HomeMy WebLinkAbout; La Costa Town Center; La Costa Town Center; 1990-06-27CULTURALRESOURCESURVEYOF THELA aXTATOWN CENTER CITYOFCARLSBAD,CALIFORNIA
Prepared for
M. A. G. PROPERTIES 5075 FEDERAL BOULEVARD SAN DIEGO, CA 92102
M. CHEEVER uommD~croR
EC0N
Regional Environmental Consultants
1276 Lbrrv Boubvud. S.n Di.go. U 92110-3lJlS 27SJ732
RECON NUMBER 2212A JUNE27,1990
TABLEOFOONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION
II. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. CULTUREHISTORY
B. PREVIOUS STUDIES
III. FIELD INVESTIGATIONS AND RESULTS
IV. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
V. PROJECT STAFF
VI. REFERENCESCITED
FIGURES
1: County vicinity map 2: Project location map 3: 4: Cultural resource sites within the La Costa Town Center survey area Crescentic stone tool from SDM-W-181
m
1
1
1
6
7
10
13
13
2 3 4 9
-.
r'
rc
L
In response to a proposal to develop the La Costa Town Center parcel, RECON archaeologists conducted a cultural =source survey of the project area, located in the City of Carlsbad @ips 1 and 2). The objective of this field survey was to locate and record any cultural resources not previously investigated, and to determine the current condition of previously I.ecorded cultural resource sites.
Archival record searches wen. rtquested from the South Coastal Lnformation Center at San Diego State University and the San Diego Museum of Man. Informa- tion received fiom archival sources has been incorporated into this report Three previously recorded prehistoxic .sites, SDM-W-181, SDM-W-940, and SDM-W- 942, are mapped as lying either within or immediately adjacent to the La Costa Town Center project area (Figurt 3).
Pedestrian surveys, conducted in June of 1990, determined that two cultural nsource sites, SDM-W-181 and SDM-W-942, lie within the La Costa Town Center parcel. Additionfly, the western portion of a third cultural resource site, SDM-W-940, also lies within the am of the proposed La Costa Town Center.
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), requires that testing pm
grams must be carried out at any cultural resource site that falls within the area of potential effect from proposed development. Testing programs are designed to determine site importance and the extent of potential impacts to the site from development. Proposed testing plans for SDM-W-181, SDM-W-940, and SDM-W-942 m presented in Section V of this report.
The fmt archaeologist to thoroughly investigate the prehistory of San Diego County was Malcolm Rogers. His 1929 American Anthropologist article, "The Stone Art of the San Dieguito Plateau," contains an initial description of three local artifact complexes. These three complexes, San Dieguito, La Jolla, and Late Prehistoric, form the basic framework still in use in San Diego County.
The oldest of the artifact assemblages described by Rogers is the San Dieguito complex (Rogers 1929). This culture pattern was originally termed "Scraper-maker," after the large "domed scrapers" characteristic of San Dieguito sites. Other typical artifacts of the San Dieguito period are large bifacial points, sometimes with stems such as the Elk0 type, products of a sophisticated bifacial flaking industry. These stone tools are usually made of a fine gdned metavolcanic stone material called felsite. Felsite can be found in abundance in several mas of San Diego County where the Santiago Peak Formation (formerly called the Black Mountain Formation) is exposed. From these stone tools, a lifestyle dependant on hunting has been inferred. San Dieguito sites typically .occur inland, on knoIltops and ridge fingers, overlooking watercourses.
The second axtifact assemblage was originally called the Shell Midden complex by Rogers, who later renamed it the La Jolla complex. The La Job Period tool assemblage is composed of metates, manos, hammerstones, teshoa flakes (large primary flakes), and split cobble unflaked tools. In contrast
1
I
GURE 1. THE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT RELATIVE TO THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO.
FIGURE 3. CULTURAL RESOURCE SITES WITHIN THE LA COSTA TOWN CENTER SURVEY AREA RECm -
with the SM Dieguito industry, the La Jolla industry lacks a sophisticated stone tool flaking technology, instead possessing a predominance of ground stone milling tools. La Jolla Perid -artifacts art typically found in association with shell middens; deposits of shellfish refuse responsible for the original naming of this complex. These. shell midden sites, found along the coastal margins, arc often quite large.
