significant impacts from onsite vehicular noise. To reduce potential impacts, Through Site Plan review, and to the satisfaction of the City Planning Director, the location of driveways and service entrances associated with hotel uses within the Commercial Tourist (CT) zone shall be restricted to locations where such access points are not directly across from existing residential uses. Implementation of Mitigation Measures N-3a and N-3b would reduce significant impacts from vehicular noise because building permits would not be issued unless it is demonstrated that the allowable sound level limits of the City of Carlsbad are not exceeded, and measures would be implemented through development plan review to distance commercial driveways from existing residential uses. Implementation of Mitigation Measures N-3a and N-3b will reduce Impact N-3 to less than significant. Ponto Beach Village Vision Plan CEQA 15091 Findings August 2007 Page 20 Long-Term (Stationary) Noise Impacts Overall Stationary Noise Impact N-4: With implementation of the project, Impact N-4 may result in significant impacts to sensitive receptors (residential neighborhoods) from overall stationary noise exceeding the City's 60 dBA exterior and 40 dBA interior noise standards. Mitigation Measure N-4a: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation of significant impacts from overall stationary noise. To reduce potential impacts, electrical and mechanical equipment (i.e., ventilation and air conditioning units) shall be located away from sensitive receptor areas. Additionally, the following considerations should be given prior to installation: proper selection and sizing of equipment, installation of equipment with proper acoustical shielding, and incorporation of the use of parapets into building design. Prior to final discretionary development approval, property owners within the Ponto Area shall prepare a subsequent site-specific noise analysis to the satisfaction of the City Planning Director, which demonstrates that noise from electrical and mechanical equipment would not exceed maximum interior noise level criteria established for residential uses in the City General Plan and that maximum exterior noise levels have been mitigated to the maximum extent feasible. Mitigation Measure N-4b: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation of significant impacts from overall stationary noise. To reduce potential impacts, a bermed/landscaped buffer shall be provided adjacent to the property boundary between residential uses and commercial uses within areas zoned as Commercial- Tourist (CT) to distance future commercial land uses from existing and future adjacent residential uses. Consistent with the City's Standard Conditions of Approval, the applicant shall submit, to the satisfaction of the City Planning Director, a Landscape Plan illustrating the buffer and the landscaping proposed. The Landscape Plan shall be consistent with the City's Landscape Design Manual. Implementation of Mitigation Measures N-4a and N-4b would reduce significant impacts from overall stationary noise because mitigation would require that design measures be implemented that give consideration for the selection and sizing of equipment and incorporation of the use of parapets into building design. In addition, a landscaped/bermed buffer would be required in the CT zone to reduce potential noise impacts on adjacent residential uses. Implementation of Mitigation Measures N-4a and N-4b will reduce Impact K-4 to less than significant. FINDING: Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(l), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final Ponto Beach Village Vision Plan CEQA 15091 Findings August 2007 Page 21 EIR. Potential impacts from noise will be reduced to less than significant as a result of implementation of Mitigation Measures N-l through N-4. (6) Traffic and Circulation Direct Impacts Existing Plus Vision Plan Intersection Level of Service La Costa Avenue/Vulcan Avenue Intersection Impact T-l: With implementation of the project, there would be a significant impact to the La Costa Avenue/Vulcan Avenue intersection because the traffic volumes associated with the Vision Plan would cause the LOS of the intersection to change from an acceptable/marginal LOS to a deficient (failing) LOS. MitigatioD Measure T-l: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for significant impacts on the La Costa Avenue/Vulcan Avenue intersection. To reduce potential impacts to this intersection, the following improvements shall be implemented: Install traffic signal with La Costa widening to facilitate intersection improvements. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, developers within the Ponto Area shall pay a pro-rata fair share contribution to the La Costa Avenue/Vulcan Avenue improvement. The pro-rata fair share contribution shall be paid to the City of Carlsbad City Engineer prior to the issuance of building permits. The pro-rata fair share contribution may be adjusted by the City of Carlsbad to reflect any changes in estimated construction and land costs (as described in Appendix G-2). The City of Carlsbad will retain the Ponto developers' allocated pro-rata fair share contribution until the City of Encinitas is required to collect said contributions. Developers with existing ADT credits within their Ponto property will be given offsets against their projected ADT's. This intersection is located within the jurisdiction of the City of Encinitas and the improvements to this intersection are already required mitigation as part of the City of Encinitas adopted North 101 Corridor Specific Plan and have been included in the City of Encinitas Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Future developers within the Ponto Beachfront Village shall be required to make a proportionate fair share contribution towards the improvements listed in Mitigation Measure T-l. Based on cost estimates from the City of Carlsbad, the proposed road improvements associated with improving La Costa Avenue from Highway 101 through Vulcan Avenue, including the La Costa Avenue/Highway 101 and La Costa Avenue/Vulcan Avenue intersections, would cost approximately $5,335,000. This dollar amount is an estimate based on current information. Annual adjustments shall be made as described in Appendix G-2. Calculations for the cost estimate are provided in Appendix G-2 of the FEIR. As shown in Figures 5.6-8 and 5.6-9 of the FEIR, the project would contribute 5,003 ADT to this intersection. Based on 2030 traffic volumes of 18,300 ADT, the future development within the Vision Plan area shall contribute 27 percent (5,003 ADT/18,300 ADT=27%) of the total cost, or $1,440,450 ($5,335,000 x Ponto Beach Village Vision Plan CEQA 15091 Findings August 2007 • Page 22 0.27=$ 1,440,450). This amount would be divided up among the future developments within the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan area bas6d on the traffic they contribute to the intersection. Implementation of Mitigation Measure T-l will reduce potential impacts on the La Costa Avenue/Vulcan Avenue intersection by reducing the anticipated delay at the impacted intersections. Pro-rata fair share contributions from the proposed project will be made to the City of Encinitas for roadway improvements on La Costa Avenue from North Coast Highway through Vulcan Avenue. The money will be applied towards roadway improvements that will fix existing deficiencies at the intersections that cannot be connected until La Costa Avenue is widened. Implementation of the mitigation measure would ensure that the LOS associated with the intersection would meet the LOS criteria established by the regional requirements set by SANTEC/ITE. Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce Impact T-l to less than significant. This mitigation is appropriate because it is consistent with existing mitigation measures adopted by the City of Encinitas to improve the level of service at these intersections. Horizon Year (2030) Intersection Level of Service La Costa Avenue/North Coast Highway 101 Intersection and La Costa Avenue/Vulcan Avenue Impact T-2: With implementation of the project, there would be a significant impact on the La Costa Avenue/North Coast Highway 101 and the La Costa Avenue/Vulcan Avenue intersections because the traffic generated by the Vision Plan would result in a change in delay of more than 2.0 seconds when compared to the 2030 Without the Vision Plan at these intersections. Mitigation Measure T-2: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for significant impacts on the La Costa Avenue/North Coast Highway 101 and La Costa Avenue/Vulcan Avenue intersections. To reduce potential impacts, this intersection shall be mitigated by implementation of the following improvements: Widen north leg to include two left turn lanes and two through lanes and widen east leg to include two left turn lanes and one right turn lane. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, developers within the Ponto Area shall pay a pro-rata fair share contribution to the La Costa Avenue/North Coast Highway 101 improvement: The pro-rata fair share contribution shall be paid to the City of Carlsbad City Engineer prior to the issuance of building permits. The pro-rata fair share contribution may be adjusted by the City of Carlsbad to reflect any changes in estimated construction and land costs (as described in Appendix G-2). The City of Carlsbad will retain the Ponto developers' allocated pro-rata fair share contribution until the City of Encinitas is required to collect said contributions. Developers with existing ADT credits within their Ponto property will be given offsets against their projected ADT's. This intersection is located within the jurisdiction of the City of Encinitas. The improvements to this intersection are 1 Ponto Beach Village Vision Plan CEQA 15091 Findings August 2007 Page 23 already required as mitigation as part of the City of Encinitas adopted North 101 Corridor Specific Plan, and other development projects located within the City of Encinitas and are included in the City of Encinitas CIP. Future developers within the Ponto Beachfront Village shall be required to make a proportionate fair share contribution to the City of Encinitas towards the improvements listed in Mitigation Measure T-2. Based on cost estimates from the City of Carlsbad, the proposed road improvements associated with improving the La Costa Avenue from Highway 101 through Vulcan Avenue, including the La Costa Avenue/Highway 101 and La Costa Avenue/Vulcan Avenue intersections, would cost approximately $5,335,000. This dollar amount is an estimate only based on current information. Annual adjustments shall be made as described in Appendix G-2. Calculations for the cost estimate are provided in Appendix G-2. As shown in Figures 5.6-8 and 5.6-9 the project would contribute 5,003 ADT to this intersection. Based on 2030 traffic volumes of 18,300 ADT, the future development within the Vision Plan area shall contribute 27 percent (5,003 ADT/18,300 ADT = 27%) of the total cost, or $1,440,450 ($5,335,000 x 0.27 = $1,440,450). This amount would be divided up among the future developments within the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan area through a fair share contribution based on the traffic they contribute to the intersection. Implementation Mitigation Measure T-2 would reduce potential impacts on the La Costa Avenue/ North Coast Highway 101 and the La Costa Avenue/Vulcan Avenue intersections by reducing the anticipated delay at the impacted intersection. Pro-rata fair share contributions from the proposed project will be made to the City of Encinitas for roadway improvements on La Costa Avenue from North Coast Highway through Vulcan Avenue. The money will be applied towards roadway improvements that will fix existing deficiencies at the intersections that cannot be connected until La Costa Avenue is widened. Implementation of the mitigation measure would ensure that the LOS associated with these intersections would meet the LOS criteria established by the regional requirements set by SANTEC/ITE. Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce Impact T-2 to less than significant. This mitigation is appropriate because it is consistent with existing mitigation measures adopted by the City of Encinitas to improve the level of service at these intersections. Roadway Segments Impact T-3: With implementation of the project, there would be a significant impact on the segment of La Costa Avenue between Vulcan Avenue and Interstate 5, under 2030 traffic volumes because the traffic generated by the Vision Plan would result in a change in volume to capacity ratio (V/C) that would exceed the LOS threshold of 0.02, and is therefore considered significant. The segment is forecasted to operate at LOS F in the westbound direction, under the With and the Without Vision Plan scenarios. Mitigation Measure T-3: The mitigation measure specified in the FEIR has been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for Ponto Beach Village Vision Plan CEQA 15091 Findings August 2007 Page 24 significant impacts to the segment of La Costa Avenue between Vulcan Avenue and Interstate 5, under 2030 traffic volumes. To reduce potential impacts to less than significant, implementation of Mitigation Measures T-l and T-2 are required. Implementation Mitigation Measure T-3 would reduce potential impacts on the segment of La Costa Avenue between Vulcan Avenue and Interstate 5 by widening one lane in the westbound direction, in coordination with planned intersection improvements at Vulcan Avenue and La Costa Avenue, to reduce the V/C ratio to an acceptable operating condition, based on City of Carlsbad thresholds. Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce Impact T-3 to less than significant. Cumulative Impacts Intersections Impacts T-l and T-2: With implementation of the project, there would be a significant impact on the La Costa Avenue/Vulcan Avenue intersection because the traffic volumes associated with the Vision Plan would cause the LOS of the intersection to change from an acceptable/marginal LOS to a deficient (failing) LOS, and a significant impact on the intersection of La Costa Avenue/North Coast Highway 101 and the La Costa Avenue/Vulcan Avenue intersection because the traffic generated by the Vision Plan would result in a change in delay of more than 2.0 seconds when compared to the 2030 Without the Vision Plan analysis. Mitigation Measures T-l and T-2: The mitigation measures specified in the FEIR have been imposed upon the project as a condition of approval, requiring mitigation for significant impacts to the intersections of La Costa Avenue/North Coast Highway 101 and La Costa Avenue/Vulcan Avenue. To reduce potential impacts to less than significant, prior to issuance of a building permit, evidence shall be required to ensure that Mitigation Measures T-l through T-2 (refer to Section 5.6.4 of the FEIR) would be implemented (as applicable) at the discretion of the City of Carlsbad City Engineer, to mitigate a project's contribution to potential traffic impacts. Implementation of Mitigation Measures T-l and T-2 would mitigate the Vision Plan's contribution to cumulative intersection and roadway impacts that would occur under the year 2010 analysis by providing physical improvements to the intersections of La Costa Avenue/North Coast Highway 101 and La Costa Avenue/Vulcan Avenue to reduce the anticipated delays and improve the LOS to meet LOS criteria established by the regional requirements set by SANTEC/ITE. Pro-rata fair share contributions from the proposed project will be made to the City of Encinitas for roadway improvements on La Costa Avenue from North Coast Highway through Vulcan Avenue. The money will be applied towards roadway improvements that will fix existing deficiencies at the intersections that cannot be connected until La Costa Avenue is widened. Implementation of these mitigation measures will reduce the project's contribution to cumulative intersection impacts under the Year 2010 analysis to less than cumulatively Ponto Beach Village Vision Plan CEQA 15091 Findings August 2007 Page 25 considerable. This mitigation is appropriate because it is consistent with existing mitigation measures adopted by the City of Encinitas to improve the level of service at these intersections. FINDING: Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(l), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. Potential impacts relative to traffic will be less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measures T-l through T-3. PONTO BEACHFRONT VILLAGE VISION PLAN EIR EIR 05-05/GPA 05-04/LCPA 05-01/DI 05-01 SCH NO. 2007031141 FINDINGS RELATING TO IMPACTS NOT MITIGATED TO LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT August 2007 The FEIR identifies three impacts on the environment (i.e., 1) short-term (construction) impacts to air quality, 2) long-term (operational) impacts to air quality, and 3) short-term (construction) noise impacts) which will have significant environmental effects, even after, the application of all feasible mitigation measures identified in the FEIR. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15092(b)(2), the City of Carlsbad City Council shall not approve the project unless it first finds under CEQA Section 21081 (a) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a) that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures of project alternatives identified in the FEIR, and also finds under CEQA Guidelines 15092(b)(2)(B) that the remaining significant effects are acceptable due to overriding considerations as described in CEQA Section 15093. The City Council, therefore, makes the following findings: (1) Short-Term (Construction) Impacts to Air Quality Impacts AQ-1, AQ-2 and AQ-3 (Air Quality Impacts from Fugitive Dust): To partially mitigate for the project's significant short-term direct impacts to air quality,- the mitigation measures specified in the FEIR have been imposed upon the project as conditions of approval, requiring the project applicant to mitigate for significant short-term direct impacts from fugitive dust as a result of clearing, grading, and earth moving operations, trucks hauling material on and offsite, and construction equipment onsite. Mitigation Measure AQ-1 shall require that during clearing, grading, earth-moving, or excavation operations, excessive fugitive dust emissions shall be controlled by regular watering and other dust preventive measures. Mitigation Measure AQ-2 shall require that all trucks hauling excavated or graded material onsite shall comply with State Vehicle Code Section 23114, with special attention to Sections 23114(b)(F), (e)(2) and (e)(4), as amended, regarding the prevention of such material spilling onto public streets. Mitigation Measure AQ-3 shall require that during construction activities, excessive construction equipment and vehicle exhaust emissions shall be controlled through efficient maintenance and use of construction equipment. Implementation of the Vision Plan would include considerable construction activities, which could potentially result in periodic exceedances of SDAPCD standards. The existing regional air quality surrounding the proposed project site exceeds SDAPCD standards and is classified at a non-attainment status. As such, with or with out Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad CEQA Findings Regarding Significant Effects 1 August 2007 implementation of the proposed project, impacts to air quality will continue to occur. Furthermore, air quality impacts to this basin are a result of a cumulative effect from a variety of activities occurring throughout the San Diego Air Basin. As such, a requirement for the proposed project to mitigate for existing air quality impacts in the San Diego Air Basin is infeasible due to the size of the air basin which covers most of San Diego County. Lastly, as the Vision Plan establishes guidelines for the development anticipated to occur within the Ponto Area, but does not provide final development plans, it is not possible to quantify potential future impacts associated with fugitive dust. Therefore, based on the size of the Ponto Area, it is anticipated that impacts regarding fugitive dust from future construction activities would be significant and unavoidable. Additionally, the timing or phasing of the development with the Ponto area is unknown. (2) Long-Term (Operational) Impacts to Air Quality Impact AQ-6 (Operational Emissions): To partially mitigate for the project's significant direct impacts to air quality, the mitigation measures specified in the FEIR have been imposed upon the project as conditions of approval, requiring the project applicant to mitigate for significant direct impacts on long-term (construction) air quality resulting from operational emissions. Mitigation Measure AQ-6 provides programmatic measures the City of Carlsbad can recommend to future developers to reduce air quality impacts from operational emissions. Mitigation Measure AQ-6 will require, prior to approval of site development plans for future development within the Ponto Area, the City shall ensure that all of the operational mitigation measures identified below are identified and included as part of the project development plans, as applicable. These measures shall be implemented by the project applicant of each individual project, when development plans are proposed, and shall be verified by the City of Carlsbad Planning Department and are discussed below. The City shall recommend that the proposed surrounding commercial facilities which incorporate gas stations utilize pumps dispensing oxygenated gasoline (especially during winter months, typically taken as November through February inclusive) in an effort to reduce overall CO emissions within the air basin due to traffic traveling to and from the project site. In addition, the City shall recommend that workers at surrounding commercial facilities participate in ride-share programs and seek alternate forms of transportation to the site. Future onsite commercial land uses shall implement design measures that promote the use of alternative modes of transportation, such as: mixed- use development (combine residential, retail, employment, and commercial). Sidewalks; safe street and parking lot crossings; showers and locker rooms; sheltered transit stops; theft-proof well- lighted bicycle storage facilities with convenient access to building entrance; carpools and vanpools; onsite services to reduce need for offsite travel such as: childcare; telecommute center; retail stores; postal machines; and automatic teller machines; commercial and retail businesses should be encouraged to schedule operations during off-peak travel times; adjust business hours; and allow alternative work schedules, telecommuting; provide preferential parking for carpool/vanpool vehicles; construct transit facilities such as bus turnouts/bus bulbs, benches, shelters, etc.; provide direct, Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad CEQA Findings Regarding Significant Effects 2 August 2007 safe, attractive pedestrian access from project to transit stops and adjacent development; increase wall and attic insulation beyond Title 24 requirements; plant shade trees in surface parking lots to reduce evaporative emissions from parked vehicles; use lighting controls and energy-efficient interior lighting, and built-in energy efficient appliances; use double-paned windows; and use energy-efficient low sodium parking lot and streetlights. It is anticipated that by the Year 2030 Project Operational Emissions, regional level PMio and ROG emissions would exceed the SDAPCD thresholds of significance. As such, with or with out implementation of the proposed project, and with or without implementation of these mitigation measures, any additional pollutants emissions would result in impacts to air quality. Furthermore, the existing air quality of this basin is a result of a cumulative effect from a variety of activities occurring throughout the San Diego Air Basin. As such, a requirement for the proposed project to mitigate for existing and future air quality impacts in the San Diego Air Basin is infeasible, due to the size of the air basin which covers most of San Diego County. Lastly, the Vision Plan establishes guidelines for the development anticipated to occur within the Ponto Area, but does not provide final development plans; it is not possible to quantify potential future impacts associated with fugitive dust. Therefore, based on the size of the Ponto Area, it is anticipated that impacts to air quality would be significant and unavoidable. Implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ-1 through AQ-3, and AQ-6 would reduce significant impacts associated with Impacts AQ-1 through AQ-3, and AQ-6. These mitigation measures would reduce air quality impacts where practicable; however, these mitigation measures would not completely mitigate the project's significant direct impacts to air quality associated with the development of the project. (3) Short-Term (Construction) Noise Impacts Impacts N-l/N-2 (Construction Noise) To partially mitigate for the project's significant direct impacts from construction noise, the mitigation measures specified in the FEIR have been imposed upon the project as conditions of approval, requiring the project applicant to mitigate for significant noise impacts resulting from project construction. Mitigation Measure N-l would require, for all projects within 1,000 feet within residential neighborhoods, prior to Grading Permit issuance, future developments shall demonstrate to the City of Carlsbad that the project complies with the following: All construction equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers; construction noise reduction methods such as shutting off idling equipment, installing temporary acoustic barriers around stationary construction noise sources, maximizing the distance between construction equipment staging areas and occupied residential areas, and use of electric air compressors and similar power tools, rather