The most recent of the artifact complexes to occur in the County is proposed to have been influenced by desert cultures. This culm pattern has been called Yuman (Rogers 1945) as well as the Late Prehistoric (Wallace 1955) and is indicated in archaeological assemblages by small, "desert side-notched" arrow points irs well as other flaked lithic implements. These implements axe often made hrn caxefully selected raw materials, including obsidian, that was imported from outside the county area. Ceramics also appear in this complex. Because these items do not appear in either the San Dieguito or La Jolla Period material culm complexes, the presence of ceramic artifacts at an archacolog- ical site is considered to be temporally diagnostic of the Late Prehistoric.
While the existence of three distinct artifact complexes is agrted upon by the majority of local archaeologists, the relationship between these com- plexes has been the focus of ongoing controversy. Rogers proposed that the San Dieguito assemblage was indicative of an early hunting people' who existed in San Diego County until 7,000 to 8,000 years beforcv~the present (l3.P.). He then postulated that an environmental change occurred which caused a change in sub- sistence patterns to a gathering economy with exploitation of lagoon shellfish, as demonstrated by the La Jolla assemblage. This pattern continued until approximately AD. 800 to l,OOO, when influences were introduced into the County, which Rogers perceived as indicative of an influx of peoples from the Colorado River area, into the region west of the mountains. This phenomenon was known as the "Yuman Invasion" (Rogers 1945). The new subsistence pattern was dependant on acorn processing, and a new technology was introduced which included pottery making, cremation, and a different flaked lithic artifact industry. These changes resulted in a shift to moIt sedentary subsistence patterns, which we= in existence when the Spanish arrived in the 1700s;
While Roger's culm 'history is still considered valid by a number of archaeologists, there have been attempts to modify it At the pnxent time, there is considerable discussion concerning the relationship between the San Dieguito complex and the La Jolla complex. There is speculation that the lithic assemblage associated with the SM Dieguito complex is contemporaneous with the La Jolla complex and the differences in the artifact assemblages axe the msult of functional differences rather than temporal differences. Interpreted within a framework of seasonal food procurement strategies, the San Dieguito hunting pattern (with associated flaked stone hunting-related tools) and the La Jolla shellfish and plant processing pattern (With associated ground and crushed stone tools) could be discrete ecological and geographical subsistence patterns. Thus, the La Jolla pattern and the San Dieguito pattern may reflect mWication of a tool kit for coastal camps and for iriland camps.
Although "early" bast camp sites of this type are relatively scarce in SM Diego County, a number have been investigated within the past seved years. RBR and Associates (Van Wormer and Cardenas 1984) conducted an excavation of SDi-4648 in the southern foothills of the El Cajon Valley. Cultural connections
5
_- with early desert hunting groups were strongly suggested by the' artifact col- lection. This is an inland site and the subsistence focus was determined to be on hunting.
WESTEC Services, Inc. (1984) investigated a large base camp Site on Agua Hedionda Lagoon, SDM-W-131. This site was detedned by the investigators to be a major camp occupied between 7,000 and 8,500 B.P. The subsistence focus was determined to be on maritime resources, shellfish, and fish, although evidence for hunting and plant gathering was also discovered Artifacts typical of both the San Dieguito complex and* the La Jolla complex were recovered. No stratigraphic evidence for a distinction between the two complexes was defined.
In 1983, RECON conducted an archaeological investigation of two knoll top sites (SDi-9098 and SDi-9099) as a result of development of the Otay Border crossing and the Otay International Center Precise Plan (Hector 1983). The sites contained Ethics that are typically San Dieguito, although recovered shell at SDi-9098 was dated at 5,700 B.P. The variety of remains at SDi-9098 indicated a semipermanent occupation site, while the second site on an adjacent knoll top was defined as a special-use site.
A recently completed related study with regard to the interpretation of San Diego prehistory is the excavation of sites SDi-10,621A and. SDi-10,619 in Otay Mesa (Hector 1987). Prehistorjc activities conducted at the two sites can be characterized as representing two functionally different occupation camps. One site is located at the confluence of two subsidiary drainages flowing into Spring Canyon. The other site is located directly above the fmt, on a mesa top. The sites were also occupied during diffennt time periods, Late Prehis- toric and La Jolla; however, similarities in artifact attributes and technology,
as represented by flake types and patterns of tool production, led to the con- clusion that the same culm was responsible for both sites. Although SDi- 10,619 had pottery and a late period projectile point, similarhies in lithic technology with SDi- 10,621A were more pronounced than were the differences.