than diesel equipment, shall be used where feasible; during construction, stationary construction equipment shall be placed such that emitted Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad CEQA Findings Regarding Significant Effects 3 August 2007 noise is directed away from sensitive noise receivers; during construction, stockpiling and vehicle staging areas shall be located as 'far as practical from noise sensitive receptors; operate earthmoving equipment on the construction site, as far away from vibration sensitive sites as possible; and, construction hours, allowable workdays and the phone number of the job superintendent shall be clearly posted at all construction entrances to allow for surrounding owners and residents to contact the job superintendent. If the job superintendent receives a complaint, appropriate corrective actions shall be implemented and a report of the action taken to the reporting party. Mitigation measure N-2 would require construction activities to be limited to 7:00 a.m. to sunset Monday through Friday, and 8:00 a.m. to sunset on Saturdays with no work permitted on Sunday's and legal holidays. Construction activities generally have a short and temporary duration, lasting from a few days to a period of several months. As properties within the Ponto Area are all privately owned, development of the area will take place incrementally as individual property owners choose to undertake development or redevelopment activities. Therefore, a scheduled construction-phasing plan has not been established for the project. In order to estimate the "worst case" construction noise levels, the combined construction equipment noise levels have been calculated for the grading/excavation phases. Although it is not anticipated that the "worst-case" scenario will occur, if it did, despite implementation of Mitigation Measures N-l and N-2, short-term construction activities are anticipated to result in noise levels above 85 dBA. Therefore, per the City's standards, a significant temporary noise impact could potentially occur during future construction activities. Short-term noise impacts resulting from project construction would be temporary and cease upon construction completion. Although Mitigation Measures N-l and N-2 are proposed to reduce noise levels resulting from construction activities, mitigation would not reduce such noise impacts to less than significant. Therefore, this impact would be significant and unavoidable. Implementation of Mitigation Measures N-l and N-2 would reduce significant impacts associated with Impact N-l and N-2. This mitigation measures would ensure construction impacts were reduced; however, this mitigation measures would not completely mitigate the project's significant impacts resulting from construction noise associated with the development of the project. INFEASIBILITY OF PROJECT ALTERNATIVES AND RATIONALE RELATING TO THE FINDINGS The project objectives for the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan identified in the FEIR and considered by the City Council are described in Section 1.2 of the FEIR which states: The objectives of the project applicant are to develop a project that: a. Provide options for land use; b. Increase flexibility for property owners to respond to market conditions; c. Increase opportunities and individual decision-making for small lot property owners; Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan E1R City of Carlsbad CEQA Findings Regarding Significant Effects 4 August 2007 d. Continue to consider environmental factors and conditions; and, ' e. Create a neighborhood and amenities that contribute to the surrounding area and City as a whole. The following is the rationale for finding that the project alternatives in the FEIR are infeasible in accordance with CEQA Section 21081(a)(3) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3). "Feasible" means capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable time, taking economics, legal, social, and technological factors into account (CEQA Guidelines Section 15363) A full discussion of the project alternatives identified in the FEIR is discussed in Section 6 of the FEIR commencing on page 6-1. Based on the objectives of the project as described, the City Council considered the following Project Alternatives: A. No Development Alternative (FEIR Section 6.2, pages 6-3 through 6-6): The No Development Alternative assumes that the project site would not be developed with the proposed project. The project site would remain in its present condition and would continue to support the existing single-family residential and small-scale commercial and light-industrial uses. No onsite or offsite roadway improvements, including Carlsbad Boulevard, would occur with this alternative. Although this alternative is similar to the Open Space Alternative, preservation of the undeveloped portions of the Ponto Area would not be guaranteed for the long-term through zoning or dedication of an open space easement. The No Development Alternative would reduce or avoid all of the impacts associated' with the proposed project, with the exception of hydrology and water quality, as BMPs to control drainage from the site would not be implemented. Therefore, the No Development Alternative is considered to be the Environmentally Superior Alternative. Although most impacts of this alternative would be less than those of the proposed project, and this alternative is the Environmentally Superior Alternative, it fails to meet any of the project objectives, such as establishing the Southern Coastal Gateway to the City or providing a balanced and cohesive mix of local and tourist-serving commercial, medium- and high-density residential, mixed use, live/work, and open space land use opportunities that would be economically viable. In addition, this alternative would not establish a pattern of pedestrian and bicycle accessibility that would link with adjacent existing and planned pedestrian and bicycle facilities, or establish a mixed-use district that encourages local and tourist-oriented retail, commercial, recreational and residential uses. For these reasons, The No Development Alternative was rejected from further consideration. Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad CEQA Findings Regarding Significant Effects 5 August 2007 B. No Project Alternative (FEIR Section 6.3, pages 6-6 through 6-10): The No Project Alternative would develop the project site as allowed under the current land use and zoning designations without special permitting. The proposed project would allow the same uses as those allowed under the existing General Plan designations, as well as the underlying Specific Plans (Poinsettia Properties Specific Plan and the Poinsettia Shores Master Plan), uses developed under the No Project Alternative would be similar to that proposed with the Vision Plan; however, the Vision Plan envisions uses that would result in a decreased intensity than what would ultimately be allowed under the existing land use designations. The No Project Alternative would allow the property to be developed with travel/recreational commercial, medium-high density residential uses, or as open space or parks. In the southern portion of the site, the existing General Plan designation would allow for travel and recreational commercial uses, such as hotels, restaurants, and commercial retail, to enhance the tourism and recreational opportunities in the City. In the northern portion of the site, residential housing could be provided at a density of 8-15 dwelling units per acre, or in combination with travel and recreational commercial uses. Areas that are currently designated as "Unplanned" may require further planning to determine appropriate uses. Similar to the proposed project, this alternative would ultimately contribute to offsite road improvements, as applicable, to mitigate for potential traffic impacts caused by vehicular trips generated by onsite uses. This alternative would also propose onsite trails and linkage to the regional trail system for recreational use. In addition, improvements would be made, consistent with the Zone 9 and 22 LFMPs, to provide public water and sewer service to the site. Development onsite would be consistent with the Scenic Corridor Guidelines and would contribute to improvements along Carlsbad Boulevard, but would not result in an overall themed design approach that would establish and enhance a major entryway into the City of Carlsbad. Like the proposed project, this alternative would be consistent with all land use plans and zoning, and would reflect the type of development originally intended for the site under the General Plan. However, with the No Project Alternative, impacts to traffic and circulation, noise, utilities and public service systems, as well as air quality, would be greater than the proposed project, due to the potential increase in the number of proposed residential units or square footage of development. This alternative would meet the objective of conforming with the General Plan, Amended Zone 9 and 22 Local Facilities Management Plans (LFMP), applicable City ordinances, regulations and policies. This alternative would also meet the objective of establishing a mixed-use district that encourages local and tourist-oriented retail, commercial, recreational and residential uses, as such uses would be allowed under the existing land use and zoning designations. This alternative would also be required to assure that public facilities and services meet the requirements of the Growth Management Plan. However, as the Vision Plan would not be implemented with this alternative, this alternative would not achieve the project objectives of establishing the Southern Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad CEQA Findings Regarding Significant Effects 6 August 2007 Coastal Gateway to the City or providing site design guidelines that require street scenes and site plans to respect pedestrian scale arid express a cohesive and high- quality architectural theme. In addition, this alternative would not provide for expanded and enhanced beach access, or establish a mixed-use district that encourages local and tourist-oriented retail, commercial, recreational and residential uses. This alternative would also not achieve the objective of requiring landowners within the project development area to utilize landscape architecture that celebrates the historic past and horticultural heritage of the City, thereby reinforcing an overall theme. Expanded and enhanced beach access would also not be provided. For these reasons, The No Project Alternative was rejected from further consideration. C. Increased Residential Use Alternative (FEIR Section 6.4, pages 6-10 through 6- 13): The Increased Residential Land Use Alternative assumes that the majority of the project site would be developed with townhomes, at a density of 19 du/acre. At this density, an estimated 352 townhomes could be constructed. In addition, the Resort Hotel and Hotel/Commercial uses would also be developed, similar to the proposed project. No Mixed-Use or Live-Work/Mixed-Use uses would be developed in the northern and southern portions of the Ponto Area, thereby reducing commercial retail or tourism-oriented commercial uses. This alternative is intended to emphasize the residential component, and therefore, would not result in improvements associated with the State Beach such as the pedestrian underpass that would allow visitors to travel between the Ponto Area and the recreational uses provided by the beach. In doing so, potential conflicts between the residents of the proposed residential uses and visitors to the State Beach would be reduced. In addition, this alternative would not include enhancements to create a Southern Coastal Gateway into the City at Carlsbad Boulevard and Batiquitos Lagoon, or gateways into the Ponto Area at Avenida Encinas, Beach Way, or Ponto Road, as much of the Ponto Area would" support residential uses, and would not represent a cohesive themed development for the approximately 50 acre area proposed for development. The improvements would not be made as the main focus of the development would shifted away from attracting visitors to the area and more focus on the residential uses. Like the proposed project, this alternative would be consistent with all land use plans and zoning, and would reflect the type of development originally intended for the site under the General Plan. However, with the Increased Residential Use Alternative, impacts to visual aesthetics and utilities and public service systems would be greater than the proposed project, as a greater number of residential units would be constructed, thereby increasing visual density as well as an increased demand for public utilities, such as water and sewer facilities. This alternative was rejected because it fails to achieve the majority of the project objectives. As the majority of the project site would be developed with residential uses under this alternative, the objective of establishing a mixed-use district that encourages local and tourist-oriented retail, commercial, recreational and residential uses or accommodating a mix of local and tourist-serving commercial, medium-and high-density residential, mixed use, live/work, and open space land use opportunities Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad CEQA Findings Regarding Significant Effects 7 August 2007 would not be achieved. This alternative would also not provide expanded and enhanced beach access, or provide site design guidelines that require street scenes and site plans to respect pedestrian scale and express a cohesive and high-quality architectural theme. In addition, this alternative would not establish the Southern Coastal Gateway to the City, as no improvements would be made to signify such an entry point. For these reasons, the Increased Residential Use Alternative was rejected from further consideration. D. Increased Residential Use/Open Space Alternative (FEIR Section 6.5, pages 6-13 through 6-17): The Increased Residential Use / Open Space Alternative would result in a large portion of the property being developed with townhomes at a density of 19 du/acre; refer to Figure 6-3. This would allow approximately 316 dwelling units. In addition, a Mixed-Use Center would be developed in the same location as with the proposed project, and would allow for a variety of commercial retail uses, restaurants, and specialty stores to support the residential and hotel and residential uses. The Hotel/Commercial use would be proposed in the northern portion of the property, although at a smaller scale than compared to that of the proposed project. In addition, this alternative proposes an open space/community park in the southern portion of the property, rather than the Beachfront Resort. The park would be open to the public and would offer opportunities for active and passive recreation, such as walking trails and picnic tables. Development of the Ponto Area would not occur under the Vision Plan with this alternative. This alternative would also result in the realignment of Carlsbad Boulevard and the construction of the pedestrian underpass. This alternative would reduce impacts to traffic, noise and air quality, as well as impacts to biological resources as compared to the proposed project, due to the removal of the Resort hotel use and reduction of the Mixed-Use area. In addition, this' alternative would achieve the project objectives of assuring that public facilities and services meet the requirements of the Growth Management Plan and that the project conforms with the General Plan, Amended Zone 9 and 22 Local Facilities Management Plans (LFMP), applicable City ordinances, regulations and policies. As Carlsbad Boulevard would be re-aligned, expanded and enhanced beach access would be provided. However, as the Vision Plan would not guide development within the project area, this alternative would not achieve the goals of establishing the Southern Coastal Gateway to the City or providing site design guidelines that require street scenes and site plans to respect pedestrian scale and express a cohesive and high-quality architectural theme. This alternative would also conflict with the stated goals of the LCP to provide visitor-serving commercial uses in the coastal zone. In addition, this alternative would not provide landscape architecture that celebrates the historic past and horticultural heritage of the City, as no design guidelines would be proposed. For these reasons, the Increased Residential use/Open Space Alternative was rejected from further consideration. Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad CEQA Findings Regarding Significant Effects 8 August 2007 E. Increased Townhomes / Single-Family Detached Alternative (FEIR Section 6.6, pages 6-17 through 6-20): The Increased Townhomes / Single-Family Detached Alternative assumes that the project site would be largely developed with' townhomes and single-family development at a density of 10 du/acre. This would allow for approximately 172 dwelling units within the northern portion of the site. In addition, the Hotel/Commercial uses at the northern end of the property would be developed. A Mixed-Use Center would be developed in the central portion of the site, just north of Avenida Encinas, similar to the proposed project, but at a smaller scale. The Resort Hotel Use would be developed in the southern,portion of the site, also similar to the proposed project. This alternative assumes the re-alignment of Carlsbad Boulevard with development of a linear park along the west side of the roadway. Onsite road patterns would be the same as the proposed project. This alternative is intended to emphasize the residential component, and therefore, would not result in. improvements associated with the State Beach, such as the pedestrian underpass, that would allow visitors to travel between the Ponto Area and the recreational uses provided by the beach. In doing so, potential conflicts between the residents of the proposed residential uses and visitors to the State Beach would be reduced. The Increased Townhomes / Single-Family Detached Alternative would reduce potential significant impacts to traffic and circulation, as well as incrementally decrease air quality impacts, due to a decrease in the number of trips generated. Noise impacts would also be reduced, due to the reduction of commercial uses. The objectives of assuring that public facilities and services meet the requirements of the Growth Management Plan and conformance with the General Plan, Amended Zone 9 and 22 Local Facilities Management Plans (LFMP), applicable City ordinances, regulations and policies, would be achieved. As individual ownerships would be developed without an overall plan for guidance, this alternative would not establish a mixed-use district that encourages local and tourist-oriented retail, commercial, recreational and residential uses. This alternative would allow for the establishment of" a mixed-use district that encourages local and tourist-oriented retail, commercial, and recreational land uses, but at a reduced scale as compared to the proposed project. Improvements to Carlsbad Boulevard would provide additional parking, thereby enhancing access to the State Beach. This alternative does not meet the project objectives of establishing a Southern Coastal Gateway to the City, or of accommodating a balanced and cohesive mix of local and tourist-serving commercial, medium- and high-density residential, mixed use, live/work, and open space land use opportunities. This alternative would conflict with the stated goals of the LCP to provide visitor-serving commercial uses in the coastal zone. In addition, no cohesive architectural theme would be achieved for development of the site, as the site would not be developed under the Vision Plan and site guidelines would therefore not be proposed. Although this alternative does reduce some adverse impacts associated with the proposed project, it does not result in a substantial reduction in impacts that would make it preferable over another project alternative. For these reasons, the Increased Townhomes/Single family Detached Alternative was rejected from further consideration. Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad CEQA Findings Regarding Significant Effects 9 August 2007 F. Increased Townhomes / Visitor Use Alternative (FEIR Section 6.7, pages 6-20 through 6-24): The Increased Townhomes / Visitor Use Alternative assumes that the project site would be developed with a mixture of commercial retail and hotel uses, with additional residential dwelling units provided. In the southern portion of the site, the Resort Hotel use would be developed, similar to the proposed project. An increased number of townhomes would be developed at a density of 19 du/acre as compared to the proposed project, with such uses replacing the Mixed-Use Center. Approximately 281 dwelling units could be developed under this alternative. This alternative would allow for a mixture of commercial uses including retail shops and restaurants. In addition, the Hotel/Commercial use at the northern portion of the site would be developed at a reduced scale, with construction of a neighborhood park at the northernmost portion of the site to provide recreational opportunities and to buffer the hotel use from the adjacent residential neighborhoods. This alternative assumes the re-alignment of Carlsbad Boulevard with development of a linear park along the west side of the roadway. Onsite road patterns would be the same as the proposed project. No improvements to enhance the State Beach would be proposed with this alternative, as the Resort Hotel and Hotel/Commercial uses and the linear and neighborhood parks would instead provide'opportunities for recreation. The Increased Townhomes / Visitor Use Alternative would reduce potential significant impacts to traffic and circulation, as well as resultant noise and air quality impacts, as compared to the proposed project. This alternative would meet the objectives of assuring that the provision of public facilities and services would meet the requirements of the Growth Management Plan, prior to development. In addition, conformance with the General Plan, Amended Zone 9 and 22 Local Facilities Management Plans (LFMP), applicable City ordinances, regulations and policies would also be achieved with this alternative. Improvements to Carlsbad Boulevard would also allow for additional parking for the State Beach, providing improved' access. However, as no overall plan would be provided to guide development within the area without the Vision Plan, and individual ownerships would be developed as desired, a cohesive mix of local and tourist-serving commercial, medium- and high-density residential, mixed use, live/work, and open space land use opportunities would not be achieved. In addition, this alternative would not provide a cohesive architectural theme for development of the site, as the Vision Plan would not be implemented. Similarly, requirements for landscape architecture that would celebrate the historic past and horticultural heritage of the City would not be required without the Vision Plan. Although improvements would be made consistent with the Scenic Corridor Guidelines, this alternative does not specifically meet the project objective of establishing a Southern Coastal Gateway to the City. The removal of the mixed-use area would mean fewer services would be available for city residents or visitors from outside the Vision Plan area. For these reasons, The Increased Townhomes/Visitor Use Alternative was rejected from further consideration. Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad CEQA Findings Regarding Significant Effects 10 August 2007 So G. Increased Recreational Amenities/Green Space Alternative (FEIR Section 6.8, pages 6-24 through 6-27): The Increased Recreational Amenities/Green Space Alternative assumes that the project site would be developed with the same mixture of uses as proposed with the Vision Plan; however, this alternative would decrease the size of the Resort Hotel facilities at the southern end of the Vision Plan area and provide an open area along the bluff that would be available for public recreational use; refer to Figure 6-6. In addition, the area would provide an added buffer between the hotel facilities and the Batiquitos Lagoon. The open area would complement the multi-use trail envisioned in the Vision Plan, and would be located within the setback of the development envelope for the Resort Hotel. The open area would be maintained by the property owner. It is envisioned that the open area would be bermed to provide varied topography, and. landscaped with trees for shade and grassy areas for passive or active recreation. Amenities such as benches or picnic tables for meeting or relaxing could be provided within the space and may offer views to the lagoon and the Pacific Ocean. Other amenities such as an open grassy area for weddings, or a gazebo for ceremonies or viewing opportunities, could also be provided. Signage could also be installed within the open area to identify vegetation or flower types, or perhaps animal or avian species that would typically occupy the lagoon, to provide an educational opportunity. With the above-described exceptions, future development of the Ponto Area would occur as envisioned by the Vision Plan. This alternative assumes the re-alignment of Carlsbad Boulevard with development of a linear park along the west side of the roadway, and construction of a pedestrian underpass to the State Beach. Onsite road patterns would be the same as the proposed project. In addition, improvements to enhance Carlsbad Boulevard as the southern gateway into the City are also envisioned with this alternative. As the Increased Recreational Amenities/Green Space Alternative is similar to development envisioned in the Vision Plan, it would meet both the project goals as well as the majority of goals established in the South Carlsbad Coastal Redevelopment Area Redevelopment Plan. This alternative would incrementally reduce potentially significant