An important conclusion to this study was the idea that sites, repre- senting Late Prehistoric and La Jolla Period peoples, wen populated by the same culture. This culture developed pottery and the knowledge of new tool types. The basis of the culture, however, the stone tool production system, remained generally unchanged. The results of' the study indicate the need for comparison of these results to results of lithic analyses of future studies in order to evaluate these conclusions.
B.
Site record searches covering the project area and adjoining areas were requested from both the San Diego Museum of Man and the South Coastal Informa- tion Center at San Diego State University. These records show thret sites within or adjacent to the La Costa Town Center project ma. These are the sites which rwarch indicates may be impacted by development of the La Costa Town Center property.
1. SDM -- W 181
This site, originally recorded by Malcolm Rogers, is located in the southcentral portion of the project ma, on a southeast trending ridge finger.
6
From artifact descriptions given in Rogers' type collection, some excavation was
published. According to Rogers' biographer (Hanna 1982), the field notes to this excavation, probably conducted in 1929 or 1930, arc possibly still intact and located at the Muscum of Man in San Diego, where Rogers was a curator (Hanna, RECON, 6/90).
conducted here (Rogers 1966). The results of this excavation have not been -
Rogers described SDM-W-181 as a "highland camp with adjacent scat- tered camps," and noted that the artifact assemblage possessed both San Dieguito and La Jolla Period attributes. Flaked lithic artifacts from this site which are in Rogers' San Dieguito type collection include a blade, a concaveconvex scraper, a beaked scraper, a domed discoidal scraper, a leaf-shaped projectile point, and a crescentic. The crescentic stone is unusual in that it was one of only two found by Rogers in a subsurface provenience. The second was movered from SDM-W-198, the Hanis site.
This site was first formally described by Kaldenberg, in 1975, although it is possibly one of the "adjacent scattered camps" described by Rogers in association with SDM-W- 18 1 (Kaldenberg 1975). Kaldenberg describes this site, located I under two very large California live oaks, as consisting of approximately 10 pieces of debitage, a convex sidescraper, a quartz projectile point tip, and several hgmentcd pieces of shell. SDM-W-940 is located at the southeastern edge of the La Costa Town Center Parcel.
3. DM -- W 942 - Also first &suibed.by. Kaldenberg in 1975, SDM-W-942 is located on a south-facing knoll, just south of SDM-W-181. Artifacts noted at the time of original recording include ceramics,. quartz, and felsite flakes, and whole and fragmented shell. Due to the dense. vegetative cover, Kaldenberg was unable to determine how far SDM-W-942 extended.
XILmm
In May of 1990, RECON archaeologists conducted a pedestrian survey of the La
Costa Town Center project ma. The project area comprises 75 ams of land borded on the south by La Costa Avenue, and on the north by Rancho Santa Fe Road. This area is dissected by a number of small drainages, running north to south. Ground surface visibility varies from excellent to poor, depending on vegetation cover. Approximately 10 percent of the project area has been disturbed by grading and dumping.
The entire project am was surveyed in east-west oriented transects, with a 20-meter interval between c~tw members. Where the potential for cultural resources was felt to be high, a fivemeter transect interval was used.
Three cultural resource sites were found within the boundaries of the La
Costa Town Center parcel (SDM-W-181, -940. and -942). These three sites arc already nxorded within this area. No previously undiscovered cultural resource sites or isolates were found.
-.
7
The cumnt status of cultural resource sites within I- the La Costa Town Center parccl is as follows:
k SpMWlU --
Artifacts located at this site include metavolcanic and quartz flakes, cores, scrapers, and ceramics. Shell was also visible on the surface of this site, with both Chione sp. and Argopecten observed. Because of the heavy ground cover, ground surface visibility over much of the site was poor. Site boundaries provided on Figure 3 are therefore only approximate. No evidence of Rogers' excavation was found.