impacts to traffic and circulation, as well as resultant noise and air quality impacts, as compared to the proposed project. In addition, future development of the Ponto Area would be consistent with requirements of the General Plan, Amended Zone 9 and 22 Local Facilities Management Plans (LFMP), and applicable City ordinances, regulations and policies, and therefore, no conflicts relative to land use and planning would occur. This alternative would also allow for improvements to Carlsbad Boulevard and establishment of a Southern Coastal Gateway to the City, as well as enhanced access to Carlsbad State Beach, similar to the proposed project. This alternative would also establish a mixed-use district that encourages local and tourist-oriented retail, commercial, recreational and residential uses, and would provide a cohesive architectural theme for future development of the Ponto Area. Similar to the proposed project, this alternative would meet the objectives of assuring that the provision of Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad CEQA Findings Regarding Significant Effects 11 August 2007 public facilities and services would meet the requirements of the Growth Management Plan, prior to development. Requirements for landscape architecture that would celebrate the historic past and horticultural heritage of the City would also be achieved. As discussed above, the Increased Recreational Amenities/Green Space Alternative would meet the project goals, as well as the goals of the SCCRA Redevelopment Plan. For these reasons, the Increased Recreational Amenities/Green Space Alternative was not rejected from further consideration. G. Carlsbad Boulevard Re-Alignment Alternatives (FEIR Section 6.9, pages 6-27 through 6-32): It should be noted that the Carlsbad Boulevard Re-Alignment Alternatives are not separate alternatives from the proposed project, but alternatives addressing one component of the proposed project. Adoption of the proposed project or project alternatives would also adopt one of the Carlsbad Boulevard Re-Alignment Alternatives. OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS WARRANTING PROJECT APPROVAL DESPITE REMAINING SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS TO TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION CEQA Guidelines Sections 15093(a) and (b) state: (a) CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered "acceptable." (b) When the decision of the public agency allows the occurrence of significant effects which are identified in the final EIR but not avoided or substantially lessened, the agency shall stat in writing the specific reasons to support its action based on the Final EIR and/or other information in the record. This statement may be necessary of the agency also makes a finding under Section 15091(a)(2)orl5091(a)(3). As identified above, this project has significant and not fully mitigated effects relating to air quality impacts associated with short-term construction impacts and long-term operation impacts, as well as short-term construction noise impacts. The mitigation measures and project alternatives identified in the FEIR are infeasible in accordance with CEQA Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 to fully mitigate these impacts as detailed above. However, the City Council has weighed the benefits of the proposed Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan against the identified unavoidable environmental risks and impacts in Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad CEQA Findings Regarding Significant Effects 12 August 2007 determining whether to approve the project. The City Council finds that the project will provide specific economic, social, and public safety benefits which outweigh the unavoidable environmental impacts of the project, such that those impacts are considered acceptable. With approval of the project, these benefits are: Finding of Economic Benefit Development pursuant to the Vision Plan would result in construction jobs for the region, which would help support the local economy. Proposed uses include residential and commercial uses, which would require a need for a variety of different construction trades. Development pursuant to the Vision Plan includes commercial and retail uses which would result in the addition of new jobs for the residents of the City Carlsbad and the surrounding area. The Vision Plan includes areas where hotels and mixed-use commercial areas could be developed. Hotels and commercial enterprises would need staff to support the services these uses would provide. Development pursuant to the Vision Plan would provide increased revenues to the City of Carlsbad through increased tax revenues. As development would occur within the Vision Plan area, the property value of the property would increase resulting in an increase in property taxes. Development pursuant to the Vision Plan would result in increased access to coastal areas for the public by providing local and tourist oriented retail, commercial, residential and recreational uses. City residents and tourists would be drawn to the area by new development and would enjoy expanded and enhanced beach access. Development pursuant to the Vision Plan would increase the number of people living in the area that will be in need of goods and services that can be provided by other commercial ventures within the City of Carlsbad. Finding of Social Benefit Development pursuant to the Vision Plan would result in a realignment of Carlsbad' Boulevard which would result in an estimated 104 parking spaces on the west side of Carlsbad Boulevard to facilitate public use of the State Beach. A realignment of Carlsbad Boulevard that would provide for potential opportunities for the State Parks campground to expand on to land vacated by the realignment. Additional land would be available for a linear park adjacent to the State Beach for public use. Development pursuant to the Vision Plan would supply needed housing in the City of Carlsbad, thereby helping to meet the needs of the region's growing population. The project will also increase the stock of new homes in the region, thereby providing a wider range of housing stock than currently exists. Development pursuant to the Vision Plan would provide recreational opportunities in the area, including recreational facilities available to the general public, through the development of the project's public and private multi-use trail system. The Vision Plan trails system includes additional routes and linkages for the Coastal Rail Trail. Finding of Public Safety Benefit Development pursuant to the Vision Plan would result in a benefit to public safety by constructing a pedestrian underpass (with handicapped access ramp), which would safely Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad CEQA Findings Regarding Significant Effects 13 August 2007 41 move residents and visitors from the Ponto Beachfront Village to the beach area without crossing Carlsbad Boulevard Traffic. The City Council specifically finds that any one of the benefits detailed above is sufficient, standing alone, to justify approval of the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan in accordance with State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15092 and 15093 and CEQA Section 21081. Documents related to these findings are available for review at the City of Carlsbad, City Planning Department, 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008. The City of Carlsbad City Council has adopted Findings Regarding Significant Effects for the above project, which identify that certain significant effects of implementing the project are unavoidable, even after incorporation of any feasible mitigation measures. The City Council finds that the remaining unavoidable significant effects are acceptable due to each of the specific economic, legal, social, technological or other benefits which will result from the approval and implementation of the project, as described above. All of these benefits are based on the facts set forth in the Findings Regarding Significant Effects, the Final EIR, and the record of proceedings for this Project. Each of these benefits is a separate and independent basis that justifies approval of the project, so that if a court were to set aside the determination that any particular benefit will occur and justifies project approval, the City Council determines that it would stand by its determination that the remaining benefits are sufficient to warrant project approval. Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad CEQA Findings Regarding Significant Effects 14 August 2007 S tsSrt o o EXHIBIT "EIR-B' 2 50 IO OH gIP•c2•ao c •8<S•SP <u r! W ^W ^ oO u in .^ «S O X £chfrontmo meAon5-05/GEPi 04 HHS «3> ^ o2 c^ fi *• 3 i-rifc 5 •a 00ou o3 CMC <^ P rt^•a u V> O oo ro O: —< fi ts f>1 r*i v~> O•«3CQ < X '•3. •8•813u Q. .ts< O BVa 6 § 03bo s I "o x'•3B 1o'•§X)I O> i '«u,ue £ o- 1 g51 I 1 <C OIa. *z*I§eu O5 £op. ofc2 8 5 u § ICQo ll oo o£Ift.§ Oz TIGAT1gl SB SI Z O poi z PURPOSE.s •-igatioVillatoredThe purthe Pontplemegency,impAI Ponogargatfor thves mvisiite,digaparenddesf thThe Final EIR prethe Vision PlanVision Plan provin development.consistent with PuAct (CEQA) Guidelire that implementationmeasures as appropriatreparedaitynsursucheThe MMRP is pEnvironmental Qresponsibilities towell as to enforcefl•9 a The following headingsareas: 1) Air Quality; 2)identified for each mitigV 8 g <P*UO£ PN O PORTINg Q ^2o 1i— i^0szo H<O H S •s •gs 1 P-57Q I6 u5 c(0Cfl O •o§ UH D <J U O "B09 JCi/a £ O U <aPI S K) 6t2 g and Wildlife Service (USFWS),5J Environmental Health as approprijRequired Time of Application« % 31c -^ 11J2 c1- 8.5 u W Ci.•° E73 .B li? 2 CA 90> o 1 8 ° &>a os .2 G _S) g ^3'i-Sg a i/a ^ . S 4> W & || *rt fli> t2!lu us^*^ o« •0 -I "B .0o 3 * 52S u The approximately 50-acre Pontovarying times, as individual lando0 \8 "~~iSCuojssu (L>•*r^ *5L 1 £•o "gO£•oa «0o the application or improvement prMonitoring Frequencyg.2 en i E § 1 & o « I*>^ 1 1 -"3 g -og'™ ' J onitoringc •«£ c- — 1 This column identifies at what ija •§£ « O n §*>, H•5 ** § g? S o a •-TO £*_O 9^^ W ll — M~ V "IC T)u •— 3 —f- ^>H•C w .•§ .§ § "*- S o^•gi/a p. 1- CS *!-t *-t U > *f<u&Dww <U 1 .§Q5 "•*-*.J5 1 O C03 O >*» rt 1! .implemented and that it is effectmitigation measure, and may occimitigation measure, as appropriate1-3 •2?'1 1 (4-1 1 tS 1 . 1 2 .52 S3 Sfljigo'•g&•c 'E i£j , O mentation^.V CL 1 s 01 u i tn•3 1 V3»> > 1s- u ^bO u^^ g >^USs ^8 ua*^!i *•complete£•• 1" 1^ od .S/tOH* dn Plan/Completion DateThis column identifies the locatiofcraO. W)c•g-measure, the Responsible Monit•oSu"a. Ioin 14-*C300 1 I u •1 '-S " Mll 31 B 8 2 ^<c -S 01 c <a w •fO*-<L)«.2>,>§ ^o > « o£«3 "• <u BJ 'a > :s TI S<»oo B5CM O 1Ocu a Qz•<oz SPfa izoM5o HNN S' 8-Ji f ««|'S «§N »_ *l s rs .IE |°en • r? V^ oi >iiSS 3 §!s£ « = Jl SIS S3U D '* < « ei fi.SSs^ i '1(ft OcsS i)b en S d2 *61 1-5JS **i S — ii J5 ^"o g S J5•p •" w o 3 "S g _ § T3 S >." 53 S u w jcsBJ 3 *•» C^•s 1 .§ 5 a•1 « •§ 3 •§B g S 'S I B60 § >. U S CU.is * * soo 2 H _ u •- 8JI 111 111 it!^Sfe. fw 5•o^o 5 a °-w y *• H a o•e s « ~ •§. ** „•3 CO •*-* T3 C ^ ^ £Q O {^•1 fe S § £ •&'% •o S co 2 isS . S -a 8 §) " O« ??'5 S ™A^-Sc «uo ^'I'.s f I'll .^••* J5 ^* «3 ^* V-i PI *^J-i E E -o H a.w CJ • • u •d iao«•o 1 8 ^ Q +-• <* o .2 &.€ lllfl 51811 a)u •- c1 2 ^3 »j»S £14-1 5o a. • V C4z bn -M |g & 8 I U S *M g< U D S <*" tN-§g ~ X 3C r? o <no JTJ ^-/<<-i — ^ .0g se§mi "S w S S•S-gR S1 ^°S5au X 00 u6 o -B . S §•a-1 8*2 «s ;>•» a.a1^251 o ea .- -rf o.^ 4^ G J* ^™5 c« .2 ^ o isn pq r« C3 C^•5 g u oJ= > tt E QO3 •* C3 03 c S >._ a S•*« "S es ™ "CXi .»S „ d.a | 8#& I !||| < -i '1 i i fs|6•< •oc ri -n § "? 'i ^ <*S Sa « « S •< S. 5 « s :Hilllam - a -o -5 «3 tt c> oo § § S H g.S's^ 5 §^ ^iiliii^Ui -3 5b s o iJ •«; & ?> c§ Sa£ §1*8 ^^3 C" '—' "5 fa B O •« "^ ^ t~- -E 3 < . VO o: tocM 51 1w> 1JW > JZ 03 01 S<atC 1 2fct2 Q g3izOS§ ..i« tint ill I S 3 &o< O SOCM Oz 2oSzoSzo5 O H § li tl onIb! H 1 'a S §1 u 18 u 12 O - - .53 "O " o -- o aO « O The constructi contractoDistrict Rule 67.0 (Archivolatile organic compoundsThis rule specifies architectup and labeling requirementS•< . till -I II III I I 'S •o aj>C u^ GflT O0 faC S* O S-iw Q E.S o I 1Itfc2 fi § 05 g S z oBNHS silll e» £ 01•S •Sa S 4 H •2 "52OS £ e *M o c sasL ao Js ^e 1:1 I c si • 1 . jf!1 1 iliii 1 ill fi Mil! IP ili'Lf M!« ! !l § s §. "° 1" s. 1 ^ 'I g •? '•§ § "3 -o u "* '1 "a- "1 1 .S, 1 S S •§ 4j 3 C 2C ^ ^» '** *^ . . CX "^ HoOm E Cl*. ti1? *^SE'"''CO *^O^£32 i§"rtS2*-fl3o ww g t) rt E e W(S 3*2 <u O« CX § ^ o>4>111 11 litil liil lull il II ill n li S f, O «J O* § J?-3 4) c C U ~~ ^tL, -a b , i i i i i i « c a, u 1o Cu Og o 0- Q5 0 iofc ^20 H•< S *•*HB ^ B Shown onPlans /ComoletioiDateaa•c 1 S luencvs £ wE H 1 1 § 1 "3e o l| B « §1tf> C « 5 oilC^l S• ea> S es.'•+9 .| 1 & i 1 U T3O c '5 .3 8 3•-« y — . c § ?P5 --s ,5'G S* *x q"j 03 w V g Q< |e 1B u o!,>•*'"e £? ^ 5 «,§"§"" ~5 G '> qH -7 ^ Ba is ^ '381 1 1 a"s S" gs•a « "= S>J= - -S UM 60 g C3 •3 .S •§ u o £ u <u 3 ^ D D § 8 I 1 I §•ff •g ll I O C O .2 O. u « ! § 8""•lUS 1 1111ia .S2 oo xi f I ' W *J 09 « J3f 1*1,1!£"„§ =^ -M -S w 8I§*e11^^88 ^13 1 -1 I*S ""* s a 11 "5 n -WlO 1 •4 K C ao. Og B2£2 Q Z ig oSzo»—IH aNNHM S ea 1 1"5 I Be 4>s H 1i Be V! « BO •c i •i II Q 5 .S a. 3 3 o 5PU a-£ U 11^111o12!^! 1-B«0|>£ o § -S e 5 '> S JS. a \o S5,25 "ui^S « 3 <u TS j. — «j o o. a -S2 gn> ni r>T^ vC ^^ | OT H fc « rs '« S c2 S a.^2Q- o j=o. yat CO i o laS S| S •S "& ol.'s'-s HbQJD > 1C M I I 'l'is' **a^ a © s I cs O g0* Pio c 1I oniI O•»-» Q B dg orgt •nw> S BH (S eaO v S C ° « .i 'S>Q lii3O .5 T3 0 .43 U I- 01•3 -2 ,3 "8 g"S'l g § 2.8 8, b 2^-c " 2 •€«a 3 eb £ op I Mitiation Measureire1 3 grntcoisebbing,gaedconNogrupieforughits,occupiCalifothroupets, mprovestate the same.proposed durinbreeding seasonconducted to dt5D S a a 11 i i e eo oJOCO oOSPu, O5 w** S oz5 X2H ONMH § 01a IE3 I sas 1 o739S.a BE BO I •I 4> z 8 •cu uI 00 5 .S H JSA E u 0) Ua M 2P « .2 60 C fe h |-|*i *i»a c » S §•a I fl-flllll*P- u c -e 3 ^ ;g a -| jj 81 •K*. U 60.s.s-g < g B a(ia Q o osI5OMH § ae I B.2 .2 § 5 "B 'o.£ E ^3 3 3 o 1 I I V Z § I OO £ aC a e Oz2e z;O o VN § 31C I u Z 1 § I§ •o Sw „ -So BU H- 2 o ffI I'll 11 -8 | | .S111 1 1 e ^S 1 u 2 I t« o- 5 S — n. OQo I § •C a OS2 z2 1zo)-^ S H I u B.3 op „ i; o S •allt-g. o.^ a'« U I I co 8 § II! c OQ $ 1J3 -8 S S I o COo 3 § O, O tdDi O ol Ig's I oM 5<0rt a c I zc § 2H 7;t sC OSO, O Of au:a az g§s o o Es ao oJ3tfi e 1u. g ! uon a 1o 5s 04 O H o § Q 5of^i 2 0H jjr O •c Z2 1 a P gl V Jj5 51 a '•1 SI B a CO ^ 61aiis w B P "81 0 2 | i£ 1 1 ^<»e £ «••i-s§ -§'E 11 H Owl £ | a ii A • 1 ' ' ||I ISlrii! l\\}i.2 * O _§ ^™"Oc*"^ Q* P^cn-S'ai^c3 G.Sl^C ^ilP?lil«ig^ M'liiii iifi§ l-s3^|||i'|S|| lg|^o| s«|Ll «xfs ^§^ l« H = 3 6 fialll§» 5-rfw'i>5 §<s a. o CDo I KOO06o< Og a2 W5 oz zo § a O *i"»i •* E **! ^ •*5 51 "5 fi Jll |o a 'C•8 1 t§ai «E H•o£ ios e 4ri I"o^l»O i 1 d e §E<R Cjh hi £ 1 «jb 3S2 ^e 1I B.O"5 o %> 3M O •§ ^.s ' 60 § ^0 S S05 a 8•O «- C '5HH a Q a 3^ ^3 Ilii s3*3 •- "2 'C«r| S |.*i 2 Sl'S."-* o *? 5 ^, ^^ 4> COZ •t- co.2 3 « .f^-aoo ^ w 5 c wf|1 IH5*! •5 1 & H a1© 1 Is 54III '1^.2 ^*! *hn *•* ^'.rmPrior to issuance of grading permits and approimprovement plans pursuant to approval of any mapplicant shall retain a qualified paleontoloimonitor the site during grading. The applicanprovide evidence to the satisfaction of the PI-VV 1 « co U ill|!|i M H D. 2 ! i•- 60 C 5 1 | W3 O Ci till II1J5 Pi!1- t!*! liiil M*{<1*1 i IHil iil««§ « . g> §, « s 3 « . _- a ^ •? BI'&s'S u'S«^-o'S S-S^^.gg, J2 gc ^""'SSSSSSS -l^8 11 5'| 2 § -38 |S'i 1•SS&60 •S'««01o§ .ScHo.SS1iM £s:!g>!t<2:lo"S.ujini.isn Ii|iii!g >,, S. B - -S .1 >,« « ; * I S S 'g Ih^iu 2 f?«5bS<*?£P^oS</:-.sS_,o=o.ahoaio;5>uU20,:i: 8 S '3 rt 5 g> D."O ^3frSSB.blar.T3slllillllll fJtSilStt-8-! H^tfSl 2al.fill i s 1 S3 | Sili.NW5 «S 5* •*-•o o -ti c*U- t-i (71 «3 CN I (Nts J co > V > I coDu 1£> V CO oI gPS PM Oz O Oktt2a oz2 8fc*N ZOszO O H § 1/3 g oo ^4^a I} U DuII §II a B H 8"f (§8 X .2 <•-e -5 C o2 s & w•5 * *o u .1 al'il s ff H— '3CQ 3 « S 111 S §.^ c dII I aO U I a . I 5 •§§BQ U Ja. u00 m ! s 2 I az:5o § I «o I •a IQ <53 ^•s!,,,,> U J5 T) Wn v> O- S C -L. «s « «•; S "•go£*§•s „ o <a .2 «f ti r- "-£ M w -S «j 3 g BBSS•O S B <S.5 M '5. 8 °„ w -i c *O ^1 tl 5"I sl 85 a S 8 &< E > a cf M o gc4 £ I I I Q 8. tso-^ llflll S g «J ;« e•fi ^ o § e u OQ KOo o a- fiz 1 a izo o H u *-^HN^S s 8 iOi I1 s I S I 1*1 >- o 1 § 1IS•c a ci II I w Z <4Ho ,1 „ 2 111<§ •» 3 8 -.1-al = -l i i « SP 2 o §+« .^^ M £3 C f^- S 5 (?•€Q i "S S* JL ^ ca 1 W C S C j^SgjI-ol^gll 2 ^ " S'= " 1 | 1 I §H fe. 2 I ceo- a at« iS zilS ^2H 1 eauired§s I 'g B e III!it, any stainedd disposed ofitted facility. Oncevisually observed totaining (an indicationthe subsurface). Ifpel bece of son intoreallal bepriateils shaabsegratieo I13 u C ea.2 O 8 perIvj 3 I u t-i C || w" "o, = Io 8 S-2 S"Si >.•&1 u 00C vedled.ther-CN 2P " « ^ w ll«S'&:iftS-silra u _ E •S 11 S 3 S § lu-sc u .2 t!§ u •« "S1-°** X! W J U CD O I aea K C OSft, Og B 0. OS O 3 OZ, 5O 2O Ipj o^NH*•<S eqg II3 fll o 8 uPrio« -r- ri wi0,.> g C "^ "S cj JD ^ llll1re T) "8 ft (we ° O B B |-2 P ^«u "5. II I V z Prior to demolition, the interior of theunits shall be visually inspected prior tostorage units shall be removed and propeoffsite ved landfill facility. Ovisu th beneathS«I B CHs"l utdQ e Z datisG a > I 1 CO o I a ONu:2 a55 a g I§ 1 a 1 I u I •! a! g£ 2 § •S ~ "8 'is. * •S |-S w~ '? t9 g 'U!'w>-§ = *•S o 2 C"2 8 "S oa*^ I«.» 8S- «M .-2 « °o .« g -3> c ou « -a S-s&S-"^ f 60 R)-S 2 « iiii^li^sis-siil2 8 t> u 8 •» -oBygjS«j3'—y1 — •§ "S -a u -53 »••* 2 r_ . ^ , •«.8 3 8 -s „ = 3 3-^8' o^ow^-S** •- •" •* '" a ^3 JZ ••gs&iifi 3 3 W3 S S - SU'S £• °-ll3 *o3) 5 £.£ S s*r 025 §a, * I CQ O C ••• *J '^* w "'So 9 "3 S « —pa'S5c'«"5«5&.?«,.iKoE^ Kc 1o fc 3 A Z O H l~*S J2 15 o•s S ECO «• •c -2 ^ ?^o. o .5 e_-w .2 5!i*T* r^-« e g.5 8 S-betdaleCiCt8^^2 'Z ^ .8 0C O _r»e« u d "S c 2 e <gJill1 i(M 1 ctC B P- O oa. II c c c M S ae oXI CA BO .h9205 •co I 8 1.o S-O §• 1 «" aoJS'l^ a flllfli TS "* ^-= "1 S ° ^ 1|N«ii M r5 8-8-1 Z 2 o^ a. y II i ".S 8 o «B <J.O ^, «'w a-aj — •- „ 5^= y M'|3|l&lltariM D- U CO +-..-* VH CO 2 B (•oOS0, O2 ! 0! Q r;[TOMN^^z0 «6zo 1 i Shown onPlans/CompletionDate0 .£ c« ^g 4)1 1 A9 | "o •s 01 61 1 .E5 "§1Q "t is acj ^i 1 s•S « C^€ "S.S*• IN*l ( 8 8 .8 'o 8 8 8 § "g ^ 'S .0 e 2> § 8 S pfjp w oS (S ^ ^ !5 £j *O ^ ™ C u '+3 C ? S ® ^ 8*1 I** -Mjis iSSIfsJ ist! « <u j.'t Q*rt*a c^cdOifS t>ot>• ^^ 2 ,52 ** o *^ >% "S « M "S ^ ^ **^^*SJsJ3^w T3 co "8 ^ "S, ^>g-§JtJ^==S '*~'tOeC "w"S v"3«§"§^ ^^^.S'a^^o COM.-.OJUW ^-Ji^a*! 0 *. cnea 'erification:> e <*- ^s 2 e3 'I OJtsQ vi .2"o. . Z 3"g M «> 8 1.1 isJ5 &8'3O ca oo xi .& «3 o .eJD C «.££ 'u t3 3 CLi <* W ? 60n B| •HI 00 60 tn 1 | § H J | CQ d, ed C!Q ^"§^ * * ao « ,5 0 S*5.2 ? '»*3 (U ^ <B-c S.a "a a §«H-co O U | §1B'^-S 1- *W iy *O ar*«.a i-"3> o oa B 1'«= •- ^«!Q 8OH „ 0at iv5 S c *!S§ & SPC 8 i Z £"S2i « az 8.8« e «oj n. y 1*^ '£" •fl " e•| .2, 0* 5^ — »._, u< c 3z _c £3 .§ <£" p 2 !y 'a B. S | .2 -d | -|| | | 1 1 ;f '1 "£. o K T3 "5. o-i'H.cB 2 ^restrictednot direcu u•° S ^ 42•S S <»J18 8 «^2Plly, '«J= y « S M'§ " .S1 a 2H u x — -S "*ca f gS « su n « 6-S S2C "tJ 5«s w — * c3 i (WC (1_O J e3 •— ' ^ ^^ ^ ^ u i "o ! "o « "5 '5 E o."a i<0 60 C rT w 5w •••• i> C W O CS •< - mro ion Plan EIRen U 5 1<c VCQ 1 o * 8o OSe- Og 0. ft g •< Oz *or ZO ^zo H* o § §- § S lil — ^ 0 iSl E *"5 • a onitorinsS reauencvb w 1 "S£a d !••i 1"3 ^•s" £ M•- •!i -se xo c li •gj ul!•> 1M4I 15 se £ii s| .2 ti 1 'S Q u Z •s >. |l 1. -^ 'S > •W &• u <u III ^ *0 B, S " sfe S Va.2 a ~C to 3eu .S as oo oo jg ••i I § •3 J | U'§ « |icd **3 > 1 ti o siijlo._ 11U in e 1^a g § B- •§ ep»5 oPC"ai ®S" -a :sS C T3e CD a2 §a 1 252. '£ '3 S "-2t uj i j I | ** -rt J |l lill 1 "3 1-1 1 *• 2*i2 o. .E 1 1 1 Jl-B *~ .! 1 2 , 1.1^2111 il|l ^1 |||| g||B e l-S^^JJ^o-ii Isj!lllli51il!T&l-illllssilil lllllll.l^lsSll•^ 00 O ^"" . U g> V« -° •§ ! * f i ' 11 §1O C *w o eg UH *^ *f \^ c? 3 g g.s'sj^'iii ^is| J. W M C 0 . -w^C-a . ! ? -a 8 ?'! 1 'p S I C3 w ^^ ® w r^ "^ fiSlf.a£l1a18lSlJ i <=*bo 5C 'SO "3 S « PH in CS in ^C*«J 2 SI' I uII •ec .050-0*.!- B '2 12 c ^ 1 s §' J •a 'I I 8 0 i "8 "8 , S &--S 111*113 «c 1o p. 2 Oz I c 1 01 IS1 ua n) § II •I 1 i 60 a <~ .3 S S8 °S b,g •a i S « 5 aH § ^§2*•« tfa o .tS 5 E^^^^« •= g S U *<3.Sc!.« gg2xtsiS«S"^n.«^S'Ss- us >,"«» asis§o<»K^?; lif 03 0HorzonJ o I CD 2§"1I 5 08 tfft. O ££" C a ft 2z Cfczoszo MITIG,I S | ^ s ^ 1so i «j I aSas ^1Sa ih 1igm IM O JS e •-•:S C§1 S ' 3 ft*l Saa e 1 | ! • £» 1 0' ^ -8 5 S ^ S ^S&l'wJ'f*' o $ 'S $ ^j -0 « § .£ * 5 =1 » o|||3.aii|. ^"SflSll Ij1"'|jl'85s§|j S ofl'l'S.fl l|-g |^|I||'|I -s% i"3 i-i'^lsSsg i ill3 M-£:eaea«->P<;SV «(— ' S^^^SG OxE1*''-' .,Oc3^3 _; — -l>C *^ r^ *-• T3 ^-^ ^ *^ &« w on ^ O /. . ^^ *J E ri O O 3 r~! ^* »3 l> C3 u ^^w 2^2™a-S-5-2g 2«°1®-2ocoE cfe.^3 >2-2.oI2lu.2>c: l!l!!Silliil!iitf!il!i!i!ll!!iSi! V W iu l~_ § 1 2 ^r ^* Kj Qrrt *-• 3 o "i i o SU o -Sj U3t« Z is « > I <u aa. Oa. Q <! az5o zo e SE Oo — isa §2 1- » SS a ' .aE S°c« • 2 §11o. -5 de S I H 1 "3 i u 3 E•s ~ SID e li £|e a £ _g | "3Q •s 1 1 .. !^l1 J^l Qi • I4 1« 1 1 S js b J53 7? CQ ^3ij? <= Cfl ^ **•* 4>g a « s^ c -n ^ S> E § | ||| 2 ^ "q H .n flla § -s | " 60 > J3 i Stisii-i ^4i "" § o ^ O tti '-C .*^^ ^ CQ -3 tj t 2 o "C j«•*- g c c «>— 2 o o ^6«5 # OH W .5 « M -3.1i •> S 'S i> G Z ~ co .2 3* 3 ll ^-k o t> T S o S § '^ S rf | 8 | | S | 6JO •*-* --5- *C! w vJ'C p 5* *^ G "i S;^5 *Kf\ Q. ^aai 1 ».| g s •s 2 <<_ •^ "S S 3).| g !5 S < e 8s H §a-l A u O « "S ri, Pi? 1 || | S <o 'S « O > M Sa, < 'S E H u nl ^ ^ B 1 § • * O *-* .C ^ "> 12 __fri vx — H *3 So i3^3.«i OH 3 *-* o -^lS "^^CJ^1 {~-OeSgSg)>,.J2i5«<g'eK12 ""•SjS'liuSi S§3§ UJ CO O oa. K C aa, O &a az £ aC 2 S o £ a» 3 **iuI <u> II.rSI! BS ° 8 Jago s ' IM C ^ 60S 8 60 <S H2 8 -o 2 O•*-*C »3 u 'l-gsi, S> ^^;* _ L! cs o*^ *^ tj ***C9 •— ^ „ a US . M « ^llft<s-i l?-:8i Oi, 3 5 ? U ^^~* r^ iP *-» '^1*v *^ ' C 3 e -2 -w 4_l M fl^ i u 3 c -2 > l!- c3 « I 1 SiR*3S*1 APPENDIX A City of Carlsbad HMP Designations LEGEND ^P Local Facility Management Zons 4 C J Lucal Facility Munayement Zmw 9 Local Facility Management Zone 22 Focused Planning Area (Core 81 CONSULTING City of Carlsbad HMP Designations Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR APPENDIX B EIR Mitigation Tables (Tables 5.2-7 to 5.2-9) Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan tilR - Mitigation Tables Table 5.2-7 Mitigation Summary for Impacts to Vegetation Communities Vegetation Community/Habitat Acreage Existing Impact Mitigation Ratio Mitigation Required Habitat Group A1 Southern willow scrub 0.91 0.04 3:1 0.12 Habitat Group B Southern coastal bluff scrub (including disturbed)4.3 0.1 3:12 0.32 Habitat Group C Diegan coastal sage scrub (including disturbed) - occupied 5.2 1.2 2:13 2.43 Habitat Group F Eucalyptus woodland Disturbed habitat 0.3 24.6 0.3 21.1 4 4 4 4 Other , Non-native vegetation Developed Total 21.0 43.4 130.4 9.7 15.2 47.6 —~ -- _ —2.82 'Habitat Groups refer to MHCP habitat classification system. 2It is assumed that all habitat types in Group B will be included in the proposed preserve system. 'Maximum avoidance and onsite conservation of Group C habitat is encouraged. 'Habitat in this group which is not conserved or mitigated onsite shall pay a per acre in lieu mitigation fee in an amount to be determined by the City Council. According to the Addendum to the City's HMP (December 1999, pg 10) in lieu mitigation fees arc 18,000 for unoccupied Diegan coastal sage scrub, and chaparral (Group D), $4,000 for grassland (Group E), and $800 for eucalyptus woodland and disturbed habitat. Table 5.2-8 Mitigation Summary for Impacts to Corps Jurisdiction Areas Vegetation Community/Habitat Existing Impact Mitigation Ratio Mitigation Required Wetlands Southern willow scrub 0.91 0.04 3:1 0.12 Non-wetlands Drainage Total 0.11 1.02 0.11 0.15 1:1 - 0.11 0.23 Table 5.2-9 Mitigation Summary for Impacts to CDFG Jurisdiction Areas Vegetation Community /Habitat Existing Impact Mitigation Ratio Mitigation Required Wetlands Southern willow scrub | 0.91 | 0.04 3:1 0.12 Non-wetlands Streambed Total 0.18 1.09 0.17 0.21 1:1 - 0.17 0.29 APPENDIX C Traffic Fair-Share Contribution Methodology Traffic and Circulation Fair-Share Methodology Intersections T-l: Impacts to the affected intersections shall be mitigated by implementation of the following improvements: • La Costa Avenue / Vulcan Avenue: Install traffic signal with La Costa widening to facilitate intersection improvements. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, developers within the Ponto Area shall pay a pro-rata fair share contribution to the La Costa Avenue / Vulcan Avenue improvement. The pro-rata fair share contribution shall be paid to the City of Carlsbad City Engineer prior to the issuance of building permits. The pro-rata fair share contribution may be adjusted by the City of Carlsbad to reflect any changes in estimated construction and land costs (as described in Appendix G-2). The City of Carlsbad will retain the Ponto developers' allocated pro-rata fair share contribution until the City of Encinitas is required to collect said contributions. Developers with existing ADT credits within their Ponto property will be given offsets against their projected ADT's. This intersection is located within the jurisdiction of the City of Encinitas and the improvements to this intersection are already required mitigation as part of the City of Encinitas adopted North 101 Corridor Specific Plan and have been included in the City of Encinitas Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Future developers within the Ponto Beachfront Village shall be required to make a proportionate fair share contribution towards the improvements listed in Mitigation Measure T-l. Based on cost estimates.from the City of Carlsbad, the proposed road improvements associated with improving La Costa Avenue from Highway 101 through Vulcan Avenue, including the La Costa Avenue / Highway 101 and La Costa Avenue / Vulcan Avenue intersections, would cost approximately $5,335,000. This dollar amount is an estimate based on current information. Annual adjustments shall be made as described in Appendix G-2. As shown in Figures 5.6-8 and 5.6-9, the project would contribute 5,003 ADT to this intersection. Based on 2030 traffic volumes of 18,300 ADT, the future development within the Vision Plan area shall contribute 27 percent (5,003 ADT / 18,300 ADT = 27%) of the total cost, or $1,440,450 (55,335,000 x 0.27 = $1,440,450). This amount would be divided up among the future developments within the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan area based on the traffic they contribute to the intersection. T-2: Impacts to the affected intersections shall be mitigated by implementation of the following improvement: • La Costa Avenue / North Coast Highway 101: Widen north leg to include two left turn lanes and two through lanes, and widen east leg to include two left turn lanes and one right turn lane. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, developers within the Ponto Area shall pay a pro-rata fair share contribution to the La Costa Avenue / North Coast Highway 101 improvement. Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan ' August 2007 Page2-of2 The pro-rata fair share contribution shall be paid to the City of Carlsbad City Engineer prior to the issuance of building permits. The pro-rata fair share contribution may be adjusted by the City of Carlsbad to reflect any changes in estimated construction and land costs (as described in Appendix G-2). The City of Carlsbad will retain the Ponto developers' allocated pro-rata fair share contribution until the City of Encinitas is required to collect said contributions. Developers with existing ADT credits within their Ponto property will be given offsets against their projected ADT's. This intersection is located within the jurisdiction of the City of Encinitas. The improvements to this intersection are already required as mitigation as part of the City of Encinitas adopted North 101 Corridor Specific Plan, and other development projects located within the City of Encinitas and are included in the City of Encinitas CIP. Future developers within the Ponto Beachfront Village shall be required to make a proportionate fair share contribution to the City of Encinitas towards the improvements listed in Mitigation Measure T-2. Based on cost estimates from the City of Carlsbad, the proposed road improvements associated with improving La Costa Avenue from Highway 101 through Vulcan Avenue, including the La Costa Avenue / Highway 101 and La Costa Avenue / Vulcan Avenue intersections, would cost approximately $5,335,000. This dollar amount is an estimate only based on current information. Annual adjustments shall be made as described in Appendix G-2. As shown in Figures 5.6-8 and 5.6-9, the project would contribute 5,003 ADT to this intersection. Based on 2030 traffic volumes of 18,300 ADT, the future development within the Vision Plan area shall contribute 27 percent (5,003 ADT /18,300 ADT = 27%) of the total cost, or $1,440,450 ($5,335,000 x 0.27 = $1,440,450). This amount would be divided up among the future developments within the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan area based on the traffic they contribute to the intersection, Roadway Segments (Year 2030) T-3: Potential impacts to La Costa Avenue between Vulcan Avenue and Interstate 5 are mitigated to less than significant with the implementation of mitigation measures T-l and ' T-2. Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan August 2007 Page 2 of2 1 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 6339 2 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE 3 CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE 4 ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN TO INCLUDE , REFERENCE TO THE PONTO BEACHFRONT VILLAGE VISION PLAN FOR PROPERTIES GENERALLY LOCATED 6 BETWEEN CARLSBAD BOULEVARD AND THE SAN DIEGO NORTHERN RAILROAD, NORTH OF BATIQUITOS 7 LAGOON AND SOUTH OF PONTO ROAD. CASE NAME: PONTO BEACHFRONT VILLAGE VISION 8 PLAN 9 CASE NO: GPA 05-04 10 WHEREAS, the City of Carlsbad, "Applicant," has filed a verified application 11 with the City of Carlsbad regarding property described as 12 the areas known as the Ponto Beachfront Village Area 13 generally located between Carlsbad Boulevard and the San Diego Northern Railroad, north of Batiquitos Lagoon and 14 south of Ponto Road 15 ("the Property"); and WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a General Plan 17 Amendment as described on Exhibit "GPA 05-04" dated on the 5th and 19th days of 18 September, 2007, attached hereto and on file in the Carlsbad Planning Department, PONTO 20 BEACHFRONT VILLAGE VISION PLAN - GPA 05-04 as provided in Government Code 21 Section 65350 et. seq. and Section 21,52.160 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and 22 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 4th day of May, 2005, hold a 23 duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and 24 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did again, on the 5th and 19th days of 25 September, 2007, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said26 27 request after preparation of an EIR for the project; and 28 WHEREAS, at said public hearings, upon hearing and considering all testimony 2 and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors 3 relating to the General Plan Amendment.4 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning 6 Commission of the City of Carlsbad, as follows: 7 A) That the above recitations are true and correct. g B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission 9 RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of the PONTO BEACHFRONT VILLAGE VISION PLAN - GPA 05-04, based on the following findings and subject to the 10 following conditions: 11 Findings: 12 1. The amendment is consistent with Section II of the Land Use Element of the 13 General Plan, Subsection D (Special Planning Considerations) which allows the city to designate specific areas or land uses in the city for special planning 14 considerations. 15 2. The amendment is consistent with Goal A.1, Goal A.3, Objective B.I, and Objective B.3 of the Land Use Element of the General Plan as identified and described in Table A of the Planning Commission staff report dated September 5, 2007. 3. The amendment is consistent with all other applicable City plans as described in the 13 Planning Commission staff report dated September 5,2007. 19 Conditions: 1. Approval is granted subject to Certification of Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR 05-05) and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and approval of LCPA 05-01 and DI 05-01, and is subject to Planning Commission Resolutions No. 22 6338, 6340 and 6341 for those other approvals incorporated herein by reference. 23 24 25 26 27 28 PCRESON0.6339 -2- 1 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning 2 Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 19th day of September, 2007, by 3 the following vote, to wit: 4 AYES: Chairperson Baker, Commissioners Boddy, Cardosa, Dominguez, Douglas, Montgomery, and Whitton 6 NOES: 7 ABSENT:8 9 ABSTAIN: 10 11 12 !3 JULIE BAKEK Chairperson CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION 14 15 ATTEST: 16 17 DON NEU 18 Planning Director 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PC RESO NO. 6339 -3- 1 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 6340 2 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE 3 CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE CARLSBAD 4 LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM TO ADD TEXT TO THE LAND USE PLANS OF THE MELLO II AND WEST 5 BATIQUITOS/SAMMIS PROPERTIES SEGMENTS TO 6 INCORPORATE REFERENCE TO THE PONTO BEACHFRONT VILLAGE VISION PLAN FOR PROPERTIES 7 GENERALLY LOCATED BETWEEN CARLSBAD BOULEVARD AND THE SAN DIEGO NORTHERN 8 RAILROAD, NORTH OF BATIQUITOS LAGOON AND SOUTH OF PONTO ROAD. CASE NAME: PONTO BEACHFRONT VILLAGE VISION 10 PLAN CASE NO: LCPA 05-01 11 WHEREAS, California State law requires that the Local Coastal Program, j T General Plan, and Zoning designations for properties in the Coastal Zone be in conformance; and 14 WHEREAS, City of Carlsbad, "Applicant," has filed a verified application for 15 an amendment to the Local Coastal Program designations regarding property described as the areas known as the Ponto Beachfront Village Area 17 generally located between Carlsbad Boulevard and the San Diego Northern Railroad, north of Batiquitos Lagoon and 18 south of Ponto Road 19 ("the Property"); and 20 WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Local Coastal 21 Program Amendment as shown on Exhibit LCPA 05-01 dated on the 5th and 19th days of 22 September, 2007, attached hereto, as provided in Public Resources Code Section 30574 and 24 Article 15 of Subchapter 8, Chapter 2, Division 5.5 of Title 14 of the California Code of 25 Regulations of the California Coastal Commission Administrative Regulations; and 26 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 4th day of May 2005, hold a 27 duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and 28 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did again on the 5th and 19th days of September, 2007, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said 3 request after preparation of an EIR for the project; and 4 WHEREAS, at said public hearings, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors 7 relating to the Local Coastal Program Amendment; and ° WHEREAS, State Coastal Guidelines requires a six-week public review period 9 for any amendment to the Local Coastal Program. 10 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning 11 Commission of the City of Carlsbad, as follows: j 3 A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. 14 B) After a State mandated six week review period, starting on August 17,2007, staff shall present to the City Council a summary of the comments received. ,, C) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of the PONTO BEACHFRONT VILLAGE 17 VISION PLAN - LCPA 05-01 based on the following findings, and subject to the following conditions: 18 Findings: 1. That the proposed Local Coastal Program Amendment meets the requirements of, and is in conformity with, the policies of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act and all applicable policies 21 of the Land Use Plans of the Mello II and West Batiquitos Lagoon/Sammis Properties segments of the Carlsbad Local Coastal Program not being amended by this amendment, 22 in that the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan which is being incorporated into the Land Use Plan segments encourages enhanced public access and views, mixed use, 3 including visitor/tourist-serving uses and a unique character of design. 24 2. That the proposed amendment requires all future development in the area to be 25 consistent with the policies of the Coastal Act and the City's Local Coastal Program. 26 27 28 PC RESO NO. 6340 -2- 1 2 3 4 5•J 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting to Commission of the City of Carlsbad, held on the 19th day of September, 2007, by vote, to wit: AYES: Chairperson Baker, Commissioners Boddy, Cardosa, Douglas, Montgomery, and Whitton NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: H**^" H ±4/ ^\ ^^^J\/^» JULIE BkKER\Chairperson CARLSBAELEKANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: .«*/< WA DON NEU Planning Director PC RESO NO. 6340 -3- the Planning the following Dominguez, PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 6341 1 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE 2 CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE PONTO BEACHFRONT VILLAGE 3 VISION PLAN FOR THE AREA GENERALLY LOCATED BETWEEN CARLSBAD BOULEVARD AND SAN DIEGO 4 NORTHERN RAILROAD, NORTH OF BATIQUITOS 5 LAGOON AND SOUTH OF PONTO ROAD. CASE NAME: PONTO BEACHFRONT VILLAGE VISION 6 PLAN CASE NO: PI 05-01 7 WHEREAS, the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan has been prepared by O g the city and submitted to the Planning Commission for review; and 10 WHEREAS, the intent of the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan is to 11 create a mixed use, active pedestrian and bicycle oriented area with a strong sense of place, 12 village atmosphere and unique character of design in the Ponto area; and 13 WHEREAS, a General Plan Amendment (GPA 05-04) and Local Coastal 14 Program Amendment (LCPA 05-01) to incorporate reference to the Ponto Beachfront j^ Village Vision Plan has also been considered by the Planning Commission; and 17 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 4th day of May, 2005, consider 18 said matter and all factors relating to this item; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 5tb and 19th days of 20 September, 2007, consider said matter and all factors relating to this item. 21 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning 23 Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows: 24 A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. 