One unusual artifact, a crescentic, was found in the southeast portion of this site (Figure 4). Made of a green metavolcanic material, this artifact is broken and weathered From the weathering on the broken portion, it is apparent that the break occd in antiquity. This artifact was collected and is curated at RECON.
me purpose of these relatively rare items has long been the subject of dispute. H. Newell Wade, writing soon after the turn of the century, believed that crescentics were scarifiers, used ritually to create scar patterns (Warde 1913). Malcolm Rogers, ~ while originally agreeing with Warde, eventually came to the conclusion that mscentics were stylized animal representations, used as hunting amulets (Rogers 1939). Emma Lou Davis divided crescentics into- three categories, work tools for peeling or stripping, ornaments, and specialized implements, to be hafted with "wings" pointing back onto a heavy shaft, for use against waterfowl (Davis 1978). Davis believed that such an implement, thrown using an atlatl, could "possibly be skipped on the water at the moment of impact." Heizer and Hester report that B.R. Butler believed that crescentics were used "as scnpers, as knives and as gravers," while believing themselves that these artifacts were used as transverse projectile points (Heizer and Hester 1978).
B. SDMW94Q --
Only the western edge of this site lies within the La Costa Town Center Parcel. Artifact density was sparse, with only a scraper, two flakes, and some Chione shellfish fragments observed within the project area. Due to heavy cover of vegetation, the possibility exists that surface artifact density is greater than that which was observed.
C SDM -- W942
Surface visibility was also poor at this site which is located to the southwest of SDM-W-181. Observed artifacts include metavolcanic .flakes, a scraper, and a core. Shellfish remains are also present at this site. The southern margin of this site consists of the road cut for La Costa Avenue, which has removed as much as half of the artifact material from this site. Portions of the site surface have recently been plowed, perhaps as erosion control for this road cut. Because the boundaries of this site are obscure, the possibility exists that SDM-W-942 is contiguous with SDM-W-181.
8
-.
-..
H .D.HINSHHW HSSDCIATES TEL NO ,619-25Cl-1637 ldov.20,913 14:04 P.02
The msults of the field surveys conducted over the La Costa Town Center yrojcct ma am positive. Thrcc cultural nsource sites, SDM-W-181, SDM-W-940, arid SDM-W.942, am locntcd within tlie project ma and widrin tlie pcrccived area of potential effect,
TIE preferred option in dcnling with cultural resources, such as SDM-W-181, SUM-W-9441, and SDM-W-942. is to design thc prnjcct in such a manner that con- struction and use will avoid site impacts. If avoidance cannot be accomplished, then the implementation of 8 testing program to determine site iniportancc is indicated. This testing program should conforni to cxisting ' guidelines proposed for dic City of Carlsbad (RECON 1989).
Testing of archaeological sitcs nonmlly consists of fieldwork, laboratory analysis, and the publication of results in an appropriate tcchnical =port. 7lic scopc of thc testing programs for Park Trade should include the following.
1. Excavation of a scries of at least 10 and no mort than 20 post-boles or show1 lest pits (STPs) to dctcrminc thc aerial extent and depth of the cultunl resource dcposir.
2. Ihd excavation of 10 1-x-1-mcter tcst units. lhcse units would recover additional ncccssary data to determine site content, structm, mid integrity.
Conduct research at the Museum of Man at San Dicgo. Tire purposc of this research would be to locate notcs and artifacts &om Malcoltn Rogers investigation of SDM-W- 18 1.
4. Cataloging and analysis of the collccteJ ciiltural materiaIs. This analysis should allow for the use of spccialists in techniques, such as radiocarbon dating and/or obsidian sourcing, in the event that data anicnable IO such trcapitnt is recovered.
Preparation of a tcchnical report describing the testing program and
iis results, and providing a dctenninntion of bapomnce for SDM-W- 181.
3.
5.
If SDM-W-181 is deknilined, as a result of the testing program outlined above, to bc a non-irnprtarrt cultud reso1irccc sitc, as syccificd by the CEQA, fortlicr cvaluation will not be ticcessary. Upon acccptatice of die tcchnicd report by the jurisdiction, no furthcr archacological work would be recommcndbd
If cultural resource site SDM-IV-I81 is dcrennincd to be important, as ckfincd by CEQA, then a mitigation program, as described in the proposed Carlsbad Guidclines (RECON 1989), would be necessary.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
- Excavation of a series of at least 10 and no more than 20 post-holes or STPs to detenaine the aerial extent and depth of the cultural resource deposit.
Hand excavation of two 1-x-1-meter test units. These units would
rtcovct additional necessary data to determine site content, structure, and integrity.
Collection of surface axtifacts from those portions of SDM-W-940 located within the La Costa Town Center parcel.
Cataloging and analysis of the collected cultural materials. This analysis should allow for the use of specialists in techniques, such as radiocarbon dating and/or obsidian sourcing, in the event that data amenable to such,ptment is recovered,
Prepaxation of a technical report describing the testing program and its results, and providing a determination of importance for SDM-W- 940.
If SDM-W-940 is determined, as a result of the testing ‘program outlined above, to be a non-important cuItural resource site, as specified by the CEQA, further evaluation will not be necessary. Upon acceptance of the technical report by the jurisdiction, no further archaeological work would be recommended. - If cultural resource site SDM-W-940 is determined to be important, as defined by CEQA, then a mitigation program, as described in the Carlsbad Guidelines, would be necessary.
c sRMw942 --
1.
2.
3.
4.
Excavation of a series of at least 10 and no more than 20 post-holes or STPs to determine site. aerial extent, and depth:
Hand excavation of 10 1-x-1-meter test units. These units would rtcover additional necessary data to determine the content, structure, and integrity of the cultural resource deposit
Cataloging and analysis of the collected cultural. materials. This analysis should allow for the use of specialists in techniques, such as radiacarbon dating and/or obsidian sourcing, in the event that data amenable to such tnatment is recovered.
hparation of a technical report describing the testing program and its results, and providing a determination of importance for SDM-W- 181.
If SDM-W-942 is determined, as a result of the testing program outlined above, to be a non-important cultural resource site, as specified by the CEQA, further evaluation will not be necessary. Upon acceptance of the technical -
11
.- report by the juiisdiction, no further archaeological work would be ncommcnded.
If cultural rtsourct site SDM-W-942 is determined to be important, as defined by CEQA, then. a mitigation program, as described in the Carlsbad Guidelines, would be necessary.
12
Van Wormer, Stephen R., and D. Sean Cardenas 1984 Archaeological Investigation of SDi-4648 and SDM-W-348. RBR and Associates.
Wallace, William J. 1955 A Suggested Chronology for Southern California Coastal Archaeology. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 11(3):214-230.
Wardle, H. Newel1 1913 Stone Implements of Surgery from San Miguel Island. American Anthropologist 15:656-660.
WESTEC Services, Inc. 1984 Windsong Shores Data Recovery for Site 11-131 in Carlsbad, California
14
c REcaN Regional Environmental Consultants
Mr. John Mabee Big Bear Properties
c/o &.Roben Ladwig
Rick Engineering Company
1959 Palomar Oaks Way, Suite 200
Carlsbad, CA 92009
Reference: Additional Cultural Resource Significance Testing of SDM-W-181, La Costa Town Center (M.A.G.), City of Carlsbad (Rick Engineering Number 1’1303-F/RECON Number 2212A.)
Dear Mr. Mabee:
Phase I tesling of the three cultural resource sites located within the project area has been completed
with the following results: -
1. SDM-W-940 was demonstrated not to extend across the Project boundary and into the project area. No
additional investigations are necessary.
2. The porlion of SDM-W-942 which remains on the project parctl was detctmhed not to be an “important
archaeological site” and the data collected by he Phase I test is adequate to mitigate the loss of
the resource. No further work is recommended.
3. Test excavations at SDM-W-181 resulted in recovery of surface and subsurface artifacts which are
believed LO date to the San Dieguito Period (circa 1O.ooO to 8.500 years before the present).
Because this site has the potential to illuminate questions concerning the cultural sequence in San
Diego County, a more detailed investigation is warranted. The surface of SDM-W-181 has been
disturbed by dumping of fill dirt and undocumented collection of artifacts has resulted in an untold loss of data. The combination of these factors Serve to make preservation of the site not a
preferred option, even though the site clearly meets the criteria of “importance“ per the
California Environmental Quality Act (as amended) as well as. criteria pmvided in Section 22.06.020
of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
There are four prehistoric residential base sites located along the same drainage which serves SDM-W-181.
They are the Reyna Site (SDM-W-948). the La Costa Site (SDM-W-945). the Rogers Ridge Site (SDM-W-182) and
the Rancho Park North Site (SDM-W49A). With data from these four studies to serve as a comparative base,
additional data recovery from SDM-W-181 can be used LO provide new illumination of the San Dieguito-La
Jolla transition.