25 B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of the PONTO BEACHFRONT VILLAGE 26 VISION PLAN - DI 05-01 based on the following findings and subject to the 2i following conditions: 28 Findings: 2 1. The Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan is consistent with the General Plan and 3 the Local Coastal Program as described in GPA 05-04 and LCPA 05-01. The Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan contains desirable land uses, circulation system and design guidelines which will allow future development proposals to comply with the intent of the Plan to create a mixed use, pedestrian and bicycle 6 oriented, and visitor-serving area with a strong sense of place and village atmosphere. 7 Conditions; o Approval is granted subject to certification of Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR 05-05) and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and approval of 10 GPA 05-04 and LCPA 05-01 by the City Council, and is subject to Planning Commission Resolutions No. 6338, 6339 and 6340 for those other approvals incorporated herein by reference. 12 2. The following development guidelines shall be added to, and appropriate graphics 13 revised in the appropriate section(s) of the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan: a. Carlsbad Boulevard Re-alignment Alternative 2 is the preferred alignment. 14 b. Parking garages shall be underground unless proven to be technically or financially infeasible. c. Buildings shall implement "green" construction techniques and materials to the greatest extent feasible. d. Trails within the Ponto Beachfront Village shall be linked to the greater 17 Carlsbad citywide trail system. e. Coordination with the California State Department of Parks and Recreation 18 to develop physical connections from the Ponto Beachfront Village through the Carlsbad State Beach campground to the beach is strongly encouraged. f. All parks on public property shall be reviewed by either the Parks and 20 Recreation Commission, Planning Commission, and/or City Council as determined by the permit necessary for the development of the facility. 21 g. Any hotel on the southernmost Resort Hotel Character Area parcel shall incorporate an ocean view restaurant, h. The Character Areas shall be revised to reflect the Increased Recreational Amenities/Green Space Alternative (Figure 6.6) of the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan Final Environmental Impact Report with the 24 buffer/setback from the bluff edge set at 75 (seventy-five) feet and restricted to passive public park uses only. 25 26 27 28 PCRESONO. 6341 -2- 1 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning 2 Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 19th day of September, 2007, by 3 the following vote, to wit:4 , AYES: Chairperson Baker, Commissioners Boddy, Cardosa, Dominguez, Douglas, Montgomery, and Whitton 6 NOES: 7 ABSENT:8 9 ABSTAIN: 10 11 12 13 JULIE B,AKERL Chairperson CARLSB5*tB4»LANNING COMMISSION 14 15 ATTEST: 16 17 DONNEU 18 Planning Director 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PCRESONO. 6341 -3- RONALD R. BALL CITY ATTORNEY JANE MOBALDI ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY FOR THE INFORMATION THE CITY COUNCIL ^Bv) DATE CITY ATTORNEY CITY OF CARLSBAD 1200 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008-1949 (760) 434-2891 FAX: (760) 434-8367 December 3,2007 • RONALD KEMP - DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY PAUL G. EDMONSON DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY Mike Howes, AICP Howes Weiler & Associates 5927 Balfour Court, Suite 202 Carlsbad, California 92008 Re: Carlsbad City Council Resolution No. 2007-280 - Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan Dear Mr. Howes: The City Attorney has asked that I respond to your letter of November 28, 2007 to the Housing and Redevelopment Director concerning your requested revisions to the City Council resolution for the Ponto Vision Plan. Public testimony on the item has been closed and any further revisions would require that the public testimony portion of the hearing be reopened to obtain public input with the exception of your first request, the substance of which has already been considered. With regard to Mitigation Measure B-7a, the City Attorney is willing to recommend that this mitigation measure be deleted. The "generally 75-foot setback" shall be included in the Ponto Vision Plan as a design guideline for the southern-most parcel. The impact of the initially proposed 45-foot setback from the bluff was already analyzed in the EIR's Increased Recreational Amenities/Green Space Alternative and there is no reasonable possibility that the additional 30-foot setback from the bluff could have any greater adverse impacts on the Batiquitos Lagoon and the surrounding wildlife and habitat which were not previously analyzed. With regard to Mitigation Measure T-l, I disagree that assigning a specific financial responsibility to mitigate traffic impacts is premature. CEQA requires that impacts be analyzed to the greater extent possible with information available at the time of the environmental analysis. It also allows modification of mitigation measures if circumstances change in the future. For CEQA specificity requirements with regard to traffic mitigation, see Federation of Hillside and Canyon Associations, et al. v. City of Los Angeles (review denied February 16,2005). Our office would not recommend your suggested modification to Condition 2h of Planning Commission Resolution No. 6341 to change the word "structure" to "building" since it is our understanding that the City Council did not want to see any type of structure in the general 75-foot setback. However, you are free to raise this issue with the City Council at the hearing and they can reopen public testimony to obtain commentary on the proposed revisions. Finally, the City Attorney will not recommend limited references to Chapters 1 and 3 be in the General Plan. Any development within the Ponto Village Plan area should be reviewed for consistency with the entire Ponto Vision Plan, rather than restricting the context of the analysis to two of the four chapters contained therein. Based upon your client's ongoing input, City staff has already made good faith efforts to accommodate your client's concerns with a number of revisions to the Ponto Vision Plan prior to the City Council's deliberation on the issues. Thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours, JANE MOBALDI Assistant City Attorney kr cc: Debbie Fountain, Director of Housing and Redevelopment, City of Carlsbad Christer Wester, Senior Planner, City of Carlsbad HowesWeiler^Associates LAND USE PLANNING AND C( November 28, 2007 Debbie Fountain Housing & Redevelopment Director 2965 Roosevelt Street, Suite B Carlsbad, CA 92008 RE: City Council Resolution No 2007-280 Ponto Beachfront Village vision Plan Dear Debbie: We have reviewed the revised City Council Resolution for the Ponto Beachfront Vision Plan and would like to offer the following comments: a. Mitigation Measure B-7a - This is a modification of a mitigation measure added by the Planning Commission after the completion of the Final BR. This mitigation measure was added to support a public park requirement that was added at the Planning Commission hearing. In order for a mitigation measure to be included in an BR, an analysis must be conducted that concluded the need for the mitigation measure. No such analysis was conducted in the Draft or final BR. We have reviewed this mitigation measure with our legal council and do not believe that it is appropriate to be added as a biological mitigation measure. No where in the Draft or Final BR is there a discussion of the need for a 75' setback from the bluff to protect sensitive habitat Additionally, there is no nexus or proportionality for this requirement. When the City Council discussed a 75' setback from the edge of the Muff they expressed concerns about the visual impact of the project and its appearance. I do not recall them discussing the btokxjicai impacts of the setback. Their concern was basically a design issue, not a biological issue. If this mitigation measure is added to the BR, it could trigger the need for additional environmental review if at the time of a detailed project review it was determined that a less than 75' setback was appropriate. This could occur because if a mitigation measure in a certified BR called out for a generally 75' setback and a lesser setback could be considered not to be in conformance with the approved mitigation measure. We respectfully request that this mitigation measure be deleted. Mitigation Measure T-l - This condition addresses traffic impacts to La Costa Avenue/Vulcan Avenue. The last paragraph of this condition specifically addresses the impacts of 5,003 ADT from the development of the Ponto Vision Plan upon this intersection and requires a mitigation cost of $1,985,176 be split among the future development projects within the Vision Plan. This is a very specific number based on a maximum build out of the Vision Plan. What if the Vision Plan is built out at a lower level of development? Would the fee per ADT have to be increased? Assigning a specific financial responsibility at this time is premature. The actual impacts and costs could be overstated or understated. We believe that it would be more appropriate to base the fee on the actual amount of ADTs that were generated by the future development within the vision Plan. Tel. 760.929.2288 Fax. 760.929.2287 Email, info@hwplannmg.com 5927 Balfour Court, Suite 202, Car HowesWeiler&Associates LAND USE PLANNING AND CONSULTATION b. Condition 2h of Planning Commission Resolution No. 6341 - We believe the City Council's concerns about visual impacts of development on the Resort site are more appropriately addressed in section d on page 3 of the Resolution which addresses the Character Areas of the Vision Plan. However we request that this section be revised to read as follows: "The Character Areas within the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan shall be revised to reflect the enhanced building setback of generally 75 feet from the southerly bluff edge with the inclusion of a 10 to!2 foot public trail, and with approval of the precise building setback to be determined with approval of future development permits." This revision takes out the reference to the Increased Recreational Amenities/Green Space Alternative (Figure 6.6) of the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan Final Environmental Impact Report, since this alternative does not refer to a 75' setback. In addition we have substituted the word "building" for "structure". In the Carlsbad Zoning Ordinance a "structure" is defined as "anything constructed or erected which requires location on the ground or attached to something having a location on the ground, but not including fences or walls..." . While a "building" is defined as "any structure having a roof...". If the word "structure" is left in the text it would make it impossible to construct anything other than a fence or wail in the 75' setback from the bluff. It would also make it impossible to construct a ground level patio or any type of recreation facility in this area. Again in reviewing the tapes of the November 13th hearing we do not believe that this was the intent of the City Council. This turns their intent to require a 75' building setback into a 75' open space buffer from the top of the bluff. We fed that the intent was to have a building setback requirement and not a structure setback requirement. f. GENERAL PLAN We believe that it is important to add the following words to the first sentence of this section: The City of Carlsbad General Plan identifies Ponto as an area with special considerations and directs its development to be consistent with the goals, objectives and guidelines set for the within Chapter 1 and the Ponto vision and Land Use Strategy Plan (the Plan) as stated in Chapter 3. These terms are used in a number of areas and it should be dear in the Vision Plan exactly what is being referred to in this section, since it will be used to determine if a development proposal is consistent with the Vision Plan. Tel. 760.929.2288 Fax. 7fiO.929.2287 Email, info@hwplanning.com 5927 Balfour Court, Suite 202. Carlsbad. CA 92008 Howes Weiler&Associates LAND USE PLANNING AND CONSULTATION We appreciate the spirit of cooperation that staff has shown working with us to address Lone Star's concerns regarding the Vision Plan and do not want to appear ungrateful for this cooperation. However, as proposed the text within this Resolution could have unanticipated impacts on properties within the Vision Plan. At this time, Lone Star is just requesting that the revised wording of Resolution 2007-280 accurately reflect the intent of the City Council and provide the flexibility to judge individual projects on their merit when detailed development proposals are submitted. Sincerely, Mike Howes CC City Council Ron Ball Jane Mobaldi Lisa Hildebrand Sandy Holder Gary Barberio Christer Westman Craig Beam Nigel Oliver-Frost Tel. 760.929.2288 Fax. 760.929.2287 Email, info@hwplanning.com 5927 Balfour Court, Suite 202, Carlsbad, CA 92008