1276 Morena Boulevard San Diego, CA 92110-3815 (619) 275-3732 FAX (619) 275-3619
51199 Fast Grant Road Silite 3OlA Ticson A7 85717 f607\ R?S-SBn DOSO Chicano Aveniie Riverside CA 97507 U14\ 7R4-94fio
Mr. Robert Ladwig -2- November 26,1990 -4
A technical report de.tailing the results of the Phase I tests is in preparation. To avoid unneceapary
duplication and undue additional cost, this report will provide only a preliminary assessment of SDM-W-181 but will completely detail the work and results at SDM-W-940 and SDM-W-942. We propose additional work at
SDM-W-181 as outlined in the the enclosed change order agreement. The total labor cost associated with
this work is $43280. A breakdown of hours required to accomplish the tasks set forth in the change order,
together with our cmnt rates follows:
TA Hours Reauire& Hourlv Ra$ Dollar Amow
Conduct Archival Research
Excavate 16 lxl-units
Perfam five 5x5-sUrface scrapes
Regrade Monitoring
Laboralory Analysis
Photodocumentation and Graphics
Report Writing
Report Edit and Production
100 256
256
40
80
80
80
80
80
8
8
45
45
30
45
30
4s
45
30
45
80
40
5 4500 11520
7,680
1300 2.400
3m
3,600 2,400
1300
3,600 360 m
Total Authorization Requested
If you have any questions or comments please contact me or Sue Wade.
DMCarh
Enclosure
cc: Robert Ladwig, Rick Engineering Company
& Dayle M. Cheever
Senior Archaeologist
Appendix I:
Sage Scrub Habitat
Conservation Plan (HCP) Work Program
e!!
(1 17/92]
CITY OF CARLSBADlFlELDSTONE
SAGE SCRUB
HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN
IHCP)
WORK PROGRAM
.
The following work program has been developed to realize the goal of the Habitat Conservation Plan
(HCP) Facilitation Team to formulate an HCP which is acceptable to all signatories to the
Memorandums of Agreement and which will i) mitigate and permit incidental take of Diegan Coastal
Sage Scrub Habitat and the California gnatcatcher in connection with the City's interim activities and
Fieldstone projects by January 1, 1992, or as soon thereafter as feasible; and ii) provide for the
preparation of a long-term Habitat Conservation Plan of Coastal sage scrub habitat by January 1, 1993.
The HCP Facilitation Team will bring together the various interests of the City of Carlsbad, U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, California Department of Fish and Game, and the Fieldstone Company into a
broad-based, comprehensive planning effort for the preservation and appropriate mitigation of Coastal
sage scrub, resulting in a biologically sound Habitat Conservation Plan for the City and Fieldstone
Company projects.
TASK 1
CITY COUNCIL REPORT WITH RECOMMENDATION FOR AUTHORIZATION TO ACCEPT FUNDS AS
A DEPOSIT FROM THE FIELDSTONE COMPANY, APPROVAL OF THE FACILITATION TEAM
COMPOSITION AND DRAFT WORK PROGRAM, AND AUTHORIZATION TO CONTRACT WITH THE
FACl LITATOR, FACl LlTATl NG BI OLOG I ST, AND CITY'S ENVl RONM ENTAL CONSULTANT.
TASK 2
FACILITATION TEAM FORMATION
A. Establish Facilitation Team to advise City, Agencies, and Property Owner in the preparation of
an HCP for the Rancho Santa Fe Road/Private Grading project. During the implementation of
the work program, the responsibilities of the Facilitation Team would consist of:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8. Assist in identifying funding mechanisms for acquisition of land and long-term
Review and finalize mission, goals and work program;
Assist in identifying opportunities and constraints for the habitat;
Develop rangewide context for habitat and the HCP study area;
Develop, explore, and consider all options for mitigation and preservation alternatives;
Provide recommendations for conservation, mitigation, and long-term management of
habitat within the HCP study area;
Suggest actions to implement the HCP;
Assist in identifying the legal framework of the HCP;
management of the habitat.
Meetings of the Facilitation Team would be scheduled on a periodic basis.
PHASE II
TASK 3
BACKGROUND AND GOALS
A. Provide background report on Rancho Santa Fe Road/Private Grading Project and its relationship
to the HCP.
B. Prepare background report on City's Multi-Habitat Management Planning (HMP) efforts and
how the proposed Coastal sage scrub Habitat Conservation Plan will fit into that framework.
Identify the planning and policy relationships between the HCP, HMP and other regional
planning efforts.
C. Establish goals of the habitat conservation planning effort.
D. Determine the level of environmental documentation required for CEQA and NEPA compliance.
TASK 4
BIOLOGICAL STUDY REGARDING GNATCATCHER AND COASTAL SAGE SCRUB
A. Compile an Inventory and Map of Coastal sage scrub habitat and Species of Concern from
existing information, conducting additional study where necessary, within the HCP study area,
mitigation areas, and adjacent lands to the extent necessary.
1. Map habitat
2.
3. Field verification
Map Species of Concern occurrences
(a) Habitat structure and composition
(b) Species composition
(c) Topographic influences
(d) Species Counts
4. Facilitation Team Review
B. Determine opportunities and constraints affecting the mapped habitat.
1. Data to be mapped
(a) Dedicated biological/non-biological open space
(b) Committed project areas
(c) Proposed project areas
(d) Adjacent Area pertinent data: - Ownership - Parcel size - Land Use designations
2. Habitat Analysis
(a) Structure and composition
(b) Topographic considerations
(c) Disturbance
(d) Habitat viability
Corridors
Regional connections
External effects
(i) Adjacent land uses -.
2
F
(ii) Human activity
(iii) CompatiblelNon-compatible activities
(iv) Existing management practices
(i) Biologically defensible habitat exist
(ii)
(e) Identify areas where
Existing habitat that could be restored
C. Develop rangewide considerations.
D. Consider all options for mitigation and preservation.
E. Provide recommendations for conservation, mitigation, and long-term management.
1. Evaluate mitigation alternatives
(a) Suggest unprotected habitat areas to be protected
(i) Recommend extent of allowable encroachment
(ii) Recommend acceptable land use/human activities
Recommend connecting corridors and regional connections
Recommend compensation for habitat loss in development areas.
Determine amount of development which can occur without impacts to habitat
(b) IC)
(e)
2. Facilitation Team Review
F. Initiate Environmental Scoping Process
TASK 5
HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN DRAFT
A. Prepare a draft Habitat Conservation Plan based on the recommendations reached in Task 5.
B. Develop an Implementation Program for Habitat Conservation Plan
1. Acquisition of habitat
(a) Mechanism (Purchase/Easement/Other)
(b) Ownership (City/Non-profit/Other)
(c) Funding
2. Habitat Improvement
(a) Types of improvement
(b) Responsibility
(c) Funding
(a) Public/Private responsibilities
(b) Level of management required
(c) Funding
(a) Extent
(b) Compatible activities
3. Habitat Management/Maintenance
4. Buffer areas
5. Draft Implementation Agreement
6. Draft Environmental Documents
3
7. Facilitation Team Review
TASK 6
CITY COUNCIL STATUS REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO PROCEED
TASK 7
INITIATE PERMIT PROCESS WITH U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE AND DEPARTMENT OF FISH
AND GAME
A. Prepare and submit formal applications
1. Federal
2. State
PHASE 111
TASK 8
PREPARE FINAL DOCUMENTS
A. Prepare final HCP Document for Public Review
B. Prepare final CEQA/NEPA Documents
C. Respond to public comments
D. Publish final HCP and CEQA/NEPA Documents
TASK 9
CITY COUNCIL CERTIFICATION OF HCP
4
Appendix F:
Traffic Study
Wes Prinale and Associates
c
-- * .so,* ' p &
December 27, 1990
-@&A
Mr. Chris Webb
Cotto~eland/Associates
619 South Vulcan Avenue, Suite 205
Encinitas, CA 92024
Weston Pringle 8, Associates
Dear Mr. Webb:
.-
This report presents an analysis of traffic factors related to the proposed Rancho Santa Fe Road
realignment in the City of Carlsbad. The study is based upon the current development plan;
information received from you, the City of Carlsbad, the City of San Marcos, the County of San
Diego, and the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG); other development studies in
the vicinity and standard reference material.
INTRODUCTION
A traffic report for the proposed Rancho Santa Fe realignment has been conducted to:
1. Describe the proposed project and the two alternatives to the project.
2. Discuss a design comparison between the proposed project and the two
alternatives based upon City of Carlsbad Design Criteria.
3. Discuss construction of the proposed project.
680 Langsdorf Drive Suite 222 Fullerton, CA 92631 (714) 871-2931 FAX:(714) 871-0389
-2-
- 4. Discuss the project setting and existing roadway conditions. Existing conditions
include physical as well as intersection and road segment operating conditions.
5. Adjust the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) traffic model
performed in 1990 to project traffic volumes at project completion (assumed
1995). Compare existing road segment geometric operations to proposed road
segment geometric operations with projected 1995 volumes applied to them.
Proposed intersection geometrics to accommodate the projected volumes.
6. Adjust the SANDAG traffic model performed with input by the Cities of Carlsbad
and San Marcos to project traffic volumes at the post Year 2010. Compare
existing road segment geometric operations to proposed road segment geometric
operations with project post Year 2010 volumes applied to them. Proposed
intersection geometrics to accommodate the projected volumes. - 7. Discuss specific issues regarding the proposed realignment and its affect on the
project area. The issues are as follows:
- Melrose Drive forming a "T" into Rancho Santa Fe Road.
Rancho Santa Fe Road forming a T" into Melrose Drive. -
- Access to industrial property north of the existing La Costa
Meadows Industrial Park.
- Grade separation of Rancho Santa Fe Road.
- Corintia Street and proposed realignments.
- Intersection spacing.
- Candencia Street and MAC. property intersection.
- Rancho Santa Fe Road connection to the proposed SA-680.
CarlsbadtThe Fieldstone Company
HABITAT CONSERVATION PROGRAM I ID IName
1 HCP Work Program
Resource
December
I 51 Phase11 I
January February March
I 6 I Task 3 - Background and Goals I
2
3
4
Provide background report of RSF/private grading project in relation to HCP 1 HPAJH 8 A I 71
~ ~ ~ ~
Phase1
Task 1 - CC authorization
Task 2 - Facilitation Team Formation
City
CitylC. C.
I C. C./HPA Background report of HMP efforts I 81
13
14
15
16
17
18
Establish goals of the habitat conservation planning effort I city/c. C./Team I 91
~ Determine Opportunities and Constraints affecting mapped habitat RECON/HPA
Develop rangewide considerations RECONflFCfleam
Consider all options for mitigation and preservation
Provide recommendations for conservation, mit. and management
Initiate Environmental Scoping Process
Task 5 - Habitai Conservation Plan Dran
C. C./RECONfleam/City
RECONfleam
H & AJRECON/City
Determine level of env. doc. required for CEQAJNEPA compliance . 1 H & AJRECONfleam I 101
23 Habitat ManagemenVMaintenance
24 Draft Implementation Agreement
25 Oraft Environmental Documents
26 Facilitation Team Review
I I 11 I Task 4 - 810 study re: Gnatcatcher and Coastal Sage Scrub
-
CityflFC
H & NRECONIHPA
I 121 Compile an inventory and map of CSS Habitat I REC~N~TFC~SEB~HPA
I 191 Prepare a draft HCP based on Task 5 recommendations I HPAJRECON
Develop Implementation Program for HCP I 201
Acquistion of Habitat I CityflFC/RECON 1211 I Habitat Improvement I 221
+
Carlsbadflhe Fieldstone Company
1 /9/92 Critical Noncritical Milestone + Progress - Summary
Carlrbad/The.Fieldstone Company
HABITAT CONSERVATION PROGRAM
~ ~
January I February I March
~ December
ID Name Resource 12/8 ]la15 Il2/22 112129 I 115 I 1/12 1/19 I 1/26 I 2/2 1 2/9 [ 2/16 I 2123 1 311 I 3/8 I 3/15 I 3/22 1 3/29
27 Task 6 - CC Status Report and Recommendation to proceed ctv
1
28
29 Phase111
30
31 Prepare HCP Document for Public Review HPA
Task 7 - initiate Permit Process with USFW and DFG TFClRECON
Task 8 - Prepare Final Documents
--
32 Prepare final CEQAINEQA Documents H a AJRECONIHPA
Team - Facilitation Team c. c. - Consultants Collaborative
H 8 A - Hinshaw and Associates
RECON - Regional Environmental Consultants
TFC - The Fieldstone Company
SEB - Sweetwater Environmental Biologists
HPA - Hofman Planning Associates
CarlsbadRhe Fieldstone Company
1 /9/92 Milestone + Noncritical Critical Progress - Summary
e